PI 2V: OEM springs with Comp 262AHs?

[trinity_gt]

Who here is running Comp 262AHs with the original springs on their PI 2V?

Any issues with this? As I understand it, 262s don't need a spring upgrade though it is recommended. What're your thoughts?

 

[Orange...]

Well I threw some in about 2 weeks ago and have had no problems running stock springs.. it was a little tighter (if I remember correctly) to get the lash adjusters back in with the cams in place...
Runs good though.

 

[COramprat]

Edited...see more below

 

[trinity_gt]

Sweet.

Put the car in storage back in November and had the cams installed then. They were reluctant to swap the springs out for reasons not known to me, perhaps because they knew the stock springs would be okay and that the car has low miles on it etc.

With spring coming (no pun...), I'll be picking it up soon and of course worries like this are starting fester and bubble in the back of my head.

Hearing stuff like "50K since the swap" and no problems is really stress-relieving.

 

[COramprat]

Was it tuned? I got my best results after my dynotune.

 

[04YELLOWGT]

If you can afford it, I would put new springs in. Better to be safe than sorry.

 

[LaserRed01GT]

You will be very close to the solid height of the valve springs. Coil bind isn't so much the problem, but the stress to the valvespring will very significant since everytime the valve opens, the spring will be very close to the coil bind height. This also puts the retainer very close to the oil seal. You want at least .020" clearance from the oil seal and guide from the bottom of the retainer.

I know lots of guys have pulled this off with the stock springs, but I would not recommend it. The springs can physically hold up, but being that close to coil bind, you can rest assured that the valve is not being controlled as good as it should be. That means lost power. Valve springs are a pretty easy install, and they are relatively cheap insurance. And when, not if, you decide to go with a bigger cam down the road, you already have the spring setup to handle the bigger cam.

 

[trinity_gt]

Thanks guys. I did in fact purchase a set of Comp 26113-16 springs and have them in a box ready to install but for a number of reasons, they did not get put in.

With regards to the retainer, I hope the 262AHs with 0.550" valve lift don't come perilously close to the oil seal; no spring is going to fix that. I've not really heard much chatter about the retainer being upgraded along with the springs, just the springs themselves.

I can see me doing the springs later but I want to get a good spring and summer out of it before submitting it for surgery again to do them.

 

[LaserRed01GT]

Thanks guys. I did in fact purchase a set of Comp 26113-16 springs and have them in a box ready to install but for a number of reasons, they did not get put in.

With regards to the retainer, I hope the 262AHs with 0.550" valve lift don't come perilously close to the oil seal; no spring is going to fix that. I've not really heard much chatter about the retainer being upgraded along with the springs, just the springs themselves.

I can see me doing the springs later but I want to get a good spring and summer out of it before submitting it for surgery again to do them.

The installed height of that spring is .026" higher than the stock spring. That means at .550" lift on the aftermarket spring you will actually have .026" more retainer to oil seal clearance than the stock setup.

If you are going to take the time to do the springs, I would definitely spring the extra couple hundred bankroll, and get the Ti retainers and locks. The better you control the valves, the more power you will make and the easier it will be to tune.

 

[trinity_gt]

The installed height of that spring is .026" higher than the stock spring. That means at .550" lift on the aftermarket spring you will actually have .026" more retainer to oil seal clearance than the stock setup.

Sorry, please explain.

My understanding: The installed height has nothing to do with the spring itself. It may be a recommendation from the manufacturer of the spring but the height from the underside of the retainer to the spring seat is determined by the mechanicals of the valve seat in the combustion chamber, the length of the valve stem, the position of the keeper grooves and so on. I could take the spring out completely and push the valve closed with the retainer held in place with some grease or something. I could then move the valve 0.550" open and measure the distance between the seal and the retainer and this would be some value that is independent of the springs.

The recommendation for installed height from the manufacturer largely helps ensure adequate on-the-seat pressure and assurance that at full-open, coil-bind won't happen.

Now, what do you mean?

If you are going to take the time to do the springs, I would definitely spring the extra couple hundred bankroll, and get the Ti retainers and locks. The better you control the valves, the more power you will make and the easier it will be to tune.

Yeah, I've thought about that eh? I mean, the retainers and keepers will be right there, in hand. Why not swap them?

 

[LaserRed01GT]

Sorry, please explain.

My understanding: The installed height has nothing to do with the spring itself. It may be a recommendation from the manufacturer of the spring but the height from the underside of the retainer to the spring seat is determined by the mechanicals of the valve seat in the combustion chamber, the length of the valve stem, the position of the keeper grooves and so on. I could take the spring out completely and push the valve closed with the retainer held in place with some grease or something. I could then move the valve 0.550" open and measure the distance between the seal and the retainer and this would be some value that is independent of the springs.

The recommendation for installed height from the manufacturer largely helps ensure adequate on-the-seat pressure and assurance that at full-open, coil-bind won't happen.

Now, what do you mean?



Yeah, I've thought about that eh? I mean, the retainers and keepers will be right there, in hand. Why not swap them?

The installed height has everything to do with the spring. It is the actual measurement of the distance between the bottom of the valve spring retainer to the spring pocket when the valve is seated. It is not a recommendation by any means. It's the actual height as measured with a stock length valve and stock valve seat.

Now if you have some work done to the valve seat or use a custom length valve, then all of the numbers will of course change.

 

[trinity_gt]

The installed height has everything to do with the spring. It is the actual measurement of the distance between the bottom of the valve spring retainer to the spring pocket when the valve is seated.

Right, which is determined not by the spring but by the engine mechanicals. e.g. Valve seat receded? You're going to see the installed height go up. I can measure the height, the distance between the retainer and the spring seat pocket without the spring installed. Why would it change depending on the spring I put back in?

It is not a recommendation by any means. It's the actual height as measured with a stock length valve and stock valve seat.

Now if you have some work done to the valve seat or use a custom length valve, then all of the numbers will of course change.

Yes, but if I pull the valvecover off, remove a rocker, pull a retainer and swap a stock spring for a Comp 26113, the installed height will be exactly the same before and after.

So I don't see how going to Comp springs suddenly gets me more retainer to guide seal clearance. If I took the head off, completely disassembled it and "blueprinted" the valvetrain to get the exact height specified. But who does that when just swappin' cams and springs? Most people use the special Ford tool to compress the stock spring, pop it out, replace it and move on to do this 15 more times.

 

[LaserRed01GT]

Say you go from the stock 4.650" OL valve to a 4.705" OL valve. Not only does that change your margin, taper, and underhead radius/angle, but it also changes the installed height because of the change to the tip length. That's without touching the head itself.

Now of course if you do a valvejob or shim the springs, then the installed height goes even higher.

 

[LaserRed01GT]

Say you go from the stock 4.650" OL valve to a 4.705" OL valve. Not only does that change your margin, taper, and underhead radius/angle, but it also changes the installed height because of the change to the tip length. That's without touching the head itself.

Now of course if you do a valvejob or shim the springs, then the installed height goes even higher.

Trinity nevermind, I had you confused with somebody else on here who asked me about the installed height difference with different valve. That's what happens when you get 60 emails and PM's a day.

So yes, the installed height will of course not change if you do not touch the head, don't use shims, and use the same retainers and valves.

 

[LaserRed01GT]

Wait a minute, I just saw that this camshaft (262AH) has a .550" lift. According to my personal measurements on these stock valvesprings, you are going to coil bind them with that much lift. Ironically I just had this same conversation with Tim at MPH and Ron at Fox Lake the other day and they said the same thing.

.550 is way too much on a stock spring. IF, and I mean IF, you guys actually have a motor that has been running for 50k on the stock springs with .550" of lift, count your blessings. These motors are setup with about .120" - .150" preload, so that is the only thing that is likely saving you from valvetrain failure. The stock hydraulic lifter can actually absorb most of that 120-150 preload if the springs are in fact binding, which I am certain they are.

Tim and Ron have installed quite a few more of these cams than I have, so you might want to give them a buzz.

 

[trinity_gt]

Say you go from the stock 4.650" OL valve to a 4.705" OL valve. Not only does that change your margin, taper, and underhead radius/angle, but it also changes the installed height because of the change to the tip length. That's without touching the head itself.

Now of course if you do a valvejob or shim the springs, then the installed height goes even higher.

I know that. I've said as much, such as when I said installed height "is determined not by the spring but by the engine mechanicals." I even gave an example: if the valve seat recedes, the valve moves "up" and the installed height increases.

But when 90% of people talk about upgrading the springs during a simple cam swap -- as I have in this thread -- it's an operation that occurs, for the vast majority of people, without removing the heads, without changing valves or grinding seats or faces etc. Most don't even change the retainer and on low mile cars, even the valve seal is left as is. They simply swap springs.

For this situation, the installed height doesn't change and the retainer will come just as close to the valve seal with stock PI springs as with Comps.

 

[trinity_gt]

Trinity nevermind, I had you confused with somebody else on here who asked me about the installed height difference with different valve. That's what happens when you get 60 emails and PM's a day.

So yes, the installed height will of course not change if you do not touch the head, don't use shims, and use the same retainers and valves.

NP. Ignore my last reply...

 

[trinity_gt]

Wait a minute, I just saw that this camshaft (262AH) has a .550" lift. According to my personal measurements on these stock valvesprings, you are going to coil bind them with that much lift. Ironically I just had this same conversation with Tim at MPH and Ron at Fox Lake the other day and they said the same thing.

.550 is way too much on a stock spring. IF, and I mean IF, you guys actually have a motor that has been running for 50k on the stock springs with .550" of lift, count your blessings. These motors are setup with about .120" - .150" preload, so that is the only thing that is likely saving you from valvetrain failure. The stock hydraulic lifter can actually absorb most of that 120-150 preload if the springs are in fact binding, which I am certain they are.

Tim and Ron have installed quite a few more of these cams than I have, so you might want to give them a buzz.

I asked my shop to check for coil bind and they reported none though they didn't tell me how much space there was at max lift.

In looking at say:

http://www.rpmoutlet.com/musv8compcam.htm

I see that for the Stg 1 cams (the 262s, the ones I've got), they say "Valve springs recommended" (emphasis mine.) Same with the 270s. For the 278s they say "Valve spring upgraded required". I presume that the requirement on the 278s comes from more aggressive ramps since the gross lift is the same for all 3 cams (0.550")

If the lift was the cause of the "requirement" on the 278s, it would apply to the 262s as well but for that, and the 270s, they only "recommend" a spring upgrade.

Sean Hyland also uses stock springs up to 0.550", so I've read. Whatever you think of the guy, he's been doing these things for a while now and if he's willing to use them, I should be okay...

 

[LaserRed01GT]

I asked my shop to check for coil bind and they reported none though they didn't tell me how much space there was at max lift.

In looking at say:

http://www.rpmoutlet.com/musv8compcam.htm

I see that for the Stg 1 cams (the 262s, the ones I've got), they say "Valve springs recommended" (emphasis mine.) Same with the 270s. For the 278s they say "Valve spring upgraded required". I presume that the requirement on the 278s comes from more aggressive ramps since the gross lift is the same for all 3 cams (0.550")

If the lift was the cause of the "requirement" on the 278s, it would apply to the 262s as well but for that, and the 270s, they only "recommend" a spring upgrade.

Sean Hyland also uses stock springs up to 0.550", so I've read. Whatever you think of the guy, he's been doing these things for a while now and if he's willing to use them, I should be okay...

How did your shop check for coil bind? If they did it with a feeler gauge without the motor fully warmed and running then they didn't have the lifter pumped up and it will of course skew the measurements. Stock lift on the stock camshaft is .462" and I can assure going with .088" more lift on the stock spring will cause coil bind. The stock setup has a 1.574" installed height. Coil bind(solid) height is right at 1.049". I have said before that I wouldn't run more than .519 lift on the stock spring, but you could probably get away with .525" lift.

Coil bind has nothing to do with duration or a more agressive opening ramp. Peak lift is the sole dictator of coil bind. Now longer durations can stress a spring more than smaller durations given that the same spring is used, but how long the valve is held open has nothing to do with determining coil bind.

BTW, Sean Hyland does NOT use the stock springs on a .550" lift camshaft, he knows they will bind. You guys really need to quit going by what you read on these websites because aftermarket and performance shops hire a webmaster to design their sites. 99% of the webmasters that put together these sites don't know a muffler from a tire.

 

[COramprat]

.550 is way too much on a stock spring. IF, and I mean IF, you guys actually have a motor that has been running for 50k on the stock springs with .550" of lift, count your blessings. These motors are setup with about .120" - .150" preload, so that is the only thing that is likely saving you from valvetrain failure. The stock hydraulic lifter can actually absorb most of that 120-150 preload if the springs are in fact binding, which I am certain they are.

Mine are actually the 262H...I have a 96 GT. The lift on these cams is .500. I never really looked at the 262AH's. Didn't realize the lift was different when I said I had no problems.