Notices
944 Turbo and Turbo-S Forum 1982-1991
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Clore Automotive

Stock Valve springs vs. Lindsey Racing springs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-10-2007, 02:05 PM
  #1  
Buckaroo Banzi
Racer
Thread Starter
 
Buckaroo Banzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gilroy CA
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default Stock Valve springs vs. Lindsey Racing springs

I am looking to upgrading my valve springs because of broken OEM springs on a 87 Turbo with only 108k.

Anyone have an opinion or recommendation on the LR valve springs with Titanium retainers? is over $450 dollars worth it?

Thanks in advance...

-BB
Old 01-10-2007, 02:52 PM
  #2  
Porschefile
Three Wheelin'
 
Porschefile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

There's not really any point unless you plan on revving higher. Do a different cam, maybe a port job or some other head work, retuned chips to support it and rev a bit higher then it will be worthwhile. For that price, you'd be better off getting something like the Webcam #274 cam and sticking with stock valve springs if you had a choice between the 2. At least then there would be a noticeable improvement in top-end performance.
Old 01-10-2007, 03:23 PM
  #3  
RKD in OKC
Rennlist Member
 
RKD in OKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: In a tizzy
Posts: 4,987
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

I would think the titanium retainers are for higher rpm applications. You should pick your springs based on the amount of boost you plan to run. Stock springs go up to 16psi. Ideally the 274 web cam with springs for 18psi would be a pretty sweet upgrade.
Old 01-10-2007, 04:06 PM
  #4  
aeronautica86
Three Wheelin'
 
aeronautica86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 1,690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I would not advise going with titanium retainers, the few grams you save is not likely going to allow you to rev the engine significantly higher. This is not my main reason however; I have a good friend who has an e30 M3 which has been using titanium retainers for <10k miles, I saw the car with the head off this past weekend and you could see significant wear on the retainers themselves. I'm not sure exactly what caused the wear to occur, but I know they were installed correctly, leading me to believe that the titanium retainers were just not as durable as the stock ones. Now, this is a single case in a different car, but I know when I eventually rebuild my engine and put in new springs/lifters etc, I won't be using titanium retainers
Old 01-10-2007, 04:12 PM
  #5  
toddk911
Drive-by provocation guy
Rennlist Member
 
toddk911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: NAS PAX River, by way of Orlando
Posts: 10,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by RKD in OKC
I would think the titanium retainers are for higher rpm applications. You should pick your springs based on the amount of boost you plan to run. Stock springs go up to 16psi. Ideally the 274 web cam with springs for 18psi would be a pretty sweet upgrade.
16psi???????
Old 01-10-2007, 04:15 PM
  #6  
RolexNJ
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
RolexNJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 5,321
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzi
I am looking to upgrading my valve springs because of broken OEM springs on a 87 Turbo with only 108k. Anyone have an opinion or recommendation on the LR valve springs with Titanium retainers? is over $450 dollars worth it? Thanks in advance...

-BB
If you plan on running a good amount of boost, I would highly recommend getting the LR valve race springs. Read this piece here --> LR Race Valve Springs I think it will help you to understand why. For the engine we are building now, we are going to use springs that are stiffer than the factory ones. Regarding the Ti retainers? It's mostly for weight savings, so you really don't need to spend the money on those unless you want to. That's my two cents.

Old 01-10-2007, 04:52 PM
  #7  
toddk911
Drive-by provocation guy
Rennlist Member
 
toddk911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: NAS PAX River, by way of Orlando
Posts: 10,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

What kind of revs are you planning on Rolex???
Old 01-10-2007, 05:47 PM
  #8  
RKD in OKC
Rennlist Member
 
RKD in OKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: In a tizzy
Posts: 4,987
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by toddk911
16psi???????
Yep, that's the design limit of the factory valve train.

As with any design it can be pushed, but to what end and for how long?
Old 01-10-2007, 05:55 PM
  #9  
RolexNJ
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
RolexNJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 5,321
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by toddk911
What kind of revs are you planning on Rolex???
I'm gonna do a Secial Tool move and push the limits here. I think I'll spin this sucker like a AMA GP Superbike, and try and hit 10K on the tach! Yeah right....

Old 01-10-2007, 06:14 PM
  #10  
Jon Moeller
Three Wheelin'
 
Jon Moeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,544
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by RKD in OKC
Yep, that's the design limit of the factory valve train.

As with any design it can be pushed, but to what end and for how long?
What changes between 16psi and 18 psi of boost that causes the springs to become an issue?

-J
Old 01-10-2007, 06:29 PM
  #11  
Laust Pedersen
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Laust Pedersen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Menifee, CA
Posts: 1,357
Received 8 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Well that was a bit of a “mumbo jumbo” explanation, unless someone can explain at which crank angle the pressure difference across the intake valve is at critical levels and don’t forget to take the exhaust back pressure into consideration.
If you remove the rpm limiter and over-rev the engine then that is a problem, but the boost is of little relevance for valve float.

Laust
Old 01-10-2007, 06:47 PM
  #12  
RKD in OKC
Rennlist Member
 
RKD in OKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: In a tizzy
Posts: 4,987
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Laust Pedersen
Well that was a bit of a “mumbo jumbo” explanation, unless someone can explain at which crank angle the pressure difference across the intake valve is at critical levels and don’t forget to take the exhaust back pressure into consideration.
If you remove the rpm limiter and over-rev the engine then that is a problem, but the boost is of little relevance for valve float.

Laust
YEAH, those cam designers don't have any idea what they are talking about, it's all smoke and mirrors to sell more springs with new cams.
Old 01-10-2007, 07:32 PM
  #13  
RolexNJ
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
 
RolexNJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 5,321
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by RKD in OKC
YEAH, those cam designers don't have any idea what they are talking about, it's all smoke and mirrors to sell more springs with new cams.
Just make sure you use the right parts in your new 2.8L that were tested properly and work too. I don't want to see any issues with the new Mad Max Mobile!

Old 01-10-2007, 07:42 PM
  #14  
Porschefile
Three Wheelin'
 
Porschefile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Laust Pedersen
Well that was a bit of a “mumbo jumbo” explanation, unless someone can explain at which crank angle the pressure difference across the intake valve is at critical levels and don’t forget to take the exhaust back pressure into consideration.
If you remove the rpm limiter and over-rev the engine then that is a problem, but the boost is of little relevance for valve float.

Laust

Well put. When are people around here going to learn that you have to take everything with a grain of salt, and especially when it is "info" provided by someone personally invested in the associated product. Max rpm is more important to determine what valve spring rate you'll want. LR's explanation really offers little in the way of a truely technical explanation of why, plus they don't really show any evidence to support it.

As far as Ti retainers go, you have to be careful when purchasing them. There is a large amount of sub-par quality Ti retainers out there on the market. Ideally, you want to get a quality retainer that is properly coated. Ti components without coatings can be extremely abrasive and cause serious amounts of wear. LR doesn't mention what brand their Ti retainers are, but I'd try to stick with reputable companies like Ferrea. Proper coatings are vital for many internal Ti components. Many of the cheap Ti retainers you might commonly see for various engines aren't even coated, so watch out for that. I'd ask LR if their retainers are coated.

Valves are another subject we could spend ages discussing. Just FYI but, Ti valves can actually be very reliable and long lasting with the proper valve seats, coatings, etc. There are many new-tech coatings and processes for coating Ti components that lead to a substantially increased life compared to what used to be available. Without coatings, Ti valves tend to eat the seats pretty quickly. In general though, the use of much of these exotic alloys is really a waste of time and money on a street motor. The improvements in tensile strength, heat dissipation capabilities, etc are sometimes minimal when compared to other alloys like SS or Chromoly. On a dedicated track car, those minimal improvements might be more than worthwhile. On a street car it will normally just leave you significantly lighter in the wallet without too much of an improvement. IMO, stick with stock or Chromoly retainers and upgrade the valve springs if you want to rev to something like 7k rpm, otherwise stick with stock springs. I see a lot of people around here get caught up with the ideas of using all of these exotic alloys and components when 9 times out of 10 there is no real worthwhile difference for a street car, and a significantly cheaper less exotic component/alloy might still give you ~90-95% of the performance. That's cool if you want to overbuild, but there are certainly far cheaper ways to go about it that still provide you comparable performance. That being said, don't ever waste the time with Ti valves in a street motor. The typical 21-4N alloy SS valves you normally see on the market are all you'd ever really need to upgrade to in a street motor. It's nice to think about using "cool" stuff like Inconnel or Ti valves but 99% of the time it just isn't practical for most people unless you really just feel like building a $10,000 valvetrain.
Old 01-10-2007, 07:43 PM
  #15  
Laust Pedersen
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Laust Pedersen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Menifee, CA
Posts: 1,357
Received 8 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by RKD in OKC
YEAH, those cam designers don't have any idea what they are talking about, it's all smoke and mirrors to sell more springs with new cams.
Cam designers that stay in business for awhile DO know what they are talking about, but that discussion does not show an insight, that a good cam designer has.


Quick Reply: Stock Valve springs vs. Lindsey Racing springs



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 12:58 AM.