Cosworth Ultra-High RPM Dual Valve Spring / Titanium Retainer Set
 

Anyone running this set? Comments and info?

I am planning to purchase one, just trying to see what people think or thought of it.

Bump, i am still looking for any comments or concerns for this particular set-up.

Also interested :)

I looked for information as well....Cosworth's site had no real information on the springs, so I had to pass....

Most people go with Supertech, Manley, crower. I suggest supertech(i have them), and they are probably the most widely used on the evo.

Kiggly's beehives are money!

http://www.kigglyracing.com/parts/valvespring1.htm

I have them in stock if your interested...

Supertech are known to eat valve seals.

Ferrera valves, valve springs and valve train components are great. Kiggly beehive springs are also one of the best options out there.

Kiggly's have been tested far higher than 99.9% of users will rev them.

Can you PM me a price, or even a general price of what these are worth?

I run the GSC Beehives. Haven't experienced any float so far.

GSC are rated to 9k
FP style beehives are also rated to 9000 +/- "edited based on new information"
Kiggly are there and up to 11,500+ (not sure exactly how much ;) )

Each has a very specific place in the market and work well. The Kiggly's are generally around 450-500 depending on where you order them from.

I thought the GSC springs were only rated to 8500? I have the 5039 springs that use teh stock retainers and have my rev limit set to 8300, never had much need to go any higher than that. Maybe the GSC units w/ uprated springs are rated higher?

http://stikiller.com/product.php?pro...cat=335&page=1

So, did GSC revise their springs, or just rate them higher now? I am 99.99% positive they used to be rated at only 8500...

FP Beehive springs are rated to 9k RPM. You say each have a very specific place in the market, how do the GSC and FP Beehive springs differ?

More info on this?

you must use the supertech valves seals which are smaller in diameter otherwise you run the risk of the springs rubbing on the oem seals...not a big deal really since you have to replace the seals anyway when going their dual valve springs

Been using Supertech Duals on our cars without any issues.. Remember RPM is not the only contributing factor to Valve float.. BOOST IS also.. I have sene valves float well before 9000 at certain boost levels where the car would hold well over 9000 at lower boost levels.. We use a particular Supertech setup that hasnt let us down yet.. Many float valves and dont even know they are losing power on top..

Mike

You gonna let us in on that particular Supertech setup? Or you just goona tease us:lol:

Its not 1 size fits all.. i tailor the seat pressure to the customers needs.. If your looking for a good setup PM me and i can give you some advice.. Thanks!!

Mike

I love these threads. I am firm believer in not over springing the motor. I run 37 psi on stock evo 8 springs 280 cams to 8300rpm with no valve float. stock 8 springs only have 52lbs seat pressure. I will let you guys figure out if you need 97lb seat pressure.

Oh and valve float in no way causes loss of power. valve float just increases valve lift.

Thats interesting to hear.. When we were floating valves with ferrea duals we couldnt break 850.. when i swapped ONLY the Supertech springs the car moved to 921whp..

floating valves is not same thing as valve bounce. valve bounce hurts power. valve float does not. valve bounce is more related to poor quality spring or improperly designed one that suffers from harmonics that allow the valve to bounce on the seat. its not as simple as being not enough seat pressure. a good designed 52lb spring can work better than a poorly designed 75lb spring.

I also am not much a believer in duals. there just insnt the room to do it correctly. springs do vibrate and move around. keeping dual springs from hitting each other is no easy task. Cosworth design looks awesome to me in that respect. they use a seat riser to keep the spring shorter. less likely to move around so much.

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f3...s/DSC00010.jpg

Ive got news for you.. Id be willing to be A LOT of $$$ those springs your showing me below are made by ferrea.. The risers as you call them AKA locators are 100% identical to ferrea and i know a little something about cosworth.. That design you like was bouncing, floating, jumping or however you want to call it and the supertech with the proper seat pressure were not..

Mike

FP doesnt recommend revving higher than 9000 :updown: "edited based on new info"

GSC now rates at 9k, maybe further testing made them decide to up the limit.

94AWD, valvefloat (though I see since I started this you also use the term "bounce") does this to power:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...Valvefloat.jpg

I am pretty sure that if that was all the higher you want to rev it I guess it would be okay. I am pretty sure seat pressure is 65 when I measured them but I can doublecheck.

Stock springs are fine to 8300 on smaller cams (think S1s) but at some point you are going to want to think about stiffer springs. I dont think Kiggly's are for everybody. Typically I only recommend them (or a Ti retainer based spring) above 9k. We havent been vary impressed with Supertech however since they do eat valvestem seals. The reason is there isnt much clearance between the inner spring and the seal and they seem to "walk".

