Kiggly Beehive Valve Springs Vs. The rest
I set up the spring pressure and installed height to be at the high side of a happy medium and also allow for 0.500" lift. There are plenty of people running around with springs at ~100lbs on the seat and no wear problems from other manufacturers, so there is no reason my springs would have any more problems than somebody else's for wear. DSM supertech stuff is in this same installed pressure range and they are a very common spring.
The trick thing with the beehive setup is it allows a lot lighter retainer and the spring itself has a lower effective mass. This translates to about 500-700rpm higher potential before valve float for the same installed pressure and spring rate as an average dual spring.
The springs I sell were tested against several other springs on a cylinder head only test stand with high speed video, looking for which springs had the best behavior during surge. I picked what I found to work best. I found some that did some really ugly things that I didn't expect before testing them.
Durability-wise, I also ran them on the test stand sweeping between surge and float rpm's on a very aggressive dsm cam grind (all 8k+ stuff) for 30mins straight and saw no loss in seat pressure or rate afterward. One customer ran my springs for an entire season going to 10,500rpm and with his 2-step set in the 8k range on some relatively large cams and saw no change in any pressures after the break-in period was over (they will change maybe 5lb on the seat during break-in, all springs do). This car in particular was running dual springs and tossing rockers while on the 2-step and beating up the other springs regularly.
Shoot out any specific questions you have and I'll do my best to answer them.
Kevin
The trick thing with the beehive setup is it allows a lot lighter retainer and the spring itself has a lower effective mass. This translates to about 500-700rpm higher potential before valve float for the same installed pressure and spring rate as an average dual spring.
The springs I sell were tested against several other springs on a cylinder head only test stand with high speed video, looking for which springs had the best behavior during surge. I picked what I found to work best. I found some that did some really ugly things that I didn't expect before testing them.
Durability-wise, I also ran them on the test stand sweeping between surge and float rpm's on a very aggressive dsm cam grind (all 8k+ stuff) for 30mins straight and saw no loss in seat pressure or rate afterward. One customer ran my springs for an entire season going to 10,500rpm and with his 2-step set in the 8k range on some relatively large cams and saw no change in any pressures after the break-in period was over (they will change maybe 5lb on the seat during break-in, all springs do). This car in particular was running dual springs and tossing rockers while on the 2-step and beating up the other springs regularly.
Shoot out any specific questions you have and I'll do my best to answer them.
Kevin
The stock evo springs are very well designed. I use them on all my builds for street cars. My yellow car over revs to 9k on a regular basis with 280 crower cams.
Years ago in the dsm world the AFC was at large for a tuning tool. It had peak hold feature so it was quite easy to gather info on max revs. There were countless reports of revs to 9-1100 on the stock springs without issues . The evo springs are better and I will get to that in a minute.
If I were an engineer building a high performance car that had a factory red line of 7500, full well knowing the engine is going to over rev on mis-shifts I would spring the engine with springs capable of handling this very common occurrence. And I believe they did. Here is what I found The stock dsm springs were not behive springs and they used a steel retainer that weighed 14grams. Seat pressure was 62lbs. When the evo first came out the springs were quickly labeled a joke as they were very whimpy looking behive springs with tiny little retainer that weighed just 4 grams! and the seat pressure was only 52lbs. At first look it would seem mitsubishi were idiots for going backwards in the spring department. But look harder and you will find they most certainly did not. The springs job is to keep the valve following the cam as closely/smoothly as possible. The weight of the parts it has to control is important. Not only does the spring have to control the weight of valve but it also has to control the weight of spring and retainer. Compare the dsm weights to the evo weights and you will find mistubishi engineers do indeed know what they are doing. I dont hve the numbers in front of me but I weighed the parts. The evo setup had a higher spring pressure/weight than the earlier dsm setup it was replacing. And the static weights dont tell the whole story. The action of the spring is dynamic and I have no way of measuring weight during movement. but there is even more points for the evo setup as the top part of the spring and light weight 4 gram retainer is the part that is being moved. The heavier bottom part of spring is stationary on the head.
There is is another very cool feature of the stock evo design. The retainer is very fat. So at full lifts the retainer comes very close to the valve seal. Put in some cams with 410 lift and it comes even closer. Whats good about this is if there is valve float the retainer will hit the seal. This acts like a bump stop and keeps the valve from floating of the cam too far making it easy to return to the profile.
Another thing I like to point out is valve float off the top of cam does not hurt HP. It may help since the valve is opening farther. What hurts HP is if you get valve bounce on the seats. Here the valve and spring materials are important to avoid valve bounce.
If you ask me if you should run after market springs I would only recommend them if you were regularly revving to 9500 and higher. Or if you are running a very aggressive square cam profile. The stock springs are fully capable of revs to 9000 with most cams. And they doing it without much friction and heat from heavy springs. If you want to improve the stock spring performance add lighter intake valves with hollow stem. Mistu was supposed to give us them but budget cuts must have killed them in the end. The stock exhaust valve is already very light and it very high quality filled valve. about 7 grams lighter than the dsm valve it replaced. Plus its filled to stay cool better.
