https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=158854

 

Add on a piece of pipe and you have a timing gear installer as well.

https://ls1tech.com/forums/tools-fabrication/134148-balancer-installer-kit.html

And a short piece and you can use it to push against when removing crank pulley and/or timing gear.

 

Why not just buy a bolt that is about an inch longer for a couple of bucks. Thats what I did. It's a hell of a lot cheaper. Just my 2 cents.

 

Because then the strain of pressing the pulley on is put on the crank threads. Ask someone that screwed up the threads in the crank how cheap it was to fix. People don't seem to mind spending $10 more for a piece of steel, a bolt and a nut to change valve springs.

 

Whatever works. I've build over a dozen motors using the same bolt with a washer to get the hub started, then switching to the original bolt to draw it the rest of the way on. Either method that is used puts stress on the crank threads. The only time you are going to have a problem is if you don't have enough thread engagement. As far as the valve spring tools go, I saw those too. It's amazing how willing people are to spend money on some of that stuff.

 

The stock bolts don't have the harndness or tensile strength that the studs provide. Stock bolts will deform at much lower torque levels than good studs will, like the ones used in the tool above. Plus you're placing a lot of stress on the crank (for example) threads because you're turning the bolts threads on it and at the same time pushing the crank pulley on. So you have two forces acting here, rotating the bolt against the crank threads and the push back toward the front of the car experienced by the stock bolt due to the crank pulley.

A fellow in the internal section just snapped a factory bolt off in his head b/c he didn't use a stud and grade 8 nut setup like you're supposed to. Now he has to pull the head and have the snapped off bolt removed b/c he can't get to it with an EZ-out (no room). If he would have used a stud with the nut it wouldn't have happened and he wouldn't have to go buy an EZ-out, buy a new head gasket, new headbolts, new gallon of Dex-Cool, etc, etc.

There have been others destroy their threads using the stock bolt to pull the pulley on to the crank snout, also.

This is why they make balancer installers that use a threaded rod (stud) and nut to install these properly. They put less stress on the threads they're inserted in because you're not cranking on a bolt and turning inside the threads. With the threaded rod you have a FIXED element in crank threads and are now simply turning a nut fixed on the threaded rod threaded inside the crank snout. 90% of all the stress is now being applied to the nut and threaded rod, very little is actually being placed on the crank threads now b/c it's just holding the threaded rod in place. Therefore you don't strip or damage your crank threads.

There's a right way and a wrong way to do things. Sure, the easy not so correct way may work for you but that won't hold true across the board as is evidence by quite a few on here that have damaged the crank threads with the stock bolt when re-installing it. However, using the threaded rod and nut will prevent all this.

 

The stock bolt on my engine, as well as the longer one that I use for removal and installation, is a grade 8 equiv. or better. I assume that the studs that you are referring to are grade 8 also. That means that both the bolts and the mentioned studs are of the same hardness and the same tensile strength. As far as the stress issue goes: the stress induced on the threads is equal to the applied axial tensile force divided by the tensile-stress area. The tensile-stress area is typical calculated, based on experimental testing, using the average of the minor (root) diameter and the pitch diameter. When a bolt engages a thread, theoretically all the threads in engagement should share the load. In actuality, inaccuracies in the thread spacing, cause virtually all the load to be taken by the first pair of threads. Thus, the conservative approach in calculating thread stresses is to assume the worst case of one thread-pair taking the entire load. The other extreme is to assume that all the engaged threads share the load equally. Both of these assumptions can be used to calculate estimated thread stresses. The true stress will be between these extremes, but most likely closer to the one-thread assumption. Therefore, with a properly lubicated bolt, installation of the balancer does not induce any greater stress on the threads of the crank. Also, the area that the axial tensile force is being applied to is increasing as the bolt is tightened, which in theory would lower the thread stresses. The stess in the stud used for this application should remain constant throughout the installation.

You also commented that others have destroyed their threads by using the stock bolt to draw the balancer onto the crank. My original post states that I use a longer grade 8 equiv. bolt with washers to draw the pulley into position so that adequate thread engagement is maintained. The other plus to this method is that you don't have to worry as much about the bolt bottoming out in the crank and damaging the threads. Quite often the studs will rotate when installing components, driving them deeper into the drilling and possible damageing the threads of the crank, especially when using a hardened stud.

