Welcome to the 2GNT Forum! Interested In Advertising with 2GNT?
Home | Site Background| Info&Specs| Mods & Tech Info | CAPS | Part Reviews | Donate | 2GNT Stickers |
Search Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend 0 Users in Chat
Top 2GNT Technical Performance/Engine topic #137675
View in threaded mode

Subject: "RE: Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs" Previous topic | Next topic
ModeratorbullettdsmFeb-04-13 03:04 PM
Donating 2GNT member
2676 posts,
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#137680, "RE: Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs"
In response to In response to 2


          

Originally posted by chipdogg
What's the purpose of trying these? Is there a problem with the Crower 4g63 springs? They've seemed to work in numerous setups (in Neons but pretty sure the 420a heads are the same in that regard), including my car with Crower stage 4 (between 22's and 24's I think) cams and revving up to 8500 rpm. Just curious, always nice to see new ideas come out, wondering what the purpose is.

That's a good question Jacob. Its about control, lighter weight, better harmonics and less abuse of parts in the upper rpm (otherwise known as more power).

I had seen a few years back a couple of side by side videos of the "standard" valve spring vs the beehive. You could see the "standard" spring bouncing around a lot more and the top of the valve "shimmeying" while the beehive maintianed much better control. I can't find that one right now, so I'll have to post up a sales video to give you an idea of what I am refering to;



With starting to work the 16 to 1 engine, I took a look at beehives for our cars. I couldn't get Kevin (Kiggly) to make a retainer for ours (said he was just too busy with family stuff. I understand that but its too bad because he already has the springs. We use 4G63 springs in our engines for an easy upgrade) and I sure wasn't going to approach our buddy DCR for them (I know Kiggly's are expensive enough. I'd hate to see what DCR would want for them, lol).

So I did some researching and a buddy happen to mention that I should look at the numbers on the stocker 4.6 springs. Because if they worked, it would be a cheap alternative to.....well, I guess it would be our only alternative, haha

Agreed on the Crower springs etc, doing fine all along. But think of it as a titanium retainer vs a stocker. While the stocker will do fine, the titanium will net you a little bit more. I guess its about getting that little bit more out of the set-up.



Captain Caveman

96 RS Turbo 11.414 @ 119.62 MSNS, Crower 2 NA cams, BW366, 10.5 comp, UDP, 60mm TB, W/A intercooler, 3.55 tranny 567.9whp 430tq
97 RS NA 13.188 @ 103.87 MSnS powered 12.5 comp, Crower 3's and 219.4whp with 175tq
98 RS DD 12.5 comp on stock ECU, LTH, Crower 2's, Koni, GC, Hypercoil, DG hats
99 OZ 5sp Stocker 15.856 @ 85.97
99 GS stocker auto 17.7@77mph!

wiki home page:http://www.2gnt.com/index.php?d=bullettdsm

  

Report This Post to Admin Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote

Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs [View all] , Moderatorbullettdsm, Jan-26-13 02:12 PM
  RE: Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs, Global Ruler Of All ThingsDarkOne, Jan-28-13 03:09 PM, #1
RE: Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs, chipdogg, Feb-03-13 12:54 PM, #2
RE: Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs, Moderatorbullettdsm, Feb-04-13 03:04 PM #3
RE: Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs, chipdogg, Feb-04-13 06:26 PM, #4
RE: Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs, Moderatorbullettdsm, Feb-04-13 06:50 PM, #5
RE: Ford 4.6 beehive valve springs, chipdogg, Feb-04-13 07:15 PM, #6

Top 2GNT Technical Performance/Engine topic #137675 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.2
Copyright 1997-2003 DCScripts.com

I generated this page in 0.060625076293945 seconds, executing 12 queries.