shimming valvesprings for equal pressure?

[plovett]

Paulie,

Here's some data for you.

Thanks Brent!  I will digest that info.  I gotta go play with chemicals for a while.....

pl

[frnkeore]

Wow Brent, now your a mind reader. You need to put that on your business card, too.

Frank, I just figured out what you're doing and it's very cunning.  If you hang around long enough and start enough arguments with engine builders, you'll figure out which parts to use on your SBF build.  That's a good way to look knowledgeable and save face!  Kudos to you!  So far, we've helped you with pushrod diameter, valve spring pressure requirements, and that Erector Set main girdle that you built.  You're well on your way now!

Frank:  "You need to save weight on pushrods."
Engine builders:  "No, you need to use the largest diameter, most rigid, pushrod that you can fit."

Argument ensues.  *Frank furiously taking notes, "Small pushrod bad.  Big pushrod good."*

Rather than make up what I say, I'd rather that you find the post and do direct quotes. Is that asking to much?

Regarding the push rod topic, what I actually said, had nothing to do with the size of the push rod. I asked, why run the oil threw the push rod, like you do with your rockers, since it adds weight, rather than use the std oil system, with dry push rods. I don't know why that upsets you?

Frank:  "Seat pressure isn't critical."
Engine builders:  "Seat pressure is arguably more critical than open."

Argument ensues.  *Frank writing:  "Ok, seat pressure IS important."
Again, what I actually said, was that I want the lifter and lobe, to remain in contact, with ~.060 CBC, FIRST, take what you get with seat pressure and if that has to be addressed, use the heal, to address it.

I get it now!  You're such a sly one, Frank.


Again your mind reading skills kick in )
Since you apparently only have access to a 1969 TRW parts book, just let me know if you need any help picking valve springs and components for your build.  I have access to a lot of stuff and a lot of technology has changed since you built that 427 50 years ago.
At 7K the valve train, had no issues, with the SL, Chet Herbert Roller cam. He directed me to the right springs, rather than suggesting .600 springs, for a .670 cam as I saw done last May. Math skills again?


« Last Edit: Today at 03:57:50 AM by blykins »
Report to moderator   Logged
Brent Lykins
Lykins Motorsports
Custom FE Street, Drag Race, Road Race, and Pulling Truck Engines
Custom Roller & Flat Tappet Camshafts
www.lykinsmotorsports.com
brent@lykinsmotorsports.com
www.customfordcams.com
502-759-1431
Instagram:  brentlykinsmotorsports

[frnkeore]

Last post, between Brent and I on this subject, I'll move on.

If Brent wants to ignore, lift loft, so be it. I think most of us know how to set CBC by now and I'll address seat bounce, with my own relational.

Other can use this info, in their own way.

[blykins]

Wow Brent, now your a mind reader. You need to put that on your business card, too.

Frank, I just figured out what you're doing and it's very cunning.  If you hang around long enough and start enough arguments with engine builders, you'll figure out which parts to use on your SBF build.  That's a good way to look knowledgeable and save face!  Kudos to you!  So far, we've helped you with pushrod diameter, valve spring pressure requirements, and that Erector Set main girdle that you built.  You're well on your way now!

Frank:  "You need to save weight on pushrods."
Engine builders:  "No, you need to use the largest diameter, most rigid, pushrod that you can fit."

Argument ensues.  *Frank furiously taking notes, "Small pushrod bad.  Big pushrod good."*

Rather than make up what I say, I'd rather that you find the post and do direct quotes. Is that asking to much?

Regarding the push rod topic, what I actually said, had nothing to do with the size of the push rod. I asked, why run the oil threw the push rod, like you do with your rockers, since it adds weight, rather than use the std oil system, with dry push rods. I don't know why that upsets you?

Frank:  "Seat pressure isn't critical."
Engine builders:  "Seat pressure is arguably more critical than open."

Argument ensues.  *Frank writing:  "Ok, seat pressure IS important."
Again, what I actually said, was that I want the lifter and lobe, to remain in contact, with ~.060 CBC, FIRST, take what you get with seat pressure and if that has to be addressed, use the heal, to address it.

I get it now!  You're such a sly one, Frank.


Again your mind reading skills kick in )
Since you apparently only have access to a 1969 TRW parts book, just let me know if you need any help picking valve springs and components for your build.  I have access to a lot of stuff and a lot of technology has changed since you built that 427 50 years ago.
At 7K the valve train, had no issues, with the SL, Chet Herbert Roller cam. He directed me to the right springs, rather than suggesting .600 springs, for a .670 cam as I saw done last May. Math skills again?


