IW STi Forum banner

701 - 720 of 988 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,869 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

Yes, it's odd how the reason has changed.

This is what I was getting at, that others have built with no leaks/drips. No instructions with the gaskets. I did just get off the phone with someone from JE directly who said most likely, heat cycling is recommended. He's going to call me back once he talks with the team.

I'm just torn at this point.

farmboss, yes I'm doing it myself using ARP's torque values and sequence:

-------3------1------6
Front
-------5------2------4

3 equal steps to 90: 30-60-90, check 24hrs later for torque hold, torque center two to 100ft-lbs.
Dam, your doing it that way. I had high hopes for that method but with the motors I've worked on I went by the book with the whole loosening back up of a couple to un-do the bind and haven't had a problem.

I figured the 30-60-90 would work. Probably does, you just got a freak situation going on or something. Or maybe that heat cycle thing is true. But if so, im glad i now know not to get those type of gaskets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
Discussion Starter #703
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

That's the OEM method for when you're using TTY head bolts. The design and strength of ARP stud's don't require that be done. I don't think it's a gasket issue; these are being used on builds with way higher cylinder pressures than mine. No, I have not fired the motor. I don't believe coolant is going to shoot out, but I also am not confident that the leaks will seal.

That said, here's the response I got just a few minutes ago:
Gavin,

At this point we have given you a course of action and you are refusing to take it. There’s nothing to lose by starting the car. Worst case scenario it will leak coolant, which it’s already doing.

We’re still 100% confident that starting, heat cycling, and driving the vehicle will resolve the situation.

We have built over 1,000 short blocks in 2016, over 250 of those were built with used/seasoned case halves and have not had this issue when proper procedure was followed.

I’ll reiterate, you need to start the car and heat cycle the engine.

Let us know if we can help in any other way.

Thank you, Keith
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,387 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

They were also confident that the prior head finish was what was causing the leaking and never made any mention of heat cycling gaskets.

I say try it, let it leak, then tell them to suck start a shotgun. Even the gasket manufacturer doesn't agree. I couldn't find anything pointing to this being a method on these gaskets.

Next time you e-mail them, ask to speak with someone other than Keith.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
Discussion Starter #705
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

Indeed, true.

Fair enough. Although the main motive behind all this was to build a stout and stronger motor so that I could have a bit of enjoyment and not be worried about the regular Subaru issues in the back of my mind. Lowering the chance of failure as it were. That seems moot now.

Part of me is thinking to just pull it out one more time and re-do torque to put that to bed. No?

This email chain has had [email protected] and the rest of the sales team cc'd the whole time. So it would seem they are supporting what he says. I'll play ball this time, but at least this is all on record.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
899 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

Make sure to record it (in 1080p please :D), so you can show us how your floor gets spilled with coolant :domo:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,077 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

I've been pretty busy the last few weeks, need to catch up on a few things (your build, Jason's house and Ben's Time Attack event being some of them!).

EDIT

I stand corrected - see post # 727.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,624 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

That's the OEM method for when you're using TTY head bolts. The design and strength of ARP stud's don't require that be done. I don't think it's a gasket issue; these are being used on builds with way higher cylinder pressures than mine. No, I have not fired the motor. I don't believe coolant is going to shoot out, but I also am not confident that the leaks will seal.

That said, here's the response I got just a few minutes ago:
Gavin,

At this point we have given you a course of action and you are refusing to take it. There’s nothing to lose by starting the car. Worst case scenario it will leak coolant, which it’s already doing.

We’re still 100% confident that starting, heat cycling, and driving the vehicle will resolve the situation.

We have built over 1,000 short blocks in 2016, over 250 of those were built with used/seasoned case halves and have not had this issue when proper procedure was followed.

I’ll reiterate, you need to start the car and heat cycle the engine.

Let us know if we can help in any other way.

Thank you, Keith
Nothing to lose by starting the car?! Water in the cylinders causing scoring and possibly even hydrolocking comes to mind. I have the regular ARP studs and OEM gaskets and just did 30-60-90 in factory sequence. No issues yet. Sucks that you're having so many problems.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
317 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

Guys,

A few points that I want to address, as this thread was brought to my attention and I was able to catch up on the email chain this morning.

1. As Keith stated, our position is that heat cycling DOES have an impact on these gaskets, as we have discovered on several cars here in house recently over the last 3 weeks or so. This theory has been proven out in our facility, using setups extremely similar to Gavins, and heat cycling has been key to sealing. As a matter of fact, our stance on this position was developed by testing, as previous to our discovery, I/we would have agreed with the stances that many have shared within the last few posts about the subject.

