[Z06] WCCH heads w/ SS exhaust valves
08-30-2013, 09:19 AM
#201
Considering the intake valve also weighs more that the stock exhaust valve, I'm not sure where you're going with this. The intake valve is 77g. So that makes the Ferrea hollow valve a mere 8g heavier on the spring relative to the intake. With dual springs, I could see where there might still be a question mark, but not with PSI springs that Katech sells. Naturally, the only way to be 100% certain is to also run it on the Spintron with the cams in question (not worried about mine - it's only a .622 lift).
Just my opinion.
Just my opinion.
And I'm asking Michael_D, that if he places a premium on the results of spintron testing, then why does a valve which has not, at least not in here, undergone that testing in this application, get a recommendation from him?
You mention that the new Ferrea valve is "merely 8 grams heavier" than the stock titanium valve.
For my own information, what would one consider to be a "safe cutoff", in terms of "acceptable exhaust valve weight over and above that of the 77g intake valve", and why?
I know that you say 8g is OK, but how high can one go before they get into trouble?
The thing that stands out to me, is the fact that there are and have been several cars, in fact hundreds of cars, (I've counted over 200 of them myself) running in "direct violation" to what the spintron results predicted would happen as long ago as 2008, and we have no rampant reports of those cars failing.
In the three cases of failure I know about in here, I look at Madsen's case, and find that it wasn't "valve bounce" that got him, but rather worn stock guides, where he apparently thought that he had bronze guides.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...post1584068005
1stZ's case, as already illustrated in this thread, was simply a case of the car having been beaten to death.
So to me, that leaves one case in here, of a failure of what many of us refer to as "The Fix", and that is the case of the bent valve in the other gentleman's car.
But not to get off what you and I were discussing, I'm wondering if "8g greater than the weight of the stock intake valves" is not the actual cutoff and if it really goes further beyond that.
One other thing, is that when I was counting the failures in here, I typically did not refer to them as failures unless the engine, or at the very least the short block, had to be replaced.
The one exception that I can think of with that was the case where a guy broke a valve spring in a days old car, took it back and demanded a new cor when the dealership offered only to replace the head and the piston, figuring that this would be enough.
But I think that if one is to take the approach of counting yours as an engine failure, traced to the valve train and secondary to the use of SS valves, as I have seen alluded to, well then one would also have to count instances of lifter failure and cam failures in stock cars in the same manner.
In other words, if I had started counting lifter damage and failures as engine failures, well then I was going to end up with more stock failures than I had already counted.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 08-30-2013 at 12:53 PM.
08-30-2013, 09:52 AM
#202
Team Owner
You know I've talked to 240sx2jz on this issue too, I've shared PMs from him with you. Two things stand out to me.
1) His heads with OEM valves and OEM guides were grossly out-of-spec after the first 20-25K miles. His heads after the next ~25K miles with SS valves and bronze guides still showed wear, but they were still within spec. There is a stark contrast in the wear he experienced prior to and after he sent his heads to WCCHs. Aside from actual valves and guides in 240sx2jz's heads, it is the same car, same head castings, same driver with the same driver habits, and even roughly the same number of miles spent on each set up.
Granted, the wear 240sx2jz showed with SS valves/bronze guides isn't exactly ideal, but it still shows to me that incidence of wear was greatly reduced after changing to SS valves and bronze guides.
You can argue if he tracked his car his bronze guides would now be out-of-spec, and you might be right. But considering how grossly out-of-spec his OEM guides were (also without tracking his car) prior to WCCH work, I would question whether or not his engine would have even survived the first 20-25K miles if he was a guy who regularly went to the track.
2) 240sx2jz also told me he thinks the iron guides are better, and now that Ferrea has the hollow stem exhaust valve he would like to use them as well. So while he personally might like the sintered iron guides better than bronze, he also has no intention of returning to the OEM sodium-filled exhaust valve either.
1) His heads with OEM valves and OEM guides were grossly out-of-spec after the first 20-25K miles. His heads after the next ~25K miles with SS valves and bronze guides still showed wear, but they were still within spec. There is a stark contrast in the wear he experienced prior to and after he sent his heads to WCCHs. Aside from actual valves and guides in 240sx2jz's heads, it is the same car, same head castings, same driver with the same driver habits, and even roughly the same number of miles spent on each set up.
Granted, the wear 240sx2jz showed with SS valves/bronze guides isn't exactly ideal, but it still shows to me that incidence of wear was greatly reduced after changing to SS valves and bronze guides.
You can argue if he tracked his car his bronze guides would now be out-of-spec, and you might be right. But considering how grossly out-of-spec his OEM guides were (also without tracking his car) prior to WCCH work, I would question whether or not his engine would have even survived the first 20-25K miles if he was a guy who regularly went to the track.
2) 240sx2jz also told me he thinks the iron guides are better, and now that Ferrea has the hollow stem exhaust valve he would like to use them as well. So while he personally might like the sintered iron guides better than bronze, he also has no intention of returning to the OEM sodium-filled exhaust valve either.
DH
08-30-2013, 09:55 AM
#203
Team Owner
Not sure what the rev was as I wasn't looking .......DH
08-30-2013, 10:10 AM
#204
Team Owner
Where I'm going with it, is that it's still "untested" on the spintron.
