Heavy valve springs don't use more HP
06-20-2002, 11:17 AM
#61
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 4,712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
So what if I'm argueing that point. It's true isn't it. Wouldn't you think it contradicts your argument. And it's not the only contributing factor to a loss of power. I've argued other points as well(example: friction, and bleeding down of the lifter, etc.).
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's stupid because I already conceded frictional losses in my original statement. Only an idiot would argue that the valve spring system (roller lifters and all) doesn't return 90-95% of the energy you put in to it. Maybe if we were talking flat tapped lifters with stamped steel rockers, I could see someone arguing a 25% loss. Even that large of a loss would be more or less moot, because you're getting the majority of the energy used to compress those springs back. Has anyone even bothered to calculate how much HP it takes to compress a 400# spring? I bet less than 5rwhp to run the entire valve train.
As for why you perceive its harder to turn an engine over with rockers on VS. rockers off, I don't have the patience to run through it with you. Maybe someone else will. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
So what if I'm argueing that point. It's true isn't it. Wouldn't you think it contradicts your argument. And it's not the only contributing factor to a loss of power. I've argued other points as well(example: friction, and bleeding down of the lifter, etc.).
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's stupid because I already conceded frictional losses in my original statement. Only an idiot would argue that the valve spring system (roller lifters and all) doesn't return 90-95% of the energy you put in to it. Maybe if we were talking flat tapped lifters with stamped steel rockers, I could see someone arguing a 25% loss. Even that large of a loss would be more or less moot, because you're getting the majority of the energy used to compress those springs back. Has anyone even bothered to calculate how much HP it takes to compress a 400# spring? I bet less than 5rwhp to run the entire valve train.
As for why you perceive its harder to turn an engine over with rockers on VS. rockers off, I don't have the patience to run through it with you. Maybe someone else will. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
06-20-2002, 01:18 PM
#62
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Slart:
<strong>"Never argue with a fool. People will forget who is the fool."
I wrote a 2 page reply explaining that there is more drag and where it's distributed, then I erased it because I realized it would do no good. Perfectly valid explanations have already been thrown back and forth yet nobody's coming to an agreement.
Rather than try and explain it scientifically and get shot down by someone with half an understanding of the situation, I'll leave it at this: Anyone who's built an engine knows that when you put rockers on an engine it gets much harder to turn over. This is clearly a result of friction added by the springs, so more spring pressure clearly increases the friction.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd like to appeal to a higher authority here:
"Do not answer anyone stupid according to his foolishness, that you yourself also may not become equal to him." - Proverbs 26:4
You are clearly correct here, Slart. But there are few here that do not allow pride to pervert sound judgement.
As I have done a hundred times before: Spin a shortblock (an ideal case of minimum spring pressure) and then bolt the heads and valvetrain on (a case with greater spring pressure) and report the torque required to spin each.
No brainer. But then again, maybe that's why the obvious escapes some M.E. "geniuses"....
SC
<small>[ June 20, 2002, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: SS00Blue ]</small>
<strong>"Never argue with a fool. People will forget who is the fool."
I wrote a 2 page reply explaining that there is more drag and where it's distributed, then I erased it because I realized it would do no good. Perfectly valid explanations have already been thrown back and forth yet nobody's coming to an agreement.
Rather than try and explain it scientifically and get shot down by someone with half an understanding of the situation, I'll leave it at this: Anyone who's built an engine knows that when you put rockers on an engine it gets much harder to turn over. This is clearly a result of friction added by the springs, so more spring pressure clearly increases the friction.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd like to appeal to a higher authority here:
"Do not answer anyone stupid according to his foolishness, that you yourself also may not become equal to him." - Proverbs 26:4
You are clearly correct here, Slart. But there are few here that do not allow pride to pervert sound judgement.
As I have done a hundred times before: Spin a shortblock (an ideal case of minimum spring pressure) and then bolt the heads and valvetrain on (a case with greater spring pressure) and report the torque required to spin each.
No brainer. But then again, maybe that's why the obvious escapes some M.E. "geniuses"....
SC
<small>[ June 20, 2002, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: SS00Blue ]</small>
06-20-2002, 01:31 PM
#63
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Wide Open Throttle:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wow, I guess all those years of Mechanical Engineering courses may have finally paid off...
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe you should go back to community college and take the courses over again. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">There's really no need to get personal. You've definitely given your opinion, its only fair that I can give mine. This is just one more reason I am beginning to hate posting here. Immature and or ignorant "experts" hiding behind their keyboards insulting others for no reason. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
Shane
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wow, I guess all those years of Mechanical Engineering courses may have finally paid off...
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe you should go back to community college and take the courses over again. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">There's really no need to get personal. You've definitely given your opinion, its only fair that I can give mine. This is just one more reason I am beginning to hate posting here. Immature and or ignorant "experts" hiding behind their keyboards insulting others for no reason. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
Shane
06-20-2002, 01:32 PM
#64
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Only an idiot would argue that the valve spring system (roller lifters and all) doesn't return 90-95% of the energy you put in to it. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Who said that, not me. I said it was 95% efficient. Which is based off of what you gave earlier. Frictional loses do add up. My argument isn't based off of one angle, but many, look at the sum of all the loses. Not individually.
You're not making anymore sense. Now your looking for ways to twist words. You're wrong. Admit it, it's okay. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> You've been proven wrong, now you're looking for a way to get out without looking like you where wrong. Accept your original statement as a misclaim and move on. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
You're not making anymore sense. Now your looking for ways to twist words. You're wrong. Admit it, it's okay. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> You've been proven wrong, now you're looking for a way to get out without looking like you where wrong. Accept your original statement as a misclaim and move on. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
06-20-2002, 01:56 PM
#65
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> This is not debated and is not a mystery to any competent engine builder.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I guess the above statement helps you fall into a category slated by you in your following post.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Immature and or ignorant "experts" hiding behind their keyboards insulting others for no reason. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You started, I just continued. Careful what you type. It can easily be construed with a different meaning than initially intended with.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I guess the above statement helps you fall into a category slated by you in your following post.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Immature and or ignorant "experts" hiding behind their keyboards insulting others for no reason. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You started, I just continued. Careful what you type. It can easily be construed with a different meaning than initially intended with.
06-20-2002, 02:19 PM
#66
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 4,712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
You are clearly correct here, Slart. But there are few here that do not allow pride to pervert sound judgement.
As I have done a hundred times before: Spin a shortblock (an ideal case of minimum spring pressure) and then bolt the heads and valvetrain on (a case with greater spring pressure) and report the torque required to spin each.
No brainer. But then again, maybe that's why the obvious escapes some M.E. "geniuses"....
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Cylinder pressure is the main resistance to spinning an engine with heads on by hand, duh.
WOT you haven't made any logical arguments to disprove my point. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
You are clearly correct here, Slart. But there are few here that do not allow pride to pervert sound judgement.
As I have done a hundred times before: Spin a shortblock (an ideal case of minimum spring pressure) and then bolt the heads and valvetrain on (a case with greater spring pressure) and report the torque required to spin each.
No brainer. But then again, maybe that's why the obvious escapes some M.E. "geniuses"....
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Cylinder pressure is the main resistance to spinning an engine with heads on by hand, duh.
WOT you haven't made any logical arguments to disprove my point. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
06-20-2002, 03:54 PM
#67
Banned
iTrader: (54)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Posts: 1,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Terry Burger:
<strong>Cylinder pressure is the main resistance to spinning an engine with heads on by hand, duh.
WOT you haven't made any logical arguments to disprove my point. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's easy enough to argue. Have you ever turned a crank over by hand to adjust the valves with the sparkplugs out? It is far from easy. Sometimes you'll be turning the motor over and you'll feel it want to come back off the lobes in the reverse direction, that sucks and can hurt. Trust me, the stiffer the springs the harder it is. To me that is increased friction and will make the engine slower revving at the very least.
This is a good little debate by the way, lets keep it on topic and not personal.
<strong>Cylinder pressure is the main resistance to spinning an engine with heads on by hand, duh.
WOT you haven't made any logical arguments to disprove my point. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's easy enough to argue. Have you ever turned a crank over by hand to adjust the valves with the sparkplugs out? It is far from easy. Sometimes you'll be turning the motor over and you'll feel it want to come back off the lobes in the reverse direction, that sucks and can hurt. Trust me, the stiffer the springs the harder it is. To me that is increased friction and will make the engine slower revving at the very least.
This is a good little debate by the way, lets keep it on topic and not personal.
06-20-2002, 05:13 PM
#68
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: w.s.n.c.
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP "Never argue with a fool. People will forget who is the fool."
Love it. Will add this to my decisions when fooled into reacting.
