Ok, cleaned everything up and measured again. I did the intake on 5 & 8, I got 1.957 and 1.943. I put on a steel retainer I had and got almost .exactly 030 less in both cases, so to Fast’s point it appears to be a difference in the retainer. In comparing to my original set-up I’m still .060-.070 out.

I don’t see any way those parts had 1.875” IH before.......... not without some cups/shims.

The locks appear to be sitting normally in the retainers.

If that’s how the springs are really set up, then there’s probably no need to do anything extreme when you set them up this time around.
At 1.950 the springs would only be about 105 on the seat, and a mile from coil bind.

Reduce the IH by .100 and it’ll probably be fine.

Should I pull the heads or just shim and move forward?

I’d do a leak down test to help make that call.
I wouldn’t be surprised if you find a few leakers from the valves bouncing off the seats.

My feeling is........ I don’t really think anything “moved”.
I think it’s more like someone left out the shims, and that’s how they’ve been all along.
Your installed height is shorter than the head I have here when checked using similar parts........ so it’s not like the IH is abnormally high.

Unless you can come up with another plausible scenario.
(The shims weren’t just sticking onto the bottom of the springs when you removed them?)

Ok, got a chance to do a leak down today, and everything looked good, actually everything was 6-8% with two at 10%.

I agree, I feel like the valve hasn't moved and with the way the locks fit in the retainer, I want to say they haven't moved either so that leaves you with "pilot" error on the set-up.

At this point, I am planning to leave the heads on it, re-measure for shims, move the shafts up .150 and put the Crane 1.6 on it and start testing shift points again.

With looking at what the two the springs tested (below) I am thinking about going to 1.800 on the IH.

135@1.855
150@1.800/1.820
180@1.735/1.724
200@1.670
250@1.540

Based on those numbers, there is probably some sort of error in the measuring, or the readings.

Starting at 1.855, to 1.800 the load changes 15lbs in .055”. Then 30lbs in the next .065”, then 20lbs in the next .065”, then 50lbs in the next .130”(25lbs per .065”).
The spring rate between those data points vary greatly........
272.7
461.5
307.6
384.6

If you compare the rate for each lift point against the 1.855 starting point......
272.7
375.0
351.3
365.0

You are using a retainer when checking the springs, right?

I’d probably shoot for 1.825”(assuming a net lift of .568” like posted earlier).

No, I'm not using a retainer. My vise is just large enough to fit the tester and spring. On the two I tested, I just placed the spring, one end against the vise and one end on the tester. I would compress to a set poundage (i.e. 135,150, 180, 200, 250) and then measure the distance with a caliper. I agree on the calculation of the rates, I played with them at lunch today and decided to go back and re-measure and actually test them all. This is a new tool to me and it was the first time I have used it, so it sounds like I need a little tutoring (same with the height mic). I was going to look into removing my rubber contact points on my vise and place some aluminum stock in there to ensure flatness and hopefully pickup a little clearance.

Here is the exact numbers and calculation on the two springs I measured.

135 1.8550 xx xxxx xxxxxx xxxx 135 1.8560
150 1.8200 15 0.03 428.57 xxxx 150 1.8000 15 0.06 267.86
180 1.7350 30 0.09 352.94 xxxx 180 1.7240 30 0.08 394.74
200 1.6770 20 0.06 344.83 xxxx 200 1.6700 20 0.05 370.37
250 1.5400 50 0.14 364.96 xxxx 250 1.5380 50 0.13 378.79

If you calculate the average on 180-250, you get 354 on one, and 381 on the other, which would calculate to less than a pound difference at an IH of 1.823, and about 16 pounds on the nose.

The spring should be tested using the retainer it will be run with, since that inner step has the inner and outer springs at different lengths.
If you can’t fit the retainer in there, then you can substitute a spacer(washer) the same thickness as the retainer step, that fits inside the outer spring and only pushes on the inner, to put the inner spring at the correct height differential.
The typical retainer step is .100”....... but not always.

I def wouldn’t have any type of soft material(rubber) being used in the test fixture.

I would set each spring at whatever height was required to get 150-155 on the seat, as tested with the retainer step accounted for, and no rubber used in the test fixture.
Then test the open pressure at .570 more than whatever the IH for that spring is.
Use the 8 with the highest open load on the intake valves.

That makes perfect sense.

I put together a new set-up last night that allows me the range to include the retainer and gives me a nice straight edge and place to lay my caliper to help with repeatability. In testing two springs, am getting some variation but but when I averaged the calculated lbs/inch from each reading I get the same number - 382. While the 8005A is advertised at 400 lbs/in, when you calculate the two measurements given (135/1.875, 380/1.250) you get 392.



My tester only goes to 300, so I have changed my intervals to 15 pounds starting at 135 (i.e. 135,150,165, etc) to 300. I will test some more tonight.

I went to order the viton seals and noticed they are .670 OD vs .630 OD on the Teflon. All my shims are .640 OD. I like having the ability to pull the shims off without removing the seals, but in the end, I guess seals aren't that expensive. Just pondering removing a little material, the downside is I'll need at least two shims per valve and in some cases three.