And I'm asking Michael_D, that if he places a premium on the results of spintron testing, then why does a valve which has not, at least not in here, undergone that testing in this application, get a recommendation from him?
You mention that the new Ferrea valve is "merely 8 grams heavier" than the stock titanium valve.
For my own information, what would one consider to be a "safe cutoff", in terms of "acceptable exhaust valve weight over and above that of the 77g intake valve", and why?
I know that you say 8g is OK, but how high can one go before they get into trouble?
The thing that stands out to me, is the fact that there are and have been several cars, in fact hundreds of cars, (I've counted over 200 of them myself) running in "direct violation" to what the spintron results predicted would happen as long ago as 2008, and we have no rampant reports of those cars failing.
In the three cases of failure I know about in here, I look at Madsen's case, and find that it wasn't "valve bounce" that got him, but rather worn stock guides, where he apparently thought that he had bronze guides.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...post1584068005
Well, he also thought that he had bronze guides.
1stZ's case, as already illustrated in this thread, was simply a case of the car having been beaten to death.
So to me, that leaves one case in here, of a failure of what many of us refer to as "The Fix", and that is the case of the bent valve in the other gentleman's car.
But not to get off what you and I were discussing, I'm wondering if "8g greater than the weight of the stock intake valves" is not the actual cutoff and if it really goes further beyond that.
One other thing, is that when I was counting the failures in here, I typically did not refer to them as failures unless the engine, or at the very least the short block, had to be replaced.
The one exception that I can think of with that was the case where a guy broke a valve spring in a days old car, took it back and demanded a new cor when the dealership offered only to replace the head and the piston, figuring that this would be enough.
But I think that if one is to take the approach of counting yours as an engine failure, traced to the valve train and secondary to the use of SS valves, as I have seen alluded to, well then one would also have to count instances of lifter failure and cam failures in stock cars in the same manner.
In other words, if I had started counting lifter damage and failures as engine failures, well then I was going to end up with more stock failures than I had already counted.
And I'm asking Michael_D, that if he places a premium on the results of spintron testing, then why does a valve which has not, at least not in here, undergone that testing in this application, get a recommendation from him?
You mention that the new Ferrea valve is "merely 8 grams heavier" than the stock titanium valve.
For my own information, what would one consider to be a "safe cutoff", in terms of "acceptable exhaust valve weight over and above that of the 77g intake valve", and why?
I know that you say 8g is OK, but how high can one go before they get into trouble?
The thing that stands out to me, is the fact that there are and have been several cars, in fact hundreds of cars, (I've counted over 200 of them myself) running in "direct violation" to what the spintron results predicted would happen as long ago as 2008, and we have no rampant reports of those cars failing.
In the three cases of failure I know about in here, I look at Madsen's case, and find that it wasn't "valve bounce" that got him, but rather worn stock guides, where he apparently thought that he had bronze guides.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...post1584068005
Well, he also thought that he had bronze guides.
1stZ's case, as already illustrated in this thread, was simply a case of the car having been beaten to death.
So to me, that leaves one case in here, of a failure of what many of us refer to as "The Fix", and that is the case of the bent valve in the other gentleman's car.
But not to get off what you and I were discussing, I'm wondering if "8g greater than the weight of the stock intake valves" is not the actual cutoff and if it really goes further beyond that.
One other thing, is that when I was counting the failures in here, I typically did not refer to them as failures unless the engine, or at the very least the short block, had to be replaced.
The one exception that I can think of with that was the case where a guy broke a valve spring in a days old car, took it back and demanded a new cor when the dealership offered only to replace the head and the piston, figuring that this would be enough.
But I think that if one is to take the approach of counting yours as an engine failure, traced to the valve train and secondary to the use of SS valves, as I have seen alluded to, well then one would also have to count instances of lifter failure and cam failures in stock cars in the same manner.
In other words, if I had started counting lifter damage and failures as engine failures, well then I was going to end up with more stock failures than I had already counted.
This may be the simple explanation of why even though there may be more bounce that all these H/C, SS valve motors are not BOUNCING apart !!
DH
08-30-2013, 10:39 AM
#205
Track time in your case not a lot. A road course however would show a dramatic difference as there is much more heat and abuse.
What you wrote above is exactly the problem. I am not looking for a "well its better than the stock wear". I am looking for much more longevity than that. You should have zero wear at 25k daily driven miles. The wear indicates the problem is still not resolved. The heavier valve might be a contributor. This is the problem when you change to much. You cant identify the root cause. Was it the bronze? Was it the valve?
Better than the problem we are trying to fix but still displaying the problem along with an increase in mass in the valve train adding more instability doesn't sound like longevity to me. Sounds like history about to repeat itself. Its not a matter of if. Its when.
SS might delay the inevitable but it is not immune to the exact same type of failure as the OEM valve as we have seen with Madsens car.
Solve the guide wear and you solve the problem. Run the oem valves and you dont introduce another one with unknown outcomes.
What you wrote above is exactly the problem. I am not looking for a "well its better than the stock wear". I am looking for much more longevity than that. You should have zero wear at 25k daily driven miles. The wear indicates the problem is still not resolved. The heavier valve might be a contributor. This is the problem when you change to much. You cant identify the root cause. Was it the bronze? Was it the valve?
