Well, the 90-93 motors have main studs from the factory, the 94-96 motors have bolts. Not sure if they're TTY or not.WizardBlack wrote:Hmm, that seems awfully expensive for the mains. Forgive my lack of info (since I haven't perused that portion of the FSM's yet), but are the mains TTY? If not, it probably isn't worth it for mains. If head studs are available, then that leaves rod bolts which would be handy for cheap turbo builds.
As far as the "cheap torque" solution, that may be what some people value in the VH, but I see the tech info on this motor and I see it as a good platform for a 20 psi pump gas V8 beast.
As much engineering that went into this beast, I just hate to see guys leave it all stock and blow the crap outta it and then just pitch it and buy another. When they're all gone; they're all gone.
Yeah, too true. I have a full sized 92 FSM and a bible sized 94 FSM so I'll check out what they say on both of them.SuperHatch wrote:
Well, the 90-93 motors have main studs from the factory, the 94-96 motors have bolts. Not sure if they're TTY or not.
I agree 110% on the over engineering and ability to make gobs of power. That's what I chose it for, I was speaking for the majority of other VH swappers.
That jives with what I've seen on the 92 and 94 motors I've disassembled. My 92 motor had studs with crossbolts and my 94 motor had all bolts.WizardBlack wrote:Both books do NOT show a [X] symbol next to the main hardware which implies they need not be replaced when they are removed. OTOH, both books show main studs for four of the six whilst the 94 has main bolts for all 6 on each main.
Sounds like the early style stud/bolt combo is about the most we'd need, then. I guess rod bolts are the only area to look at, then. Any ideas on what level of torque the rods can handle anyways?SuperHatch wrote:
That jives with what I've seen on the 92 and 94 motors I've disassembled. My 92 motor had studs with crossbolts and my 94 motor had all bolts.