[Skip Fix]

Beehives are the new big deal(whether real or not). Since retainer smaller and lighter they say you can use less valve spring pressure -but how much lighter is OK for an HR?
LS motors that use a 1.8 IH spring is maybe 100 seat. PAC replacement for those is maybe 130 @1.800 per their specs I get 120.

[steve25]

I don't care about the loss in valvetrain weight form a small retainer in terms of a Hydro roller Cam.

For me I would first want to know if a Hydro roller lifter is heavier then a regular one, and if so then what is that percentage and then factor that percentage into my spring seat pressure I run.

Speaking for myself and to have a motor that can buzz to 6500 i would want 140 on the seat, at least for the big 2.11" Intake valve.

[Skip Fix]

Kind of my thoughts Steve. Buddy has a RAIV headed HR 455 he is putting together not sure what valve springs the head guy used. He is using the new Comp cartridge rollers.
I'm also putting together a 383 SBC with Fast burns and the GM Hot Cam which is fairly mild. The PACs I have I can shim to get 140 and still have C.B. room even with 1.6 rockers. Factory style HRs.

[Steve C.]

The reduction of weight can be important.

In 2003 David Vizard published an article titled the "wonder Spring".

Consider the valvetrain mass in a Big Block Chevy with 2.300" intake valves. With it David used beehive springs in conjunction with a Comp XE286XSR solid roller (248@.050) to about 6200 rpm.

His comments regarding the springs, "These delivered 150 lbs. on the seat (410 lbs. over the nose) with our street roller cam and 1.7 ratio rockers. For those of you not familiar with this high-tech spring, those numbers might look a little on the low side. But to understand how effective they can be, you need to bear in mind that a swap to these low-mass springs (a steel beehive retainer is so small it weighs less than a conventional titanium retainer) has more effect on increasing rpm than making a change to titanium valves. A ballpark figure is that with 10 percent less spring, the engine will turn about 12 percent more rpm and show better control all the way up the rpm range."


.

[Formulas]

Part of the beehive magic is in the ovate coil design.

The cross section of the spring wire is not round its oval giving it more resistance to the negative effects of spring surge giving more control at the lesser spring pressures

[Steve C.]

Beehive vs. Cylindrical Valvespring Comparison

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/co...vespring-info/


.

[ponjohn]

Pontiac Dude used these a decade ago. This was his secret to get HR to spin to 6500 + rpm.

[Steve C.]

I haven't looked at them in quite some time but years ago the their rather tall installed height was a potential issue.


.

[slowbird]

I'm running beehives on my hr cam/lifters. Pretty stout springs seems to be working great

[Jay S]

Changing to a beehive from a dual spring the minimum spring pressure drop most do is 10%, the max is about 25%. The lifter weight has nothing to do with that part of it, it all comes from less mass in the spring and retainer. The biggest down side with beehives is when they break they like to drop valves into the engine.

[PAUL K]

We use a lot of LS style dual springs on hydraulic roller set up. There seems to be more options and prefer a dual springs set up.

[Skip Fix]

Originally Posted by Jay S

Changing to a beehive from a dual spring the minimum spring pressure drop most do is 10%, the max is about 25%. The lifter weight has nothing to do with that part of it, it all comes from less mass in the spring and retainer. The biggest down side with beehives is when they break they like to drop valves into the engine.

Yes that is a worry for me about any single spring!
When I flowed my friends RAIV heads years ago when he pulled them off his running 428 there were several with broken inners he did not have a clue the motor had an issue.
Lots of E Head assembled heads have single as well as lots of factory head old and new even boosted factory motors. Most of the LS folks use Beehives and I think even head guru David Vizard is big on them for all head.

[i82much]

how fast can you safely turn a pontiac hyd roller with 2.19 valves and a standard dual spring?

[Skip Fix]

Most of Chevy crate motor SBCs using the Fast Burns use LS beehives about 100 seat, had a single non beehive on the older ones only 90 on my RImac. The drop in PAC springs that will go .600 lift are 130 seat specs-more like 120 on my Rimac.

[Steve C.]

Skips examples above again point out why you never trust the pressures stated in catalogs ! Always test news springs with their intended retainers at the 'verified' installed height on your cylinder heads.

Dual valve springs ?

A tid bit....In an LS application, using a short-travel hydraulic roller lifter and a Comp PN 26926 dual valve spring, Comp tested a 0.675-inch-lift hybrid lobe up to 7,500 rpm without control loss.


.

[Jay S]

Originally Posted by i82much

how fast can you safely turn a pontiac hyd roller with 2.19 valves and a standard dual spring?

I recall Joe Sherman had a 366 Ram Air 5 on the Dyno for Tom S that he took up to almost 7000 with a HR set up and dual springs. That probably had 2.19s. It was just a comp HR cam with magnum profiles and run of the mill comp HR lifters. Easiest way to get something to rev is to use a cam profile that doesn’t require spring pressure that over tax the lifters.

[Steve C.]

"Easiest way to get something to rev is to use a cam profile that doesn’t require spring pressure that over tax the lifters"

Not Pontiac but for interest, material from Comp Cams.....

LST™ & HRT™ Performance Camshaft Packages take the guesswork out of choosing the best valve train upgrade for your specific engine and desired performance. The Low Shock Technology behind these performance packages features lobe profiles designed to maximize horsepower, while improving stability at higher RPM. These profiles are also easier on the valve springs, enhancing durability and reducing load loss.

By Spintron® and dyno testing these new profiles with many combinations of valve train components, COMP Cams® engineers have created valve train packages that are perfectly matched for maximum horsepower and dependability.


.

[Skip Fix]

Even checked my Rimac calibration today with the checking spring they send withing 2lbs at all 3 compressions listed on the spec sheet.

Then the question how do you know if 130, 140,150 is better than 120? And is "over the nose" more important than seat?

[Jay S]

Originally Posted by Steve C.

"Easiest way to get something to rev is to use a cam profile that doesn’t require spring pressure that over tax the lifters"

Not Pontiac but for interest, material from Comp Cams.....

LST™ & HRT™ Performance Camshaft Packages take the guesswork out of choosing the best valve train upgrade for your specific engine and desired performance. The Low Shock Technology behind these performance packages features lobe profiles designed to maximize horsepower, while improving stability at higher RPM. These profiles are also easier on the valve springs, enhancing durability and reducing load loss.

By Spintron® and dyno testing these new profiles with many combinations of valve train components, COMP Cams® engineers have created valve train packages that are perfectly matched for maximum horsepower and dependability.


.

I have a HRT in a daily driver.

[Cliff R]

When you look at what a valve spring has to do it's AMAZING any of that works at all!

Weight in the valve train is NOT your friend, but it goes far beyond just the springs and retainers. You have the valves, rockers arms, pushrods and lifters to add to the pile. HR lifters are HUGE and heavy.. So are most aftermarket rocker arms. At least 95 percent of the folks building these engines also use thick/heavy aftermarket retainers and big springs, often dual or even triple springs.

So taking out weight only at the retainers and springs would only allow a small drop in spring pressure to keep things in check. If you really want to effectively use much lighter springs you need to put the entire valve train on a diet.

Another thing seldom mentioned is the cam lobe profile. Seating velocity is also a BIG player in required spring pressure. When you get really "aggressive" with lobe profiles and slamming the valves around with great authority stronger springs are going to be required.

I've always been one to use LESS spring pressure than most, but I also try to avoid fast-ramp cam profiles with ultra quick seating velocities. I know for sure (have observed it on the dyno) that some of these cams require a lot of spring pressure to keep things in check. Then you've got to factor in the hydraulic action of the lifters. I ran into a "brick wall" with my first HR cammed 455 at 5800rpm's. It simply would NOT rev any further that that with parts being used and I had quite a bit of spring pressure. On my next build I went to a "hybrid" set up with solid roller lifters tight lashed and that engine would rev to and past 6500rpm's and never did act like it was going to quit!

Some some food for thought when it comes to this topic......