Advanced Engineering Tech - Valve Tech

What is the benefit of Titanium valves from Steel other than weight?

I have a set of titanum valves,Exhaust:5.740" long,the bead groove stems are 5/16" and the head diameter is close to 1.615".

Intake:5.400" long, the bead groove stems are 7 mm and the head diameter is 2.100"

Can i have them cut down to fit my LT1 oem valvetrain,what about valve springs,Retainers,bead locks etc?

I think weight is just about the only benefit (I may be wrong, any metalurgists out there?). In fact the titanium is not supposed to last as long as stainless which is why copper berilium seats are used with titanium valses as they dissapate heat much better (which will provide longer service life of the titanium valve) and are harder to hold the angles of the valve job longer to account for the quicker wear of the titanium face of the valve (this is my understanding of it, maybe off). It's interesting to see that gm went to a titanium intake valve in the ls7, I would think that since they have done so titanium should be able to last fairly long in a regular street motor. Does anyone know if the titanium valve in the ls7 is some kind of alloy which is different then your standart titanium valve?

What is the benefit of Titanium valves from Steel other than weight?

I have a set of titanum valves,Exhaust:5.740" long,the bead groove stems are 5/16" and the head diameter is close to 1.615".

Intake:5.400" long, the bead groove stems are 7 mm and the head diameter is 2.100"

Can i have them cut down to fit my LT1 oem valvetrain,what about valve springs,Retainers,bead locks etc?

Sometimes Ti valves bounce less when they hit the seat on close. This may be connected with less weight and the resulting less spring load needed. However it may also connected with the stiffness of the valve stem. There is not much tension load ("pulling") on the stem until the valve hits the seat (and bounces) and then there can be a lot, especially at high rpm.

If you really have 5/16 (.313 or 8mm) exhaust stems and 7 mm (.276 in.) intake stems you might have a problem. The stock SBC valve stem is 11/32 (.343 in) which has about 55% more cross section than a 7 mm valve stem.

If the stems aren't stock size, you'll need to replace all of the valve guides and do a new valve job. You also need to coordinate all of the other valvetrain parts to take advantage of the valves. Some of these parts might be diffiult to find and very expensive. If you engine isn 't set up to rev well over 7000, you probably don't need a $2000+ valvetrain. If you want to continue to run other OEM parts in your under 7000 valvetrain, I suggest not using the Ti valves. It just isn't worth the hassle.

Polish up a couple and have them sitting around on your bench or coffee table. Toss one to a geahead buddy when he walks in and see if he notices the lightness? Lots of oohhs and aahhhs. :)

I like that line at the bottom of your posts: "I am not young enough to know everything."--Oscar Wilde

Ed

I like that line at the bottom of your posts: "I am not young enough to know everything."--Oscar Wilde

Ed

Thanks, Ed.

Getting older has some benefits...but I can't always remember what they are.

I do remember when I was young. We "reinvented the wheel" almost on a daily basis. Some folks won't understand that.

On another forum I use:

"Dead valvesprings, like dead canaries, are a sure sign of trouble ahead.--David Reher"

Every once in a while someone gets that.

Thanks, Ed.

Getting older has some benefits...but I can't always remember what they are.

I do remember when I was young. We "reinvented the wheel" almost on a daily basis. Some folks won't understand that.

On another forum I use:

"Dead valvesprings, like dead canaries, are a sure sign of trouble ahead.--David Reher"

Every once in a while someone gets that.

I know exactly what you mean. I turned 62 last week.

I know exactly what you mean. I turned 62 last week.
Got ya' by 7 months!

Shoot, now none of the 20-somethings will listen to our posts.

Shoot, now none of the 20-somethings will listen to our posts.

I wouldn't say that. I'm young enough to know everything and I listen:jest:

I know exactly what you mean. I turned 62 last week.

Happy Birthday!!!

Wow! Who knew we were knee deep in old farts here! (62 tomorrow)

How smart can i be at 38? What ages will listen to me? :eyes:

How smart can i be at 38? What ages will listen to me? :eyes:

Sometimes my 27 year old engine builder son actually listens to me. :)

Of course, I listen to him a lot, too. So do quite a few other folks of various ages.

