"110# springs"

T

Texashighways

Comp Diesel Sponsor
There are some springs inexpensive springs being sold that are billed as 110# springs but are really made for the ricer market and have 118.5# on the seat not 110#. The sad part is they have 251.5 over the nose of the 188-220.


It is a great spring and would do great if the valve stem was .080"-.100" longer or if they were run in a Neon engine that they were designed for. Then they would not be so close to coil bind. If the 188-220 is used you are literally .036" from coil bind. There is no reason that a street truck should ever be .036" from coil bind......ever. In competition engines people regularly run that close to bind, but then they also run crazy additives and change springs, once to twice a season because of fatigue and load loss. If a customer uses a 194-220, you will be .009" from the spring going solid. That is three Caucasian hairs from your valvetrain destructing. The sad thing is that as heads get better, I see people running higher lift cams. If someone was to run a 200-220 which is becoming a popular common rail cam, the spring would go solid before the cam was done lifting which would ruin your day. They are being sold as an inexpensive spring option for the 110# springs that have been designed for the 24v engine only. That is not entirely accurate.. They are 118.5# on the seat and there is no warning about how much lift they will handle before toasting your engine........ They are a good spring that is made in the USA. They are cheaper because they are made for a very popular engine and coiled in much larger lots than diesel springs. The second factor to them being so cheap is that they are coiled with round wire not ovate wire. That is why you can't run a very high lift cam like you can on ovate wire. Ovate just costs more.
 
I know my hair measures approx. .003", but other races vary slightly I have been told, so I just use Caucasian as an SAE standard for helping people visualize what we are talking about :) ................without getting all racial and everything that is. Any other races have a set of Micrometers and scissors laying around so we can set up a precedent for different parts of the country/world?

Since there are more women in diesels these days and I am trying to clean up my language, I had to find a new way to say .003"...............
 
Last edited:
Seat Pressure doesn't mean **** to anyone unless you have a spring rate to go with it. Let alone Coil bind height of the spring and over all install height, which is going to vary from head to head. Then with the higher spring pressure and seat load that is advertised on a smaller spring pocket depending on 12 or 24 valve you're gonna put quite a bit of load on the valve stem and guide on a higher rpm engine and the dynamics the springs will cause needless of the motor.

So Why doesn't anyone that offers "Diesel" only springs supply this information out? I know you used to show a spring rate on the beehives for 12v that were offered but I don't see it anymore. Seems just odd to me...
 
Seat pressure at X height, Pressure at .960", coil bind, you have all the information you need to figure the rate and to figure out what differing installed heights will yield ;)

I have done my best to make it easy for people to figure out what they need. On the newer springs being offered, no information is being offered except for regurgitation of my descriptions without pertinent installed data.
 
Last edited:
Pressure is high, but you will have the best chance of them not harming your engine with a stock cam due to the lower lift. There is no reason, I would run them with an aftermarket cam.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. They for sure wouldnt work with the cam Im using.

So with too high of spring pressure, are the pushrods the issue? A very good engine builder (nitro funny car) told me that with forced induction, as long as you arnt wiping the cam lobes off you really cant run too much pressure:
 
Texashighways said:
Seat pressure at X height, Pressure at .960", coil bind, you have all the information you need to figure the rate and to figure out what differing installed heights will yield ;)

I have done my best to make it easy for people to figure out what they need. On the newer springs being offered, no information is being offered except for regurgitation of my descriptions without pertinent installed data.
Click to expand...

I have the equation to figure this out, that you posted up on CF. But I'm still new to it, but the info you gave was an opening to so much that makes picking springs given the lift at the valve, open seat pressure, and pressure on the nose of the cam A LOT more understandable. Just wish I knew how to use it more accurately.
 
Craig_C said:
Thanks. They for sure wouldnt work with the cam Im using.

So with too high of spring pressure, are the pushrods the issue? A very good engine builder (nitro funny car) told me that with forced induction, as long as you arnt wiping the cam lobes off you really cant run too much pressure:
Click to expand...

Craig_C said:
Thanks. They for sure wouldnt work with the cam Im using.

So with too high of spring pressure, are the pushrods the issue? A very good engine builder (nitro funny car) told me that with forced induction, as long as you arnt wiping the cam lobes off you really cant run too much pressure:
Click to expand...

Spring pressure counts against the pushrod threshold for buckling strength.