2. Bead blasting the heads will ABSOLUTELY cause a sealing issue, and the heads ABSOLUTELY needed to be decked, no question. While there is a sealing issue at this point in time, it does not dismiss the fact that this procedure needed to take place.

3. We did not torque these head studs, and obviously there are questions about torquing procedure, etc. even being discuss right now in this very thread, a few posts up.

4. IF there is an issue with the block, as with anything else that we offer, we will ABSOLUTELY stand behind our work, and will be completely open and transparent with Gavin should the engine need to come in to us.

Like any other client who chooses our blocks, machine work, etc. we value Gavin as a customer, and obviously would prefer that this situation be resolved as quickly and effectively as possible for him.

Gavin,

I have been following, and would like for you to heat cycle and test as Keith has suggested and report back to us. Hopefully the situation is resolved as we suspect. If that is not the case, then let me/us know, and I'd like to get everything on the way in so that we can figure out exactly why there might still be an issue, and of course IF IAG is responsible for a problem, we will stand behind our work all the way, and will ask that you please not advise that Keith suck on a shotgun as yamahaSHO has suggested...

On that note, obviously (yamahaSHO) I can see that you have some beef with an employee here (and from what I gather, a former friend). I apologize that you gentleman have experienced a disagreement that has left you bitter or displeased, but this business is filled with employees, including Keith, who care VERY much about the best interests of our customers, and want this situation to be resolved by any means necessary. We certainly don't want this to be happening any more than Gavin, as this type of banter is certainly counterproductive for all of us, and at the end of the day, we want Gavin to be enjoying his car and not experiencing these issues any more than he wants to be experiencing them...

It is unlikely that I will have time to continue in this thread, but if anyone wants to discuss ANYTHING going on in this thread with me directly, I can be reached at [email protected]

Have a great weekend everyone, and Gavin, we'll await to hear from you and look forward to resolution.

Kind Regards,

Rick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

Hey OP,

As owner of a shop and friends with IAG, this is what I think you should do.

remove the heads, look between the layers of the head gaskets for cardboard.
Take a picture of the studs in the block from the side so the relative heights can be compared.

Why? In the last month, we've had two HG's from JE show up with cardboard between the layers. The little punched out piece from the packaging that gives you the spot to hang it on, has SOMEHOW got into the bag with the gasket and found its way in between the gasket layers. Guess what happens when you put coolant in the engine with the cardboard in the HG? It leaks just like that picture you posted.
Running it very well may soften the cardboard or burn it enough that it no longer affects the seal. Which lends credibility to what IAG suggested, but it does not address the actual issue. I would prefer to address the actual issue.

Lastly, ALWAYS un-torque ARP studs (or any head faster in a Subaru) after torquing them. That part of the procedure isn't just about the factory bolts. It's about the embossing on the gasket laying flat in addition to the bolt stretch. The distance between studs is so great that you can force the embossed area to unevenly compress as the heads flex from torque. Also, ARP told me specifically that they should always be torqued, untorqued and torqued again if they are new studs. They mentioned that the threads get "cleaned up" on the stud and the nut as well as the stud stretches just a little bit with torquing. The person at ARP told me to do it 3 times. I have found 2 with the recheck 12-24hrs later to be sufficient.

I would give the odds of the head or deck surface not being flat a 1 out of 10,000. The issue is going to be the gasket or the torque. In both cases, it's going to be the OPs fault, not IAGs.

Good luck,
Dominic
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,387 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

2. Bead blasting the heads will ABSOLUTELY cause a sealing issue, and the heads ABSOLUTELY needed to be decked, no question. While there is a sealing issue at this point in time, it does not dismiss the fact that this procedure needed to take place.
I think the point is lost here. We've already discussed the issue about the bead blasting, and that the head needs to be skimmed and ensured straight (and I even told him in person to have them skimmed, which I tell everyone). However, It shouldn't leak without any pressure behind it. We've discussed this in this thread. The stance from you guys is that the finish is causing it, where Keith told me it was similar to a concrete finish and has "thousands of tiny pores". Well no... Concrete is porous whereas the head finish did not have pores.

Again, we all agree the bead blasted finish is going to be problematic, but many of us agreed that it should still hold water. Now the heads have been skimmed, it still leaks. Now that it's leaking again, a new response is given which was never referenced at any point prior, anywhere. See where I am going with this?