Love it. Will add this to my decisions when fooled into reacting.
06-20-2002, 06:37 PM
#69
Launching!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Jantzer98SS:
This is a good little debate by the way, lets keep it on topic and not personal.[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
This is a good little debate by the way, lets keep it on topic and not personal.[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
06-20-2002, 06:42 PM
#70
Launching!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by XtraCajunSS:
There's really no need to get personal. You've definitely given your opinion, its only fair that I can give mine. This is just one more reason I am beginning to hate posting here. Immature and or ignorant "experts" hiding behind their keyboards insulting others for no reason. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
Shane[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Shane,
I'm beginning to hate posting here for those reasons too, I know what you mean. Years of EXPERIENCE (25 years to be exact) in race engine building and actually drag racing plus those of our crew (each around 20 to 30 years) mean zip on this board sometimes. I personally started racing in 1977, and built my first Chev V8 the same year. Go figure! Shane & Terry, best of racing to ya with your cars, Terry keep up those 10 second times (wonder if those other guys run tens <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> ) <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" /> I'm done here with this one. Will leave this to you and Terry. Haven't got the patience......
<small>[ June 20, 2002, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>
There's really no need to get personal. You've definitely given your opinion, its only fair that I can give mine. This is just one more reason I am beginning to hate posting here. Immature and or ignorant "experts" hiding behind their keyboards insulting others for no reason. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
Shane[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Shane,
I'm beginning to hate posting here for those reasons too, I know what you mean. Years of EXPERIENCE (25 years to be exact) in race engine building and actually drag racing plus those of our crew (each around 20 to 30 years) mean zip on this board sometimes. I personally started racing in 1977, and built my first Chev V8 the same year. Go figure! Shane & Terry, best of racing to ya with your cars, Terry keep up those 10 second times (wonder if those other guys run tens <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> ) <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" /> I'm done here with this one. Will leave this to you and Terry. Haven't got the patience......
<small>[ June 20, 2002, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>
06-22-2002, 07:54 PM
#71
On The Tree
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP > Will leave this to you and Terry. Haven't got the patience......
Or the correct answer for that matter <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
> Cylinder pressure is the main resistance to spinning an engine with heads on by hand, duh.
How much cylinder pressure do you get with the plugs out? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> Back to my original point, when you bolt the rockers and the springs start getting compressed the engine gets harder to turn over. Care to explain why that is, if not the springs?
- Steve Sadler
Or the correct answer for that matter <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
> Cylinder pressure is the main resistance to spinning an engine with heads on by hand, duh.
How much cylinder pressure do you get with the plugs out? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> Back to my original point, when you bolt the rockers and the springs start getting compressed the engine gets harder to turn over. Care to explain why that is, if not the springs?
- Steve Sadler
06-23-2002, 01:48 AM
#72
Launching!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Slart:
<strong>"Never argue with a fool. People will forget who is the fool."
This is clearly a result of friction added by the springs, so more spring pressure clearly increases the friction.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Slart,
Didn't know that increasing to a larger seat or open pressure valve spring increases friction!!!!
How does increasing the spring pressure increase friction? (I realise that more coils, etc will increase friction, depending on type of materail also, but this is theory here, so..) Need some evidence please. (Keep this technical, civil and NOT personal, unlike your above comment, thats why a lot of people left the 'other' board and came here) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
<small>[ June 23, 2002, 01:50 AM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>
<strong>"Never argue with a fool. People will forget who is the fool."
This is clearly a result of friction added by the springs, so more spring pressure clearly increases the friction.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Slart,
Didn't know that increasing to a larger seat or open pressure valve spring increases friction!!!!
How does increasing the spring pressure increase friction? (I realise that more coils, etc will increase friction, depending on type of materail also, but this is theory here, so..) Need some evidence please. (Keep this technical, civil and NOT personal, unlike your above comment, thats why a lot of people left the 'other' board and came here) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
<small>[ June 23, 2002, 01:50 AM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>
06-23-2002, 03:58 AM
#73
On The Tree
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP I apologize for the nontechnical component of my post. I thought it was funny, didn't realize it would be offensive.
> Didn't know that increasing to a larger seat or open pressure valve spring increases friction!!!!
That's ok, you do now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
> How does increasing the spring pressure increase friction? (I realise that more coils, etc will increase friction, depending on type of materail also, but this is theory here, so..)
I'm not speaking of the spring itself, but in the components it loads.
The rocker tip on the valve, the rocker on it's fulcrum, the rocker at the pushrod, the lifter body on it's bearing, the roller on the cam are the most obvious examples.
>Need some evidence please. (Keep this technical
Ok, friction=force*mu. As long as mu remains constant, friction is proportional to force. As the spring compresses there is a force applied to various components, so there is friction.
But a technical explanation isn't necessary. It's plainly obvious that when you put the springs on it gets harder to turn over.
- Steve
> Didn't know that increasing to a larger seat or open pressure valve spring increases friction!!!!
That's ok, you do now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
> How does increasing the spring pressure increase friction? (I realise that more coils, etc will increase friction, depending on type of materail also, but this is theory here, so..)
I'm not speaking of the spring itself, but in the components it loads.
The rocker tip on the valve, the rocker on it's fulcrum, the rocker at the pushrod, the lifter body on it's bearing, the roller on the cam are the most obvious examples.
>Need some evidence please. (Keep this technical
Ok, friction=force*mu. As long as mu remains constant, friction is proportional to force. As the spring compresses there is a force applied to various components, so there is friction.
But a technical explanation isn't necessary. It's plainly obvious that when you put the springs on it gets harder to turn over.
- Steve
06-23-2002, 04:09 AM
#74
Launching!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP [QUOTE]Originally posted by Slart:
[QB]I apologize for the nontechnical component of my post. I thought it was funny, didn't realize it would be offensive.
Reply:
After what has been put on this post, yes saying that 'you haven't got the correct answer either' is not. What if someone said that to you?? See what I mean?
Didn't know that increasing to a larger seat or open pressure valve spring increases friction!!!!
That's ok, you do now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
Reply:
That was a statement by myself, wasn't looking for answer, already have that...
> How does increasing the spring pressure increase friction? (I realise that more coils, etc will increase friction, depending on type of materail also, but this is theory here, so..)
I'm not speaking of the spring itself, but in the components it loads.
The rocker tip on the valve, the rocker on it's fulcrum, the rocker at the pushrod, the lifter body on it's bearing, the roller on the cam are the most obvious examples.
Reply:
THATS DIFFERENT.
>Need some evidence please. (Keep this technical
Ok, friction=force*mu. As long as mu remains constant, friction is proportional to force. As the spring compresses there is a force applied to various components, so there is friction.
But a technical explanation isn't necessary. It's plainly obvious that when you put the springs on it gets harder to turn over.
Reply:
everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as to that. It MAY (depends on TOTAL COMBINATION) increase, but what I originally meant was does it decrease HP.. Thats what David Reher was saying too, that it doesn't..
Peace.
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
<small>[ June 23, 2002, 04:11 AM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>
[QB]I apologize for the nontechnical component of my post. I thought it was funny, didn't realize it would be offensive.
Reply:
After what has been put on this post, yes saying that 'you haven't got the correct answer either' is not. What if someone said that to you?? See what I mean?
Didn't know that increasing to a larger seat or open pressure valve spring increases friction!!!!
That's ok, you do now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
Reply:
That was a statement by myself, wasn't looking for answer, already have that...
> How does increasing the spring pressure increase friction? (I realise that more coils, etc will increase friction, depending on type of materail also, but this is theory here, so..)
I'm not speaking of the spring itself, but in the components it loads.
The rocker tip on the valve, the rocker on it's fulcrum, the rocker at the pushrod, the lifter body on it's bearing, the roller on the cam are the most obvious examples.
Reply:
THATS DIFFERENT.
>Need some evidence please. (Keep this technical
Ok, friction=force*mu. As long as mu remains constant, friction is proportional to force. As the spring compresses there is a force applied to various components, so there is friction.
But a technical explanation isn't necessary. It's plainly obvious that when you put the springs on it gets harder to turn over.
Reply:
everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as to that. It MAY (depends on TOTAL COMBINATION) increase, but what I originally meant was does it decrease HP.. Thats what David Reher was saying too, that it doesn't..
Peace.
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
<small>[ June 23, 2002, 04:11 AM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>
06-23-2002, 09:07 AM
#75
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Danielson, CT
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP Shane[/QB][/QUOTE]Shane,
I'm beginning to hate posting here for those reasons too, I know what you mean. Years of EXPERIENCE (25 years to be exact) in race engine building and actually drag racing plus those of our crew (each around 20 to 30 years) mean zip on this board sometimes. I personally started racing in 1977, and built my first Chev V8 the same year. Go figure! Shane & Terry, best of racing to ya with your cars, Terry keep up those 10 second times (wonder if those other guys run tens <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> ) <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" /> I'm done here with this one. Will leave this to you and Terry. Haven't got the patience......[/QB][/QUOTE]
I will comment on this one - Why is it people think that just because they have done something for x amount of time that they know all the answers? There is no doubt that you have a huge amount of knowledge BUT one should still keep an open mind <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
For the record - I feel that is you increase spring pressure you increase the frictional losses wheather or not the loss increase is proportional or not I don't have the data to argue that. SO if you increase the spring pressure you also increase frictional loss on the cam lobe to lifter (roller or not increased pressure increases friction) - Also friction would increase on the rocker arm pivot (again roller or not it's still going to increase friction) then again from the rocker arm tip to the valve stem itself. You will also increase the friction between the valve stem and the valve guide due to the forces being excerted from the rocker tip to the valve stem.
I would reason that the sum of the increased friction would be enough to cause some loss. NOW whether of not this loss can be measured on a DYNO I don't know. but from a mathamatical point of view the increased pressure has to cause increased friction that will in turn cause some power loss.
My .02,
-Silver
I'm beginning to hate posting here for those reasons too, I know what you mean. Years of EXPERIENCE (25 years to be exact) in race engine building and actually drag racing plus those of our crew (each around 20 to 30 years) mean zip on this board sometimes. I personally started racing in 1977, and built my first Chev V8 the same year. Go figure! Shane & Terry, best of racing to ya with your cars, Terry keep up those 10 second times (wonder if those other guys run tens <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> ) <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" /> I'm done here with this one. Will leave this to you and Terry. Haven't got the patience......[/QB][/QUOTE]
I will comment on this one - Why is it people think that just because they have done something for x amount of time that they know all the answers? There is no doubt that you have a huge amount of knowledge BUT one should still keep an open mind <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
For the record - I feel that is you increase spring pressure you increase the frictional losses wheather or not the loss increase is proportional or not I don't have the data to argue that. SO if you increase the spring pressure you also increase frictional loss on the cam lobe to lifter (roller or not increased pressure increases friction) - Also friction would increase on the rocker arm pivot (again roller or not it's still going to increase friction) then again from the rocker arm tip to the valve stem itself. You will also increase the friction between the valve stem and the valve guide due to the forces being excerted from the rocker tip to the valve stem.
I would reason that the sum of the increased friction would be enough to cause some loss. NOW whether of not this loss can be measured on a DYNO I don't know. but from a mathamatical point of view the increased pressure has to cause increased friction that will in turn cause some power loss.
My .02,
-Silver
06-23-2002, 03:22 PM
#77
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lake Jackson, TX
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP **I have NEVER installed stiffer valve springs on an engine and lost power; the improvement in valvetrain dynamics more than offsets whatever additional power is required to overcome the springs resistance."
It seems reasonable that if you use stiffer springs, it will take more power to work the valvetrain. You will get some of that power back, but only a percentage. It also seems reasonable that the improvement in dynamics in the valvetrain will at least partially offset the extra power required to compress the springs. Using a heavier spring to insure there is no valve float will cost a VERY small amount of power. What's the argument??
It seems reasonable that if you use stiffer springs, it will take more power to work the valvetrain. You will get some of that power back, but only a percentage. It also seems reasonable that the improvement in dynamics in the valvetrain will at least partially offset the extra power required to compress the springs. Using a heavier spring to insure there is no valve float will cost a VERY small amount of power. What's the argument??
06-23-2002, 04:27 PM
#78
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 4,712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP OK Max you run your light weight valve springs and I'll run heavier valve springs, and we'll race to settle the difference, OK? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
I suspect it takes almost no HP to run a valve train with 450# open (pretty heavy) valve springs. Hopefully someone who remembers more physics can figure it out for us. If that is the case, this whole argument is moot anyway. I will say with roller lifters and roller rockers, the frictional loss must be small compared to the total energy put in to the system.
<small>[ June 23, 2002, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: Terry Burger ]</small>
I suspect it takes almost no HP to run a valve train with 450# open (pretty heavy) valve springs. Hopefully someone who remembers more physics can figure it out for us. If that is the case, this whole argument is moot anyway. I will say with roller lifters and roller rockers, the frictional loss must be small compared to the total energy put in to the system.
