Comp Beehive valvesprings?

[BigBobsL]

Will soon be assembling my 427 Dart SBF. Since it will see some street cruising time, I am considering using a hydraulic roller and Comp #26120 (155# seat) springs on the AFR 225 heads instead of a solid roller. Another reason I was looking at HR was because years back I saw a good number of solid roller lifters fail and wipe cams.

Recently I have been hearing rumors of Comps beehive springs being prone to breakage. With a single valve spring, that can be tragic. Does anyone have real world experience with these springs? I have a set of convention HR dual springs (145# seat) I could use.

Would I be safer with solid rollers or HR with conventional dual springs? My experience with solid rollers is old, do they hold up better now?

Thanks

[ou812]

Those springs break because they are being used outside of where they were designed to be used. That spring you mentioned is not one of the springs that has been breaking, its the ls1 replacement spring. Guys are using this spring in oval track and yes they are breaking them. One nice thing about the beehives is if they break it will most likely be the second coil because it is the heaviest coil of the active coils. So...if it breaks, the spring just stacks on top of the others. Yes the valve does drop down but probably only about .150 or less. The key is to use the proper valve spring for the application. I have used both springs with very good success. The one you want to use is the proper spring for the app. so I wouldnt worry about it. Infact, I bet you get longer spring life and valve life from using them.
Brian

[BigBobsL]

One of the reasons I ask is that p. 67 of May 05 "CAR CRAFT" shows a failed beehive valve spring with bent valve that I believe is the spring I have now per their description at start of the article. In the photo caption CAR CRAFT criptically states that builder has "stepped up to the beehive springs that are on the engine now".

It sounds to me like the original beehive broke and they stepped up to a higher quality "oval track" beehive and are attempting to mask the failure by not stating it was a beehive spring that failed, only that it was not the "beehives now in the motor" without giving any detail.

Seems to me I may have read of another failure with standard Comp behive that necessitated a move to the oval track beehive.

The CAR CRAFT picture shows you definitely nailed the failure mode, failed at second coil and stacked, but it did badly bend the valve.

[67RS502]

I have a set of 918 beehives on my mellow 383, in my Luv truck.
383 has been in it for over a year, and I have about 5000 miles on them so far, but the HR cam is pretty small, 224/224, 568/568, around 125seat / 320open. I can say that they helped it rpm more, valve float was 6100 with 987 springs, with the beehives its 6500. Its mostly a work truck / cruiser, but I do stick my foot in it too, and havent had any breakage/problems.

[Len]

Crower has a line of dual cone shaped springs that might be of interest to you guy's .
Len

[EngineTech1]

I've used the 26120's in a few different engines with different cam types and have had some pretty impressive results. With steel valves and steel retainers I have seen the 26120's ( which are BBC hyd roller springs by the way) be worth over 900 rpm before valve float with a dual spring with damper and steel retainers with comparable pressures.
No failures yet, and after a couple freshens these springs still check within about 5lbs of what they did after initial start up.

[67RS502]

Dano
What kind of rpm are you seeing with the 120 spring? 7500?
Was this on a SBF or BBC. I ask because my 502 starts to set off the dyno knock
sensor at 6800 and floats 'em at 7000, with a double spring / damper. When I upgrade
the heads I'd like to try a beehive and see if I can get more rpm out of it. I know that
aggressive lobes will float sooner, but it would be nice to do a beehive spring and a
aggressive lobe and still get 7000+rpm.
Thanks

[EngineTech1]

This was a SBF with light steel valves and a very agressive flat tappet.
with the dual spring w/damper and steel retainer/locks, we went into massive float at something like 67 or 6800 and when we switched to the 26120's it would pull to 7900+ before floating. Of course its going to be different with BB valves and the hyd roller cam. I think you could at least pick up 500 rpm but that is just a guess. We picked up much more than that but with smaller valves and lighter valvetrain.
I do know that the steel ret for the 120's was about a third the weight of the standard comp steel dual spring ret that we had used before and the upper mass of the 120 was way less than the dual with damper. the spring weighed less than half as much and most of the mass is in the lower half so there is way less mass to control.