Basic static factors on the intake pushrod are spring pressure, multiplied by rocker ratio. In dynamic situations, boost pressure and Hertz of the resonance come into affect. All that said, the main issue is not the pushrod on the intake when excessive spring pressure is used, it the lobe wear and loading on your journals if you do not have bushings. This is amplified at idle as lower oil pressure exists, and boost pressures have not started to offset the lobe pressure by having boost pressure act on the intake valve and reduce the pressures created by the spring, reduced by the boost acting on the surface area of the intake valve multiplied by the rocker arm ratio, not factoring for friction from side loading which gets higher as lift/rpm increases.
On the intake, your friend is right, kind of. In top level force induction competition engines. Valves get so large that it take less and less boost pressure to counteract spring pressure. At a certain point Boost pressure not the cam will open the valve. PressureXsurface area = force.... Also mass associated with larger valves needs more pressure to counter-act high velocity cams with high ratio rocker and elevated rpm. Run as much spring pressure as is needed to control your valves correctly. More can create issues you should not have to deal with at your level. IN this instance run enough seat pressure to keep the valves seated against boost pressure and enough nos pressure to return the valve in the number of degrees necessary factoring for rpm.

On the exhaust, spring pressures are peanuts compared to Cylinder pressure which is derived and calculate based on horsepower at a given rpm. As larger valves are employed the equation pressure x surface area=force comes into play. Higher hp engines use larger valves, larger valves amplify the pressure the rocker and pushrod sees by the amount of surface area . The cool thing is is just for a small amount of time you see this peak pressure. It is less likely to damage a lobe or journal that only sees this pressure for minute seconds. The issue with lobe and journal wear really is most closely related to high lift camshafts that have higher duration. In this instance, instead of running higher pressure for just a few degrees of duration, you run higher pressure for more degrees of rotation. At this point the load on the journal is multiplied many times. Instead of having one or two lobes open at any one time which puts a load on the tappet, you will see 6 or 8 lobes at varying points in their lift curve with higher lift, higher duration cams which create exponentially higher pressure on the journals. Wide lobes and wider tappets counteract higher loading on the lobe. Better pushrods counteract transmitting motion against major forces like compression and side loading.
 
I just dumped out my keyboard and found the following:

Eye Brow Hair : .0020"
Head Hair : .0020"
Mustache Hair : .0055"
 
Texashighways said:
Spring pressure counts against the pushrod threshold for buckling strength.

Basic static factors on the intake pushrod are spring pressure, multiplied by rocker ratio. In dynamic situations, boost pressure and Hertz of the resonance come into affect. All that said, the main issue is not the pushrod on the intake when excessive spring pressure is used, it the lobe wear and loading on your journals if you do not have bushings. This is amplified at idle as lower oil pressure exists, and boost pressures have not started to offset the lobe pressure by having boost pressure act on the intake valve and reduce the pressures created by the spring, reduced by the boost acting on the surface area of the intake valve multiplied by the rocker arm ratio, not factoring for friction from side loading which gets higher as lift/rpm increases.
On the intake, your friend is right, kind of. In top level force induction competition engines. Valves get so large that it take less and less boost pressure to counteract spring pressure. At a certain point Boost pressure not the cam will open the valve. PressureXsurface area = force.... Also mass associated with larger valves needs more pressure to counter-act high velocity cams with high ratio rocker and elevated rpm. Run as much spring pressure as is needed to control your valves correctly. More can create issues you should not have to deal with at your level. IN this instance run enough seat pressure to keep the valves seated against boost pressure and enough nos pressure to return the valve in the number of degrees necessary factoring for rpm.

On the exhaust, spring pressures are peanuts compared to Cylinder pressure which is derived and calculate based on horsepower at a given rpm. As larger valves are employed the equation pressure x surface area=force comes into play. Higher hp engines use larger valves, larger valves amplify the pressure the rocker and pushrod sees by the amount of surface area . The cool thing is is just for a small amount of time you see this peak pressure. It is less likely to damage a lobe or journal that only sees this pressure for minute seconds. The issue with lobe and journal wear really is most closely related to high lift camshafts that have higher duration. In this instance, instead of running higher pressure for just a few degrees of duration, you run higher pressure for more degrees of rotation. At this point the load on the journal is multiplied many times. Instead of having one or two lobes open at any one time which puts a load on the tappet, you will see 6 or 8 lobes at varying points in their lift curve with higher lift, higher duration cams which create exponentially higher pressure on the journals. Wide lobes and wider tappets counteract higher loading on the lobe. Better pushrods counteract transmitting motion against major forces like compression and side loading.
Click to expand...

With this being said, how much bigger valves are you talking in reference for this to start taking effect ? Only a .010 over, .020 or bigger ? And at about what boost pressure/flow does this take major effect ? Are we talking the average street truck application at about 650-700hp, or the 1100+hp 5000+rpm trucks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top