<small>[ June 23, 2002, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: Terry Burger ]</small>
06-23-2002, 06:09 PM
#79
Launching!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Bad *** LS1:
<strong>**I have NEVER installed stiffer valve springs on an engine and lost power; the improvement in valvetrain dynamics more than offsets whatever additional power is required to overcome the springs resistance."
It seems reasonable that if you use stiffer springs, it will take more power to work the valvetrain. You will get some of that power back, but only a percentage. It also seems reasonable that the improvement in dynamics in the valvetrain will at least partially offset the extra power required to compress the springs. Using a heavier spring to insure there is no valve float will cost a VERY small amount of power. What's the argument??</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No argument here. I agree 100% with the quoted statement at the top of your post, Bad *** LS1.
That quote BTW was by David Reher of Reher-Morrison (Rro Stock racing & Sportsman engine building fame) Racing Engines in Texas for those tuning in late.. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
<small>[ June 23, 2002, 06:11 PM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>
<strong>**I have NEVER installed stiffer valve springs on an engine and lost power; the improvement in valvetrain dynamics more than offsets whatever additional power is required to overcome the springs resistance."
It seems reasonable that if you use stiffer springs, it will take more power to work the valvetrain. You will get some of that power back, but only a percentage. It also seems reasonable that the improvement in dynamics in the valvetrain will at least partially offset the extra power required to compress the springs. Using a heavier spring to insure there is no valve float will cost a VERY small amount of power. What's the argument??</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No argument here. I agree 100% with the quoted statement at the top of your post, Bad *** LS1.
That quote BTW was by David Reher of Reher-Morrison (Rro Stock racing & Sportsman engine building fame) Racing Engines in Texas for those tuning in late.. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
<small>[ June 23, 2002, 06:11 PM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>
06-23-2002, 07:23 PM
#80
On The Tree
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Heavy valve springs don't use more HP > After what has been put on this post, yes saying that 'you haven't got the correct answer either' is not. What if someone said that to you?? See what I mean?
Yes I do. Your feelings are absolutely understandable.
In my defense, from my point of view I was just giving you a ribbing. It wasn't meant as an insult. If it came off as an insult I apologize again and I'll try to be less offensive in the future.
>> I'm not speaking of the spring itself, but in the components it loads. The rocker tip on the valve, the rocker on it's fulcrum, the rocker at the pushrod, the lifter body on it's bearing, the roller on the cam are the most obvious examples.
> THATS DIFFERENT.
I disagree because the friction is a direct result of the spring pressure.
>> But a technical explanation isn't necessary. It's plainly obvious that when you put the springs on it gets harder to turn over.
> everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as to that. It MAY (depends on TOTAL COMBINATION) increase, but what I originally meant was does it decrease HP.. Thats what David Reher was saying too, that it doesn't..
I undersatnd what you're saying, that the springs stop valve bounce and therefore help compression which helps make power. That may be true (I dont have any data to prove either way, but I'm willing to assume that it is for the purpose of this discussion), but that's not what we're discussing. The topic says: "Heavy valve springs don't use more HP". They do, and it can be clearly demonstrated with a beam torque wrench on the crank pulley.
- Steve Sadler
Yes I do. Your feelings are absolutely understandable.
In my defense, from my point of view I was just giving you a ribbing. It wasn't meant as an insult. If it came off as an insult I apologize again and I'll try to be less offensive in the future.
>> I'm not speaking of the spring itself, but in the components it loads. The rocker tip on the valve, the rocker on it's fulcrum, the rocker at the pushrod, the lifter body on it's bearing, the roller on the cam are the most obvious examples.
> THATS DIFFERENT.
I disagree because the friction is a direct result of the spring pressure.
>> But a technical explanation isn't necessary. It's plainly obvious that when you put the springs on it gets harder to turn over.
> everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as to that. It MAY (depends on TOTAL COMBINATION) increase, but what I originally meant was does it decrease HP.. Thats what David Reher was saying too, that it doesn't..
I undersatnd what you're saying, that the springs stop valve bounce and therefore help compression which helps make power. That may be true (I dont have any data to prove either way, but I'm willing to assume that it is for the purpose of this discussion), but that's not what we're discussing. The topic says: "Heavy valve springs don't use more HP". They do, and it can be clearly demonstrated with a beam torque wrench on the crank pulley.
- Steve Sadler