Snyder's Head Problem

[1931 flamingo]

James Rogers: Is this "flaw" the reason you're selling the "new" heads on the SWAP site with the .060 "cut" ??
Paul in CT

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by James Rogers

What does it matter, the studs are incorrect also. The only way to simulate Ford's original specs is to use NOS studs and mill the head to factory specs. Pouring the cast iron is not the problem, the machining is.

This is true too regarding reproduction ones.

So the next line of questions for folks to ponder is during the rebuild, did the rebuilder 'deck' the block? If so, how much?? Was that the first time this procedure has been done to that block?? Do you think this affects the clamping force of the block because one thread in the stud hole potentially has been eliminated? And, just how many threads are necessary (i.e.: required) for the stud to adequately clamp the head to the block with 5.5:1 compression?

Originally Posted by BILL WILLIAMSON

I can't believe that ANYONE WOULD NOT SEAT THE STUDS TIGHTLY!! That's how they were intended to be installed!!
When they're loose, they wobbble, if the stud turns while torqueing, then you're tightening with the coarse threads which equals LESS TORQUE. This way violates all the rules of common sense, proper assembly.
If any stud hole has water below it, it'll leak like a sieve up around the stud & nut.
I always use Locite to seal the threads & tighten them to 10 Ft Lbs.
Ya'll do what you want, but mine don't leak!! Bill W.

If you think about this, how does one "seat the stud(s)" if there is a hole in the bottom? What do we seat the stud against? Therefore as you mentioned, using a thread sealant is a good thing. Having a stud height gauge to use to set the proper height after the sealant has been applied and the stud installed helps lock the stud in place. These are easy to make. One other point, if the fine thread and the course thread end of the stud have equal friction, then the nut on the fine thread end will turn during the torquing procedure because of the mechanical advantage on that end. Granted the torque specification will likely be skewed however most would agree this is moot because torque wrenches, nor torque values per se' were not known back in the day when the Model-A engine was manufactured.

Originally Posted by 1931 flamingo

James Rogers: Is this "flaw" the reason you're selling the "new" heads on the SWAP site with the .060 "cut" ??
Paul in CT

Paul, I'm sure James will come along and answer you definitively but I'm pretty sure what he did was buy a group of 5.5 heads and machine them to become a 5.9/6.0 compression ratio head to meet the needs of us who were needing that higher compression ratio while the other heads are out of production.

[James Rogers]

Paul, Brent is correct. I am only machining the heads for compression. I don't have any problem with the heads and stud height. I have installed many more than I have cut and find that if I add .040 to .060 to the height of the studs they work and the nut is correct in relation to the stud. I also find that NONE of the studs on the market will run down into the block and be the correct height when bottomed out. All will be too short, so how do you combat this because, all will have to be at less than tight. Brent is also correct when he suggests to look at the block. It could have been decked several times before and this can affect many things ie; piston, protrusion stud length and height when the head is installed, valve seats, even height of the deck to pan rail distance. I have neverhad anyone or seen anyone measure the pan-deck distance either before or after cutting. Everyone I have talked to or watched just set up with the deck at the ends or use an indicator to set up by the ends. Mind you, I have never seen all operations so, I am sure there are some out there that do but, can you find/afford them?

[James Rogers]

How is it that people can come on here with less than 10 lifetime posts and start a controversy like this and get everyone here in an uproar and never post a rebuttal to opposing opinions? Hit and run??????

This is good conversation but the reason the original poster started this escapes me. Did he just want to start trouble amoung friends or is he just venting?

[theHIGHLANDER]

Thanks for the opinions, and y'all can do as ya wish I reckon. But let me get this straight...by not "wrenching" my studs in I'm doing shitty engine work? The age of the thread requires tightness? Me and my racin boys are just lucky. We NEVER reef down on the studs. C L A M P I N G force. I put over 400 WFO 7800RPM trouble free passes on my last race motor at 14.11:1. Luck? My bud's was a tic over 15:1 and a mix of aluminum in there too. I don't count his rounds but it stays together all year. We ain't talking Top Fuel where they get redone every round.

So skip the racers, no pressure there. Maybe the Packards, also studed, are just lucky for me? Then again, maybe because I use the old nasty sealants that many don't like to use I simply "get by"? Rather than get all wound up about the studs/procedures/clamping forces, how bout them block threads? If they really are that bad then you need inserts. Bushings with inside and outside threads are far superior to heli-coils, if there's only a couple that are questionable then you wouldn't need to get too hi-tech to install em. Worst case scenario, rent a mag drill for accuracy. I have several Packards out there, decades old restorations, no leaks, no issues. Everyone has their ways and their sources for info. Ya gotta do what works for you I guess. Whatever you choose, it should give massive peace of mind as you clear turn 4 at 8400RPM...

Enjoy the Holiday kids.