It's not just age and experience that qualify one, it's what ya' know. Even if noone knew posters' ages, we'd make a judgement of their credibility by what they said, not by their breathing time. Of course there are a few young'uns (different from "young guns" :) ) who blatently shine their butts with their wealth of misinformation. OK, some of us OF's do the same.

1943 was a very good year, right Bill & Ed? Just curious; were either of your dads in the War in early 43? IOW, were you a furlough baby? I was a summer vacation at the lake baby. No home TV back then.

"Old Fart Power!"

Sometimes my 27 year old engine builder son actually listens to me. :)

Of course, I listen to him a lot, too. So do quite a few other folks of various ages.

It's not just age and experience that qualify one, it's what ya' know. Even if noone knew posters' ages, we'd make a judgement of their credibility by what they said, not by their breathing time. Of course there are a few young'uns (different from "young guns" :) ) who blatently shine their butts with their wealth of misinformation. OK, some of us OF's do the same.

1943 was a very good year, right Bill & Ed? Just curious; were either of your dads in the War in early 43? IOW, were you a furlough baby? I was a summer vacation at the lake baby. No home TV back then.

"Old Fart Power!"

My father wan't in the service, not sure why not. A lot of guys around here like to buy cars the same "year model" they are. You, Bill & I don't have that option. A '43 model would be rare, right? :)

Take care, Ed

I'm a 1949 model myself. Recently, I was at a Chevy dealership and they had a '49 Model on the showroom floor that was restored to better than mint condition. I was a little envious of the condition of the car because it exceeded my own.

I like the canary analogy. I don't work in a mineshaft, but if I did, I'd keep an eye on my canary.

Steve

My Dad had a doctorate in chemistry, so spent the war in the labs of a Dupont Nylon plant. My first motorcycle was a wartime Model 18 Norton 500 cc. side valve though...

A lot of guys around here like to buy cars the same "year model" they are. You, Bill & I don't have that option. A '43 model would be rare, right? :) Take care, Ed

There seems to be a lot of interest in restoring WWII Jeeps. I never thought of it that way, but they were the '42-'45 model year cars, right? Maybe the guys that like them are about our age.

I don't post here much, because at this point I have alot more knowledge to learn than to share, so most of my time spent here is spent reading. But I just wanted to say that I appreciate the participation of the older guys in these forums.

It's kind've nice to be able to ask a question and get an intelligible answer, not 20 guys who say that they've heard of their father's-cousin's-uncle's-brother's-neighbor's-cable guy doing that, and that it MIGHT work, if you use the right brand of duct tape, of course. And oh yeah, we can't forget that one last guy who always chimes in to remind you that "Your wheels totally suck dude!"

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that there aren't younger guys who don't know their stuff. The thing is, no matter how smart or talented any given car enthusiast is, there's one thing that the older guys have over the younger ones: it's that they've had 20-30 more years worth of opportunities to see sh!t blow up.

Anyway, keep the pipeline flowin'... :)

Getting back to the topic at hand,

There is a killer book written by Ben R. Rich (he took over lockheeds skunkworks after the legondary Kelly Johnson retired)

Called simply "skunkworks" It goes thru the develop ment of the U2 spyplane all the way to the development of the F-117. It's a great book that reads like a Tom Clancy novel but everything actually happened.

Anyways the reason why I mentioned it was because there is a big portion of the book that talks about how Lockheed developed the tooling and processes on how to work and machine titanium. ( the black bird's outer skin gets to hot for aluminum to survive at the tempratures the plane operates at)

It's funny that at that time the soviets were the largest exporters of titanium. Lockheed had to set up dummy companys to buy it from the russians. They were selling us the material to build a spyplane to use against them!!!!!

Getting back to the topic at hand,

There is a killer book written by Ben R. Rich (he took over lockheeds skunkworks after the legondary Kelly Johnson retired)

Called simply "skunkworks" It goes thru the develop ment of the U2 spyplane all the way to the development of the F-117. It's a great book that reads like a Tom Clancy novel but everything actually happened.

