516 heads with double valve springs ?

-
71_dart_swinger

71_dart_swinger

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Messages
295
Reaction score
103
Location
central valley cali
Does anybody know if I can fit double valve springs on 516 heads. I’ve got a hydraulic roller and it’s finally time to change the valve springs as it starts floating valves.motor is still in car ‍♂️ I have a set of 452 heads and they will not go on those as the casting around the valve seal is too wide. ? Excuse the heads. They are just heads I’ve had from an rv motor I’ve got. The 452 heads. ? They fit around the exhaust valve. But not the intake.

E1CB04D1-F77F-4118-BFC2-C2C468283D98.jpeg


003DD931-A3BA-4989-BD93-5E9301BD1370.jpeg


6618EC7E-0620-4E2F-AB45-A9110EBB7905.jpeg
 
You must machine that "step" against the guide flat with the larger diameter of the spring seat and you need to machine the guides to the proper diameter to get a seal in there. .630 is a popular size to machine the guide to. The 1.550 x .630 guide cutter will do the job. I had to machine the guides and mill the inner diameter of the spring seats down on my slant 6 head.

Having said all that, I do not recommend machining the main spring seat diameter DOWN into the head for any reason whatsoever. Some of the heads in that area are very thin as is and you may mill right through to the water jacket. If you need extra room for springs, the correct way is to go UP with the retainers with offset locks and or retainers or use longer valves.

I've had people argue me into oblivion about that, but that's how "I" do it. I will NOT mill the spring seat deeper into the head. NO NO NO.

Here is what my slant 6 head looked like after I machined the entire valve spring seats flat and enlarged them to 1.550 for 440 springs, but I did not machine DOWN into the head.

I Might Have Found Something Pretty Cool.....
 
Another option might be beehive or Comp #7228 conical springs. You will need to take some measurements & check the available springs & their specs. many to choose from now. Less overall machining might be reqd with the BHs or conicals, plus they need less pressure & give superior valve control over parallel springs.
 
Bewy said:
Another option might be beehive or Comp #7228 conical springs. You will need to take some measurements & check the available springs & their specs. many to choose from now. Less overall machining might be reqd with the BHs or conicals, plus they need less pressure & give superior valve control over parallel springs.
Click to expand...


LOL!
 
Yeah, the OPs smile might turn into a laugh when he finds out how good the new technology is...
 
Give an example of an ovate spring from 'years & years' ago.
 
SAE paper #932891 discusses the research & development of ovate wire springs, 1993.
Not 1963 or 1973....
 
Bewy said:
SAE paper #932891 discusses the research & development of ovate wire springs, 1993.
Not 1963 or 1973....
Click to expand...


Keep looking. SAE isn’t the only place to look. A see if it were, 1993 is an ice age ago in terms of exalted advances in springs and such. And yet and still, much like BH springs they just don’t offer enough of an advantage to bother with. I realize you are invested in the BH being the end all for every ill of the pushrod engine, but real world results don’t match your wet dreams. Get over it.
 
RB,
1993 is hardly the ice age when springs in IC engines go back to before the model T.
Comp Cams is probably the most well known company for BH springs among the cam companies & there are NONE listed in their 1997 catalog.
If you have to buy new springs, then you are spending money; so they do offer an advantage, & more than one advantage.
Nice try, but no cigar....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top