[Bubby Sharp in KY]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

How in the world does a head bolt work on a model T or a modern high compression engine? It would be nearly impossible to get full threads and proper tourque on a head bolt ! I think Purdy swoft has a good idea about using the ignition clamp studs . I am well pleased with the Snyder heads preformance and a lot of other people must be too, be thankful we have them. Bubby Sharp in KY

[George Miller]

Let me say as a old machinist there is no reason for getting boss height wrong. It would be just as easy to get it right. Sounds like some one got the wrong dimension for the head.

Did we not have this same issue on this head a couple of years ago.

I worked in the hydraulac cylinder manufacturing for many years, we made cylinders up to 24" bore. The standard for studs, also tie rods is the stud should be screwed in the block 1-1/2 times the dia or a little over 5/8 of a inch. .655. It should also be a close fit. You do not use a standard tap to clean the threads like most model a blocks have had done at some time.

[V4F]

use the grade 8 studs & locktite them & back the off .

[James Rogers]

Originally Posted by Bubby Sharp in KY

How in the world does a head bolt work on a model T or a modern high compression engine? It would be nearly impossible to get full threads and proper tourque on a head bolt ! I think Purdy swoft has a good idea about using the ignition clamp studs . I am well pleased with the Snyder heads preformance and a lot of other people must be too, be thankful we have them. Bubby Sharp in KY

Bubby, I agree with you on all you post except, what Purdy suggests. Using the distributor wire stud, goes against the original posters problem which, is the studs are too short because of the thickness of the head. Using the stud Purdy suggests would make the stud too long which would be as bad. In the end for judging, the studs are WRONG as are the heads WRONG. The heads are wrong in another sense as they are marked at the time they are cast and the originals are marked also. The 5.5 heads have 2 round bumps on the top on the driver side with 5 picks on each which designates them as 5.5 heads. The original heads have a dimple on the front between the water outlet mount and the pump mount which looks like a 3/16" X 1/16" bump.
I just see that for judging, which is the original posters issue, the heads have more discrepancies than just the stud boss thickness. Besides that, where did he go anyway? Why is he not part of this discussion?

[James Rogers]

Originally Posted by George Miller

Let me say as a old machinist there is no reason for getting boss height wrong. It would be just as easy to get it right. Sounds like some one got the wrong dimension for the head.

Did we not have this same issue on this head a couple of years ago.

I worked in the hydraulac cylinder manufacturing for many years, we made cylinders up to 24" bore. The standard for studs, also tie rods is the stud should be screwed in the block 1-1/2 times the dia or a little over 5/8 of a inch. .655. It should also be a close fit. You do not use a standard tap to clean the threads like most model a blocks have had done at some time.

I agree George but, as has been debated here many times, repo parts are seldom made to original specs. If they are in the beginning, they are soon modified to be off for some reason not understood by most except for the manufacturer.

[BILL WILLIAMSON]

Naturally, I don't insist on a stud "seating" if it's obvious that it'll screw to CHINA,! I set it level with the others and let the Loctite do it's job of locking & sealing.
Original poster's concern was appearance for judging, some others concern was durability.
I think it was James that said, whatever we've found that works well for us. There's always variables to deal with.
Good discussion, lots of info & viewpoints. Bill W.

[fordgarage]

Originally Posted by James Rogers

...
I just see that for judging, which is the original posters issue, the heads have more discrepancies than just the stud boss thickness. Besides that, where did he go anyway? Why is he not part of this discussion?

I don't see where the original post (below) had anything at all to do with judging.
He was just legitimately commenting on the head being made wrong, and also the available studs not working properly with it.

Also, the correct original dimension from the gasket surface to the top of the 12 stud bosses is 2.25 inches.

Originally Posted by meskhov

Just purchased a new 5,5 to 1 head and just found out that when I installed it found out it is thicker than the original by about a 1/16". I called Tom at Snyder's and he told me they had a batch that the tickness was off and would be corrected with the new batch. The top of the studs are about 3 threads shy of being flush with the top of the nut. The goseneck is worse only 1/2 of the nut catches the stud and this is with a new Snyder's outlet! This is totally unacceptable for paying this amount of money for a new part that is supposed to fit perfect. They tried telling me to back off te studs a few turns but come on really? I'm no dummy when it comes to mechanial problems as I've restored a dozen cars over the years and never had the problems of repro parts as I've had with A and T parts. I'm going to mill down the tops of the bosses to brind the dimension equal to an original head so I'll have the 1 thread exposed.
Hate to vent but tis is the 3rd head in the last year that has this problem, so much for the new batch, huh?

[Purdy Swoft]

Originally Posted by James Rogers

Bubby, I agree with you on all you post except, what Purdy suggests. Using the distributor wire stud, goes against the original posters problem which, is the studs are too short because of the thickness of the head. Using the stud Purdy suggests would make the stud too long which would be as bad. In the end for judging, the studs are WRONG as are the heads WRONG. The heads are wrong in another sense as they are marked at the time they are cast and the originals are marked also. The 5.5 heads have 2 round bumps on the top on the driver side with 5 picks on each which designates them as 5.5 heads. The original heads have a dimple on the front between the water outlet mount and the pump mount which looks like a 3/16" X 1/16" bump.
I just see that for judging, which is the original posters issue, the heads have more discrepancies than just the stud boss thickness. Besides that, where did he go anyway? Why is he not part of this discussion?

