Exhaust manifold gaskets...
Discussion
I have just done mine, it is a bit of a pig to do but once you get stuck into it its not to bad. I got the gaskets and stainless bolts from ACT, the gaskets from them are metal faced which is 100% better than original. The trick to doing the job is to get a selection of different styles of ring spanner I think 9/16 was the size I also invested in a C shaped one. I managed to do the nearside from above but did the offside lower ones from below, didnt remove the exhaust except undoing the manifold from the Y section. That was where I made my biggest mistake I did the manifold up with special sealant then discovered a 5mm gap at the Y piece end to discover that it was all solid. What I should have done was connect the exhaust up first then bolt the manifold up. Luckily I dismantled the other side and managed to move the Y piece over and connect it to the completed side and then finished the last side. Now my car does not sound like a traction engine.Hope this helps let me know if you need anymore info.
Tyre Tread said:
Not WD40 as it is not a penetrating fluid. WD40 website said:
What does WD-40 do?
WD-40 fulfills five basic functions:
1. CLEANS: WD-40 gets under dirt, grime and grease to clean. It also dissolves adhesives, allowing easy removal of labels, tape and excess bonding material.
2. DISPLACES MOISTURE: Because WD-40 displaces moisture, it quickly dries out electrical systems to eliminate moisture-induced short circuits.
3. PENETRATES: WD-40 loosens rust-to-metal bonds and frees stuck, frozen or rusted metal parts.
4. LUBRICATES: WD-40's lubricating ingredients are widely dispersed and tenaciously held to all moving parts.
5. PROTECTS: WD-40 protects metal surfaces with corrosion-resistant ingredients to shield against moisture and other corrosive elements.
WD-40 fulfills five basic functions:
1. CLEANS: WD-40 gets under dirt, grime and grease to clean. It also dissolves adhesives, allowing easy removal of labels, tape and excess bonding material.
2. DISPLACES MOISTURE: Because WD-40 displaces moisture, it quickly dries out electrical systems to eliminate moisture-induced short circuits.
3. PENETRATES: WD-40 loosens rust-to-metal bonds and frees stuck, frozen or rusted metal parts.
4. LUBRICATES: WD-40's lubricating ingredients are widely dispersed and tenaciously held to all moving parts.
5. PROTECTS: WD-40 protects metal surfaces with corrosion-resistant ingredients to shield against moisture and other corrosive elements.
Pupp said:
As you and I both know, manufacturers claims and reality may differ.In my experience a multi function product does not always fulfil all of its functions as well as one that is dedicated to the specific task required of it.
However, should you and others choose to use a multi purpose product then be my guest.
I believe products like Plusgas and Kroil have much better 'creep' characteristics than WD39.5.
MADMAX2 said:
It's TVR mating faces you are talking about not bugatti you DO need a gasket between the joints
I thought it was JP that made the TVR manifolds, they have done plenty of installations on Bugatti & the like 
I guess Pupp was hinting that you'd not been remiss & let them get hot gas eroded to the state of scrap when he mentioned the condition.
There are plenty of us that use sealant rather than gaskets & with much less mating surface due to ported heads.... Its still your choice...
spend said:
I thought it was JP that made the TVR manifolds, they have done plenty of installations on Bugatti & the like
I guess Pupp was hinting that you'd not been remiss & let them get hot gas eroded to the state of scrap when he mentioned the condition.
There are plenty of us that use sealant rather than gaskets & with much less mating surface due to ported heads.... Its still your choice...
Spend, what type of sealent do you recommend?I guess Pupp was hinting that you'd not been remiss & let them get hot gas eroded to the state of scrap when he mentioned the condition.
There are plenty of us that use sealant rather than gaskets & with much less mating surface due to ported heads.... Its still your choice...
Tyre Tread said:
As you and I both know, manufacturers claims and reality may differ.
In my experience a multi function product does not always fulfil all of its functions as well as one that is dedicated to the specific task required of it.
However, should you and others choose to use a multi purpose product then be my guest.
I believe products like Plusgas and Kroil have much better 'creep' characteristics than WD39.5.
You really think in this age of product liability, consumer protection and trades description regulation that a multi-national is likely to risk its reputation by making knowingly bogus claims? I doubt it somehow. Of course there will be other products that may be more suited to any application you have in mind but there's a world of difference between ackowledging that and blandly asserting that something isn't what it plainly is. If I was attempting the job and had a dedicated penetrant to hand, then I would use it. If not but I had WD, then I would use that without worry (and have had decent results on similar tasks). In my experience a multi function product does not always fulfil all of its functions as well as one that is dedicated to the specific task required of it.
However, should you and others choose to use a multi purpose product then be my guest.
I believe products like Plusgas and Kroil have much better 'creep' characteristics than WD39.5.
As for the relative effectiveness of any of these preparations in capillary action terms, I imagine that will be entirely dependent on viscosity as physics will do the rest and none of has much inflence over that, so would be interested to see any empiric evidence that validates your 'belief' that WD is in any way inferior...
MADMAX2 said:
Pupp said:
If the mating faces are in decent nick, there is a school of thought that says a gasket isn't necessary - a smear of RTV can do the job nicely on exhaust joints (yep, really)
It's TVR mating faces you are talking about not bugatti you DO need a gasket between the joints Pupp said:
You really think in this age of product liability, consumer protection and trades description regulation that a multi-national is likely to risk its reputation by making knowingly bogus claims? I doubt it somehow.
YesPupp said:
Of course there will be other products that may be more suited to any application you have in mind but there's a world of difference between ackowledging that and blandly asserting that something isn't what it plainly is.
Did I, or did I give an opinion?
Pupp said:
If I was attempting the job and had a dedicated penetrant to hand, then I would use it. If not but I had WD, then I would use that without worry (and have had decent results on similar tasks).
I have used it when nothing else was to hand but found it to be apparently less effective than Kroil which was brilliant and Plusgas which is good (Other penetrating fluid are available - thought I'd better put that in before I get 'Lawyered' - Ref How I Met Your Mother . Pupp said:
As for the relative effectiveness of any of these preparations in capillary action terms, I imagine that will be entirely dependent on viscosity as physics will do the rest and none of has much inflence over that, so would be interested to see any empiric evidence that validates your 'belief' that WD is in any way inferior...
Can't say I have any data to offer which is why I offered my opinion 
A quick Google search reveals plenty of opinion out there in the big wide world that tends to agree with my opinion. Not sure that's a valid enough reason for some people to even harbour the remotest possibility that someone else's opinion might have an element of validity though.
I didn't realise that PH had employed opinion police as well as grammar and spelling police.
Tyre Tread said:
Pupp said:
You really think in this age of product liability, consumer protection and trades description regulation that a multi-national is likely to risk its reputation by making knowingly bogus claims? I doubt it somehow.
YesPupp said:
Of course there will be other products that may be more suited to any application you have in mind but there's a world of difference between ackowledging that and blandly asserting that something isn't what it plainly is.
Did I, or did I give an opinion?
Pupp said:
If I was attempting the job and had a dedicated penetrant to hand, then I would use it. If not but I had WD, then I would use that without worry (and have had decent results on similar tasks).
I have used it when nothing else was to hand but found it to be apparently less effective than Kroil which was brilliant and Plusgas which is good (Other penetrating fluid are available - thought I'd better put that in before I get 'Lawyered' - Ref How I Met Your Mother . Pupp said:
As for the relative effectiveness of any of these preparations in capillary action terms, I imagine that will be entirely dependent on viscosity as physics will do the rest and none of has much inflence over that, so would be interested to see any empiric evidence that validates your 'belief' that WD is in any way inferior...
Can't say I have any data to offer which is why I offered my opinion A quick Google search reveals plenty of opinion out there in the big wide world that tends to agree with my opinion. Not sure that's a valid enough reason for some people to even harbour the remotest possibility that someone else's opinion might have an element of validity though.
I didn't realise that PH had employed opinion police as well as grammar and spelling police.
Pupp said:
As you have so much time on your hands, suggest you delve into the dictionary (or even the internet as you place so much faith in it), and research the difference between opinion and fact. If you confuse one for the other on here, don't bleat if you get pulled up
Shamelessly stolen from another thread:Stolen from another site:
Machinist's Workshop magazine tested penetrants for break out torque on rusted nuts.
Results are below; they arranged a subjective test of all the popular penetrants with the control being the torque required to remove the nut from a "scientifically rusted" environment using different penetrating oils.
Nothing...... average load 516 pounds
WD-40 .................... 238 pounds
PB Blaster ............... 214 pounds
Liquid Wrench ............ 127 pounds
Kano Kroil ............... 106 pounds
ATF-Acetone mix.............53 pounds
The ATF-Acetone mix was a "home brew" mix of 50 - 50 automatic transmission fluid and acetone.
* Note the "home brew" was better than any commercial product in this one particular test.
From here: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Not exactly definitive but some evidence.
Perhaps you might like to tell me where I said it was fact. I stated an opinion. Just because I didn't say it was an opinion does not make it anything other than an opinion.
Are we only allowed to state facts that we can support with substantial evidence now. Hellooooo - Internet Police?
If all postings in future must be based on fact there's not going to be much content on PH.
As for time on my hands: Only while I'm supposed to be working during the day!
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff