Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
#1728195
01/12/15 06:36 PM
01/12/15 06:36 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272 PA.
pittsburghracer
OP
"Little"John
|
OP
"Little"John
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272
PA.
|
Just posting some info that I was always curious about and finally tested today. I am in the process of porting one of the sets of B1 heads I have for this years build and did a weigh test on a 2.300 stainless valve and 2.300 titanium valve. Stainless valve 150 grams titanium valve 105 grams 45 gram difference which at 7500 RPM equals more than I figured but it comes with a pretty high cost difference. Durability would be a big factor on valve spring and rocker life. I weighted a few things to give you an idea of how much 45 grams equals. This is one of my 1/4 inch shank double-cut carbide head porting burrs and it weights 40 grams.
1970 Duster Edelbrock headed 408 5.984@112.52 422 Indy headed small block 5.982@112.56 mph 9.38@138.67
Livin and lovin life one day at a time
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: pittsburghracer]
#1728196
01/12/15 07:51 PM
01/12/15 07:51 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,081 Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,081
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
I've read Ti valves are typically worth 800 rpm in valve train stability, and I would think a horsepower increase of some sort below that? I wish they were in my budget,,,,,,,,
8.582, 160.18 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: gregsdart]
#1728197
01/12/15 08:07 PM
01/12/15 08:07 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272 PA.
pittsburghracer
OP
"Little"John
|
OP
"Little"John
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272
PA.
|
Exhaust valves are 115 grams and 85 grams
1970 Duster Edelbrock headed 408 5.984@112.52 422 Indy headed small block 5.982@112.56 mph 9.38@138.67
Livin and lovin life one day at a time
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: pittsburghracer]
#1728198
01/12/15 08:20 PM
01/12/15 08:20 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,081 Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
gregsdart
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,081
Frostbitefalls MN (Rocky&Bullw...
|
John, I have no data to back this up, but wonder if the TI intake valves would offer a horsepower increase, while the exhaust might not do much other than increase rpm range and parts life? What got me thinking is the intake closing is critical, more so than the exhaust closing.
8.582, 160.18 mph best, 2905 lbs 549, indy 572-13, alky
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: gregsdart]
#1728199
01/12/15 08:39 PM
01/12/15 08:39 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272 PA.
pittsburghracer
OP
"Little"John
|
OP
"Little"John
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272
PA.
|
Not sure on that one Greg and the only reason I even have them is they came with a set of heads I bought years ago. Thinking I may start out with the older set of heads and stainless valves as this will be a learning year with nitrous
1970 Duster Edelbrock headed 408 5.984@112.52 422 Indy headed small block 5.982@112.56 mph 9.38@138.67
Livin and lovin life one day at a time
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: pittsburghracer]
#1728200
01/12/15 09:28 PM
01/12/15 09:28 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,225 Charleston
sixpackgut
Drag Week Mod Champion
|
Drag Week Mod Champion
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,225
Charleston
|
So if you add that carbide to the titanium valve it equals the weight of a stainless valve? Thats huge
Gen 3 power 6.22@110, 9.85@135 Follow @g3hemiswap on instagram
performance only racing, CRT, ultimate converter, superior design concepts, ThumperCarbs
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: zooom]
#1728204
01/13/15 02:59 PM
01/13/15 02:59 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272 PA.
pittsburghracer
OP
"Little"John
|
OP
"Little"John
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272
PA.
|
true but in my case the stem sizes are both the same. I still will probably flow them both just for the heck of it.
1970 Duster Edelbrock headed 408 5.984@112.52 422 Indy headed small block 5.982@112.56 mph 9.38@138.67
Livin and lovin life one day at a time
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: pittsburghracer]
#1728205
01/13/15 03:26 PM
01/13/15 03:26 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,324 Ohio
jlatessa
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,324
Ohio
|
Isn't the weight of the valve only a part of the reciprocating mass that the spring has to control??
i.e. lifters, pushrods, rockers, retainers and locks.
Joe
Last edited by jlatessa; 01/13/15 03:41 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: pittsburghracer]
#1728207
01/13/15 04:30 PM
01/13/15 04:30 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,478 Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,478
Kalispell Mt.
|
Look at it this way, would you add that much weight to all your valves if someone paid you a couple hundred bucks?
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: jlatessa]
#1728209
01/13/15 04:53 PM
01/13/15 04:53 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,478 Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,478
Kalispell Mt.
|
Even at 7500 there should be a longevity benefit as you can run a lot lighter tension spring.
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: HotRodDave]
#1728210
01/13/15 05:02 PM
01/13/15 05:02 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,324 Ohio
jlatessa
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,324
Ohio
|
I agree, the lightest springs to control a given RPM are what we should all have. I would like to hear what Hughes or Barton and the like have actually seen in practice because of a change in valve weight alone. Good topic...Joe
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: jlatessa]
#1728211
01/13/15 05:14 PM
01/13/15 05:14 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
I agree, the lightest springs to control a given RPM are what we should all have. I would like to hear what Hughes or Barton and the like have actually seen in practice because of a change in valve weight alone.
Good topic...Joe
A lot of times the guy puts the ti valve in to lighten the over all weight BUT normally they plan on turning up the revs.. I went that way to turn 9000 plus rpm
|
|
|
Re: Valve weight tech, stainless to titanium difference
[Re: jlatessa]
#1728213
01/13/15 10:53 PM
01/13/15 10:53 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 41 PA
R5P7 Bantam
member
|
member
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 41
PA
|
Quote:
Isn't the weight of the valve only a part of the reciprocating mass that the spring has to control??
i.e. lifters, pushrods, rockers, retainers and locks.
Joe
We can get really into this if you like, but let's start with the basics. What's the purpose of the spring?
1. bring the valve back up via the retainer after opening. 2. Yes, permit the roller wheel or flat tappet to stay in contact with the backside of the cam lobe.
Also, think of it this way, during the opening and closing process of the valves, there isn't any lash or separation between the components of the cam and valve train (at least there isn't suppose to be).
We can get into fulcrum lengths and pivot lengths too if you want. It's all mechanics and levers that dictate the pressure required.
|
|
|
|
|