Better than the problem we are trying to fix but still displaying the problem along with an increase in mass in the valve train adding more instability doesn't sound like longevity to me. Sounds like history about to repeat itself. Its not a matter of if. Its when.
SS might delay the inevitable but it is not immune to the exact same type of failure as the OEM valve as we have seen with Madsens car.
Solve the guide wear and you solve the problem. Run the oem valves and you dont introduce another one with unknown outcomes.
What many in these discussions refer to in slang terms as "The Fix", consists of both solid stainless valves, (or Inconel) and bronze valve guides.
Under that definition, Madsen's car, didn't have "the fix", as apparently unbeknownst to him, he was still running with the stock sintered valve guides.
Indeed, when I think back to talk in here that Lingenfelter was the only vendor from which new stock guides could be obtained, I don't know about you, but it makes me wonder if those may have been his original guides. Especially considering how blown out they were. TJ said there was no point in even measuring. And if you saw that video, you know he's right.
But yes, to my own case, you are right in that those heads did not have a lot of road course duty on them.
You know I've talked to 240sx2jz on this issue too, I've shared PMs from him with you. Two things stand out to me.
1) His heads with OEM valves and OEM guides were grossly out-of-spec after the first 20-25K miles. His heads after the next ~25K miles with SS valves and bronze guides still showed wear, but they were still within spec. There is a stark contrast in the wear he experienced prior to and after he sent his heads to WCCHs. Aside from actual valves and guides in 240sx2jz's heads, it is the same car, same head castings, same driver with the same driver habits, and even roughly the same number of miles spent on each set up.
Granted, the wear 240sx2jz showed with SS valves/bronze guides isn't exactly ideal, but it still shows to me that incidence of wear was greatly reduced after changing to SS valves and bronze guides.
You can argue if he tracked his car his bronze guides would now be out-of-spec, and you might be right. But considering how grossly out-of-spec his OEM guides were (also without tracking his car) prior to WCCH work, I would question whether or not his engine would have even survived the first 20-25K miles if he was a guy who regularly went to the track.
2) 240sx2jz also told me he thinks the iron guides are better, and now that Ferrea has the hollow stem exhaust valve he would like to use them as well. So while he personally might like the sintered iron guides better than bronze, he also has no intention of returning to the OEM sodium-filled exhaust valve either.
1) His heads with OEM valves and OEM guides were grossly out-of-spec after the first 20-25K miles. His heads after the next ~25K miles with SS valves and bronze guides still showed wear, but they were still within spec. There is a stark contrast in the wear he experienced prior to and after he sent his heads to WCCHs. Aside from actual valves and guides in 240sx2jz's heads, it is the same car, same head castings, same driver with the same driver habits, and even roughly the same number of miles spent on each set up.
Granted, the wear 240sx2jz showed with SS valves/bronze guides isn't exactly ideal, but it still shows to me that incidence of wear was greatly reduced after changing to SS valves and bronze guides.
You can argue if he tracked his car his bronze guides would now be out-of-spec, and you might be right. But considering how grossly out-of-spec his OEM guides were (also without tracking his car) prior to WCCH work, I would question whether or not his engine would have even survived the first 20-25K miles if he was a guy who regularly went to the track.
2) 240sx2jz also told me he thinks the iron guides are better, and now that Ferrea has the hollow stem exhaust valve he would like to use them as well. So while he personally might like the sintered iron guides better than bronze, he also has no intention of returning to the OEM sodium-filled exhaust valve either.
But that was when I called back here, approximately a year ago.
Worthy of mention in your posting is what 240sx2jz says here:
West coast said they weren't surprised by these readings, they said my build was one that was of earlier ones and they were running the guides a touch larger (.0015-.0017) than current ones for a couple reasons. 1, they needed to in order to get the guide straight and then final reamed and 2 the guides they get now have a thicker wall to allow them to get it straight and then cut the final size. ...
Also just my personal opinion, i have a feeling they are learning as well with all the head work they are doing and have opted just to tighten them up because of all the daily drivers and cruisers they are doing. When building a race motor you run them a touch looser to account for thermal expansion and to avoid sticking the valve.
Also just my personal opinion, i have a feeling they are learning as well with all the head work they are doing and have opted just to tighten them up because of all the daily drivers and cruisers they are doing. When building a race motor you run them a touch looser to account for thermal expansion and to avoid sticking the valve.
All of 240sx2jz's guides as you mention above, were in spec at 25k miles.
So starting at 0.0017" and looking at his table below indicating his exhaust guide to stem clearances at the bottom of the chart below, you will see that he actually had very little wear starting from that point.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/83083721@N08/8735779566/lightbox/
With the exception of what appears to be #7, all are minimal starting from 0.0017", or even 0.0015".
With the exception of #7, they run somewhere between 0.0022" and 0.0029", which would indicate as little as 0.0005" to 0.0012" of guide "wear" during those 25K miles, to as much as 0.0007"-0.0014" of guide wear worst case.
Now I don't know what was going on at #7 as he was up to 0.0033" guide to stem clearance, which would indicate about 0.0016" - 0.0018" of wear, but perhaps it had something to do with heat, as #7 is said to run leaner than the other cylinders, I don't know.
But it does appear that based upon where he started, he had minimal wear at all but #7, and what I would want to know is what was different about it vs the other cylinders. Why is it the oddball?
The other key thing that I take from this, is that now, that particular shop is setting their guide to stem clearances tighter than they were when 240sx2jz's heads were done, giving the owner more "margin" for wear to within the spec.
If 240sx2jz's heads had demonstrated "across the board" excessive wear, well then I would be more in tune with propain's concerns about guide wear in the bronze guides.
But the fact that it showed up in only one cylinder makes me wonder about that cylinder, that rocker, that spring, etc., as opposed to all of his guides.
Finally, if you look at the information put up by hoefi some time ago, you will see that the "production values" for exhaust guide to stem clearance are 0.0010 to as much as 0.0026".
Presumably this wide degree of what is "acceptable", would have an impact on just how quickly one would approach the service limit in a stock set of heads, if you were lucky enough to get a set of stock heads which started out with all guide to stem clearances of 0.0010", it would seem that you would be in much better shape in terms of margin, than if you were to start at .0026" in all of your guides.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 08-30-2013 at 08:46 PM.
08-30-2013, 10:43 AM
#206
Melting Slicks
Over the months during which this issue has been discussed, different "terminology" in the discussions has come about.
What many in these discussions refer to in slang terms as "The Fix", consists of both solid stainless valves, (or Inconel) and bronze valve guides.
Under that definition, Madsen's car, didn't have "the fix", as apparently unbeknownst to him, he was still running with the stock sintered valve guides.
Indeed, when I think back to talk in here that Lingenfelter was the only vendor from which new stock guides could be obtained, I don't know about you, but it makes me wonder if those may have been his original guides.
But yes, to my own case, you are right in that those heads did not have a lot of road course duty on them.
This was a very interesting case as several months ago, I spoke with the shop where you say those heads were done and asked what stem to guide clearances they set their heads up at, and was told back then that they typically release their heads with a guide to stem clearance of .0012" up to .0015" on the exhaust side.
But that was when I called back here, approximately a year ago.
Worthy of mention in your posting is what 240sx2jz says here:
So when it comes to 240sx2jz's guides in his new heads, they may have started as high as .0017" stem to guide clearance.
All of 240sx2jz's guides as you mention above, were in spec at 25k miles.
So starting at .0017" and looking at his table below indicating his exhaust guide to stem clearances at the bottom of the chart below, you will see that he actually had very little wear starting from that point.
Valve clearances | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
With the exception of what appears to be #7, all are minimal starting from .0017", or even .0015"
Now I don't know what was going on at #7 as he was up to .0033" guide to stem clearance, but perhaps it had something to do with heat as #7 is said to run leaner than the other cylinders, I don't know.
What many in these discussions refer to in slang terms as "The Fix", consists of both solid stainless valves, (or Inconel) and bronze valve guides.
Under that definition, Madsen's car, didn't have "the fix", as apparently unbeknownst to him, he was still running with the stock sintered valve guides.
Indeed, when I think back to talk in here that Lingenfelter was the only vendor from which new stock guides could be obtained, I don't know about you, but it makes me wonder if those may have been his original guides.
But yes, to my own case, you are right in that those heads did not have a lot of road course duty on them.
This was a very interesting case as several months ago, I spoke with the shop where you say those heads were done and asked what stem to guide clearances they set their heads up at, and was told back then that they typically release their heads with a guide to stem clearance of .0012" up to .0015" on the exhaust side.
But that was when I called back here, approximately a year ago.
Worthy of mention in your posting is what 240sx2jz says here:
So when it comes to 240sx2jz's guides in his new heads, they may have started as high as .0017" stem to guide clearance.
All of 240sx2jz's guides as you mention above, were in spec at 25k miles.
So starting at .0017" and looking at his table below indicating his exhaust guide to stem clearances at the bottom of the chart below, you will see that he actually had very little wear starting from that point.
Valve clearances | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
With the exception of what appears to be #7, all are minimal starting from .0017", or even .0015"
Now I don't know what was going on at #7 as he was up to .0033" guide to stem clearance, but perhaps it had something to do with heat as #7 is said to run leaner than the other cylinders, I don't know.
All it takes it one guide and one valve.
08-30-2013, 11:12 AM
#207
I agree.
But I'm not ready to conclude that bronze guides are a worse choice than the stock guides, or a bad idea, based on one being slightly more worn than all of the other 7, which are not just in spec, but well within spec.
Especially when it too, is still within spec.
Seriously, I'd want to know what was going on at his #7.......especially if his prior stock guides had also shown more wear there than at the others.
I'd want to know that before considering changing guides.
But I'm not ready to conclude that bronze guides are a worse choice than the stock guides, or a bad idea, based on one being slightly more worn than all of the other 7, which are not just in spec, but well within spec.
Especially when it too, is still within spec.
Seriously, I'd want to know what was going on at his #7.......especially if his prior stock guides had also shown more wear there than at the others.
I'd want to know that before considering changing guides.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 08-30-2013 at 11:18 AM.
08-30-2013, 11:29 AM
#208
Melting Slicks
I agree.
But I'm not ready to conclude that bronze guides are a worse choice than the stock guides, or a bad idea, based on one being slightly more worn than all of the other 7, which are not just in spec, but well within spec.
Especially when it too, is still within spec.
Seriously, I'd want to know what was going on at his #7.......especially if his prior stock guides had also shown more wear there than at the others.
I'd want to know that before considering changing guides.
But I'm not ready to conclude that bronze guides are a worse choice than the stock guides, or a bad idea, based on one being slightly more worn than all of the other 7, which are not just in spec, but well within spec.
Especially when it too, is still within spec.
Seriously, I'd want to know what was going on at his #7.......especially if his prior stock guides had also shown more wear there than at the others.
I'd want to know that before considering changing guides.
It is odd that #7 is more out of wack, But as stated..."Well within spec" on the rest doesn't fly for me. At 25K miles on a daily driver he should he zero wear. I've seen tanner pull apart heads with ZERO wear with many miles. I forgot what it was off of? LS6 maybe?
The wear "well within spec" along with #7 tells me something is still wrong. Again if this was a track car the results would be worse. Would you just blame it on the track then and still be fine with this setup?
There are those who road course their cars with this setup. I would definitely inspect for wear at this point if it was my car. More so after seeing the results of Madsens car and the conclusion of failure.
08-30-2013, 11:56 AM
#209
Did he actually take measurements to arrive at the zero wear assessment, or did he do a wiggle test?
I'm doubting that most human beings can perceive through purely tactile sensation, many of the minuscule measurements we're discussing in a valve guide at 3 different positions.
Not saying that it can't be done. Just that I don't see it. I mean, in some cases we're talking the difference between .0033" which would be in spec and.0037" which would be the limit. I doubt any human being can tell that difference purely through proprioception.
Zero wear???
I'm no engineer, but is this even possible?
I'm thinking that "some" wear is to be expected.
As I said before, I have heard that some wear is to be expected, and this makes sense to me.
I'm just not seeing how one can start at say .0015" of guide to stem clearance, and then several tens of thousands of miles later expect to still be at that same exact stem to guide clearance.
They might still be in spec, mind you. But I'm doubting that they would still be at the original .0015" clearance after say 90K miles.
What I'm saying is that any guide will wear.
It's just that bronze alloy guides are said by some professionals, those whom I trust on this matter for example, to have better wear characteristics than the powdered metal guides.
I have no idea where his guide to stem clearances may have started, and the fact that he was still on his stock guides, when from a prior post it appears that he apparently thought that he was on bronze, is in my mind, a factor as well.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 08-30-2013 at 12:57 PM.
08-30-2013, 12:38 PM
#211
Melting Slicks
SS failure alleged to fail from bounce. Madsens car having its guides measured and confirmed to fail from guide wear even with SS valves. WCCH heads showing a valve stem beat to hell. WCCH heads with bronze and SS show wear. While still in spec the owner is switching from bronze and SS to iron and hollow.
I was curious how the proponents of the "fix" feel about it. The only thing I see is a lot of excuses with no real rebuttal. At least from a data standpoint.
Again. Time will tell on all of this but I have seen all I need to make my decision.
Last edited by propain; 08-30-2013 at 12:43 PM.
08-30-2013, 12:48 PM
#212
Im pretty much done. Nothing left to discuss. There have been some new recent developments that sparked things back up.
SS failure alleged to fail from bounce. Madsens car having its guides measured and confirmed to fail from guide wear even with SS valves. WCCH heads showing a valve stem beat to hell. WCCH heads with bronze and SS show wear. While still in spec the owner is switching from bronze and SS to iron and hollow.
I was curious how the proponents of the "fix" feel about it. The only thing I see id a lot of excuses with no real rebuttal.
Again. Time will tell on all of this but I have seen all I need to make my decision.
SS failure alleged to fail from bounce. Madsens car having its guides measured and confirmed to fail from guide wear even with SS valves. WCCH heads showing a valve stem beat to hell. WCCH heads with bronze and SS show wear. While still in spec the owner is switching from bronze and SS to iron and hollow.
I was curious how the proponents of the "fix" feel about it. The only thing I see id a lot of excuses with no real rebuttal.
Again. Time will tell on all of this but I have seen all I need to make my decision.
And I agree that time not only will, but indeed already has told and is telling.
If things were not working, then people would stop doing them, it really is not any more than that.
I have seen 3 engine failures of cars with SS valves in them on this forum.
Madsens car, with extreme stock valve guide wear in it, which we learn now had the stock guides in it, which is a deviation from the typical fix in here which includes new bronze alloy valves.
1stZs car which failed at 150 mph after multiple prior 190mph runs on a motor which he himselfs admits needed an overhaul but he didn't have the funds to do so.
And Corvee's case of the bent and broken exhaust valve.
I think that this issue, just like the free market in our democratic society, will "regulate" itself.
If things aren't working, well then people will stop doing them.
But as long as they are working, then they will continue to.
08-30-2013, 01:31 PM
#213
Melting Slicks
As am I, pretty much done.
And I agree that time not only will, but indeed already has told and is telling.
If things were not working, then people would stop doing them, it really is not any more than that.
I have seen 3 engine failures of cars with SS valves in them on this forum.
Madsens car, with extreme stock valve guide wear in it, which we learn now had the stock guides in it, which is a deviation from the typical fix in here which includes new bronze alloy valves.
1stZs car which failed at 150 mph after multiple prior 190mph runs on a motor which he himselfs admits needed an overhaul but he didn't have the funds to do so.
And Corvee's case of the bent and broken exhaust valve.
I think that this issue, just like the free market in our democratic society, will "regulate" itself.
