Beryllium Copper Valve Seats
Are they fine to run for a 99% street car with coated Titanium intake and SS exhaust valves (using pump gas)? Any pit falls? Can they survive high mile street usage?
Do any of you use them on the street? Can you offer your experience w/them?
Thanks
Last edited by Stage7; Oct 31, 2009 at 10:08 AM.
Some info on the Net says it's about the best thing going for Tit valves and endurance racing, and would last very long w/proper setup on the street. Other info says, I wouldn't last 5k miles. I was hoping to get some real world 1st hand feedback?
Trending Topics
I was told by the guys who did my heads that the copper-berrylium seats are harder than cast iron seats and will beat up the valves. The main reason they are used with Ti valves is because Ti is not as heat resistant as stainless. The Ti needs to have the heat conducted away from the valve or its life will be reduced significantly-especially on the exhaust valve. The CB seats, because they have copper as a component, conduct heat far better than cast iron so it will be drawn out of the valve once it makes contact. It isn't as necessary on intake valve seats when using Ti valves as it is on the exhaust valve seat. Where copper is very soft, I understand berrylium to be very rather hard making the overall alloy of the two harder than than cast iron.
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
What?

I wonder where you guys on here get your information sometimes? Do you people make this stuff up?
I don't know how heat resistant titanium is, but he is correct that titanium is not very efficient at dissipating heat. That's half the reason Be-Cu seats are popular with Ti valves, because it's very good at absorbing the heat out of the titanium.
As for the second part, I don't know about reduced valvebounce, but it surely makes sense that the titanium would have less inertia than a comparable stainless (heavier) or even inconel (much heavier) valve, so it wouldn't be far fetched to assume there could be less valve bounce either.
I don't see what's so suspicious about his comments.
I don't know how heat resistant titanium is, but he is correct that titanium is not very efficient at dissipating heat. That's half the reason Be-Cu seats are popular with Ti valves, because it's very good at absorbing the heat out of the titanium.
As for the second part, I don't know about reduced valvebounce, but it surely makes sense that the titanium would have less inertia than a comparable stainless (heavier) or even inconel (much heavier) valve, so it wouldn't be far fetched to assume there could be less valve bounce either.
I don't see what's so suspicious about his comments.
As far as the valve bounce comment, his post reads as though the CB seats have something to do with reducing valve bounce which doesn't make any sense. If that is not what he meant, then I am sorry for the comment. The Ti being a lighter material will reduce valve bounce and valve lofting because the spring is not stressed as much as it would be with a heavier stainless valve. It has nothing to do with CB seats.
The cylinder head guys that put CB seats in my SB2.2 castings informed me they are harder than cast iron seats and are also toxic among other things... I dunno. They told me not to put a lot of street miles on the engine because the valves would not last. They would beat themselves to death against the CB seat. They are race car only type of stuff. (Like an SB2.2 is a great idea in a pro street car anyway...)
I believe the stock GM valves are coated which makes the Ti alloy more resistant to heat so the CB seats are not necessarily an essential at than point- although I doubt it would hurt.
I would agree with v8pwr that Ti does not conduct as well. It seems to "absorb" or hold the heat (for a lack of better terms).
Not to mention, I don't think the valve/seat meterial combination was designed for the same stresses that a Be-Cu seat is normally used in. If you cracked open the engine in any 9000RPM smallblock in a NMRA/NMCA pro stock type class, I don't think you'd find any seat material other than Be-Cu, or something similar like AMPCO 45, which is a non-toxic alternative.
The reason being is that copper beryllium seats are much softer than steel seats. Think about it this way. With a lighter material being smashed into it (titanium) a copper beryllium seat can not last as long compared to a heavier (stainless) valve being smashed into a steel seat. Why would a larger force being smashed into the same sized item cause it to last longer than a comparably sized, but less weight (thus less force) object being smashed into the same sized object made out of copper beryllium not last as long? We've already covered that copper beryllium seats dissipate heat much better so that is out of the question as a stressor. The answer is simply material strength.





