This post is to address all issues related to MMS valvesprings breakage.

I've been on leave and will continue to be for the month of June, but felt this was a grave and serious matter that needed to be addressed.

Last year there was a rash of valvespring breakage throughout the industry. At the time most of the breakage was related to the Comp Cams 941-16 springs which was one of the more common springs used for LS1's at the time. In an effort to reduce the inconvenience to our customers we began researching other options. Our criteria was simple.
1. Fit in the stock spring pocket. This would alleviate the need of removing heads on a cam only swap.
2. Provide adequate seat and open pressure similar to the 941 specs and have a similar set up height.
3. Handle cam lift up to .600"
4. Provide near trouble-free operation. This was a service life of 15-20 thousand miles under typical usage.

We gathered info on the various springs available on the market to see if there were any options. We found a company that was very confident in there spring. We also had the option to private label the spring keeping it somewhat proprietary. After much discussion on the spring and how it was manufactured we decided to go for it. We also offered a 1 year unconditional warranty against breakage since we felt it satisfied our criteria.

Our first batch we ran was near flawless. We did have some issues with the inner damper. This was similar to what had happened with the 941's. At that time it was recommended to us to not use the damper. There were several other single springs on the market that didn't use dampers so we felt that would work.
We then noticed that we were getting some high rpm flutter. So we went ahead and changed the install height to increase the seat and open pressure. The springs have a pretty low coil bind height of between 1.080" and 1.100" so it wasn't an issue lowering our install height to 1.750"
Unfortunately that change has increased the failure rate. We had hoped that the spring would satisfy all our criteria, but it is now apparent that it won't.

We are now changing the way we sell our heads. All our cylinder heads are sold complete minus springs, retainers and locks. This will be priced as follows.
Stage I $1249.95
Stage II $1699.95 x upgrade option ($250)
Stage III $2299.95

These will still be warranted for 1 year against material defects and workmanship. The warranty only covers the cylinder heads and not any labor or incidental or consequential damage. They are also not covered in cases of abuse, negligence or improper usage. Copy of warranty will be made available by request.

From there you may choose the following spring retainer options:
Comp Cams 26918-16 w/ stock retainers
Comp 987-16 dual springs w/ titanium retainers and spring seats
Manley 221423-16 w/ Rev Titanium retainers
Erson 915046 w/ Rev Titanium retainers
REV VS1116 w/ Rev Titanium retainers (currently on backorder)

Each combo has various usages and recommendations. Consult MMS for specifics and pricing.

If you buy the spring retainer combo with our heads, then we will assemble and setup the proper height (This doesn't include machining time for the Comp dual springs) at no add'l charge to the customer. Our warranty will only cover proper installation of the springs. Any warranty on the springs or retainers will be a manufacture warranty on the part only.

As with any situation MMS is always willing to work with our valued customers to solve any problems or meet expectations. But we reserve the right to evaluate these on a case by case basis. Our willingness to help is not an admission of guilt, but rather an extension of good will to our customers who appreciate the one on one service we provide. Our record of service stands and we will always go the extra mile when we are at fault. But as of late there has been some unreal expectations of what to expect from the performance tuner industry. The reality is that it is a rarity to offer anything more than a taillight warranty on the types of parts and intended application.

In the end, I'm sorry for all the inconvenience that these problems may have caused. We hope that in the future these new options will alleviate any problems, but the reality is that these are high performance parts used in high stress applications. We will continue to support our customers and continue our R&D to provide a better product in the months and years to come.

 

MMS -

It's good to see you acknowledge a clearly defective part that has been the root of all evil for your company as of late (on the Corvetteforum.com, mostly).

It's even better to see that you're going with proven springs from now on.

I'm glad to see it all come clean and lets hope all goes well from here <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by NastyC5:
<strong>MMS -
It's even better to see that you're going with proven springs from now on.
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I wish that were the case. That's what everyone thought with the comp 941 springs at the time time. This is why we are offering several options. We will always have our recommendations, but we want the customer to feel that they have some choices.

 

What about the 918s that everyone raves about?

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Colonel:
<strong>What about the 918s that everyone raves about?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well they haven't stood the test of time yet. The 941's were used for over a year before problems arose. There were also issues with some tool steel springs that took a while to show problems.
I also feel that the 918 springs are light on the open pressure for an aggressive cam lobe. We don't recommend them past 6600 rpm. The advantage of the 918 is that it doesn't have the harmonic issues because of the beehive design. So there are trade offs.

 

Mike,
You just warrantied a set of your springs that broke on me. Do I have a warranty on the replacement set that Al sent to me? The first set of MMS springs I bought from you lasted 7k miles (about 4 months).

Al tells me the new MMS springs he sent are (the ones I have on now) better.

Should I be looking for something to switch to in the near future to avoid having a spring break on me unexpectedly?

 

Mike, I haven't done any business with your company yet, but I sure wouldn't hesitate to do so. A good friend and former boss of mine told me that he didn't judge people poorly if they made a mistake -- he judged them on how they fixed things after they made a mistake.

I wish you continued success.

 

This is a good idea. Make it the customers responsibility.. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

 

Thanks Mike

 

Honesty is the best policy. I applaud your post here Mike, good information.

Tony

 

Mike,
While I do think it is good you came on the site and admitted the issues with your product you are still guilty of selling a product that did not meet the criteria of the application. I don't know what type of testing you did with the first batch, whether it was accelerated usage or some type of bench test but either way you did not do enough to detect the issues before you went to market. I know people who specifically chose your springs based on the claims made by your company and are now in the position of having to eat the cost / time of installation and swap out for new springs. Don't you think you should take full responsibility for your product and refund the full amount for all returned springs?

 

I do applaud your honesty Mike. However, the average Joe off of the street will have no clue which spring to choose from. SO, you'll be back in the same boat of choosing a spring for them. I've heard great things from various engine builders, Judson Massengill included, that the 918 spring is the best one yet for a stock diameter replacement. As you said, they haven't been on the market long enough to see how they're going to hold up in the long run, but as of right now I've yet to hear of a 918 breaking. I'm running .581" lift with them and turning up to 6,800 RPM with no problems yet (knock on wood).
Again, I'm glad to see you acknowledge the problem. Not too many shops would do that.

 

Mike and Al are good guys. That is why I am still doing business with them come August, even after all this spring BS. I am glad that MMS came out and addressed the issue. Now time to call and upgrade from stage 2 to stage 3 heads <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
-dan

btw - any reason to use stock retainers with the 918's?

 

was wrong, they were 941s

<small>[ June 06, 2002, 11:11 PM: Message edited by: jimmypop13 ]</small>

 

What about installing the 918's at 1.750? I've just had the shop do that for me with the belief that I'll be able to run at (a little) higher rpms w/ less chance of float.

Anybody else try that w/ the 918's?

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Trevor D:
<strong>but as of right now I've yet to hear of a 918 breaking.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is the only instance where I've heard of a 918 breaking: http://www.ls1.com/forums/showthread...threadid=92560

EDIT: I see jimmypop has beat me to it. I should hit the refresh button a bit more often. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

<small>[ June 05, 2002, 11:01 AM: Message edited by: J'sRamAir ]</small>

 

Just got of the phone with Al from MMS.

He tells me my springs will be warrantied from the original date of purchase, which is good to hear.

He also says the latest batch of springs that were sent out with brass shims are the ones they are having the most problems with. I got my springs back in April and they did not have brass shims with them.

Al has been very cooperative with helping me deal with my spring breakage issue.

I just hope these springs last longer than the first set.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Mike Morgan:
<strong>This post is to address all issues related to MMS valvesprings breakage.

I've been on leave and will continue to be for the month of June, but felt this was a grave and serious matter that needed to be addressed.

Last year there was a rash of valvespring breakage throughout the industry. At the time most of the breakage was related to the Comp Cams 941-16 springs which was one of the more common springs used for LS1's at the time. In an effort to reduce the inconvenience to our customers we began researching other options. Our criteria was simple.
1. Fit in the stock spring pocket. This would alleviate the need of removing heads on a cam only swap.
2. Provide adequate seat and open pressure similar to the 941 specs and have a similar set up height.
3. Handle cam lift up to .600"
4. Provide near trouble-free operation. This was a service life of 15-20 thousand miles under typical usage.

We gathered info on the various springs available on the market to see if there were any options. We found a company that was very confident in there spring. We also had the option to private label the spring keeping it somewhat proprietary. After much discussion on the spring and how it was manufactured we decided to go for it. We also offered a 1 year unconditional warranty against breakage since we felt it satisfied our criteria.

Our first batch we ran was near flawless. We did have some issues with the inner damper. This was similar to what had happened with the 941's. At that time it was recommended to us to not use the damper. There were several other single springs on the market that didn't use dampers so we felt that would work.
We then noticed that we were getting some high rpm flutter. So we went ahead and changed the install height to increase the seat and open pressure. The springs have a pretty low coil bind height of between 1.080" and 1.100" so it wasn't an issue lowering our install height to 1.750"
Unfortunately that change has increased the failure rate. We had hoped that the spring would satisfy all our criteria, but it is now apparent that it won't.

We are now changing the way we sell our heads. All our cylinder heads are sold complete minus springs, retainers and locks. This will be priced as follows.
Stage I $1249.95
Stage II $1699.95 x upgrade option ($250)
Stage III $2299.95

These will still be warranted for 1 year against material defects and workmanship. The warranty only covers the cylinder heads and not any labor or incidental or consequential damage. They are also not covered in cases of abuse, negligence or improper usage. Copy of warranty will be made available by request.

From there you may choose the following spring retainer options:
Comp Cams 26918-16 w/ stock retainers
Comp 987-16 dual springs w/ titanium retainers and spring seats
Manley 221423-16 w/ Rev Titanium retainers
Erson 915046 w/ Rev Titanium retainers
REV VS1116 w/ Rev Titanium retainers (currently on backorder)

Each combo has various usages and recommendations. Consult MMS for specifics and pricing.

If you buy the spring retainer combo with our heads, then we will assemble and setup the proper height (This doesn't include machining time for the Comp dual springs) at no add'l charge to the customer. Our warranty will only cover proper installation of the springs. Any warranty on the springs or retainers will be a manufacture warranty on the part only.

As with any situation MMS is always willing to work with our valued customers to solve any problems or meet expectations. But we reserve the right to evaluate these on a case by case basis. Our willingness to help is not an admission of guilt, but rather an extension of good will to our customers who appreciate the one on one service we provide. Our record of service stands and we will always go the extra mile when we are at fault. But as of late there has been some unreal expectations of what to expect from the performance tuner industry. The reality is that it is a rarity to offer anything more than a taillight warranty on the types of parts and intended application.

In the end, I'm sorry for all the inconvenience that these problems may have caused. We hope that in the future these new options will alleviate any problems, but the reality is that these are high performance parts used in high stress applications. We will continue to support our customers and continue our R&D to provide a better product in the months and years to come.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks for coming on, now go take care of the customers that lost time, money because of these issues.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by J'sRamAir:
<strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is the only instance where I've heard of a 918 breaking: http://www.ls1.com/forums/showthread...threadid=92560

EDIT: I see jimmypop has beat me to it. I should hit the refresh button a bit more often. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> </strong>[/QUOTE]

They weren't 918s, I heard wrong, sorry

<small>[ June 06, 2002, 11:16 PM: Message edited by: jimmypop13 ]</small>

 

I have yet to hear of 918's breaking.