977/978 springs, Hydra-Rev question
01-05-2003, 09:03 AM
#1
Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Buffalo, New York
Posts: 10,745
977/978 springs, Hydra-Rev question
I am going to be running a CC XE cam next year with the #3192/3196 224/236 lobes (.567/.585" lift with the 1.5 rockers I will be using). I have been using the CC #978 springs with 106lbs of seat pressure and 368lbs open with my current 214/224 XE cam (.535/.567"). Presently I run the combo to 6,000rpm. Next year I plan to spin it a little faster, perhaps to 6,200-6,300.
Should I go to the #977 spring (133lbs seat, 419lbs open), use #978 again, or maybe go #978 with the Hydra-Rev? Or some other spring altogether? I tend to stick with Comp as I have always had good luck with their stuff.
Opinions welcome.
Rich Krause
Should I go to the #977 spring (133lbs seat, 419lbs open), use #978 again, or maybe go #978 with the Hydra-Rev? Or some other spring altogether? I tend to stick with Comp as I have always had good luck with their stuff.
Opinions welcome.
Rich Krause
01-05-2003, 10:50 AM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 2,931
Rich,
Bret used the 3190/3192 and the 3192/3196 with 1.6's.
He used the 977's but at 155 seated pressure. This was for an engine never to exceed 6800. The spring choices and seated load came from as high up as you can get @ cc.
With 1.5's and NE rpm of 6500, I think your idea of 977's @133 (1.900 installed height) sounds good. Hey, it's time for new springs anyway, right?
I'll run this by Bret today.
Bret used the 3190/3192 and the 3192/3196 with 1.6's.
He used the 977's but at 155 seated pressure. This was for an engine never to exceed 6800. The spring choices and seated load came from as high up as you can get @ cc.
With 1.5's and NE rpm of 6500, I think your idea of 977's @133 (1.900 installed height) sounds good. Hey, it's time for new springs anyway, right?
I'll run this by Bret today.
01-05-2003, 11:16 AM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Jacksonville,fla
Posts: 1,983
I aslo have some what the same cam but a little less lift xe 224/236-502/520. Does this cam need double coil springs with such little lift?. I will be using the stock 1.5 rockers for a couple more months so the lift will be the same. Btq i do have comp 987 springs but i will switch to some single coil springs if dont need the double's.
thanks
thanks
01-05-2003, 11:30 AM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 504
155lb seat pressure sounds like a lot for a hydraulic lifter. I'm running a cc 3314/3315 with crower 68390-3 springs. 115 on the seat and 355 over the nose. The hydra-rev adds 32lbs closed and 50 lbs open @.340 lift, to the lifter body. I shift at 6300, but have taken it to 6500 with no issues.
01-05-2003, 12:46 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 48
Another thing you'll need to consider is the amount of boost against the intake valve. As the valve closes, the boost will increase the load against the spring at the point where the spring is decreasing in pressure. The 977 with the hydra-rev is what I'd recommend.
01-05-2003, 01:36 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In a house by the bay
Posts: 2,985
FWIW Rich, I think your choice of the 977 @ about 130 lbs seat and probably about 380 lbs open would be enough with the use of a rev-kit. Remember that you springs will lose a little pressure after the first few heat cycles.
Good luck.
-Mindgame
Good luck.
-Mindgame
01-05-2003, 02:24 PM
#8
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Rich,
I would go with the 977 installed @ 1.850" w/ a seat pressure of 155 @ least. With the good Comp Lifters and that much spring a Rev Kit really isin't needed. With the 1.6:1's I didn't run a Rev Kit, but I should have run 177 at the seat to help the 6000-6500rpm range rather than the 155. This was on a 3190/3192 with 1.6's, on the 3192/3196 I would have rather run 929 springs because they are better for the extra lift or a Rev Kit if I wanted to run the 1.6's.
The rev kit is a good idea in case something breaks like a pushrod or rocker arm because it will keep positive pressure on the lifter and you will not loose oil pressure and end up breaking more things.
The 977 should be more than enough spring for you then. With a Rev Kit as a safetly margin.
Bret
I would go with the 977 installed @ 1.850" w/ a seat pressure of 155 @ least. With the good Comp Lifters and that much spring a Rev Kit really isin't needed. With the 1.6:1's I didn't run a Rev Kit, but I should have run 177 at the seat to help the 6000-6500rpm range rather than the 155. This was on a 3190/3192 with 1.6's, on the 3192/3196 I would have rather run 929 springs because they are better for the extra lift or a Rev Kit if I wanted to run the 1.6's.
The rev kit is a good idea in case something breaks like a pushrod or rocker arm because it will keep positive pressure on the lifter and you will not loose oil pressure and end up breaking more things.
The 977 should be more than enough spring for you then. With a Rev Kit as a safetly margin.
Bret
01-05-2003, 06:56 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In a house by the bay
Posts: 2,985
Originally posted by SStrokerAce
Rich,
I would go with the 977 installed @ 1.850" w/ a seat pressure of 155 @ least. With the good Comp Lifters and that much spring a Rev Kit really isin't needed. With the 1.6:1's I didn't run a Rev Kit, but I should have run 177 at the seat to help the 6000-6500rpm range rather than the 155. This was on a 3190/3192 with 1.6's, on the 3192/3196 I would have rather run 929 springs because they are better for the extra lift or a Rev Kit if I wanted to run the 1.6's.
The rev kit is a good idea in case something breaks like a pushrod or rocker arm because it will keep positive pressure on the lifter and you will not loose oil pressure and end up breaking more things.
The 977 should be more than enough spring for you then. With a Rev Kit as a safetly margin.
Bret
Rich,
I would go with the 977 installed @ 1.850" w/ a seat pressure of 155 @ least. With the good Comp Lifters and that much spring a Rev Kit really isin't needed. With the 1.6:1's I didn't run a Rev Kit, but I should have run 177 at the seat to help the 6000-6500rpm range rather than the 155. This was on a 3190/3192 with 1.6's, on the 3192/3196 I would have rather run 929 springs because they are better for the extra lift or a Rev Kit if I wanted to run the 1.6's.
The rev kit is a good idea in case something breaks like a pushrod or rocker arm because it will keep positive pressure on the lifter and you will not loose oil pressure and end up breaking more things.
The 977 should be more than enough spring for you then. With a Rev Kit as a safetly margin.
Bret
Have you really had much luck in running that cam at 160 lbs at the seat for extended periods? Not just talking a stint on a dyno here. I'm geniunely curious, not just trying to be my usual smartypants self.
A friend of mine just finished up a 360 (.060 over 350), actually the engine was built by Hans Feustal Racing Engines. With our goals in hand they used the solid roller Comp XR280R, 242/248 .575/.585 110deg lsa (I'm guessing at the lift #s, but they're in that ballpark). The engine made it's peak power at 6700 with use of that cam and a Isky rev-kit. The springs were setup at 165 seat and a little better than 400 open. I've also run a very similiar hydraulic Xtreme grind (3316/3317) in a 383 that peaked at 6300 rpm, also using a rev-kit and a seat pressure of 130 seat and about 380 open. The Hans Feustal example made one of the nicest dyno graphs I've ever seen... no 'surge' dips along the way. So you see where my question of that much spring on such a mild grind is coming from? I was always taught to use the least amount of spring necessary to do the job... ala Vizard. Again, we are talking about an engine that Rich says will peak at about 6300 rpm max.
Thanks.
-Mindgame
01-05-2003, 09:41 PM
#11
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Mindgame,
I was thinking along that line too with usung a 987 spring orignally but Billy Goldbolt @ Comp suggested the 977 and it controls the valve on the lifter much better and is much better on seat bounce and it actually picked up average power in my simulations because of this better control. (yes the program is that good if you have the stiffnesses of the valvetrain!) those lobes don't need the spring pressure just because of the lift, but they need it for the control too.
The engine was designed to be a Max Effort for that contest on the dyno but also to bolt into a car and drive and Billy knew that when we asked him about the setup. The springs will need to be checked to see that they maintain pressure on the seat and rate, but other than that he said they should work fine for street use.
A 214/224 that peaked at 6000-6100 and could run to 6900 easy worked fine with the 977.
Bret
I was thinking along that line too with usung a 987 spring orignally but Billy Goldbolt @ Comp suggested the 977 and it controls the valve on the lifter much better and is much better on seat bounce and it actually picked up average power in my simulations because of this better control. (yes the program is that good if you have the stiffnesses of the valvetrain!) those lobes don't need the spring pressure just because of the lift, but they need it for the control too.
The engine was designed to be a Max Effort for that contest on the dyno but also to bolt into a car and drive and Billy knew that when we asked him about the setup. The springs will need to be checked to see that they maintain pressure on the seat and rate, but other than that he said they should work fine for street use.
A 214/224 that peaked at 6000-6100 and could run to 6900 easy worked fine with the 977.
Bret
01-05-2003, 11:55 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Juan PR
Posts: 3,083
Well.. I gave Nick at Nutek a call and he recommended the 977 with the hydra rev kit... Even for my low lift version of the XE cam. Even though I was only going to rev to 6000-6200rpm.. He told me that the hydra rev kit did in fact help out... But he also recommended other springs... not sure which ones they were, I'll post later, but he said it was dependant on the installed height... He told me that he had used the 977 with the AFRs a lot... But he did recommend the hydra rev kit.
01-06-2003, 07:00 AM
#14
Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Buffalo, New York
Posts: 10,745
Originally posted by The Highlander
Well.. I gave Nick at Nutek a call and he recommended the 977 with the hydra rev kit... Even for my low lift version of the XE cam. Even though I was only going to rev to 6000-6200rpm.. He told me that the hydra rev kit did in fact help out... But he also recommended other springs... not sure which ones they were, I'll post later, but he said it was dependant on the installed height... He told me that he had used the 977 with the AFRs a lot... But he did recommend the hydra rev kit.
Well.. I gave Nick at Nutek a call and he recommended the 977 with the hydra rev kit... Even for my low lift version of the XE cam. Even though I was only going to rev to 6000-6200rpm.. He told me that the hydra rev kit did in fact help out... But he also recommended other springs... not sure which ones they were, I'll post later, but he said it was dependant on the installed height... He told me that he had used the 977 with the AFRs a lot... But he did recommend the hydra rev kit.
Rich Krause