Years ago in the dsm world the AFC was at large for a tuning tool. It had peak hold feature so it was quite easy to gather info on max revs. There were countless reports of revs to 9-1100 on the stock springs without issues . The evo springs are better and I will get to that in a minute.
If I were an engineer building a high performance car that had a factory red line of 7500, full well knowing the engine is going to over rev on mis-shifts I would spring the engine with springs capable of handling this very common occurrence. And I believe they did. Here is what I found The stock dsm springs were not behive springs and they used a steel retainer that weighed 14grams. Seat pressure was 62lbs. When the evo first came out the springs were quickly labeled a joke as they were very whimpy looking behive springs with tiny little retainer that weighed just 4 grams! and the seat pressure was only 52lbs. At first look it would seem mitsubishi were idiots for going backwards in the spring department. But look harder and you will find they most certainly did not. The springs job is to keep the valve following the cam as closely/smoothly as possible. The weight of the parts it has to control is important. Not only does the spring have to control the weight of valve but it also has to control the weight of spring and retainer. Compare the dsm weights to the evo weights and you will find mistubishi engineers do indeed know what they are doing. I dont hve the numbers in front of me but I weighed the parts. The evo setup had a higher spring pressure/weight than the earlier dsm setup it was replacing. And the static weights dont tell the whole story. The action of the spring is dynamic and I have no way of measuring weight during movement. but there is even more points for the evo setup as the top part of the spring and light weight 4 gram retainer is the part that is being moved. The heavier bottom part of spring is stationary on the head.
There is is another very cool feature of the stock evo design. The retainer is very fat. So at full lifts the retainer comes very close to the valve seal. Put in some cams with 410 lift and it comes even closer. Whats good about this is if there is valve float the retainer will hit the seal. This acts like a bump stop and keeps the valve from floating of the cam too far making it easy to return to the profile.
Another thing I like to point out is valve float off the top of cam does not hurt HP. It may help since the valve is opening farther. What hurts HP is if you get valve bounce on the seats. Here the valve and spring materials are important to avoid valve bounce.
If you ask me if you should run after market springs I would only recommend them if you were regularly revving to 9500 and higher. Or if you are running a very aggressive square cam profile. The stock springs are fully capable of revs to 9000 with most cams. And they doing it without much friction and heat from heavy springs. If you want to improve the stock spring performance add lighter intake valves with hollow stem. Mistu was supposed to give us them but budget cuts must have killed them in the end. The stock exhaust valve is already very light and it very high quality filled valve. about 7 grams lighter than the dsm valve it replaced. Plus its filled to stay cool better.
Jun 272's are ok with the stock springs/retainers revving to 9K?
The stock evo springs are very well designed. I use them on all my builds for street cars. My yellow car over revs to 9k on a regular basis with 280 crower cams.
Years ago in the dsm world the AFC was at large for a tuning tool. It had peak hold feature so it was quite easy to gather info on max revs. There were countless reports of revs to 9-1100 on the stock springs without issues . The evo springs are better and I will get to that in a minute.
If I were an engineer building a high performance car that had a factory red line of 7500, full well knowing the engine is going to over rev on mis-shifts I would spring the engine with springs capable of handling this very common occurrence. And I believe they did. Here is what I found The stock dsm springs were not behive springs and they used a steel retainer that weighed 14grams. Seat pressure was 62lbs. When the evo first came out the springs were quickly labeled a joke as they were very whimpy looking behive springs with tiny little retainer that weighed just 4 grams! and the seat pressure was only 52lbs. At first look it would seem mitsubishi were idiots for going backwards in the spring department. But look harder and you will find they most certainly did not. The springs job is to keep the valve following the cam as closely/smoothly as possible. The weight of the parts it has to control is important. Not only does the spring have to control the weight of valve but it also has to control the weight of spring and retainer. Compare the dsm weights to the evo weights and you will find mistubishi engineers do indeed know what they are doing. I dont hve the numbers in front of me but I weighed the parts. The evo setup had a higher spring pressure/weight than the earlier dsm setup it was replacing. And the static weights dont tell the whole story. The action of the spring is dynamic and I have no way of measuring weight during movement. but there is even more points for the evo setup as the top part of the spring and light weight 4 gram retainer is the part that is being moved. The heavier bottom part of spring is stationary on the head.
There is is another very cool feature of the stock evo design. The retainer is very fat. So at full lifts the retainer comes very close to the valve seal. Put in some cams with 410 lift and it comes even closer. Whats good about this is if there is valve float the retainer will hit the seal. This acts like a bump stop and keeps the valve from floating of the cam too far making it easy to return to the profile.