I am no Engineer but that sure looks like what we call VALVE FLOAT when we see it.. I dont know much about the term valve bounce but what is seen in your graph i have corrected with a proper seat pressure spring change only..

Somehow after that my car ran 8.7 & 167mph.. so i guess I made the right decision on the Spring change..

Mike

This is a ford 289 auto, but this was most certainly valvefloat. I do know what the sound of float is, and it sounded very similar to the sound my car (the 417whp graph) made on the dyno:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...rd289Float.jpg

The Sound is pretty distinctive once you know what it is.. Then you can confirm with your graph.. SOmetimes its just starting to float and the graph doesnt drop huge but it looks like litle misfires on top.. Then you go up with the boost and youll get the drop that we call valve float others call Bounce i guess... LOL

Mike

Valve float is when the cam follower leaves the top of lobe. as stated earlier this would not hurt power. you just get more lift. valve bounce is when the valve bounces off the seat. very different from valve float and it does hurt power. changing the material of the valves can also cause valve bounce. I hear titanium valves need special seats as they have a very high tendancy to bounce. its a broad subject guys. tear away at if you like. in the end its all about trial and error. I also love the stock valves. they are very well designed and no need to change them IMHO. I use them in the above results on the stock springs. here a good video on how much movement there is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_REQ1...eature=related

Maybe thats the difference between what you think you know and what you actually know and not what you were told or read thru google.. From experience I CAN HEAR CLEAR AS DAY when a valve floats badly.. When it just starts to float you can pick it up in the dyno chart most times..

Now i know what your thinking.. how can mike hear them floating in the head?? LOL From experience once again its not the float you hear its the tone of the motor when it happens in high RPM..

So I am going to stick to what i believe is termed VALVE FLOAT and i believe from my experience it causes power loss..

Btw.. I have seen that video and that, anyway you word it, will cause a loss in power.. Just look at the reply from 1 person.. He said he can see POWER LOSS & HEAR IT.. AMAZING!! LOL

"You can tell. I have an inline six in a pickup, notorious for weak springs that has no RPM. I can feel valve float as low as 4,000RPM.

Typically, on my engine, it manifests as a loss of power and a tone/pitch change in the exhaust note"

Mike

is everything an argument with you Mike? you get all butt hurt because I correct the terminology? very childish you are.

Pulled from Wiki but good definitions. Point is there is no doubt that with high rpm and higher lift cams there is a time when a stiffer spring is needed then the stockies.

"Valve float is an adverse condition which occurs when the poppet valves on an internal combustion engine valvetrain do not remain in contact with the camshaft lobe during the valve closure phase of the cam lobe profile. This reduces engine efficiency and performance and potentially increases engine emissions."


"Valve bounce is a related condition where the valve does not stay seated, due to the combined effects of the valve's inertia and resonance effects of metallic valve springs that effectively reduce the closing force, and allow the valve to re-open partially."

Im not arguing with you i am telling you you are WRONG in your statements.. Is everything a battle with you when someone disagrees with your FALSE statements.. How about " damn, i guess i was wrong mike, Seems you and john bradley can hear it so i must be misinformed".. instead you are arguing what you dont know as true but what you HEARD..

MIke

Now i know what your thinking.. how can mike hear them floating in the head?? LOL From experience once again its not the float you hear its the tone of the motor when it happens in high RPM..

Thats exactly what I was thinking. you cant hear the valves themselves floating. like you can hear detonation. what you hear is the engine change tone from loss of power. instead of point this out I erased the post. but you replied like instantly so here we are.

you ever hear the saying "mean what you say, and say what you mean" ?

Its difficult enough to have a technical discussion when you use poor terminology. its even worse when you get defensive when it gets corrected.

I thought float didnt cause loss of power?? :lol:

Either way its the internet man.. John bradley didnt have any issue understanding my typing.. I speak pretty good english.. My contribution to this thread is done... Later..

Seems to be that everything on here turns into a argument, most vendors on here have more knowledge and experience than the average member or they wouldnt stay in business, If Mike didnt know what he was talking about there wouldnt be any 8-9-10 second evos with AWD on the back of them so he must know what he is doing. This "member" measuring contest or challenging vendors knowledge on here is getting way out of hand. Mike is spot on in what he is saying.

Justin

There is a technical distinction between the two terms, but valve float leads to valve bounce. The basic concept is that you need enough spring to keep the rocker on the lobe of the cam. When the lobe has too much accelleration in its shape for the spring to keep the rocker following the lobe, you get valve float. Yes, it gives "more lift" because it's not controlled.