« Last Edit: Today at 03:57:50 AM by blykins »
Report to moderator   Logged
Brent Lykins
Lykins Motorsports
Custom FE Street, Drag Race, Road Race, and Pulling Truck Engines
Custom Roller & Flat Tappet Camshafts
www.lykinsmotorsports.com
brent@lykinsmotorsports.com
www.customfordcams.com
502-759-1431
Instagram:  brentlykinsmotorsports

Wow, you win, Frank.  You called me out on a post where I got part numbers mixed up, was corrected on it, and then I apologized.  I guess that was a crime against humanity that just can't be forgiven.  BTW, that has nothing to do with the discussion we're having on valve springs, coil bind clearance, or remotely anything of the like, but I guess you gotta get your jabs where you can, right? 

And just so you know I'm not making anything up, here's a direct quote, straight from your keyboard, in response to a post that I made on April 6th of this year stating that pushrod weight has no bearing on the springs/valves/etc...:

"If this is true, then the weight of the lifter, means nothing also and why do you use aluminum rockers?

I was taught that the weight of everything in the valve train means something and that lighter, w/o failure, increases rpm, given the same spring pressure. Am I wrong there, too?"

On April 11th, following that post, since you didn't believe us here on the weight of pushrods/lifters affecting rpm levels, you posted on Speed Talk and asked this question:  "How much does the weight on the lifter/push side of the valve train effect increasing the rpm potential?"  You were schooled there as well.

My point is, Frank, you would be much better off, when faced with something that goes against your "understanding", if you would just approach it with a larger degree of tact and open-mindedness, considering a lot of what you know is extremely outdated. 

By the way, I know you're wanting to get one last jab in, but I don't ignore lift loft either.  I choose springs correctly, based on seat pressure, open pressure, lift, and whatever other voodoo you want to consider mixed in there.  Have you ever had to design a camshaft that lofts the valves on purpose?  I have. 

Good luck, Franky boy.

[My427stang]

Last post, between Brent and I on this subject, I'll move on.

If Brent wants to ignore, lift loft, so be it. I think most of us know how to set CBC by now and I'll address seat bounce, with my own relational.

Other can use this info, in their own way.

This entire thread turned ridiculous.  It's like which a plant needs more, food, water or sunlight?  Take one away, it dies regardless.

I know Brent well, in-person friendship, he and I talk and have very different techniques at times, but he doesn't ignore loft, nor does he ignore coil bind, nor do I or anyone else worth their salt.  They all matter.  However, he, like I, generally control loft by having a lobe that is controllable not by jamming open pressure, if you are there, unless you have a very serious reason, you are wasting power and reliability to spring pressure.   Many are not controllable and require much more spring pressure than a equally powerful and controllable cam would.

The thing I see though, and agree with Brent fully, is that often a manufacturer's recommendation has them a little light on the seat, so it's best to fix it. However, you need the right spring and setup, period.

[jayb]

This entire thread turned ridiculous. 

It certainly has.  Guys, there is room for more than one opinion here.  PLEASE tone it down. 

[plovett]

Paulie,

Here's some data for you.

Thanks Brent!  I will digest that info.  I gotta go play with chemicals for a while.....


pl

Well that is some serious stuff for sure.  I looked back at my notes and my intake heights (Ebok FE heads) varied from 1.942" to 1.957".  My exhaust heights varied from 1.922" to 1.935".   I shimmed all my intakes by varying amounts and shimmed one of my exhausts to get my final values all in the 1.922"-1.930" range. 

I am not sure how good my measurement technique is, though.  I assume you have to use some "authority" to get the valve seated well enough to give you a good value without a spring on there?

I also didn't measure my pressures, but theoretically they are pretty close. 

pl
[/quote]

[Gaugster]

Man...I enjoyed this thread. The rather violent valve float videos were very educational. Seeing all the shimmy or wobble of those springs makes me think the conical type have a great advantage in that the always changing dimensions reduce harmonics. Not that I care about Uber high RPM operation but the occasional over rev' is bound to happen.

Also learned that trolling engine builders might not be ideal.

[plovett]

Man...I enjoyed this thread. The rather violent valve float videos were very educational. Seeing all the shimmy or wobble of those springs makes me think the conical type have a great advantage in that the always changing dimensions reduce harmonics. Not that I care about Uber high RPM operation but the occasional over rev' is bound to happen.

Also learned that trolling engine builders might not be ideal.