[BigBobsL]

Good info Daniel and all, thanks. Just trying to make sure thre are not inherent failures with these springs. I bought mine for the reasons discussed, but had heard some rumors of failure and possibly reinforced by failure in magazine article. Do not want to suffer a catastropic engine damage due to a bad spring.

[SStrokerAce]

I can't even tell you how many sets of these springs I have used... probably 50 or more.

The 26918's and the 26120's are both great springs. They have a very clean wire so they are less prone to breaking than a standard spring but it shows in the price. There were some failures of the early 26918's a while ago and that issue has been fixed but like everything you can still break it.

As Dano said they hold their pressure very well also.

The interesting difference between the 26918 and the 26120 is both the rate and the mass of them. You are going to see about 25g's more per spring with the 26120's, which is a considerable amount, but when you compare them to the standard dual spring they replace (Comp 977 for example) the 26918 has about 1/2 the mass, and when you look at the mass on the top of the spring which is what the valve really feels it's even better.

Billy Godbold of Comp Cams has said that a beehive with 100lbs on the seat 300 over the nose can actually control a valve better than a dual spring with 180lbs on the seat and 450+ over the nose.

I've seen lots of good dyno tests on these things, both 3rd party and results from customers of mine. One guy is using them on Marine and Street BBC's and is amazed how much more RPM the motors have. He's easily picking up 1000rpm more usefull rpm with the same motor, same cam. I've run them in a lot of small blocks using some semi aggressive cam lobes and easily run them to 7,000rpm without signs of any loss of valve control.

On a side note... the only companies/people who I have heard say the do not like them are the same ones that don't sell them. Makes me wonder, do they not sell them because they don't like them or do they not like them because they don't sell them. I have a feeling it's the latter from the results I have consistantly seen.

67RS502,

If you watch your valve mass, say go to a 11/32 valve on that 502 with some guide liners and a nice tame cam, even if it has some lift you could easily see 7,000+rpm with a beehive.

BigBobsL,

Like everything check the valvesprings at routine intervals. These things will last for a long time at .600" lift but you should monitor the pressures on them. They could go easily 10,000-20,000 miles or more on the street but if I was beating on them I would check them at 5-7K just to make sure they are kosher. Then again I would do that with any valvespring on the street.

Bret

[BigBobsL]

Thanks Bret - I assume when you are talking of periodically checking the springs, you are referring to seat pressure. Can do.

I also posted an inquiry on CAR CRAFT board since it was their magazine article that showed the failed spring, but have got ZERO response from them. Appreciate the experiences shared here. Not trying to slam the springs, just checking others' experience with these springs before installing them in my motor.

[SStrokerAce]

Yeah just check the seated pressure.... The rates not going to change but the seated pressure will. The 26000 series from Comp is good at holding it's pressure over a longer life cycle.

Bret

[DavidHarsay]

I can't even tell you how many sets of these springs I have used... probably 50 or more...

Bret

Thanks for the suggestion on these over the years, Ive used the 26918's based on your recommendation a while back.

What do you think of the conical compared to the beehive?

About what RPM limit for 26918 springs? (8mm valves, tool steel retainers, Mike Jones Hydraulic Cam at 0.600 lift, Isky Lifters, Jesel Sportsman's, ARP220 and SBC400)

[Walter R. Malik]

Will soon be assembling my 427 Dart SBF. Since it will see some street cruising time, I am considering using a hydraulic roller and Comp #26120 (155# seat) springs on the AFR 225 heads instead of a solid roller. Another reason I was looking at HR was because years back I saw a good number of solid roller lifters fail and wipe cams.

Recently I have been hearing rumors of Comps beehive springs being prone to breakage. With a single valve spring, that can be tragic. Does anyone have real world experience with these springs? I have a set of convention HR dual springs (145# seat) I could use.

Would I be safer with solid rollers or HR with conventional dual springs? My experience with solid rollers is old, do they hold up better now?

Thanks

Personally, I have used the PAC "conical" spring PAC-1427 with great results but, good race quality lifters are required. (150 @ 1.950")

[Racer97]

If you use comp test the pressure. I have some comp springs rated at 380 only have 210.