But, what goes up (uncontrolled) must come down, and when it does, still out of camshaft control, it's not a smooth landing. If the valve is not set down under control, and the spring is not balanced by the cam lobe in setting the valve down, the spring snaps the valve shut, often creating a residual bounce. It also has the capacity to weaken the valve head to stem junction, and "pull" the head off of the valve, which then causes "loss of power" (as well as destroys your piston, combustion chamber, and the like).

Want to see a cool video from kiggly of valve springs in high RPM slow motion action? http://www.kigglyracing.com/parts/im...ive_Spring.avi

So, too much valve spring can cause loss of power from the force it needs to compress them as compared to a lighter spring, but too little valve spring tension can cause float, bounce, and engine destruction. Which option would you prefer?

Whatever you want to call it, it sounds like the engine changed into an old fashioned washboard. You feel it lay over (loss of power), in my case I could see it knock at the same time. That is the stock ECU for you though wanting to call everything knock. The same exact setup with a change to some FPs resulted in an ultra clean power band like this:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...Stockturbo.jpg

wow :lol:

I am running Brian Crower valve springs/ti retainers @ 93lbs of seat pressure and so far so good for at least 8600rpm. Of course my stock ones would do that as well, although I did get a strange single knock count around 8300, which is now gone, so maybe the stock ones were floating around 8300. My friend ran the same ones (Brian Crowers) in his talon to 9500rpm with no issues for a few years. Kiggleys are overkill unless you have a huge t4 turbo. My same fiend also owned a set of those (Kiggleys) when he upgraded to a 42r and he said turning the motor over by hand with those was a ***** lol

I'm not trying to argue with you here, just get the facts straight, but FP clearly states 9k RPM on their website. I'm in the market for either these springs or GSC's and am having a tough time finding any actual differences and whether one is a better choice than the other.

That must have also been revised. In my many conversations with Groc he had said they can do it but dont offer them as a high rpm spring. I will alter my posts to reflect that.

there is much more that goes into choosing the correct valve spring than RPM and boost pressure. The best source of information will come from your camshaft manufacturer. You can either ask them directly or ask one of the dealers as they usually have a better understand or have already asked what to use with which cam.


Most know about valve float and use it as a generic term to talk about every aspect of a valve spring being inferior. There are more things that go into valve spring design than just valve float, engine rpm, and boost pressures. Things like valve bounce, flutter, jerk, spring rising rate, seat pressure, spring frequency are some of the aspects of spring terms.


Now as far as the OEM Mitsu spring. while it does have a good seat pressure there is absolutely no rise in pressure. This is common on an oem application as the constraints of the spring are defined by what the outputs are going to be from the factory. Some ask questions like are the OEM valve springs up to the task of increasing the rev limit? Well yes on the factory cam they sure are. they are designed to keep the valves from floating if a slight mechanical over rev occurs on the stock cams. What is commonly a safety net for the OEM designed products, becomes useful for the aftermarket applications.

I just changed my posts, AND then decided to look. When I did all I saw was the spring price and no information. Then I saw it under the DSM upgrade :)

http://store.forcedperformance.net/m...ode=DSM-Engine

Its also listed if you read the description for the FP4R cams. Good to know my IX retainers are light though!

Alot of good info!

I am surprised, no one has yet to run these High RPM set!

what he said {thumbup}

Anyone out there running this?

why dont you stick with whats proven to work? no sense in gambling on something that may or may not work for your needs

A valve spring cannot be tagged with a specific rpm limit, except with a particular cam set, valvetrain, etc. A spring that will effectively track an HKS cam (lazy ramps) up to an 8000rpm limit will not handle a cam with a more aggressive lobe profile (e.g. GSC S2) at that same rpm using the same valvetrain.

The backside of a valve is important to the overall flow potential of the port. This is one area where OEM valves typically fall short of better quality aftermarket parts.

We measured a typical factory EVO spring at around 50 lbs seat pressure and 150 lbs open pressure. That isn't enough to accurately track better cam sets where they are intended to make power.

Valve float causes erratic valve action that compromises power. On the intake side, the valve floats to a point whereby the piston is moving far enough upward bast BDC whereby it begins pushing the intake charge right back through the intake valve. On the exhaust side, the excess overlap begins to contaminate te intake charge. In many cases, the reduction in power may not be readily apparent, but it is there. When the effect is enough to be easily recognized on the dyno or is audibly evident, the problem is especially serious.

It is always better to have a little more valve spring pressure than one really needs than a little less. There are quite a few persons in this forum who are experiencing reduced power due to inadequate spring pressures. They just don't realize it.

This just solved my spring dilemma, thanks!

:beer:

Cosworth
 

Im running on cosworth. I havent had any issues what so ever.

Thanks for bumping a 6year old thread to let us know:updown: