Beehive valve springs on FE Heads ??

[hwoods]

anybody running Beehive valve springs on a FE Motor?  Benefits?

[Drew Pojedinec]

Beehives, tool steel retainers. Just a street car. Can’t say if it’s better as I don’t have another
Comparable engine laying around. For me it was a “gee why not” kinda deals.

[CaptCobrajet]

Lots of beehive and conicals here these days.  Almost everything that leaves here has them now, unless it is a small budget flat tappet or a big solid roller.  Everything in between those two descriptions gets 'em. Lots of benefits to those styles over conventional springs. 

[blykins]

Yep, here too.

[HarleyJack17]

Are we going to get to see how those trick flows stack up anytime soon?

[scott foxwell]

I'll be odd man out...as usual...but not a fan of beehive springs. They're OK on certain applications with light weight and stable valve trains, but they have zero noticeable benefit over a traditional valve spring on something like an older FE. If you ever break one, good luck. At least with a single/damper or traditional dual spring, there is something to keep the valve from falling and hitting a piston. Too much "monkey see monkey do" with these...
JMO

[blykins]

I have two pairs here to go on engine builds. One build is just waiting on the thrust surface of a crankshaft to be tweaked. The other is waiting on a new engine block to arrive.

Should have a set on a running engine pretty soon.

[blykins]

I'll be odd man out...as usual...but not a fan of beehive springs. They're OK on certain applications with light weight and stable valve trains, but they have zero noticeable benefit over a traditional valve spring on something like an older FE. If you ever break one, good luck. At least with a single/damper or traditional dual spring, there is something to keep the valve from falling and hitting a piston. Too much "monkey see monkey do" with these...
JMO

Beehives and conicals work on just about everything.  Robert Pond runs PAC springs on his Stock Eliminator FE engine with over 500 lbs open pressure.  Never has broken one.

I put them in Cleveland’s, Windsor’s, and FEs....street, drag race, and some road race.  Never had a problem.

The benefit is in the shape of the coil cross section, weight of the spring and the weight of the valve spring retainer.  Works great on FE hydraulic roller setups.

[Barry_R]

I've used them several times now with good results.  I still suffer from that "pucker factor" with only a single spring in play - having torn down engines and found a broken inner or outer a couple times I will admit to being nervous.  But the upside of light weight and they seem to RPM really well for their rate makes them a good pick otherwise.

[My427stang]

I'll be odd man out...as usual...but not a fan of beehive springs. They're OK on certain applications with light weight and stable valve trains, but they have zero noticeable benefit over a traditional valve spring on something like an older FE. If you ever break one, good luck. At least with a single/damper or traditional dual spring, there is something to keep the valve from falling and hitting a piston. Too much "monkey see monkey do" with these...
JMO

I haven't used a set, but how I wish you would have left the last sentence off this post.

I sure don't get my feelings hurt much, but I have watched our guys on this forum actually test these and start finding some RPM with hyd rollers.  These guys are getting to the point that I think we may be able to start controlling some hyd roller lobes with a bit quicker ramp, unlike only a few years ago when hydrailic rollers had a tough time meeting the RPM you turned.  Other forums, or weekend bench racers may be monkey-see/monkey-do, and likely what you were pointing out, but I wouldn't say that about the guys on this forum

I do agree with you though, as others do, that it takes a little guts to trust them, but one of my next 462s, planned for a fall build, will be going this route with a cam only slightly more duration than your 390.  We'll see if I get bit by the bug too

[scott foxwell]

I'll be odd man out...as usual...but not a fan of beehive springs. They're OK on certain applications with light weight and stable valve trains, but they have zero noticeable benefit over a traditional valve spring on something like an older FE. If you ever break one, good luck. At least with a single/damper or traditional dual spring, there is something to keep the valve from falling and hitting a piston. Too much "monkey see monkey do" with these...
JMO

Beehives and conicals work on just about everything.  Robert Pond runs PAC springs on his Stock Eliminator FE engine with over 500 lbs open pressure.  Never has broken one.

I put them in Cleveland’s, Windsor’s, and FEs....street, drag race, and some road race.  Never had a problem.

The benefit is in the shape of the coil cross section, weight of the spring and the weight of the valve spring retainer.  Works great on FE hydraulic roller setups.

"Beehives and conicals work on just about everything"
So do traditional springs.
Benefit over what? Do you really push a traditional spring past it's limits, or is this just "theoretical" and "cool"?
Lot of people followed the crowd on this, and quickly switched back to traditional springs. You have to go a LONG way before you actually realize any benefit.

 

[scott foxwell]

I'll be odd man out...as usual...but not a fan of beehive springs. They're OK on certain applications with light weight and stable valve trains, but they have zero noticeable benefit over a traditional valve spring on something like an older FE. If you ever break one, good luck. At least with a single/damper or traditional dual spring, there is something to keep the valve from falling and hitting a piston. Too much "monkey see monkey do" with these...
JMO

I haven't used a set, but how I wish you would have left the last sentence off this post.

I sure don't get my feelings hurt much, but I have watched our guys on this forum actually test these and start finding some RPM with hyd rollers.  These guys are getting to the point that I think we may be able to start controlling some hyd roller lobes with a bit quicker ramp, unlike only a few years ago when hydrailic rollers had a tough time meeting the RPM you turned.  Other forums, or weekend bench racers may be monkey-see/monkey-do, and likely what you were pointing out, but I wouldn't say that about the guys on this forum

I do agree with you though, as others do, that it takes a little guts to trust them, but one of my next 462s, planned for a fall build, will be going this route with a cam only slightly more duration than your 390.  We'll see if I get bit by the bug too

All I can tell you is do a little OBJECTIVE research outside this page.
I push hyd rollers with upper .700 lift to 8000rpm...BB Chevy stuff...heavy stainless valves. I understand hyd rollers. Beehives have their place and can work, but like everything else, do your own research. My motor has .640 lift and a traditional inexpensive dual with damper and went well past 6500 on several pulls.

[blykins]

 You built a really nice engine. Now build 100 more like it and then you can have the authority to come back on here and tell us what we should and shouldn’t do.

Your first unedited post would have been plenty. If you don’t like beehives then it is your prerogative to not use them. However, a lot of us do use them and don’t have issues.  I have turned 6500 RPM as well with a small dual spring and a lazy lobe like you have.   However,  when you use a more aggressive lobe it is easier to pull rpm’s with lighter valve train.

You screwed up when you went and edited your post and proceeded to call us all a bunch of monkeys… You will never learn how to work well with others.

[My427stang]

[ll I can tell you is do a little OBJECTIVE research outside this page.
I push hyd rollers with upper .700 lift to 8000rpm...BB Chevy stuff...heavy stainless valves. I understand hyd rollers. Beehives have their place and can work, but like everything else, do your own research. My motor has .640 lift and a traditional inexpensive dual with damper and went well past 6500 on several pulls.

Scott, nothing I dislike more than a forum leg-lifting contest, but what would ever make you think I would not research, spec, and build my own?

Most importantly, I am not discounting your use of standard springs, because I use them too, but it doesn't make other techniques foolish any more than your own.

I also see Ti retainers on yours, which many would say have no place on a street engine, but you did things to make your setup work.  I applaud that, as I applaud the harmonic resistant and lighter retainers of a beehive when someone wants to try something new.

I can't speak for everyone, but for me, I just don't like the absolutes.  Beehive, conical, desmodronic, I don't care what spring you use, if a guy can "plan the flight and fly the plan" and tries to find ways to outmaneuver physical limitations, I say test and try.

[Barry_R]

I probably use as many hydraulic rollers on FE builds as anybody does. 

I usually use a dual spring on most of my street stuff and build them to peak between 5800 and 6000.
No need for anything fancy at that level.

The beehive has lower mass at the working end of the valve and will definitely get you another couple hundred RPM compared to a low dollar dual when using normal chrome-moly retainers on both, and with the same cam.  You can see it in the data and hear it in the cell.  Put a tool steel or TI retainer on the dual and the advantage goes pretty much away and the cost equalizes.  The TI retainer on a beehive seems like small gains due to the small size of the retainer.

In all honesty I have never seen a broken beehive, so anybody wanting to run them can proceed with confidence.