2.20 intake valve...stainless or titanium?
10-17-2005, 02:33 PM
#1
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Morton IL
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2.20 intake valve...stainless or titanium? I'm getting conflicting advice. Do you think a stainless 2.20 intake would be too heavy, and cause valve float?
ET Performance says they will be ok. 2 other respectable vendors say to use TI.
ET Performance says they will be ok. 2 other respectable vendors say to use TI.
10-17-2005, 03:12 PM
#2
TECH Addict
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nevada, TX
Posts: 2,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Greg Fell
I'm getting conflicting advice. Do you think a stainless 2.20 intake would be too heavy, and cause valve float?
ET Performance says they will be ok. 2 other respectable vendors say to use TI.
ET Performance says they will be ok. 2 other respectable vendors say to use TI.
Brandon
Last edited by xfactor_pitbulls; 10-17-2005 at 03:18 PM.
10-17-2005, 03:14 PM
#3
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Salisbury,MD
Posts: 1,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are going to solid the stainless will certainly be fine. If you are going to go hydraulic I would keep a very close eye on spring pressure and run a set of Morel lifters to deal with the 150 or so seat pounds you're going to need to be able to spin this thing up in the rpms.
What size motor are these heads going on again?
What size motor are these heads going on again?
10-17-2005, 03:43 PM
#4
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Morton IL
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot justify $10000 in a lunched motor! I'll tell you that 
I was thinking of gettin the TI valves just for the intake. Not sure.
This is going on a 422. Not sure how much the stock lifters can handle.
I was thinking of gettin the TI valves just for the intake. Not sure.
This is going on a 422. Not sure how much the stock lifters can handle.
10-17-2005, 04:41 PM
#6
I agree with DAP. The hydraulic will need very good springs and a good lifter to handle the spring pressure. I'm running a 2.125 stainless in mine, but I have .700 lift springs that provide more than adequate pressure to keep it under control. That's the good thing about these new heads. They allow you to run springs in the 1.4xx range, which provides you with many more choices. If there is anyone you can trust, it would be ET. I say good springs and the stainless. If money is no option, then go titanium.
10-17-2005, 04:43 PM
#7
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Morton IL
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm in the process of getting them.
Hopefully this may be another type of situation where the 02 ls6 valves were hollow/sodium filled and people were worried about the weight of them.
Hopefully this may be another type of situation where the 02 ls6 valves were hollow/sodium filled and people were worried about the weight of them.
Trending Topics
10-18-2005, 08:50 PM
#9
Originally Posted by RedHardSupra
wanna post numbers for weights of both versions, along with retainers, etc?
https://ls1tech.com/forums/advanced-engineering-tech/394940-those-who-want-big-nasty-cams-lots-lift-etc.html
10-20-2005, 06:13 AM
#10
Collections Hold
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: howell mi
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
valves Greg,
The titanium valves would be better no matter what, but if your cam and spring combo are right a 10 degree 2.200 valve in that length is not very heavy, I made a flow valve from one of the 10 degree rev blanks and it is only 114 grams, and could be lightened another 2 grams. the ls1 2.055 valves come in around 105 grams. A comp 921 spring and a ti retainer would be your most cost effective solution. We can make you the exact shape valve that the Ls7 uses from the factory, so flow would be right.
The titanium valves would be better no matter what, but if your cam and spring combo are right a 10 degree 2.200 valve in that length is not very heavy, I made a flow valve from one of the 10 degree rev blanks and it is only 114 grams, and could be lightened another 2 grams. the ls1 2.055 valves come in around 105 grams. A comp 921 spring and a ti retainer would be your most cost effective solution. We can make you the exact shape valve that the Ls7 uses from the factory, so flow would be right.
10-20-2005, 01:44 PM
#13
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Morton IL
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I respectfully disagree. I have had valve float issues in the past that resulted in bent valves, worn valve tips, guides and seats that were beat to hell. I think GM uses the TI parts for a reason, they are light and will not float. Also keep in mind, these valves are quite a bit longer (heavier) than the ls1/ls6 valves.
10-20-2005, 06:14 PM
#14
Teching In
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you could always go with the stainless, and use afr's "hydra rev-kit" to help control valve float.
nevermind I just looked at their website, they don't offer it for the ls1. would probably solve your problem if they did though.
nevermind I just looked at their website, they don't offer it for the ls1. would probably solve your problem if they did though.
Last edited by justanova; 10-20-2005 at 06:16 PM. Reason: i'm an idiot
10-20-2005, 06:20 PM
#16
Teching In
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's on afr's website but I just looked at it its only for normal smallblocks. for some reason I thought they made it for the ls1. It is just like a normal rev kit for the solid rollers with an extra spring that goes between the head and the lifter but it is for the hydraulic rollers. http://www.airflowresearch.com/ just click on the hydraulic roller rev kits button, they explain it all
10-21-2005, 09:32 AM
#17
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Morton IL
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After talking with ET, I've decided to do stainless. haha back/forth/back/forth...they said the 2.20 intake is 114 grams, about 10 more than the 2.055. He assured me the 2.20 stainless would work.
10-21-2005, 09:53 AM
#19
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Morton IL
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ET is putting it together for me. I'll run the 921's and TI retainers. Man, am I impressionable or what? I'll probably want to change my mind again!!!!