Not that it really matters, as the springs you’re testing “are what they are”........ but fwiw, my Isky catalog shows the 8005A specs as 135@1.875, 395@1.225.
260/.650 = 400

Spent some time in the shop last night measuring springs. The bad news is that I am getting some of the same variation in rates from measurement point to measurement point. I have used three different calipers, seeing if it makes a difference and it does to some extent. The good news is that when I calculate from my 135 to 300 measurements, I am getting 399 lbs/in. What does seem to be consistent with three different calipers is that the first measurement (135 to 150) is larger (.043-.047 per 15 lbs) than the later measurements (180-300, .035-.040). This would lead me to believe that this is where the spring may be showing a loss in rate is in the early part of the cycle. At this point it will put most the IH's at 1.83-1.85, so .100 to .120 worth of shim. I have some .065 cups that I will probably use and stick my additional shims under the cup.

Anyway, got tried of measuring springs and started setting up the Crane rocker spacing and well wouldn't you know it, the Cranes are the widest of all my rockers (Crane ductile, CAT, Harland), so I am going to have to make up a new set of hold downs and spacers. Fortunately, I had a extra set of blocks made up when I did my last set so I will need to mill off a little and drill.

“Back in the day”, when Crane golds were current, readily available parts for a BBM, I used several sets of them on various builds.

They came with springs to hold the rockers apart, and I always just used the factory hold downs.

They came with a little bag of 32- .015” thick heat treated shims, and you put one shim on either side of the rocker to protect them from wearing against the springs or hold downs.
I never had any issues from doing it that way.

Funny, you say that as I mocked them up that way last night with the factory hold downs, springs and a .015 shim on each side. The only problem I ran into is I still need some space toward the outside hold down to center the rocker over the valve. I have filed a little on the tabs that stick up but in order to leave some of the tab I still need a little more clearance. I guess since it is an outside hold down, I could simply oblong the hole in the hold down and let it slide over. I usually mark all of hold downs anyway so it would not be a big deal. The reason I was mocking it up "old school" is that I was thinking I may have a clearance issue with the valve cover. The tall aluminum hold downs, + .150 spacer under the shaft could get me pretty close to the valve cover. I guess too, when I rotated the rockers with the spring tension you could definitely tell they did not rotate nearly as freely as they do with a spacer.

I am thinking now, that I may just move in that direction as that allows me to keep working. Thanks for the input, very helpful.

Was able to do a little work this weekend, ran into a small issue with the valve seals. I orders the viton seals with the small diameter they use for the triple springs. These only have the viton on the top, the body is just the metal. I have very inconsistent sizes on the valve guides. When they did the cut (.530) they got so close to the guides that in some cases it has chipped off. The teflon seals are very forgiving in this situation. I am just a little afraid of the teflon because of the metal clamp that can separate from the seal. I have found several bits and pieces of them against the rail on the head. Is there anyway to secure the viton seals with black RTV or some other sealant or just stick with the white teflon and hope I have the valve train under control?

As a side note, I noticed that most of the damaged seals were on the exhaust. The ones on the intake were still intact.

The seals I use for the .530 guide are .675 outside dia. they have viton material for gripping the guide. Are you saying that you need a seal smaller than that? What is the inside dia. of the spring? I ran those metal to guide seals once. and they worked there way off and got destroyed. I had used permatex type 1 hardening sealer to install/secure them.

I ordered the Comp 522-16 seals, which are for a .530 guide and are probably only .600 wide with only the viton being on the top side of the seal (sounds like what you tried). My valve springs have a .730 ID and my shims are .640 ID so I was trying to get something that would allow me to take shims on and off without removing the seals. My guides are all over the place because the .530 was so close to the size of the valve guide, the remaining support is breaking away (picture above). I have one cylinder left to do and I have 2 of the teflon seals left but I checked my math this morning and I probably have two shim stacks I need to change so I will have to remove the seal to do that and hopefully I can get them off without tearing them up. I was hopeful that as a back up I could use the vitons with a little black rtv sealer on them to keep them in place.

I have in the past forgotten the shims after installing the seal. Vitons I carefully pry off with a bent tip flat screwdriver, the teflons I pop the metal clamp up off first then remove the seal then push the clamp back on with it removed.

Springs are all installed, most came in about 1.81-1.83 and that puts them between 150-155 on the seat.

Went ahead and milled the hold downs and got everything shimmed and spaced. I installed the new shaft spacers and mocked up a pair of rockers to measure the scrub and see how everything lined up. With the shaft spacer (+.150) the rocker tip is fairly centered on the valve, the adjusters are about 1.5 threads out and looks like it will allow oil to reach inside the pushrod cup. The scrub, the best I can measure is coming in between .035-.037, so a significant improvement over my previous .135 and not too far off the theoretical ideal of .031.

The only thing that seems strange is the pattern on the exhaust valve is not all the way across. I measured several times and each time it would be the same partial pattern. I am only rolling it over 720* by hand to get the pattern and I am running about .025 rocker clearance. I checked a few time to ensure the rocker was centered over the valve, so I am unsure what the cause is.

Everything is better with pictures

Try swapping rockers from a different position and see if it changes.

Kevin