HOME FORUM RULES CONTACT
     
   
   

Go Back   CLASS RACER FORUM > Class Racer Forums > Stock and Super Stock Tech


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-02-2015, 08:59 PM   #11
Mike Coe
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Valve springs 340 Stocker Engine

Thanks for the reply John, see you in Vegas. Mike
Mike Coe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2015, 09:39 AM   #12
James L Miller
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 495
Likes: 6
Liked 24 Times in 15 Posts
Default Re: Valve springs 340 Stocker Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Coe View Post
Thanks for the replies.. Turbo, the reason the 1409X won't work is, the inside diameter of the spring is too small, I need at least 1.00 inch and when you squeeze that spring down to 1.680 installed height and then collapse it down .520 for cam lift and coil bind clearance it is at 1.16 and it says it coil binds at 1.19 inches. Mike
Sorry if I am ignorant on Stocker engine builds, but the spec I have for a 1969 340 calls for a .462" intake and .473" exhaust lift. Are people using a "square" lobe to loft the valvetrain off the lobe to get the .520" lift? I have an old Cam Dynamics 340 Stocker cam from the 1970s and it has a flattened nose on the lobes. I have some newer cams from Lunati and Bullet that have a more regular lobe appearance.
__________________
Mopar 2 Ya!
James L Miller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2015, 10:07 AM   #13
Jim B
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Re: Valve springs 340 Stocker Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by James L Miller View Post
Sorry if I am ignorant on Stocker engine builds, but the spec I have for a 1969 340 calls for a .462" intake and .473" exhaust lift. Are people using a "square" lobe to loft the valvetrain off the lobe to get the .520" lift? I have an old Cam Dynamics 340 Stocker cam from the 1970s and it has a flattened nose on the lobes. I have some newer cams from Lunati and Bullet that have a more regular lobe appearance.
He did say the .520" number was for lift AND coil bind. Allowing .060" for coil bind clearance would put the lift number at about what you had....
Jim B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2015, 07:24 PM   #14
Greg Reimer 7376
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Glendora,Calif.
Posts: 1,108
Likes: 164
Liked 644 Times in 205 Posts
Cool Re: Valve springs 340 Stocker Engine

Quote:
Originally Posted by James L Miller View Post
Sorry if I am ignorant on Stocker engine builds, but the spec I have for a 1969 340 calls for a .462" intake and .473" exhaust lift. Are people using a "square" lobe to loft the valvetrain off the lobe to get the .520" lift? I have an old Cam Dynamics 340 Stocker cam from the 1970s and it has a flattened nose on the lobes. I have some newer cams from Lunati and Bullet that have a more regular lobe appearance.
The earlier cams had a more square nose profile like you describe because there was a maximum allowable duration rule in effect then.The valve started to open later,and it had to close sooner,so the lobe characteristics were more brutal. Parts breakage,valve bounce, bad stuff happened very frequently,especially on the go fast setups.The more recent stocker cams look more conventional because the ramp starts sooner,arrived at maximum lift about when it did, then closed later. Valve action was a bit smoother, and the engine would run at a higher rpm with out all that uncontrolled motion,Also,breathing started sooner and ceased later,making more power. DON'T EVEN THINK of using a square nose cam with a ceramic lifter. Get a set of Trend or Sherman tool steel lifters,fork out the bucks and do it right the first time.
Greg Reimer 7376 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2015, 10:43 AM   #15
James L Miller
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 495
Likes: 6
Liked 24 Times in 15 Posts
Default Re: Valve springs 340 Stocker Engine

I read that as ".520" lift" and the coil bind clearance on top of that. It never occurred to me that he was rolling the .060" in with the lift. In the USAF we had a saying about tunnel vision. Thanks for the vision outside my little box.

As far as that old CD Stocker cam, it sounds like it needs to go back in the 1970s box it came out of. I don't have the budget for ceramic lifters or even the tool steel ones. I think the Speed-Pro HT2011R lifters are exotic.
__________________
Mopar 2 Ya!
James L Miller is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.