I just saw this on LS1TECH and thought I'd pass it along.

Guy just found a broken BeeHive only after changing other parts thinking they were the cause of his poor engine performance.

A few months ago, I did some research on valve springs, using Google, and found a site for he 26918s. At the bottom of the ad was the caution that they are recommended for occasional race use only.

The guy with the broken Beehive was taking his engine to 6700 which I think qualifies as "race use", even if not at the track.

One of the responders posted on how his SA rockers jumped off the valve and damaged his spider as part of the carnage.

Hope this helps in future decisions.

Jake

West Point ROCKS! Nation's TOP COLLEGE per Forbes Magazine!! Graduation Day Parade 20 May 2010!!!

 

I know there were quite a few 918's broken on this site. That's why I went with PAC(1518) and NSA rockers.

 

His is a fresh "broken" post but I didn't respond to ask him for more specifics. Going with NSA rockers was DEFINITELY the RIGHT move.

Eric, if you'd like, how about PMing with the guy and see if his are PACs or not. I don't recall him mentioning which ones his are, other than Beehives. I do recall, though, they were installed by one of the most respected head guys around so, with that, I figure he has/had confidence in them.

If you come up with something that would help all of us, it would be nice if you'd share. Thanks.

Jake

West Point ROCKS! Nation's TOP COLLEGE per Forbes Magazine!! Graduation Day Parade 20 May 2010!!

 

If you pay attention there is a common detail other than the 918s. Myself and a LOT of other folks used the 918s for a long time without a problem.

Leads me to believe that the other common detail to a LOT of these stories is an important detail.

Are you sharp enough to find it and open minded enough to believe it?

 

The guy on LS1tech had 7k+ miles on the springs. Who knows how old they were and if they were in the batch that ages ago Comp admitted was suspect. That particular problem was well documented here long ago.

 

I know about their history. When reports first began to filter in, it was thought to be just a bad batch. Then many, many other batches began showing up having the same problem. One Forum member even began creating a listing of all the different batch numbers. Turned out to be a LOT of different batches.

When new information is brought to your attention, I believe, maintaining objectivity is the KEY. Many are too quick to defend something which, I feel, is basically because it's what they bought or what they run. It's a self-defense mechanism kicking in, not even stopping to consider there may be a something to consider. It's one of those 'instant jump to the defense/justify my selection' kind of things. Happens all the time; it's Human Nature.

My thinking is, rather than jump into this 'automatic defensive/protective mode', that so many do - "I've been running/using such and such since the beginning of time without a problem" (wish I had a dollar for everytime I read that!), do yourself a favor and do your homework on his failure issue.

Email with the guy to get the specifics, then you'll be responding from a position of "knowing" If his turns out to be the earlier version, post that. If they turn out to be of the newer, or PAC version, post that too. I don't run 'em, so I'm out of the loop (no dog in this fight), but for those of you who do run them , I'd think you'd be interested in knowing.

We can, many times, benefit from the negative experiences of others. I posted this in an effort to help others, to make them aware of a recent reported BeeHive failure. Should any of you choose to Poo-Poo it and not accept the information provided, be my guest. You can lead a horse to water . . . .

Jake

West Point ROCKS! Nation's TOP COLLEGE per Forbes Magazine!! Graduation Day Parade 20 May 2010!!!

 

I believe alot has to do with breaking the springs in properly and not abusing the motor when its cold. I ran two different cams from the "common detail" and didn't have any problems over a 4 year period with plenty of WOT runs.

 

So you see the common thread too but are too closed minded to admit it could be critical.

The 918s have been used outside their designed capability frequently, that is the problem. Square lobes and exceeding the lift spec on the earlier .600 max ones. Lot of cases of the Comp 3192 lobe breaking 918s in just 2-3K miles.

Mine is a street car and I live in a closely packed neighborhood. I don't think the neighbors would like it if I gave the car 5 minutes to warm up when I leave for work at 5:20am. H-11 tool steel springs are touchy about warmup but not 918 beehives.

 

Not trying to start a fight, but, at the risk of doing so, here are some more of my thoughts, including what I refer to as "Cardinal" rules.

As back-ground, I spent 32 years in the Criminal Justice System. In investigating an alleged crime to determine whether a crime has actually been committed and warrants prosecution, there were several "Cardinal" rules we followed. A couple are:

Never assume. Everything had to be verified, especially verbal accounts of what transpired. The outcome of the case would depend on the credibility of the evidence as presented in Court of Law under oath.