I also didn't see anything in the original post about judgeing. I guess if your building for judgeing you've gotta do what you've gotta. My reference to the ignition cable studs was because I feel that they .could be a viable alternative for the home model A mechanic. For a driver car these studs would allow the average model A mechanic to install his new head and have the ability to use all of the block threads and still have threads above the head nut.

Criswellink, on # 16 of present thread posted a link to a previous thread about this subject in 2010. There were four pages in the thread. On page three, #43 , Model A apprentist, posted pictures. the pictures showed the way that it looked with the standard length stud and a picture with the ignition cable stud and how far it protruded above the nut. It didn't look that bad to me

[James Rogers]

Well, I guess you all are correct. I don't see anything in the original post that indicates he is doing judged cars. My apologies. As far as the ignition stud, I guess for a driver car, I suppose it would work but would protrude above the nut and look as bad as one that was a couple of threads short. Work better, maybe look better, not so much. I am just used to working around little problems like this so, I don't think about it. I do agree that in the last 3 years I haven't gotten a Snyder head that was the same thickness as an original. I agree, it should be as easy to make the bosses correctly but evidently nobody can. I also know most of my aluminum and cast iron aftermarket heads are this way.

[Purdy Swoft]

Here is a picture showing the difference. Anybody is entitled to their opinion
I still don't think that it looks bad. Maybe three threads above the nut. I would think that it would be best to bottom the stud and have threads above the nut. I know that this is the way that I would do mine.

[Kohnke Rebabbitting]

I have never taken any motor down, cars, tractors, or machines of any kind, where the stud bolts were left loose. If something like a stud bolt is not long enough, you go the say MSC, and get ones in the spec. range, and machine as needed. If a bolt in something is to long, you don't add 4, or 5 extra lock washers, you machine the bolt, or find a replacement.

What some don't seem to under stand, is, putting in a stud bolt, they have to be tight!

Why, do they have to be tight???

Because, a stud bolt will take more pressure then a Cap bolt, as it is not pulling on the threads only in the block!!

With the stud tight it is pulling on the block as a solid piece, as it is locked to the block, NOT to just the threads!!

Lastly, I would say, if some have to ask how to seat studs, or in fact how the stud is locked in as Opposed to a cap bolt, when you are trying to defend loose studs, you will never get it any way!

[BILL WILLIAMSON]

Originally Posted by Purdy Swoft

Here is a picture showing the difference. Anybody is entitled to their opinion
I still don't think that it looks bad. Maybe three threads above the nut. I would think that it would be best to bottom the stud and have threads above the nut. I know that this is the way that I would do mine.

Purdy,
I think the long one looks good, looks substantial, I wish all mine looked like that. Aw shucks, why do I care, I got me a whole new set of CKROME acorn nut covers! I stick them on with a dab of bubble gum, so's they can come off easy for a ree-torque. Someday, I'll be "normal" again. Bill W.

[Tom Wesenberg]

I just measured my Snyder's 5.5 head and an original stock head and they both measured exactly the same at 2.2275". The Snyder's head looks excellent in every way. It's still in the box it came in, but I don't foresee any problems and will use all original studs and nuts.

If it had been too high, then I would have milled the bosses down to the correct height.

[Purdy Swoft]

Originally Posted by BILL WILLIAMSON

Purdy,
I think the long one looks good, looks substantial, I wish all mine looked like that. Aw shucks, why do I care, I got me a whole new set of CKROME acorn nut covers! I stick them on with a dab of bubble gum, so's they can come off easy for a ree-torque. Someday, I'll be "normal" again. Bill W.

Thanks Bill, I always liked the chrome nut covers. Here is my 31 tudor with the head nut covers. I bought this engine from a guy that was going to make a street rod . The engine was professionaly rebuilt and only run for a few minutes. the guys son wanted a street rod so he sold me the engine, transmission and muffler. the engine had been painted, head nuts and all. I decided to use the nut covers being as it is mine and I could do it as I pleased.

[meskhov]

First I would like to say thanks to most that replied.
George, you are correct indeed about the 1.5 x thread diameter for depth as that is in the Machinists handbook.
Let me also state to James that I'm very upset and insulted that you call me a hit and run poster. I am merely posting facts about my findings with a new product that has viable issues that should have been corrected years ago. I had company come from out of state this past holiday weekend and had better things to do then argue with you.
I am merely advising my fellow Model A members so they know of an option to correct the wrong thickness of the new Snyder 5.5 head so that the nuts will be flush, that's all. If you don't want to use or believe the findings then that is your decision but don't go slamming new members that are here to learn and help others in this hobby!
I rest my case.