Another thing I like to point out is valve float off the top of cam does not hurt HP. It may help since the valve is opening farther. What hurts HP is if you get valve bounce on the seats. Here the valve and spring materials are important to avoid valve bounce.
If you ask me if you should run after market springs I would only recommend them if you were regularly revving to 9500 and higher. Or if you are running a very aggressive square cam profile. The stock springs are fully capable of revs to 9000 with most cams. And they doing it without much friction and heat from heavy springs. If you want to improve the stock spring performance add lighter intake valves with hollow stem. Mistu was supposed to give us them but budget cuts must have killed them in the end. The stock exhaust valve is already very light and it very high quality filled valve. about 7 grams lighter than the dsm valve it replaced. Plus its filled to stay cool better.
Years ago in the dsm world the AFC was at large for a tuning tool. It had peak hold feature so it was quite easy to gather info on max revs. There were countless reports of revs to 9-1100 on the stock springs without issues . The evo springs are better and I will get to that in a minute.
If I were an engineer building a high performance car that had a factory red line of 7500, full well knowing the engine is going to over rev on mis-shifts I would spring the engine with springs capable of handling this very common occurrence. And I believe they did. Here is what I found The stock dsm springs were not behive springs and they used a steel retainer that weighed 14grams. Seat pressure was 62lbs. When the evo first came out the springs were quickly labeled a joke as they were very whimpy looking behive springs with tiny little retainer that weighed just 4 grams! and the seat pressure was only 52lbs. At first look it would seem mitsubishi were idiots for going backwards in the spring department. But look harder and you will find they most certainly did not. The springs job is to keep the valve following the cam as closely/smoothly as possible. The weight of the parts it has to control is important. Not only does the spring have to control the weight of valve but it also has to control the weight of spring and retainer. Compare the dsm weights to the evo weights and you will find mistubishi engineers do indeed know what they are doing. I dont hve the numbers in front of me but I weighed the parts. The evo setup had a higher spring pressure/weight than the earlier dsm setup it was replacing. And the static weights dont tell the whole story. The action of the spring is dynamic and I have no way of measuring weight during movement. but there is even more points for the evo setup as the top part of the spring and light weight 4 gram retainer is the part that is being moved. The heavier bottom part of spring is stationary on the head.
There is is another very cool feature of the stock evo design. The retainer is very fat. So at full lifts the retainer comes very close to the valve seal. Put in some cams with 410 lift and it comes even closer. Whats good about this is if there is valve float the retainer will hit the seal. This acts like a bump stop and keeps the valve from floating of the cam too far making it easy to return to the profile.
Another thing I like to point out is valve float off the top of cam does not hurt HP. It may help since the valve is opening farther. What hurts HP is if you get valve bounce on the seats. Here the valve and spring materials are important to avoid valve bounce.
If you ask me if you should run after market springs I would only recommend them if you were regularly revving to 9500 and higher. Or if you are running a very aggressive square cam profile. The stock springs are fully capable of revs to 9000 with most cams. And they doing it without much friction and heat from heavy springs. If you want to improve the stock spring performance add lighter intake valves with hollow stem. Mistu was supposed to give us them but budget cuts must have killed them in the end. The stock exhaust valve is already very light and it very high quality filled valve. about 7 grams lighter than the dsm valve it replaced. Plus its filled to stay cool better.
Negative, you absolutely will float valves with JUN 272's and stock springs reving that high. In fact a friends car would experience this issue starting around 7000 to 7200 rpms every time he got into it. A swap to stronger springs and the problem was completely resolved and the car has never had an issue since.
BTW the JUN's have a square-ish profile 94AWDcoupe mentioned in his post.
BTW the JUN's have a square-ish profile 94AWDcoupe mentioned in his post.
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
for what it's worth I regularly take my HKS 280's to 8500 as necessary to keep from having to shift to 5th gear with my current power.
soon I'll be installing the BR BF 272 and wouldn't dream of using stock springs for that...I have the BR springs/retainers for it. I'll be spinning it as high at 10,500 and don't want to take any chances.
soon I'll be installing the BR BF 272 and wouldn't dream of using stock springs for that...I have the BR springs/retainers for it. I'll be spinning it as high at 10,500 and don't want to take any chances.
for what it's worth I regularly take my HKS 280's to 8500 as necessary to keep from having to shift to 5th gear with my current power.
soon I'll be installing the BR BF 272 and wouldn't dream of using stock springs for that...I have the BR springs/retainers for it. I'll be spinning it as high at 10,500 and don't want to take any chances.
soon I'll be installing the BR BF 272 and wouldn't dream of using stock springs for that...I have the BR springs/retainers for it. I'll be spinning it as high at 10,500 and don't want to take any chances.
You run 8500 on stock springs?
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
yes but keep in mind the HKS 280's aren't as big as the name would have you think...the Jun 272, BR BF 272, Tomei 280 etc.. are all more aggressive as are several others.