Another one was "To Close All Open Doors". Basically, that means that for any question that arises, the answer should be found. If a "door is opened" during the investigation, it should be Closed. Failure to do so leaves what are commonly referred to as "Loop Holes" or "Holes in the case". These "holes" can often lead to a "Not Guilty" verdict, which is not the goal of prosecution. The issue is NOT whether the defendant committed or didn't commit the crime he was being accused of, but rather whether it was provable in a Court iof Law that the defendant committed the crime. Provable Beyond Reasonable Doubt. ABSOLUTE PROOF is not a requirement in a Court of Law and is often not attainable.

As far as Beehive valve springs, the issue is not whether the ones you're running have or haven't experienced failure but, instead, have their been enough reported failures to warrant concern.

As a parable, didn't one of the major car companies recently recall over 4 million of their vehicles due to reported throttle pedal problems? Not all of those vehicles experienced those failures, but enough did to warrant concern and the recall.

My point being, when presented with information, even when (or perhaps ESPECIALLY when) it conflicts with held beliefs, that information should be investigated. Think "OPEN/CLOSED DOORS". That information OPENS a door which should be CLOSED.

So when it comes to valve springs (or any other part for that matter), if it's been shown to have a significant failure rate - even if you're running that part without failure, consideration should be given to its suitability.

Changing or not buying the part is a personal choice, but should be based, at least in part, on consideration of the reported instances of failure. Should one decide that the reported failures don't sway you toward the side of not buying/running the part, or, on the contrary, if the failure rate sways you to continue using or buying the part, so be it. At least you would have made an informed, intelligent decision and not a knee-jerk one.

Just trying to convey not to dismiss such information out of hand.

I think I'll leave this alone now. Brings to mind the old saying "You Can Please (or as in this case, convince) Some of the People All of the Time and All of the People Some of the Time, but you can Never Please (convice) All of the People All of the Time"

And I'm Out.

Jake

West Point ROCKS! Nation's TOP COLLEGE per Forbes Magazine!! Graduation Day Parade 20 May 2010!!!

 

Hmm well not jumping into the defense mode on this one but yes i did run the 918 beehives for about 8k if not more and never had an issue with them, i know my roommate at the time bought the same 918's about a month later and one of his broek so i've sen the good and bad of these springs.. My set did amazing and i ran them between 6,400-6,700 with two different cam set ups and over a couple years with the biggest lift on them being the CC306 cam. I've noticed some of the guys that had them fail were pushing them pretty close to their limit as far as how much lift they can handle.. So i guess yes Comp Cams made a bad spring in some peoples eyes but not everyone had a problem with them, But recently i sold my 918 spring setup not because i was scared of one breaking but because i am switching to a nice LE custom grind and would break them on start up.

 

Other questions I've never seen answered in any detail are:

What Company Actually Winds Comp's Valve Springs - Comp's springs and others as well?

Does Comp wind its own springs in-house?

Do they, and if they do, quality check all the spring material they receive from their material supplier(s)?

Also: What are their quality control procedures like? What industry specs do their quality control specs meet? Edelbrock, for example, raves about meeting the industry's highest quality control standards.

Oops. I did say I was Out, didn't I. Darn

Jake

West Point ROCKS! Nation's TOP COLLEGE per Forbes Magazine!! Graduation Day Parade 20 May 2010!!!

 

Comp had PAC making them then went offshore and that was when they had the bad batch.

Far as the guy who ran them on a 306 cam, the 306 is pretty mild compared to todays lobes.

JAKEJR, you TALK a good game not a lot of substance behind it though.

Edelbrock's shocks and catback are garbage quality wise for the b-bodies, and their LT1 topends are about the worst performance choice you can make though far as I know they are reliable so no quality issue, just an integrity one.

 

Here are some threads from way back....do a search on 918's and they come up.

https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/sho...&highlight=918
https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/sho...&highlight=918

 

Back in the day of all the hoopla about the 918s breaking was when Comp changed suppliers. The problem was eventually recognized and they changed again (not sure if I correctly remember that is was PAC that they changed (or went back) to).

[edit] lol, I was a little late...

 

Hehe, the story I remember was that Comp changed from PAC to some other supplier(overseas I think...but not sure). Then they started having breakages. That is the main reason I bought from PAC. Actually, from Shon Herron through a group purchase.....https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=527275.