408 hyd roller, too much spring pressure?

-
mock-up-jpg.jpg

Pretty sure that Lunati cam is a billet steel core with a cast on ductile iron intermediate gear. Very sweet looking build, BTW!
 
I have one here , billet n billet. I'd like to get one with the iron intermediate gear. Can still get the malonized steel gears which work great...but say you change the cam...new gear for new cam, so its said. I'm not gambling 4-500 dollar in parts to find out either.
 
the mentioned cam 20200712 is a cast core. I do have the next bigger one here in my shop.

to the op: i run the stock hr lifters also with zero problems. Try different preload, my Valvetrain is quiet. I used .080" before and it worked.

Michael
 
MOPAROFFICIAL said:
They said their cast iron roller cam can take 500 open pressure? As long as they knew you weren't talking about a billet core, sweet.
Just an echo.. as far as I know ..it's the constant extreme seat load that can hurt a cast iron roller cam and not really so much the open of your average load requirement. Rock on!
Click to expand...

Would a beehive spring help alleviate this problem?
 
Beehive/conical springs require less seat pressure & less pressure over the nose of the lobe. Less strain on the valve train. Used on many modern engines.
 
Bewy said:
Beehive/conical springs require less seat pressure & less pressure over the nose of the lobe. Less strain on the valve train. Used on many modern engines.
Click to expand...
And if they were where it was at and top of the advancement scale... they would **** can the rest of the springs and everybody would be using them.
Use what you want as long as it works
 
Bewy said:
Beehive/conical springs require less seat pressure & less pressure over the nose of the lobe. Less strain on the valve train. Used on many modern engines.
Click to expand...
So is there a generally accepted conversion factor for beehive rating vs standard dual coil spring rating? How does one select the proper beehive if the standard spring requirement is all that is known?
 
gzig,
Do not know of any formula or scale. But Comp Cams listed their popular BHs & what they suited. There was a list of 6 or 8, but the list has grown as more people realise the benefits & start using them.
Couple of examples:
26986 description: 650 lift, sol or hyd FT. 123# seat, 280# rate.
26915: 600 lift, hyd rol cams, 105#seat, 313# rate.

Comp now has single & dual conical springs which offer the same benefits as BHs with more lift. PAC & PSI also make these springs.
 
Bewy said:
MO,
They ARE at the top of the advancement scale, maybe just not yours.
Click to expand...
Bewy, you're full of **** and the more you post...the more an asswipe you come off as.
Every new trick flow has what on them....hint, it's not a beehive , asswipe.
I ought to just ignore you along with ones agreeing with you.
 
And guess what stupid. Vast numbers of BH springs are used in production engines [ apart from many aftermarket engine builders ], which the manufacturers have to warranty for several years. Would they use these springs if they were unreliable & may cause warranty claims???
 
MOPAROFFICIAL said:
Every new trick flow has what on them....hint, it's not a beehive , asswipe.
Click to expand...
Trick Flow is a business - they are here to make money just like any other business. They ship their heads with "regular" springs because they will do the job and are cheaper. I would be willing to bet they would ship them with behives if they could get them for the same price as a conventional spring.
 
Ted265 said:
Trick Flow is a business - they are here to make money just like any other business. They ship their heads with "regular" springs because they will do the job and are cheaper. I would be willing to bet they would ship them with behives if they could get them for the same price as a conventional spring.
Click to expand...
They are a premium head, not a budget head. They would be using elgin valves and pioneer springs if so.. nut they're using re boxed pac springs as far as I know and better valves.

The automakers tried using beehives and have now for a while with newer engines and there have been more failures/breaking than any other spring before. That said...back to OUR engines.. unless you correct the geometry and use the same lighter weight parts... those beehives will float sooner than later on a mopar and for others too...on their own chevies above 6500rpm. There are countless instances of this all over speed talk and other sites. Yoy have well known saying to use x amount of load...the things ARE floating with more load still. The 4.6 Fords break them, hemis break them and on n on n on. Another one people mention...lighter parts...If the 1.25 chevy springs were bitchin..we would use those as well...but they dont work for us. The amount of defection and harmonics caused by the angles at the top and bottom of the pushrod make them unstable and require more load psi than others..due to the 59 degree lifter bank...
Now are there examples of them working great, sure. Have we checked on those same builds after a season or a few years...let me know. Regardless, they probably weren't with a non corrected shaft mount and mostly pedestal magnums.
They work..sometimes. I don't bank on sometimes.
 
Last edited:
^^ I never said trick flows were a budget head.
Yes they use PAC springs (PAC also make quite a few different behive springs) I was saying if they could increase their profit by using a conventional spring that would fit the intended use over a behive or conical spring they would.
I have yet to see a broken behive spring myself but I don't have a lot to do with racing circles - I'm lucky to get to a track 2-3 times a year but I know plenty of people running them in street cars for years without issues.
Your post above would have fit this thread a lot better and promoted more relevant discussion than just stating "trick flows don't ship with behives asswipe".
It all comes down to personal preference - some people prefer fast rate cams, some people prefer edelbrock carbs over holleys & some people think a geometry correction kit is a waste of money.
Run what you want to run & let the next guy run what he wants to run without shitting on him
 
Maybe Bewy can tell us how hard he's pushed a beehive spring in a Mopar?
Engine,Cam, spring pressure and Rpm?
 