If things aren't working, well then people will stop doing them.
But as long as they are working, then they will continue to.
And I agree that time not only will, but indeed already has told and is telling.
If things were not working, then people would stop doing them, it really is not any more than that.
I have seen 3 engine failures of cars with SS valves in them on this forum.
Madsens car, with extreme stock valve guide wear in it, which we learn now had the stock guides in it, which is a deviation from the typical fix in here which includes new bronze alloy valves.
1stZs car which failed at 150 mph after multiple prior 190mph runs on a motor which he himselfs admits needed an overhaul but he didn't have the funds to do so.
And Corvee's case of the bent and broken exhaust valve.
I think that this issue, just like the free market in our democratic society, will "regulate" itself.
If things aren't working, well then people will stop doing them.
But as long as they are working, then they will continue to.
Many have had failed engines replaced by GM under warranty. I have a personal friend with a new LS7. 20k hard miles including track time. His car is as fine and alive as any ss/bonze build. Does that mean GM fixed the problem or would you need more time to come to that conclusion?
He is free to chime in if he wants. But trust me he is just one of many who dont post here much and are just as secure as a ss/bronze car at this point.
Again. Longevity. Dont show me 200 people with ss valves most of which have made the change 6 months ago and have barely put any miles on. Show me a 60k mile car with this build. Shouldn't be too hard if its such a common fix.
08-30-2013, 02:22 PM
#214
Just because people are doing something that doesn't make it the correct course of action. Unfortunately that is the only data in support of it. There is simply not enough data to come to a conclusion. The amount of builds and the amount of time and mileage is simply not there.
Many have had failed engines replaced by GM under warranty. I have a personal friend with a new LS7. 20k hard miles including track time. His car is as fine and alive as any ss/bonze build. Does that mean GM fixed the problem or would you need more time to come to that conclusion?
He is free to chime in if he wants. But trust me he is just one of many who dont post here much and are just as secure as a ss/bronze car at this point.
Again. Longevity. Dont show me 200 people with ss valves most of which have made the change 6 months ago and have barely put any miles on. Show me a 60k mile car with this build. Shouldn't be too hard if its such a common fix.
Many have had failed engines replaced by GM under warranty. I have a personal friend with a new LS7. 20k hard miles including track time. His car is as fine and alive as any ss/bonze build. Does that mean GM fixed the problem or would you need more time to come to that conclusion?
He is free to chime in if he wants. But trust me he is just one of many who dont post here much and are just as secure as a ss/bronze car at this point.
Again. Longevity. Dont show me 200 people with ss valves most of which have made the change 6 months ago and have barely put any miles on. Show me a 60k mile car with this build. Shouldn't be too hard if its such a common fix.
1. People tend not to put a lot of miles on these cars anyway. That's likely even more true if it's modded for, and intended to see track duty from time to time, or even frequently, as many of these SS valved cars are. Howie's is an exception as he is one of the rare one who daily drives his, as well as tracks it several times a season on road courses.
2. For virtually any given mass produced model of car out there that one can name, the sheer number of stock examples of it, will far surpass the number of "modified" examples of it out there. And a car with what we refer to as "The Fix" done to it, would certainly count as "modified".
Because there are more stock cars available in the population anyway, then there are more examples of stock cars which are likely to have higher mileage on them.
3. The C6 Z06 itself has only been around for 8 years. It will take a while, years, for modded examples of it to become anywhere near as "commonplace" as are stock examples of it. If that ever happens.
4. Many of the owners inclined to do this, are already modding enthusiasts. And from my own observations, coupled with a 10 year tenure in here, that is a group which doesn't tend to run up 60-100k miles while modded.
5. You won't find many members in here who have personally run up 60k or more miles on a C6 Z06. Even stock. And when I say "many" I'm talking about 250 plus.
6. If one were to survey this forum, or even outside of it, asking members with modded cars if they have 60K on their mods, I believe that those responding "yes" to that question, would be few if compared against owners of the same cars, but bone stock.
But most importantly, looking over the years, one can cite several examples of cars in here which never made it anywhere close to 60k miles before failure.
This is especially striking when it is taken into account that there are between 6 and 7 times as many LS2 and LS3 based Corvettes built vs LS7s, and that includes the Vert.
If one knows the current number of 60,000 plus mile STOCK cars in here, and is waiting for a comparable sized sample of cars with 60,000 plus miles on "The Fix" setups, before giving the procedure a passing mark, well then they are welcome to.
If they were so inclined, they could even wait for as much as a 50/50 mix of stock valve vs SS valve cars, before making an assessment, and still be able to make the argument, that it was only at that point that a truly good assessment could be made.
But many, myself included, know that the time that it would take to collect such examples, could very possibly put us over into the time frame of the introduction of the C8, if not the C9.
And many of us aren't willing, nor see the need, to wait that long. Especially when during that "wait", mishap can still occur.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 08-30-2013 at 02:52 PM.
08-30-2013, 02:51 PM
#215
Melting Slicks
It's extremely hard and for multiple reasons.
1. People tend not to put a lot of miles on these cars anyway. That's likely even more true if it's modded to and intended to see track duty from time to time, or even frequently, as many of these SS valved cars are. Howie's is an exception.
2. For virtually any given model of car out there that one can name, the sheer number of stock cars out there, will far surpass the number of "modified" cars out there. And a car with what we refer to as "The Fix" done to it, would certainly count as "modified".