Anyways the reason why I mentioned it was because there is a big portion of the book that talks about how Lockheed developed the tooling and processes on how to work and machine titanium. ( the black bird's outer skin gets to hot for aluminum to survive at the tempratures the plane operates at)

It's funny that at that time the soviets were the largest exporters of titanium. Lockheed had to set up dummy companys to buy it from the russians. They were selling us the material to build a spyplane to use against them!!!!!

Good info. You might also pick up "Lockheed Martin's SKUNK WORKS" by Jay Miller. It goes pretty deep in to some of the development of the Blackbirds. Initially 80% of the titanium thy bought wasn't up to spec and was rejected. Wonder if that was the Ruskie stuff? :) They also had to come up with oil that lived at 600F(synthetic?), rubber tires that would handle almost that temp. KJ's Skunk Works had amazing outputs.

Most folks only think of the SR-71 and maybe the YF-12A when they think of Blackbirds. The forget or don't know about the A-12 (single-seater), which was operational with the CIA prior to the SR-71 (USAF two-seater). Anyone know why Johnson called it the A-12? It certainly wasn't an "attack" bird which the "A" stands for in USAF and Navy-speak.

Habu? Oxcart?

Sorry to run on. It's a favorite subject of mine?

Happy Birthday to all.

Valve Tech:

Can we say a lighter mass will produce less 'ringing' upon valve closing,
and this will reduce harmonics through the valve spring?

How about the mechanical sound heard through the exhaust as the valves
slam shut?

And...did anyone mention thermal properties? Will the Ti valve be less prone
to warping over time? Better sealing and less wear on the guides?

Most folks only think of the SR-71 and maybe the YF-12A when they think of Blackbirds. The forget or don't know about the A-12 (single-seater), which was operational with the CIA prior to the SR-71 (USAF two-seater). Anyone know why Johnson called it the A-12? It certainly wasn't an "attack" bird which the "A" stands for in USAF and Navy-speak.

Habu? Oxcart?

Sorry to run on. It's a favorite subject of mine?

The A-11 was a "non-anti-radar" version after all... or was it? ;)

Great book btw.

The A-11 was a "non-anti-radar" version after all... or was it? ;)

Great book btw.

"A" was for Archangel, the highest "flying" angel. It took 11 designs before they got it right. The 12 had some composite panels. The birds weren't black until near the end of the CIA program. Natural titanium has a nice look.

Here's a slide show link:

http://area51specialprojects.com/lockheed_photos.html

Here's a lot of the story:

http://area51specialprojects.com/oxcart.html

You definitely got me thinking about Miller's book on this one Old SStroker. Here's the quote from page 122,

From Kelly Johnson's "Archangel Log",

Plans going forward for surfacing of the AF-12 program. I worked on the draft to be used by President Johnson and
proposed the terminology 'A-11' as it was the non-anti-radar version.

You definitely got me thinking about Miller's book on this one Old SStroker. Here's the quote from page 122,

From Kelly Johnson's "Archangel Log",

Plans going forward for surfacing of the AF-12 program. I worked on the draft to be used by President Johnson and
proposed the terminology 'A-11' as it was the non-anti-radar version.

My initial take was because the 11 had Ti vertical tail surfaces but the 12 had composite which gave a much lower radar signature, he called the 11 the non-anti-radar version. Additionally didn't they use some either radar reflective or maybe radar absorbing material (RAM) on the SR-71? That might also be what he referred to. Also, a Fighter/Interceptor may have less need to be steathy. I might be confused, however.

This was in 1962 or so! "Stealth" wasn't even in the aircraft vocabulary then. "Anti-radar" is actually more descriptive, I think, but more difficult to say. Hey, all of the blackbird stuff was done with pencil and paper, slide rules and Marchant mechanical calculators. Of course that's how cams were designed also. It took weeks of calculation to do a new profile. We've come a long way, baby!

The AF-12 only made it to YF-12, Y being prototype designation. What I think cool was the AIM-54 missle developed for the YF was ready before the airplane, but was never used until the F-14 Tomcat, quite a few years later.