Ted265 said:
^^ I never said trick flows were a budget head.
Yes they use PAC springs (PAC also make quite a few different behive springs) I was saying if they could increase their profit by using a conventional spring that would fit the intended use over a behive or conical spring they would.
I have yet to see a broken behive spring myself but I don't have a lot to do with racing circles - I'm lucky to get to a track 2-3 times a year but I know plenty of people running them in street cars for years without issues.
Your post above would have fit this thread a lot better and promoted more relevant discussion than just stating "trick flows don't ship with behives asswipe".
It all comes down to personal preference - some people prefer fast rate cams, some people prefer edelbrock carbs over holleys & some people think a geometry correction kit is a waste of money.
Run what you want to run & let the next guy run what he wants to run without shitting on him
Click to expand...
Then you didn't read or comprehend my reply...and my response was to bewy ,not you, so why are YOU perturbed and trying to manifest an articulated info packed response to yourself out of it? Aside from exotic race stuff in the 3000 plus range just to make it run..the trick flows are high end $2000 plus heads ootb, so really... tell me more how they chose the spring based on cost and not what a good fit and function spring would be.
You don't know of any failures.. ok..4.6 Ford breaks them all the time. Why do I have to do that homework for you? If a coil breaks on a conventional double
the inner will keep the valve from dropping, most cases. The beehive..when it breaks... the valve drops. The hemis too on occasion. Search don terril speed talk beehive failures. I will quote myself here since you didn't read my post start to finish....Everything has its place...some work while others dont...use what works for you....now I'll add and is my point... what works for you isn't an automatic qualifier for 'best for everyone'.
Enough with blanket statements.
 
Last edited:
Heres what being missed....and it shows some have biased or predetermined options 'mind set'...
Someone said beehives are the best, top of the food chain...wheres the proof of that statement?
They have been around for decades....why arent they in everything? I can go look at 2000's year mopar muscle mags and see them....yet...about maybe what 15 % of us use them, and that might be a generous guess.
So where is this coming from besides an asswipe looking down from his mountain top..
 
I know one of the major hurdles for the unlimited class on drag week is valve springs. Anyone know what they run? As of yet I don’t think they change them everyday.
 
MOPAROFFICIAL said:
Heres what being missed....and it shows some have biased or predetermined options 'mind set'...
Someone said beehives are the best, top of the food chain...wheres the proof of that statement?
They have been around for decades....why arent they in everything? I can go look at 2000's year mopar muscle mags and see them....yet...about maybe what 15 % of us use them, and that might be a generous guess.
So where is this coming from besides an asswipe looking down from his mountain top..
Click to expand...

I'm sure, said "asswipe" will be along soon to amaze us with his beehive exploits.
I for one am looking forward to it.
 
They inspect them, test them and some use a different ratio rocker for the street miles.
 
I will bite. I run a Crane 669931 HR, which is 230/238, .528"/.548" with Manley NexTek beehive springs #221438 on Edelbrock heads.

Caveat: my cam has a billet core, however, I also run T&D 1.65 rockers, so I have a reasonably aggressive street set-up with .584"/.603" lift at the valve (measured). Heads have 2.05/1.60 valves.

LS style beehives drop straight in to Edlebrock heads. I've also just done an LS beehive spring conversion on a Ford 302 Windsor with GT40P heads. Yes, I like beehives.

Back to my 408 Mopar . . . Seat pressure is 170lb and open pressure is 380lb. Rev limiter is set to 6800rpm and I shift at 6500rpm. The engine will rev to 7000rpm but there is not point as it's all over by around 6200rpm.

I saved a lot of sprung weight going to a beehive, as the retainers and locks are lighter, as is the spring itself. The springs have been in the engine for over eight years now with a best of 11.666@121mph with a slippy clutch. It's a manual.

Nothing wrong with beehives for the right application.
 
MOPAROFFICIAL said:
Just an echo.. as far as I know ..it's the constant extreme seat load that can hurt a cast iron roller cam and not really so much the open of your average load requirement. Rock on!
Click to expand...
I don't know you, but you call someone an "asswipe" and yet post this up ^.

You do know that the cam does not see "constant extreme seat load" right?

The only time the cam sees "seat load" is when it first opens the valve. When the valve is closed, the cam sees only pressure from the lifter plunger and oil pressure in a hydraulic cam. Perhaps the initial jolt of opening the valve against the spring's seat pressure is enough to wipe some lobes, but the lobes themselves are not under "constant" spring pressure or load.

I only point this out because I don't think you should be swearing at other people for no real reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top