3. The C6 Z06 itself has only been around for 8 years. It will take a while, years, for modded examples of it to become anywhere near as "commonplace" as are stock examples of it. If that ever happens.
4. Many of the owners inclined to do this, are already modding enthusiasts. And from my own observations, coupled with a 10 year tenure in here, that is a group which doesn't tend to run up 60-100k miles while modded.
5. You won't find many members in here who have personally run up 60k or more miles on a C6 Z06. Even stock. And when I say "many" I'm talking about 200 plus.
6. If one were to survey this forum, or even outside of it, asking members with modded cars if they have 60K on their mods, I believe that those responding "yes" to that question, would be few if compared against owners of the same cars, but bone stock.
But most importantly, looking over the years, one can cite several examples of cars in here which never made it anywhere close to 60k miles before failure.
This is especially striking when it is taken into account that there are between 6 and 7 times as many LS2 and LS3 Based corvettes on existence vs LS7s and that includes the Vert.
If one knows the current number of 60,000 plus mile STOCK cars in here, and is waiting for a comparable sized sample of cars with 60,000 plus miles on "The Fix" setups, before giving the procedure a passing mark, well then they are welcome to.
But many, myself included, know that the time that it would take to collect such examples, would probably put us over into the introduction of the C8.
And many of us aren't willing, nor see the need, to wait that long. Especially when during that "wait", mishap can still occur.
1. People tend not to put a lot of miles on these cars anyway. That's likely even more true if it's modded to and intended to see track duty from time to time, or even frequently, as many of these SS valved cars are. Howie's is an exception.
2. For virtually any given model of car out there that one can name, the sheer number of stock cars out there, will far surpass the number of "modified" cars out there. And a car with what we refer to as "The Fix" done to it, would certainly count as "modified".
3. The C6 Z06 itself has only been around for 8 years. It will take a while, years, for modded examples of it to become anywhere near as "commonplace" as are stock examples of it. If that ever happens.
4. Many of the owners inclined to do this, are already modding enthusiasts. And from my own observations, coupled with a 10 year tenure in here, that is a group which doesn't tend to run up 60-100k miles while modded.
5. You won't find many members in here who have personally run up 60k or more miles on a C6 Z06. Even stock. And when I say "many" I'm talking about 200 plus.
6. If one were to survey this forum, or even outside of it, asking members with modded cars if they have 60K on their mods, I believe that those responding "yes" to that question, would be few if compared against owners of the same cars, but bone stock.
But most importantly, looking over the years, one can cite several examples of cars in here which never made it anywhere close to 60k miles before failure.
This is especially striking when it is taken into account that there are between 6 and 7 times as many LS2 and LS3 Based corvettes on existence vs LS7s and that includes the Vert.
If one knows the current number of 60,000 plus mile STOCK cars in here, and is waiting for a comparable sized sample of cars with 60,000 plus miles on "The Fix" setups, before giving the procedure a passing mark, well then they are welcome to.
But many, myself included, know that the time that it would take to collect such examples, would probably put us over into the introduction of the C8.
And many of us aren't willing, nor see the need, to wait that long. Especially when during that "wait", mishap can still occur.
Action is fine. No one is saying just sit back and wait. However, sitting back and saying you are better off than a OEM setup when using an build that doesn't have much longevity as far as testing goes seems ignorant.
For me to say SS is 100% bad I need to see long term results. It would be ignorant of me to say "Its 100% bad and will blow up your car" I simply dont have the data yet. The bounce however and increased instability over the OEM valve is a red flag for me. Why introduce yet another unknown in an already unknown long term fix?
The same goes for the OEM valve. The fix needs to be done and monitored as even the bronze/oem hasn't been tested for longevity. Time will tell of course but at least I don't need to add another variable like valve fatigue at the upper RPM due to bounce and instability. One less thing for me to worry about while we figure out which is the better fit. I also don't know of any oem/bronze failures and many are running this setup.
08-30-2013, 03:01 PM
#216
Action is fine. No one is saying just sit back and wait. However, sitting back and saying you are better off than a OEM setup when using an build that doesn't have much longevity as far as testing goes seems ignorant.
For me to say SS is 100% bad I need to see long term results. It would be ignorant of me to say "Its 100% bad and will blow up your car" I simply dont have the data yet. The bounce however and increased instability over the OEM valve is a red flag for me. Why introduce yet another unknown in an already unknown long term fix?
The same goes for the OEM valve. The fix needs to be done and monitored as even the bronze/oem hasn't been tested for longevity. Time will tell of course but at least I don't need to add another variable like valve fatigue at the upper RPM due to bounce and instability. One less thing for me to worry about while we figure out which is the better fit. I also don't know of any oem/bronze failures and many are running this setup.
For me to say SS is 100% bad I need to see long term results. It would be ignorant of me to say "Its 100% bad and will blow up your car" I simply dont have the data yet. The bounce however and increased instability over the OEM valve is a red flag for me. Why introduce yet another unknown in an already unknown long term fix?
The same goes for the OEM valve. The fix needs to be done and monitored as even the bronze/oem hasn't been tested for longevity. Time will tell of course but at least I don't need to add another variable like valve fatigue at the upper RPM due to bounce and instability. One less thing for me to worry about while we figure out which is the better fit. I also don't know of any oem/bronze failures and many are running this setup.
And the end of the day, I think that all that anyone can do is hedge their bet when it comes to this matter.
Now what steps that owner believes will accomplish that, well only he can decide that after reviewing the information.
The "bounce" issue is not an issue, or a sticking point for me, because of predictions made 5 years ago with regard to it, coming up all but dead empty, if not dead empty.
When profound predictions are being made, I don't care if you're talking about sports betting, gambling at the casino, or predicting the weather, well then it goes without saying, that it's in the prognosticator's interest that they're on.
We have but one, even potentially credible, example of a SS valve failure in here, due to valve bounce. And just throwing this out there, it would be interesting if the information and pics, that we have on this particular instance were put before say, 10 professionals, if all 10 would read it as such.
Many have asked for examples of higher mileage cars which have been running "The Fix".
I'd ask for verifiable examples of failures of it, due to valve bounce.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 08-30-2013 at 03:14 PM.
08-30-2013, 08:03 PM
#217
Melting Slicks
I don't think that anyone can say that either setup is 100% bad, as long as there are running examples of it out there.
And the end of the day, I think that all that anyone can do is hedge their bet when it comes to this matter.
Now what steps that owner believes will accomplish that, well only he can decide that after reviewing the information.
The "bounce" issue is not an issue, or a sticking point for me, because of predictions made 5 years ago with regard to it, coming up all but dead empty, if not dead empty.
When profound predictions are being made, I don't care if you're talking about sports betting, gambling at the casino, or predicting the weather, well then it goes without saying, that it's in the prognosticator's interest that they're on.
We have but one, even potentially credible, example of a SS valve failure in here, due to valve bounce. And just throwing this out there, it would be interesting if the information and pics, that we have on this particular instance were put before say, 10 professionals, if all 10 would read it as such.
Many have asked for examples of higher mileage cars which have been running "The Fix".
I'd ask for verifiable examples of failures of it, due to valve bounce.
And the end of the day, I think that all that anyone can do is hedge their bet when it comes to this matter.
Now what steps that owner believes will accomplish that, well only he can decide that after reviewing the information.
The "bounce" issue is not an issue, or a sticking point for me, because of predictions made 5 years ago with regard to it, coming up all but dead empty, if not dead empty.
When profound predictions are being made, I don't care if you're talking about sports betting, gambling at the casino, or predicting the weather, well then it goes without saying, that it's in the prognosticator's interest that they're on.
We have but one, even potentially credible, example of a SS valve failure in here, due to valve bounce. And just throwing this out there, it would be interesting if the information and pics, that we have on this particular instance were put before say, 10 professionals, if all 10 would read it as such.
Many have asked for examples of higher mileage cars which have been running "The Fix".
I'd ask for verifiable examples of failures of it, due to valve bounce.
The thread that was pulled with the valve stem beat up pretty bad might have been a good indicator. I don't know. Someone in this thread however with a very beat up seat might be something.
On the contrary I have yet to see an oem valve fail after addressing the guides. While there isnt a registry for it you can bet a lot are running that setup and so far so good.
Again. Time. Lets hope right or wrong all our cars at least show signs before disaster.
:
:
08-30-2013, 08:34 PM
#218
A fair request. I believe we all need to see more data. But just like you come to conclusions based on what you feel about the previous performance of the oem valve others who have been building race cars for a long time come to conclusions as well based on bounce and how unhealthy it is for engines.
The thread that was pulled with the valve stem beat up pretty bad might have been a good indicator. I don't know. Someone in this thread however with a very beat up seat might be something.
On the contrary I have yet to see an oem valve fail after addressing the guides. While there isnt a registry for it you can bet a lot are running that setup and so far so good.
Again. Time. Lets hope right or wrong all our cars at least show signs before disaster.
::
The thread that was pulled with the valve stem beat up pretty bad might have been a good indicator. I don't know. Someone in this thread however with a very beat up seat might be something.
On the contrary I have yet to see an oem valve fail after addressing the guides. While there isnt a registry for it you can bet a lot are running that setup and so far so good.
Again. Time. Lets hope right or wrong all our cars at least show signs before disaster.
:
:
09-01-2013, 08:22 AM
#219
Intermediate
Member Since: Aug 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07 C6Z data post
I saw in an earlier post where someone was asking about stock Z06 set ups with high mileage. I am the second owner of a 100% bone stock Z06 with 83,000 miles and according to GM and the previous owner no head work has been performed ever. The car is a daily driver and always has been. Maintenance is 100% complete since new at 2500-3500 mile intervals.
Admittedly I am concerned with the valve issue detailed in this forum, but many have told me that if I was going to have an issue it would have already surfaced.
Anxioousy awaiting the fall out of my post
Admittedly I am concerned with the valve issue detailed in this forum, but many have told me that if I was going to have an issue it would have already surfaced.
Anxioousy awaiting the fall out of my post
09-01-2013, 08:50 AM
#220
It's not the fallout that'll get ya, it's the radiation 
Since one forum member's car with 88K miles had badly worn guides, I would strongly suggest you perform the wiggle test to be on the safe side. If it passes, you got a good one
Since one forum member's car with 88K miles had badly worn guides, I would strongly suggest you perform the wiggle test to be on the safe side. If it passes, you got a good one