Head Removal: Tips 'n Tricks

[Brendan]

Originally Posted by alexiskai

Have you ever seen that actually happen? What makes you think the weak torque applied by the starter motor is capable of bending a rod?

i think that is a bad idea,The rope, mabey a head that has resently been off. i used the chain trick on my car , lifted it off the ground. did not budg. i used a head puller, heat penatrating oil ans wacked the studs with a body hammer, use more heat then a propane torch, repeated the prosess over a 3 weeks, the head finly gave free, take your time

[Brendan]

Originally Posted by alexiskai

What I'll say in its defense is:

1. It is by far the most recommended solution every time this problem comes up, by people who say it worked for them, so from an empirical standpoint it seems to be reliable.

2. 90% of stuck heads aren't literally fused to the block, they're just heavily gummed up and you don't have a good way to grip them from the outside. The force required to remove them is not large if applied effectively, and that's what the rope trick does.

there is no way The Rope Trick would have worked for my car i broke a Bill Stipe head puller, The Rope Trick may be good for a Head that was off a week ago , i just think its a bad idea, and everyone recamends it

[alexiskai]

Originally Posted by Brendan

there is no way The Rope Trick would have worked for my car i broke a Bill Stipe head puller, The Rope Trick may be good for a Head that was off a week ago , i just think its a bad idea, and everyone recamends it

"The rope method would not have succeeded in removing my cylinder head" and "the rope method risks damaging the engine" are two completely unrelated statements.

The closest analogue to putting rope into the cylinder is hydrolock. Water is incompressible; if a cylinder gets too much water in it, the piston will be stopped from turning by the volume of water.

If you do any research on hydrolock, you'll find that engines are damaged from hydrolock when the lock occurs while the engine is ON – most commonly by driving through a flooded area. If a car somehow hydrolocks while the engine is off, the car simply won't start. The torque from the starter is not sufficient to overcome the resistance of the connecting rod. The starter motor is stopped from turning, in the same way you can stop a ceiling fan just by blocking it with an object.

The conrod is stronger than the starter and that's why the rope method is safe. If you had used it, the result would have been that your starter would have been unable to turn the flywheel.

[johnbuckley]

Alexiskai_ Thank you so much for explaining re studs vs bolts . I now understand; I have been struggling for years to comprehend the reason !!

[Marshall V. Daut]

For what it's worth, from October, 1908 until May, 1927, fifteen million Model T Fords used 7/16" hex head bolts to secure the cylinder head to the block. The threads in the block and on the bolts were coarse. The compression ratio of Model T is only slightly lower than the Model A's, negligible actually. Bolts seemed to have done the job for those many years, at least good enough for Henry to stick with them for 19 years or so without changing to studs and nuts. I wonder what made him ultimately decide to use studs and nuts in the Model A??? Cost? Engineering discoveries? Also for what it's worth, being in the antique Ford hobby since 1966, during those years I have heard of (and experienced!) more Model A head gasket failures than Model T. 'Not taking sides which is better - studs or bolts - but draw your own conclusions from the Model T's "fairly" successful history.
Besides helping to seal the head gasket from leaking, copper head gasket spray also keeps the gasket from minute shifting, which can lead to blowouts in the narrow sections between cylinders. The late great expert engine builder Ron Kelley advised me to use copper spray for that purpose when I had him build a banger for me.
Marshall

[alexiskai]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by Marshall V. Daut

For what it's worth, from October, 1908 until May, 1927, fifteen million Model T Fords used 7/16" hex head bolts to secure the cylinder head to the block. The threads in the block and on the bolts were coarse. The compression ratio of Model T is only slightly lower than the Model A's, negligible actually. Bolts seemed to have done the job for those many years, at least good enough for Henry to stick with them for 19 years or so without changing to studs and nuts. I wonder what made him ultimately decide to use studs and nuts in the Model A??? Cost? Engineering discoveries? Also for what's it's worth, being in the antique Ford hobby since 1966, during those years I have heard of (and experienced!) more Model A head gasket failures than Model T. 'Not taking sides which is better - studs or bolts - but draw your own conclusions from the Model T's "fairly" successful history.

Can't say why it worked in the T. Maybe because the engine operates at lower RPMs?

