Single beehive 9/18s
07-24-2016, 11:17 AM
#62
My problem was CREATED by CompCams "behive" springs and cam at Westech, a bench Dyno test.
My ECU-882C, my coils, turbo LS, Comp Valve Train, Comp "turbo" cam. (free)
The Spring broke in minutes, cam made no power BEFORE the spring cracked.
I called Carl Wegner, he stated "I have never broke a "behive" PSI 1511ML spring in ANY of the GNW engines we sell, they are required items."
The camshaft was replaced by a stock GM ZO-6 item.
The PSI-1511ML's where installed
The engine now ran fine, we made 1200+ HP@22 PSI.
Another item I will NEVER understand, why most install a TI Retainer on an exhaust valve when the weight, with a steel retainer, is still less than the intake with a Ti Retainer.
Lance
My ECU-882C, my coils, turbo LS, Comp Valve Train, Comp "turbo" cam. (free)
The Spring broke in minutes, cam made no power BEFORE the spring cracked.
I called Carl Wegner, he stated "I have never broke a "behive" PSI 1511ML spring in ANY of the GNW engines we sell, they are required items."
The camshaft was replaced by a stock GM ZO-6 item.
The PSI-1511ML's where installed
The engine now ran fine, we made 1200+ HP@22 PSI.
Another item I will NEVER understand, why most install a TI Retainer on an exhaust valve when the weight, with a steel retainer, is still less than the intake with a Ti Retainer.
Lance
07-27-2016, 06:02 PM
#63
TECH Fanatic
Finally got off my butt to weigh some BTR parts. This is the BTR "Platinum" .660" lift kit (SK001) with titanium retainers. The locks are not titanium in this kit but steel(or some ferrous material but close enough)
BTR dual spring: 94g
Retainer: 9g
Locks: 3g
So the BTR duals weigh less than a 918 single?! No wonder we've been eating up the marketing of duals having no disadvantage(weight/power/RPM) compared to singles.
BTR dual spring: 94g
Retainer: 9g
Locks: 3g
So the BTR duals weigh less than a 918 single?! No wonder we've been eating up the marketing of duals having no disadvantage(weight/power/RPM) compared to singles.
07-27-2016, 08:18 PM
#64
Right. I thought I made that point earlier in the thread.
What I was trying to indicate is that the magazine article comparing the singles which I am pretty sure are Comp 918s that must be made of lead to duals that weigh almost the same was a complete waste of time because we knew the extra spring weight would cost power over stock and if the duals weren't much heavier, wouldn't be much of a further detriment.
Put another way: the guys in that magazine article did the LS community a disservice by even publishing that because if they had used the LS1511 or anything lightweight like it, it would have likely gained on the stockers and the duals, and then we wouldn't have had the blanket decree that duals don't cost any power over beehives. This is only correct when comparing against crappy beehives, I think.
And in the case that something like the 1511s weren't available to them, at least the conclusion should not have been indicated so broadly IMO.
What I was trying to indicate is that the magazine article comparing the singles which I am pretty sure are Comp 918s that must be made of lead to duals that weigh almost the same was a complete waste of time because we knew the extra spring weight would cost power over stock and if the duals weren't much heavier, wouldn't be much of a further detriment.
Put another way: the guys in that magazine article did the LS community a disservice by even publishing that because if they had used the LS1511 or anything lightweight like it, it would have likely gained on the stockers and the duals, and then we wouldn't have had the blanket decree that duals don't cost any power over beehives. This is only correct when comparing against crappy beehives, I think.
And in the case that something like the 1511s weren't available to them, at least the conclusion should not have been indicated so broadly IMO.
07-28-2016, 11:14 AM
#68
Sure. I have to grab some parts soon and will use that as an excuse to chat him up. I suspect that the full results are considered proprietary intellectual property and I would treat it the same if I spent the dollars and developed a product around it.
Bottom line, I need to win the damn Powerball and buy a few dynos.
Until then we can hope that the mags will update their tests with modern components.
Bottom line, I need to win the damn Powerball and buy a few dynos.
Until then we can hope that the mags will update their tests with modern components.
07-29-2016, 07:39 AM
#69
TECH Fanatic
Right. I thought I made that point earlier in the thread.
What I was trying to indicate is that the magazine article comparing the singles which I am pretty sure are Comp 918s that must be made of lead to duals that weigh almost the same was a complete waste of time because we knew the extra spring weight would cost power over stock and if the duals weren't much heavier, wouldn't be much of a further detriment.
Put another way: the guys in that magazine article did the LS community a disservice by even publishing that because if they had used the LS1511 or anything lightweight like it, it would have likely gained on the stockers and the duals, and then we wouldn't have had the blanket decree that duals don't cost any power over beehives. This is only correct when comparing against crappy beehives, I think.
And in the case that something like the 1511s weren't available to them, at least the conclusion should not have been indicated so broadly IMO.
What I was trying to indicate is that the magazine article comparing the singles which I am pretty sure are Comp 918s that must be made of lead to duals that weigh almost the same was a complete waste of time because we knew the extra spring weight would cost power over stock and if the duals weren't much heavier, wouldn't be much of a further detriment.
Put another way: the guys in that magazine article did the LS community a disservice by even publishing that because if they had used the LS1511 or anything lightweight like it, it would have likely gained on the stockers and the duals, and then we wouldn't have had the blanket decree that duals don't cost any power over beehives. This is only correct when comparing against crappy beehives, I think.
And in the case that something like the 1511s weren't available to them, at least the conclusion should not have been indicated so broadly IMO.
Yeah, they used Comp 918s in that test. It is somewhat surprising since I'm sure we all remember the Great 918 Debacle that catapulted the dual spring movement and left a lot of sour tastes in people's mouths. You'd think they would have used a PSI or PAC beehive instead.