Gary Z

I'm interested in the 2002-03 hollow-stem LS6 valves. The 2001 intake valve was reduced from 99 grams to 67 grams for 2002. The exhaust valve was reduced from 86 to 63 grams. Also, the new exhaust valves are potassium-sodium filled. These appear to me to be all-out, high-tech valves. I have done a search and am suprised to find little or no mention of these valves. Everyone seems to use Ferrea or Manley valves in reworked heads. We all know that, all else equal, lighter is better when it comes to valvetrain components but valve weight doesn't seem to be an issue here. There is, however, much concern with spring pressure and titanium retainers. I know that the GM valves are expensive but that obviously is not a problem for everyone. What am I missing? Why are we ignoring the LS6 valves?

TIA Gary

2001CamaroGuy

iTrader: (6)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Gary Z:
<strong>I'm interested in the 2002-03 hollow-stem LS6 valves. The 2001 intake valve was reduced from 99 grams to 67 grams for 2002. The exhaust valve was reduced from 86 to 63 grams. Also, the new exhaust valves are potassium-sodium filled. These appear to me to be all-out, high-tech valves. I have done a search and am suprised to find little or no mention of these valves. Everyone seems to use Ferrea or Manley valves in reworked heads. We all know that, all else equal, lighter is better when it comes to valvetrain components but valve weight doesn't seem to be an issue here. There is, however, much concern with spring pressure and titanium retainers. I know that the GM valves are expensive but that obviously is not a problem for everyone. What am I missing? Why are we ignoring the LS6 valves?

TIA Gary</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The reason no one uses the LS6 valves is because they are $50 or $60+ a piece!!!!!!!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> Thats up there with the cost of titanium valves.

ls1290

iTrader: (20)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by 2001CamaroGuy:
<strong>The reason no one uses the LS6 valves is because they are $50 or $60+ a piece!!!!!!!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> Thats up there with the cost of titanium valves.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Close, the Manley Titanium valves for the LS1 are about $116 each <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />

<small>[ November 27, 2002, 10:15 AM: Message edited by: ls1290 ]</small>

bparker

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by ls1290:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by 2001CamaroGuy:
<strong>The reason no one uses the LS6 valves is because they are $50 or $60+ a piece!!!!!!!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> Thats up there with the cost of titanium valves.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Close, the Manley Titanium valves for the LS1 are about $116 each <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What!? I am no math wizard but I do know that 116.00 is almost twice as much as 60.00!

Tit valves are VERY expensive.. I just wonder how they perform different..

Any one know WHY one would want to use them? For people to brag? haha

Gary Z

The 2002 LS6 valves are 0.6mm longer than the earlier valves. The increase is necessary to compensate for the reduced base circle of the 2002 cam. But all high-lift cams have a smaller base circle than the stock LS1 cam because otherwise the lobes would extend near or past the bearing journals. So the greater length is another benefit of the LS6 valves.

-Gary

BigTex

iTrader: (16)

I know someone who was putting down some SOLID numbers running a good sized cam and stock 02 LS6 heads.

Buy a set, pull the valves and springs, then sell the bare cores.

Ragtop 99

iTrader: (7)

Another factor is valve size. A lot of ported heads move up to larger diameter valves. Those that stay with the stock size are generally looking for a low cost solution.

Gary Z

I was unaware that anyone made titanium valves for the LS1. I certainly won't be buying at the prices mentioned but I appreciate the info. The LS6 valves are much cheaper if included in the purchase of a complete LS6 head assembly. A bare head (12564825) is available for $579 from SDPC. A head with valves and springs (12564824) is available from various GMPP dealers for around $770 so each valve plus spring thus purchased is less than $24.

-Gary

1madss

iTrader: (10)

Most people don't use them due to the fact that the 02 LS6 valve stem is longer than the 01's or LS1 valves. This requires changes in the rest of the valve train components. I don;t remeber the specifics, but maybe somebody else will chime in with the lengths.

LS1derfull

Gary Z, i would say people are hung up on the idea of going to a larger valve diameter as an automatic part of upgrade. I disagree except in some cases, if people understood that larger valve can be a obstruction to flow, and 2.00" valves can flow close to 300 cfm, which is enough flow to make other choices of combo to be the limiting factor in making big HP, not head flow.LS1 heads with fat flow curve peaking near 300 cfm have the volume and flow for over 600 flywheel hp no problem. By staying with stock valves its possible to use lighter tension springs,have more compression from not relieving comb. chambers and piston reliefs. I like reliability of lighter components and extra rpm they allow for more power. It doesnt always pay to follow the herd! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

Fenris Ulf

I agree, most think that a 2.100" intake valve will make more power. In reality, properly matching the intake valve size to the intake port cross sectional area is the idea.

Gary Z

I had not thought about larger diameter valves. I'm sure that that is the answer to my original question. I'm still on the steep initial slope of the LS1 learning curve and this site is my most valuable resource. Thanks to all.

-Gary

DONAIMIAN

iTrader: (18)

Is there a link to thoes Ti valves. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" />

LS1derfull

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Gary Z:
<strong>I had not thought about larger diameter valves. I'm sure that that is the answer to my original question. I'm still on the steep initial slope of the LS1 learning curve and this site is my most valuable resource. Thanks to all.

-Gary</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Gary Z, i have been on here for some time and its still the most valuable source around! LS1.COM WHO? LOL <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />