Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

Doing some research for heads I'm working on .Does anyone know the weight of these comp cam #787 steel retainers they are for beehive springs on a 11/32 stem valve w/7°locks . Thanks Dan

I have the 774's and they are 12 grams, they appear to be the same as the 787 from what I can tell.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/CCA-787-16/
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca- ... 252f0ac4f5

Thanks Gary , nobody selling them or even comps site don't give a weight. Dan

6.50camaro wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:40 pm Thanks Gary , nobody selling them or even comps site don't give a weight. Dan

Is there a reason I am missing to weighing a spring?

Its a retainer . I was trying to fiqure find the weight of that retainer vs. A Manley h13 tool steel retainer that cost $140 more for a set of 16.
12gr retainer +3.5 gr 7* lock (787) vs 8gr retainer +6.8gr 10* lock.manley tool steel retainer . 140 $ more to save .7gr weight Dan

6.50camaro wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2019 9:43 pm Its a retainer . I was trying to fiqure find the weight of that retainer vs. A Manley h13 tool steel retainer that cost $140 more for a set of 16.
12gr retainer +3.5 gr 7* lock (787) vs 8gr retainer +6.8gr 10* lock.manley tool steel retainer . 140 $ more to save .7gr weight Dan

I am so sorry I missed retainer. Mike Jones has a pretty good source on the steel retainers.

I think the 774s are for 8mm stems, so they are probably a touch heavier than the 787s.

Geoff2 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:46 am I think the 774s are for 8mm stems, so they are probably a touch heavier than the 787s.

I am not sure, they show to be for stock valve stem and then they have one for 8mm and one for 11/32... I don't know what the stock GenIII stem size is .308/.313?
http://www.compcams.com/Products/CC-'Va ... es'-0.aspx

Also if anyone is interested the 26915 spring is 72 grams.

I've used Manley Ti locks with their TS retainers, was lighter & cheaper than Ti retainers & steel 10 deg locks.
Don't think it'd be a good idea to run Ti locks in Ti retainers & I probably wouldn't use Ti locks in a roller valve train.
But for the flat tappet combo I was dealing with we saved something like 12g with just locks & retainers.

Trying to decide if I want to upgrade to conical springs .I have 1.460 od dual springs with 10° Titanium retainers now. Seat and open pressures are good . Maybe save a little mass on the valve side of the rocker. 6800 rpm tops hyd roller 383 bracket motor. Dan

6.50camaro wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 9:34 am Trying to decide if I want to upgrade to conical springs .I have 1.460 od dual springs with 10° Titanium retainers now. Seat and open pressures are good . Maybe save a little mass on the valve side of the rocker. 6800 rpm tops hyd roller 383 bracket motor. Dan

What spring pressures and cam are you running now?

The springs are 140 lbs on the seat and 400 lbs @max lift off .618 . Cam is not nailed down at this point the last cam I had in this motor was a Crane hyd roller 240/248 .050 .372 lobe lift @110lsa w/1.65 in 1.6 ex rockers . The new cam will have about the same duration @.050 but a faster ramp 53-55° dfference between adv duration and .050 dur. not 66° like the Crane was . Springs worked fine with no problem to 7000 rpm.

6.50camaro wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:26 pm The springs are 140 lbs on the seat and 400 lbs @max lift off .618 . Cam is not nailed down at this point the last cam I had in this motor was a Crane hyd roller 240/248 .050 .372 lobe lift @110lsa w/1.65 in 1.6 ex rockers . The new cam will have about the same duration @.050 but a faster ramp 53-55° dfference between adv duration and .050 dur. not 66° like the Crane was . Springs worked fine with no problem to 7000 rpm.

I would probably try what you have first then, If you run in to some stability issues with your new lobe intensities, they would be worth lookin at.

I just recently had some quick hydraulic roller lobes cause me some stability issues that weren't there with the slower lobes..short travel lifters would probably take care of it though. Similar change to what your mentioning though, you going to XE lobes by chance? I use the 221438-16 Manley beehives quite a bit. Nice spring with pressures similar to your current duals.

6.50camaro wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:26 pm The springs are 140 lbs on the seat and 400 lbs @max lift off .618 . Cam is not nailed down at this point the last cam I had in this motor was a Crane hyd roller 240/248 .050 .372 lobe lift @110lsa w/1.65 in 1.6 ex rockers . The new cam will have about the same duration @.050 but a faster ramp 53-55° dfference between adv duration and .050 dur. not 66° like the Crane was . Springs worked fine with no problem to 7000 rpm.

Most of the springs mentioned here are decent enough but I will say without a doubt that you are running further out on the edge with single spring setups. Not that a dual spring setup still can't munch valves up if something goes wrong.. but you get the point of less safety margin. The 7228 conicals are nice too, next evolution of beehives, if you're concerned about mass.

Maybe a shameless plug but if you wanted a bit more spring to better handle more aggressive valve motion?.. I have a very lightly used set, low miles on puny factory Vortec cam, of polished Manley Nextec 221436 springs and retainers being sold cheap to clean out my years of parts stashing.

groberts101 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:45 pm

6.50camaro wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:26 pm The springs are 140 lbs on the seat and 400 lbs @max lift off .618 . Cam is not nailed down at this point the last cam I had in this motor was a Crane hyd roller 240/248 .050 .372 lobe lift @110lsa w/1.65 in 1.6 ex rockers . The new cam will have about the same duration @.050 but a faster ramp 53-55° dfference between adv duration and .050 dur. not 66° like the Crane was . Springs worked fine with no problem to 7000 rpm.

Most of the springs mentioned here are decent enough but I will say without a doubt that you are running further out on the edge with single spring setups. Not that a dual spring setup still can't munch valves up if something goes wrong.. but you get the point of less safety margin. The 7228 conicals are nice too, next evolution of beehives, if you're concerned about mass.

Maybe a shameless plug but if you wanted a bit more spring to better handle more aggressive valve motion?.. I have a very lightly used set, low miles on puny factory Vortec cam, of polished Manley Nextec 221436 springs and retainers being sold cheap to clean out my years of parts stashing.

I hear what your saying. I'm total comfortable with the 1.460 dual spring ti retainer setup I have. A little leery of a single spring breaking and dropping a valve . But I thought try some new technology going with the conical . I'm also trying to use up my spare parts stash . I had the 383 short block with about 150 1/8 runs on it. A freind that runs the local machine shop give me a set of Sportsman II heads bare castings that I'm working on . ( throat , narrow the guides, short turn ,evening out the PR pinch )Had everything but intake valves to complete the top end . It ran 6.96@98mph 1/8 mile before with a set of 292 turbo heads hoping to match that or better it some. Thanks all for input . Dan