There was no trolling that I saw in the initial responses, at all.  Just different opinions.  Did I mention that the sky is blue? 

pl

[Cyclone03]

Man...I enjoyed this thread. The rather violent valve float videos were very educational. Seeing all the shimmy or wobble of those springs makes me think the conical type have a great advantage in that the always changing dimensions reduce harmonics. Not that I care about Uber high RPM operation but the occasional over rev' is bound to happen.

Also learned that trolling engine builders might not be ideal.

There was no trolling that I saw in the initial responses, at all.  Just different opinions.  Did I mention that the sky is blue? 

pl

But is your blue sky the same as my blue sky?

[Joe-JDC]

Some camshafts are ground with lobe intensity that cannot be controlled by any normal or close to normal valve spring pressures.  I had a custom camshaft ground for my EMC entry in 2019 with .370" lobe lift and 1.6 roller rocker arms.  I had valve float at 6600 rpm and could not contain the valve float by changing 3 sets of heads, 5 sets of valve springs, but did finally get the engine to rev to 7100 before valve float and nose dive on dyno.  After the EMC, I changed the camshaft to an Isky that we had ordered before the EMC but came too late to test.  I simply removed the custom camshaft, left the Trend tool steel lifters in place, and installed the new Isky camshaft.  .370" lobes, and almost identical camshaft specs.  On the warm up pulls and after the camshaft was deemed ready, the lash checked for wear, we made a pull and the engine pulled to 7300 rpm without a hick-up and made 12 more horsepower.  We made several pulls to 7300 rpm and changed several intake manifolds, and the engine never missed a beat.  The special custom camshaft simply could not be controlled with any of the 5 different sets of valve springs.  Ran great up to 6500 rpm, but that was all it would smoothly handle.  We set the seat pressures all the way up to 165#, and coil bind at .040" and still could not control valve float.  The over the nose pressure exceeded the camshaft manufacturer's warranty for going flat, so we did everything by the book.  The valves were 5/16" stems, titanium retainers, 5/16 chromoly push rods, HS roller rocker arms, everything first class.  The springs used on both camshafts at the end were the same set.  Joe-JDC

[475fetoploader]

Hey Joe, I’m thinking out loud to myself. Did those 2 camshafts have identical base circles?

[Joe-JDC]

The custom camshaft was designed to run .009" hot lash, and the Isky .016" hot lash.  I have not measured the base circle diameter, but we moved the rocker arm stands with shims, and changed three different length pushrods to get the geometry perfect with both camshafts.  Joe-JDC

[chilly460]

Really good thread, admittedly never messed with anything FE that was going to turn enough RPM to worry much about valve float, but now I’m pondering a build that will and this info is very helpful.  I never quite understood the “use the biggest pushrod” angle until I watched the valve float videos a few years ago and it clicked that it’s harmonics not just “loft” that causes float. 

I did buy an Intercomp tester on EBay because through years of horse trading I have a bunch of valve springs with no clue on specs.  I also have had the opportunity to check springs on four sets of assembled heads and I’ll tell you it’s scary what I found for seat pressures on a few.  These were fresh rebuilt heads of unknown provenance, but there’s no wonder some guys have issues with float even with a 5500rpm cam, and I suspect it’s why the Edelbrocks I had seemed to struggle over 5000.  I will say the BBMs I bought secondhand but setup by Brent were spot on, and consequently can do 6000 no problem, even though the rest of the hydro roller valvetrain is sort of a hodgepodge of parts, but some guys have reported hydro rollers struggling over 5500 (with 6300ish being a more common upper limit)

[blykins]

....but some guys have reported hydro rollers struggling over 5500 (with 6300ish being a more common upper limit)

That used to be the case about 12-13 years ago.  If you checked the forums back then, everyone thought that 5500 rpm was like a wall that couldn't be penetrated.   Now we're touching 7500. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_JY47anClA

A lot of guys don't understand how heavy some FE components are....especially if you're still running 3/8" stem valves.  Even the 11/32" valves are heavy compared to BBC standards.   Coupling heavy valves with inadequate seat pressures and aggressive lobes exacerbated the issue.   I learned a big lesson when I tried Comp XFI lobes.  Customer constantly complained of noise and not being able to pull the rpms.   It didn't make sense to me that I could build a SBF that would turn 7000 with a hydraulic roller, but had trouble with FE's, so that led to a lot of dyno testing and experimentation. 

On a separate note....

Joe, I used a camshaft ground by that gentleman before in a 445ci Windsor.  It was a hydraulic roller and was so aggressive that it was showing all kinds of valvetrain issues (float, laziness up top, etc.), even with his recommended valve spring pressures.  That's why I started doing my own thing.