On that note, obviously (yamahaSHO) I can see that you have some beef with an employee here (and from what I gather, a former friend). I apologize that you gentleman have experienced a disagreement that has left you bitter or displeased, but this business is filled with employees, including Keith, who care VERY much about the best interests of our customers, and want this situation to be resolved by any means necessary. We certainly don't want this to be happening any more than Gavin, as this type of banter is certainly counterproductive for all of us, and at the end of the day, we want Gavin to be enjoying his car and not experiencing these issues any more than he wants to be experiencing them...
We were acquaintances. It's actually this issue that caused the fallout. I messaged him to talk out this problem, where he said "250% why it's leaking" in reference to the finish on the heads. He got very defensive very quickly (and he'd been working there like 2 minutes at the time) when I hadn't even run through all the ideas and then he randomly stated, "I've already lost one friend working here" out of nowhere. Okay... I see where this is going.

I already knew his demeanor over a couple years of all his Facebook post. Negative all the time to where I un-followed him. I also know someone called him out for it so I followed again. It got slightly better. I said that to say, that's the type of demeanor I was dealing with while trying to talk through a problem. Eventually, I told (agreed) that he was too defensive and told him to disregard.


Oh, and I didn't tell Keith to suck start a shotgun. Unless he's now referred to as "them". ;)


I would give the odds of the head or deck surface not being flat a 1 out of 10,000. The issue is going to be the gasket or the torque. In both cases, it's going to be the OPs fault, not IAGs.
Let's get this straight... A bad gasket is NOT the OP's fault.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

Let's get this straight... A bad gasket is NOT the OP's fault.
Or IAGs, which was my point.

Not checking the gasket for foreign material is absolutely the OPs fault (if that's what the problem is). A responsible builder always fully inspects the gaskets. We always inspect ours. The customer who didn't had a coolant leak just like that.
We sold him the gaskets, but that doesn't make it our fault.
It's just a loose piece of cardboard. It doesn't mean the gasket is bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
Discussion Starter #714 (Edited)
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

A lot to respond to, so here goes:

-----

Rick/Keith/IAG,

First let me say as always thank you for the support thus far. It helps to know you got my back. I never questioned that aspect at all, I know you take care of your customers, as evidenced by your response here. The goal with posting this in my journal was to get other eyes on this situation from others' whose experience and advice I respect and don't take lightly. I hope this is not seen as going behind your backs; that was not my intent. I am not putting this all over NASIOC, the amount of people that have been following have been a few close members. I also have respect for IAG and it's people as well as the relationship we've had this far, that is why I've been open to feedback and advice from you as well. I hope I've been as neutral as possible and I'm not mad at anyone, just frustrated with my situation.

1) As Jason said, reasons seem to have been changing, that's why I was consulting him and others. I found it odd that JE says heatcycling likely won't help, as well as other members' experience with building. However, if you say your piece in this way, I will take your recommendation and go with it. I want to cooperate and follow your advice as well.

2) As I said earlier, yes I agree on this. It needed to be done like Jason said. This would've been an issue down the road. I remember reading proper surface prep before all this, but for some reason, forgot to take it into account the first time. And for that I blame myself completely. It was not easy personally getting over this the first time as a result. It should be noted that the leaks are slightly different than before resurface; there's only one small area that is damp on the block, indicating in that area, coolant is getting between the deck and that coated top layer on that side. The drips are actually on the gasket edges, which looks to me like coolant is getting between the layers which is surprising at the current clamping force. We(myself, others, JE) all think it's odd that it's not holding water at atmospheric pressure.

3) There were questions about one aspect of the procedure; going to 100ft-lbs on the centers AFTER the initial run up to 90. Other than that, I did this to a T of ARP's included instructions. That said, the current suspected "uneven torque" would really have to be measured to say bar-none this is the sole issue. HOWEVER, I torqued these so that's why I'm open to all this feedback. Still I feel that the effects of my doing so should not get this result.

4) Thank you, it's reassuring to know.

Thanks for working with me so far, I aim to continue the relationship and sort things out. It's just at first, with all this feedback from you guys and others whom I respect, I was getting conflicting experiences.

Seems that we should clear this up; I have been civil in my emails to you guys and I hope that is taken for what it is. Jason may be a little blunt in his wording, but like he said, he wasn't targeting Keith directly with that. However, a bit harsh. But I also know he doesn't just say things for no reason. It's not his car, but he is involved obviously. I'm a friend of his, but also a customer and I know he doesn't want to see me get shafted.

The exchange he had with Keith is his to work out, as hard as that may be. Though again, thanks for the vote of confidence that you're working towards making this endeavor successful, as this is not just a project car for me, it's a major part of my life(much to the dismay of my S.O.). This is my first personal foray into performance cars that I can call my own and I've made a lot of sacrifices to get here.

-----

Dominic, thanks for the input, I will keep this in mind. Like I said before, I looked over the gaskets before and didn't see anything like this, but I will do it again anyways. That is surprising you've seen this though. I want to address the issue as well, right to the heart of the matter. It's just that all the info I was being told was conflicting, and I certainly don't want to continue on normally, for risk of ruining parts. More on that later.

THIS is new info to me - this is NOT stated in the instructions included with the studs, and I have the newer instructions that were updated with the newer torque value of 90ft-lbs that was changed by ARP sometime in 2013. These studs have now been fully sequenced twice all around. Are you saying three times total? Or you saying three times successively in the same session? Again, the instructions that ARP included did not specify running up to torque and then backing them off like OEM.

Agreeing with Jason, bad gaskets would not be my fault for failure. I checked them before I installed them. But like I'm trying to get across elsewhere, I'm not blaming anyone and I don't even know if I can, just pointing out the fact that the general opinion was/is pointing to a block issue somewhere.

-----

Jason, I know you're mainly responding to Rick to clear the air and explain yourself, but I agree with your stances. Seems like certain folks were mistaken.

-----

Here's what I'm gonna do:

I'm pulling the motor again and going back down to the studs.

Do I need to only go to 90 on all studs per ARP? Or take into account OEM torque angle as well and go from 60 to 100 on the centers?(As part of the same torque sequence of course). Check 24hrs later.

After which and with it still on the stand, I will put coolant in and see if it leaks. If it doesn't, awesome, we will know that it was probably me, which I will be shocked if it came down to post-run up 10 ft-lbs added clamping. If it does, to follow IAG's instruction, I will aim to get everything installed, get a break-in tune, and heat cycle to see if it goes away. After that, who knows....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,112 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,387 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

Or IAGs, which was my point.

Not checking the gasket for foreign material is absolutely the OPs fault (if that's what the problem is). A responsible builder always fully inspects the gaskets. We always inspect ours. The customer who didn't had a coolant leak just like that.
We sold him the gaskets, but that doesn't make it our fault.
It's just a loose piece of cardboard. It doesn't mean the gasket is bad.
You're placing the blame on the OP and assuming he didn't check anything. That is my point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
Discussion Starter #717
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

Ship entire longblock to IAG and have them reinstall heads to block :)
Well I want to be sure myself of the agreed upon right way to do this so I can put it to rest. But yes, I actually have considered doing that. It's just the cost associated with shipping is going to be outrageous. We'll see....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

You're placing the blame on the OP and assuming he didn't check anything. That is my point.
You're really coming off as an asshole with poor reading comprehension.

If you noticed, in both of my posts, I said "If that's the problem"

So I'll sum it up again: IF THAT IS THE PROBLEM, it's his fault. Because, IF THAT IS THE PROBLEM, he obviously didn't check them well enough. If that isn't the problem, then nothing I said pertaining to that specific issue applies. I think that goes without saying, but I'll go ahead and say it for you.

So maybe you should seriously take a chill pill. You're more upset, more hostile and a much larger prick than the guy who owns the car, engine and is experiencing the issue. So if he isn't as upset as you, maybe there is something you should look into; like yourself.

At this point, you are only pure poison in the thread and you're not helping the OP at all because others are trying to help, but your attitude is making them less likely to help. Your misplaced anger will actually affect your friend negatively.

So get it under control.

If you think you have nothing to get under control, then you need to seek professional assistance. Recommending anyone commit suicide over an engine is pretty ridiculous.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,687 Posts
Re: Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

You're really coming off as an asshole with poor reading comprehension.

If you noticed, in both of my posts, I said "If that's the problem"

So I'll sum it up again: IF THAT IS THE PROBLEM, it's his fault. Because, IF THAT IS THE PROBLEM, he obviously didn't check them well enough. If that isn't the problem, then nothing I said pertaining to that specific issue applies. I think that goes without saying, but I'll go ahead and say it for you.

So maybe you should seriously take a chill pill. You're more upset, more hostile and a much larger prick than the guy who owns the car, engine and is experiencing the issue. So if he isn't as upset as you, maybe there is something you should look into; like yourself.

At this point, you are only pure poison in the thread and you're not helping the OP at all because others are trying to help, but your attitude is making them less likely to help. Your misplaced anger will actually affect your friend negatively.

So get it under control.

If you think you have nothing to get under control, then you need to seek professional assistance. Recommending anyone commit suicide over an engine is pretty ridiculous.
Yo dude, be the bigger man and let it go, to lower yourself to name calling is totally unnecessary. Period end of story. Or you could have explained yourself from a different perspective. Yammy can be blunt, but your response is out of line.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,199 Posts
Baron's '05 STi journal - **Motor is back in again**

FWIW Viton does melt and it sticks to stuff when it does, but at over 300C, not near coolant temps.

Do parts of the head gasket get that hot?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
701 - 720 of 988 Posts
Top