Even on modern engines that use bolts, it's common to switch to studs if you are tuning the engine for higher performance. On my '18 Accord with the 1.5L turbo, there's a design flaw that's known to cause a lot of head gasket failures, and one of the suggested steps when you replace the gasket is to switch to ARP studs, which can be tightened to a higher clamp load than the OEM bolts.

Originally Posted by Marshall V. Daut

Besides helping to seal the head gasket from leaking, copper head gasket spray also keeps the gasket from minute shifting, which can lead to blowouts in the narrow sections between cylinders. The late great expert engine builder Ron Kelley advised me to use copper spray for that purpose when I had him build a banger for me.

I've heard this as well and yet I have a hard time believing that the spray would exert enough adhesive power to prevent the siamesed portions of the gasket from blowing out, relative to the compressive force exerted by the head. Who knows, might be true.

[johnbuckley]

[QUOTE=Marshall V. Daut;2362270]... from October, 1908 until May, 1927, fifteen million Model T Fords used 7/16" hex head bolts to secure the cylinder head to the block. The threads in the block and on the bolts were coarse. The compression ratio of Model T is only slightly lower than the Model A's, negligible actually. Bolts seemed to have done the job for those many years, at least good enough for Henry to stick with them for 19 years or so without changing to studs and nuts....[QUOTE]
Thanks Marshall and Alexiskai, an intriguing topic!

[Marshall V. Daut]

Point well made, "alexiskai". The way Ron Kelley explained it to me was to consider that if the holes in the head gasket fit around the studs tight enough to eliminate movement, you wouldn't be able to slide the gasket down over the studs. There is a slight looseness around the studs once the gasket is in place. As the cylinders fire, there is gasket vibration with a potential for movement. This is most critical in the very narrow area between the cylinders. Once the gasket starts "fluttering" from these vibrations, the gasket shifts and can blow out in this area. Old time hot rodders knew about this potentiality, so they would take a sharp center punch and hammer dozens of little craters into the metal in the block between the cylinders. The flared metal jagged edges would dig into the gasket and keep it from shifting. Of course, I doubt if the gasket movement could be seen or even measured. But according to Ron and apparently to those trail blazing hot rodders, Model A head gasket shifting is a real concern. Spraying sealant is just another way to reduce this from happening as much as possible.
Marshall

[Marshall V. Daut]

Before leaving the subject of holding a head gasket - which we've flogged to death here, mostly my fault - may I have one last word? While searching through my old "The Restorer" issues for the short article about Grandpa McCoy's 1931 Phaeton to complete a different topic under discussion on this website, by pure chance I came across the attached article written by world-famous Model A and B speed creator George Riley. Flipping through the magazine's pages, the bold heading "Holding the head gasket" jumped off the page to me. On the second page of the article, George discusses this very same topic as we are. Perhaps Ron Kelley had read this same re-printed article from the March-April, 1965 issue of "The Restorer" and passed that information along to me (which Larry Brumfield had also told me). I haven't read this article since the 1990's and had forgotten about it. Some readers here may find it interesting, if additional speed is desired from their Model A's.
Note that George cites the center punch prick trick to help keep the head gasket from shifting and ultimately blowing out. The pertinent passage in this section of the article reads: "The prick punch raises a small burr [sic] and this, pressing against the gasket, gives a non-skid effect. Most gaskets are blown due to slipping out at some point." (I added the "sic" to note the misspelling of bur) The last few words give support to Ron Kelley's (and Larry Brumfield's) assertion that the head gasket DOES move. The implication is that a moving head gasket can lead to a failure. Otherwise, why worry about it?
I should think that beyond making sure the block's deck and cylinder head are flat, a good head gasket is installed, creating burs around the cylinders (or at least in the thin area between them), using spray copper adhesive, and keeping the stud nuts properly torqued are about all we can do to reduce the possibility of blowing a head gasket.
O.K. I'll leave this topic alone from here on. 'Nuff said.
Marshall

[Big hammer]

Thank you for the information Marshall !

[alexiskai]

Originally Posted by Marshall V. Daut

The pertinent passage in this section of the article reads: "The prick punch raises a small burr [sic] and this, pressing against the gasket, gives a non-skid effect. Most gaskets are blown due to slipping out at some point."

I'll just note that in the article he prefaces this by saying "if you have trouble with the gasket moving." In other words this adjustment should be for-cause rather than standard practice.