GM 3100 V.S. retainers Why? what an I missing

[rustytoolss]

I've been researching this 3.3 valve spring update. And am not understanding the need for GM 3100 retainers. I know others have put time into this information. But this is what I've found at sealedpower.com catalog site (engine/ valvetrain)
A 2.2/2.5 & 3.3/3.8 mopars have intake valve with a .3127" valve stem, and a valve keeper at 7 deg (# VK144 on a 2.2)
B 2.2/2.5/3.3/3.8 mopars have exhaust stem of .3116, & 7 deg keeper # VK225
C GM 3100/3400 have intake stem at .3139, and 7deg keeper
D Gm 3100/3400 have exhaust stem at .3123, and 7deg keeper.
With me so far
If they all have 7deg keepers..I would think they all have 7deg retainer (could be wrong about that/ just makes sence to me)
And since the 2.2 amd 3.3 valve stems are the same& the keepers are both 7deg.
Why are we using gm 3100 retainer ??? Why not just use the 3.3/3.8 springs and retainers ??? What am I missing? not trying to start a problem......I'm just asking WHY ???????????
Are the mopar retainers shaped differently ? maybe the difference is in the shape/ and GM 3100 fixes it.. Please tell me what I'm missing.

also since the gm valve stems are larger/ would'nt that make the retainer holes larger, (looser) and drop the valve keeper down farther...actually making the spring height taller ?

[rustytoolss]

Lots of people have viewed this, yet no comments ??????? Are the GM retainer aluminium ?? I would like someone to help me out here. NAJ...POPE...anybody

[92TurboTona]

the pope would the best person for the answer as i think it was his idea to use these types of valvesprings in our cars

[rustytoolss]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rustytoolss Lots of people have viewed this, yet no comments ??????? Are the GM retainer aluminium ?? I would like someone to help me out here. NAJ...POPE...anybody

I guess maybe I've found my own answer to my question.. looks like the 3.3 retainer are larger and heavier than the GM 3100 retainer..found it on mopar-turbo.com

[ohnotagain]

if you want to run the beehive springs i wouldnt bother with the 3.3 springs. they need to be shimmed up a bunch just to get the valve spring closing pressure up where it needs to be.

just buy a set of LSx springs, they drop right in and need no shimming. use LSx retainers with TD valve locks and its a perfect fit.

[92TurboTona]

i would still toss in a .30 or a .50 shim or less just to protect the aluminum head from chafing

[4Daytonas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 92TurboTona i would still toss in a .30 or a .50 shim or less just to protect the aluminum head from chafing

I believe he meant.030

[92TurboTona]

oops, yep a .030 forgot the extra zero

[rustytoolss]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rustytoolss I've been researching this 3.3 valve spring update. And am not understanding the need for GM 3100 retainers. I know others have put time into this information. But this is what I've found at sealedpower.com catalog site (engine/ valvetrain) A 2.2/2.5 & 3.3/3.8 mopars have intake valve with a .3127" valve stem, and a valve keeper at 7 deg (# VK144 on a 2.2) B 2.2/2.5/3.3/3.8 mopars have exhaust stem of .3116, & 7 deg keeper # VK225 C GM 3100/3400 have intake stem at .3139, and 7deg keeper D Gm 3100/3400 have exhaust stem at .3123, and 7deg keeper. With me so far If they all have 7deg keepers..I would think they all have 7deg retainer (could be wrong about that/ just makes sence to me) And since the 2.2 amd 3.3 valve stems are the same& the keepers are both 7deg. Why are we using gm 3100 retainer ??? Why not just use the 3.3/3.8 springs and retainers ??? What am I missing? not trying to start a problem......I'm just asking WHY ??????????? Are the mopar retainers shaped differently ? maybe the difference is in the shape/ and GM 3100 fixes it.. Please tell me what I'm missing. also since the gm valve stems are larger/ would'nt that make the retainer holes larger, (looser) and drop the valve keeper down farther...actually making the spring height taller ?

Still nobody's given a reason as to why we are not using the 3.3 spring retainer. Both the 3100 & the 3.3 retainers are 7deg (sealed power.catalog) I grabbed a set of each today could not see any differences ( thats not saying that there arent some)

[Tbone]

I'm no expert but the stock 2.2L valves are 8 mm and they use 8 deg. Locks, not 7 deg. Like you say. Both intake and exhaust use 8 mm valves with 8 deg locks. The GM 3100 retainer uses an 8 mm valve but the lock angle is a little off since it is 7 deg. The dodge 3.3L retainer is 7 deg (I believe) but I think it's also for a 5/16 valve stem. Could be wrong though on that. I know the Pope was asked that question on the head porting and build up part numbers sticky and he said not to use them (the 3.3L retainers).

[detobias]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rustytoolss Both the 3100 & the 3.3 retainers are 7deg (sealed power.catalog) I grabbed a set of each today could not see any differences ( thats not saying that there arent some)

lol ok report back after you measure them thoroughly with a micrometer, including the inner angle..

just cuz the SealedPower catalog says its so, don't make it so

if the 3.3 retainers would've worked,
Pope would've used em.

why theorize? GM retainers ar ~2$ each

fyi - diff between 8mm stem & 5/16" is .0025" - 2.5 thousandths.. significant ?

[The Pope]

http://www.turbododge.com/forums/f4/...-beehives.html

first the thread / FAQ. When people go off the beaten path and start making there own setups, like you read on T-M they start manufacturing problems.

Yes 5/16" vs 8mm is pretty small yes and the 8 vs 7 degree is a bit off too.

We are working with a 8mm valve, square single groove, 8 degree retainer that works with a .650" top diameter spring with a 1" base ID and for a 1.7" installed height.

The VF keeper, 8mm and 8 degree and square groove

3.3 and comp springs, .650" top and 1" bottom. Aim for a .050" shim for a .480" bind for a little more than turbo spring pressure's with 3.3 springs. Comp's are drop in springs.

When you start mix matching the stuff you risk dropping a valve, eating a piston, destroying a turbo, destroying /welding/ and reporting a head like I did. Doesn't take long lol. In my case the parts were not matched perfect and the valves were the wrong length and it died.

Detobias has used the 8 degree setup with 3.3s a long time, so you can make it work. And I know of people using the comp keeper and no issue either. But still you should follow the FAQ and not experiment lol. Detobias' setup is different as he uses stock valves, which means you have to run a 8 degree keeper with a 7 degree retainer. Stock cam though and the 3.3 springs works fine and is dirt cheap. The conical spring doesn't break down with age and fail, so it may last "forever". But to have it all fit tight, you should all run +1 valves at least and the VF keepers to get it tight. "just in case" lol.

[92TurboTona]

so pope what do you recommend, the comp cams springs from cindy or doing the beehives

[The Pope]

depends on the mods. If you are running a ported head and plenum and even more cam you should run the Comp beehives. Even big cams have no issue with them. Then there is how long you expect to run the same engine or if you want to run a on a track at high RPM for long periods. The beehives are best, whether or not you need them often isn't true. I ran the 3.3s first because I rev the engines up higher than normal, with porting they like 6,500 RPM. With a cam and a plenum they like 7,500 RPM. At that point you can use the beehives. If your staying under 5,000 for the most part then they aren't worth it.

I think if I was doing something stock I'd just run the MP 813 springs with dampener, a stock turbo spring basically with a dampener. Then with some porting and maybe more turbo but staying with a stock cam I'd run the 3.3s. That way your not dealing with springs that break down with mileage and higher RPM. Go farther with a plenum and a cam and your now really revving up past 6500 RPM then look at the Comps. If you run near stock but 30-40 PSI of boost, which people do, then the Comps will help too.

For most though the 3.3 and the PT setup reduces a ton of valve train stress over stock. Gaps from squishing lifters causes pounding, vs a PT that keeps the follower on the cam. Then the conical 3.3 spring really reduces weight removing stress off the cam lobes, followers and even the timing belt.

Some are happy with the crane non conical spring from FWD, but the spring rates on that cam are as low or lower than turbo stock springs. So they are either listed wrong or they are a good stock replacement.

The comp Beehive conical spring has the S60 MP spring rates, seat and open. But weigh a lot less and work so far above 7,000 RPM on a .550" lift cam. Making the Comp Beehive possibly the last spring ever needed for the 8v, until something new happens like a custom race head like an Indy head is made.

So many are running the Comp Beehives with a stock cam and just don't upgrade. Some save a few $ and do 3.3 springs, not needing that much. You add a spring normally to match a cam, with old springs. But even with V8s the Beehives are treated as a one size fits all spring, within reason lol. When looking at springs you match them to a small range in cam lift and RPM. So every jump in cam you change the springs, the Beehives are listed up to a lift. The Comps are up to .600" lift, not a .550"-.600" lift spring for instance. So how they are recommended is different.

[92TurboTona]

i will probably throw in the beehive springs as i will be running

custom upper plenum
ported lower runners
mild ported head with +1mm exhaust valves
+20's
ported exhaust manifold
stock or S60 turbo
F2-3 cam
adjustable cam gear
.40 over forged pistons with T2 rods from cindy