As far as 90% of the stress being applied to the nut when using a stud setup and 10% being applied to the crank threads, this statement is false. If anything, there is more stress in the crank threads than the nut in this application. The nut is usually softer that the stud and thus are typically weaker. This promotes local yielding in the nut threads when the fastener is tightened, which can improve the thread fit and promote load-sharing between threads. This would increase the tensile-stress area between the stud and the nut, thus reducing the stress in that assembly while the stress remains the same between the stud and the crank. This would skew the higher stress values into the crank threads and away from the nut/stud threads. When it comes to the stripping of the threads, I can provide you with the shear stress equations and reasoning if you like.

One last comment, if you are buying threaded rod from an individual that has cut it up from a longer section, be careful. The rod might have been grade 8 material before, but if it has been heated during the cutting process (i.e. chop saw), that heat treatment process will be undone. Also how can you tell if the material is actually grade 8, it's not like a bolt that contains markings on the head.

Well I think that I have taken up enough space in this post, so I will not comment on the other sections of your post.

In summary, I guess you can continue doing things the "right" way and I will continue doing things the cheaper "easy not so correct" way.

 

Hey, how about if you don't want to buy one of my tools, just dont. Why don't you take a look at any professional tool company's balancer installer tool and see if it is a bolt, or some type of stud and a nut. I guess everyone must be doing it wrong.

Oh, and why would I misrepresent the material my tool is made out of. Not everyone is a liar and a cheat.

 

I personally think it's worth the $25 you're asking for the kit. I paid about that for my own parts, but then had to go cut it apart (with a high speed metal heating AKM powered hacksaw ).

Some people will always try to use a flathead screwdriver on a phillips head screw, no matter how much you tell them that the job can be done easier by using the right tool.

 

First of all, I'm not looking for a fight, and I'm not trying to say that your tool is not a good method for installing the balancer. Your setup is probably a heck of a lot cheaper than something from spx/kentmore tools (and yours won't take 6 weeks to get). I was simply trying to post an alternative method that I use. And I wasn't trying to say that you were out to cheat people with material properties. Just offering a word of caution to whoever reads this, I got burned on a supposed grade 8 stud install tool a few years ago (snapped in half the night before going to the track). That's when I started using a longer bolt and washer. I apoligize if that is the way I came across. I'm just trying to participate in this forum in hopes that maybe someone can benefit from the mistakes that I've made in the past.

 

bowtie, I assumed your post was in reference to a non-grade 8 or better bolt.

You didn't specify it in your post so I "assumed" it wasn't a grade 8 bolt. The beef I have is when other use stock bolts, i.e. the ones from our water pump, as a sufficient method to use to compress that valvespring lever-tool. It's too weak and it'll break, as it has on a few b/c they didn't use a grade 8 or better stud.

I do have a question though, why do companies use studs over bolts in the racing type field? Is it better torque, more even and accurate torque, none of the above?

 

cannibal,
Sorry for the mix up, my original post was really only in reference to the balancer install, and boy did it **** off a couple people. I always thought that the reasoning for use of a stud and nut setup instead of a bolt allowed the install/removal kits to be more universal. In other words, you can use the kit on any pulley that has the same threads reguardless of thread depth or a recessed counterbore. The studs are also cheaper to manufacture and probably cheaper to package. When the threads are adequately lubricated, I can't see how there would be a torque difference between the two setups though.

 

The best reason I've found for using stud kits (especially for cylinder heads) is ease of installation. When you need to get things together in a hurry, you really can't beat studs, especailly if you are using a rev kit under your cylinder head.

There are other benifits, including improved pre tensioning accuracy (what we are trying to acomplish by "torquing" a fastener). If I remember right there was some good reading on arp's site.

 

https://ls1tech.com/forums/forced-induction/164574-messed-up-crank-snout-now-waht.html

 

Made more tools. Have plenty for sale.

 

I received my pulley installation tool from 2xLS1, and it looks nice. I'll report more results after I actualy get to use it (maybe next week?)

 

*top*

 

Does not having a way to hold the stud from rotating while driving the balancer into place work out?

Not a flame at all, just that the balancer installers I have seen have that on 'em.
I like the ingenuity, I sure wish I had thought of that idea. Hope it sells.

 

once the threaded stud is inserted into the crank, there is no need to hold it. I also used some anti-seize on the threads to make it easier to install and remove.

 

not sure I would call that a tool. Looks like a stud, a nut and couple washers to me.
Seriously, What it is really missing is a bearing!
I have a good balancer install tool with about 8 different inserts that thread inside a huge stud for different cranks.
Unfortuneatly no insert for the ls1 crank.
But trust me the bearing takes a lot of load off the stud threads and makes the install much much easier. It does have a wrench head on the stud as well.
Add a bearing to your kit and it will last a whole hell of a lot longer before you strip the stud and nut.