Register now to get rid of these ads!

zepher valve springs

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by quickgene, Aug 29, 2010.

  1. quickgene
    Joined: Aug 7, 2009
    Posts: 141

    quickgene
    Member
    from duluth mn

    I'm having a 3 5/16 bore flathead merc 276 being rebuilt. My springs are shot at 32 - 36 lbs of pressure. They are shorter than they should be also. My cam is shot, I'm thinking on a new Max 1 cam with hollow lifters.

    The stock springs new have a 2" installed hight with a 40 lb pressure. Zepher springs are 60 lbs. Are Zepher springs are 2" also ? Do they work with stock retainers ? The Isky single springs are 85 lbs.

    I found cam kits with zepher springs. I think Zepher springs would be ok. Do the Zepher springs cause any problems like premature wear. Is there any major concern due to only 3 bearings with stiffer springs. Gene
     
  2. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Book lists LX as 51-57 pounds "valve closed", which should correspond to installed heigh, and 11-121 open, which is a perhaps useless spec...Ford '37-40, 76-80
    So 60 would be easy on LZ. Interchange with early or '49-50 stuff. I think the Zephyrs would be good, and 85 seems way high.
     
  3. You'll be fine with Zephyr springs on that cam - as long as you're not running the 'solid' adjustable lifters and not looking for high RPMs. Always check the springs to see what pressure they are at - regardless of what any supplier tells you.

    You really shouldn't need more than about 60 - 70 lbs on the seat with that cam on a street motor. The Isky 185G springs are a lot heavier and not needed for most street engines (unless you're running a more radical cam with fast ramps and high lift or higher RPMs) -- though they are a great spring for a race motor or one where you want to 'spin' it a bit higher than most. In the end, the less spring pressure you have and still NOT float the valves - the better (especially on a small base circle cam in a 3 bearing setup).
     
  4. quickgene
    Joined: Aug 7, 2009
    Posts: 141

    quickgene
    Member
    from duluth mn

    Will these Zepher springs work with stock 52 merc valves ? Gene
     
    Register now to get rid of these ads!

  5. No problem
     
  6. quickgene
    Joined: Aug 7, 2009
    Posts: 141

    quickgene
    Member
    from duluth mn

    No problem. That's what I was hoping for. Another Hammer told me in order to use Zepher springs I would have to replace the whole valve train with 49-50 parts. Thanks much B&S, This time BS is a good thing. Gene
     
  7. I'm not aware of any major differences between any of the 49-53 Ford/Mercs as far as valve lengths, spring lengths, etc.. If anybody has any information to share - I'd sure like to hear it!
     
  8. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    There ARE differences! Ford went to a rotater design in 1952 and 1953, with considerably shorter (from memory, there) springs and different keepers and such.
    If you have actual original parts, no go. If you are rebuilding, almost all easy to find offereings are the '49-51 style parts which will take the LZ springs. Will check the book for ID details for those without springs to compare, but from memory the '49 type used one piece keeper at bottom of valve, '52-up used a cup with two semi-circular keepers.
     
  9. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    OK...all these late models use clips at bottom, not the early style one piece, but differ: The '49 has a simple one-piece hat, and the clips will be locked to valve when fully assembled. The '52 or ('51?) up has a two-piece hat, and the clips form a complete circle allowing valve to rotate in relation to spring. I think you will see the spring using almost all available room in '49, biggish gap down there in later version.
    Valve assemblies can interchange, but neither valve nor retainer stuff can be interchanged between the two setups.
    Later version has become rare as parts have oft been switched to the more available early kind. I can remember the '52 stuff worried the counterman even in the late '60's, but I had to have it because I could not afford to replace a single bit of hardware in there unless it was FRIED!
     
  10. Thanks Bruce! I've never taken a motor apart with that style of valves . . . only the typical 1-piece keepers. If they had a 'rotator' mechanism, then the spring would have to be shorter. Was the valve groove/location the same on the 49-51 and the later setups?
     
  11. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    No, nothing interchanges except the entire valve assembly with all hardware. Grooves are different. I suspect the rotators were part of the process of eliminating hard valve seats in the later flatheads, one of the many results of accountants taking over from engineers at Ford in the late '40's and early '50's. Ford was chasing GM, not Henry's standards.
     
  12. quickgene
    Joined: Aug 7, 2009
    Posts: 141

    quickgene
    Member
    from duluth mn

    I don't know what setup I have for sure in the 255 Merc engine. My engine builder says these are 52 valves. The old cam was a 8CM but lots of things were fooled with so it may be an older cam than the engine itself. I have hardened exhaust seat inserts and and the intakes are just cut in the block. He said these are not rotater valves. He also said the springs were 2" not the longer 2 3/8" springs. He said I've never seen a rotating valve on these flatheads. He gets pissed when I tell him what other people say. I have Zepher springs on the way now. I hope they work. Gene
     
  13. RAY With
    Joined: Mar 15, 2009
    Posts: 3,133

    RAY With
    Member

    Zepher springs in your application should be just fine and I doubt you will have any problem at all.
     
  14. quickgene
    Joined: Aug 7, 2009
    Posts: 141

    quickgene
    Member
    from duluth mn

    Thanks for all the help guys. It appears there are some different valve parts in these 50s flatheads. I still don't know if Zepher springs are for 2" long installed height. That's what my setup is.

    Poll the audience hasn't worked. So far looks like 3 will works to 3 won't fits.

    My engine builder has a great reputation around & here worked on these since the 50s. I'll let him figure it out. Thanks guys Gene
     
  15. That 2" length should be about right for these springs, stock valves, stock guides, etc. Have your builder check them on a valve spring pressure tester - then set them for a minimum of 70 lbs on the seat. The last set I checked from 'Reds' were 80 lbs at 1.980 length.
     
  16. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    OK, found a spec. Ford 221 (up to '48) and LZ are 2.13" at closed position stock. Pressure numbers in post above. Pretty sure '49-50 will be the same, but don't have any late model stuff here.
    Hah...someone stuck a '48 sheet into my bulletins. Looks like '49 uses same spring.
     
  17. quickgene
    Joined: Aug 7, 2009
    Posts: 141

    quickgene
    Member
    from duluth mn

    B&S said,
    That 2" length should be about right for these springs, stock valves, stock guides, etc. --- The last set I checked from 'Reds' were 80 lbs at 1.980 length.

    B&S, poll the audence didn't pan out, had to use you phone a friend. Thanks friend. That is the info I needed. I should have a perfect spring for my setup.

    Thanks guys--Gene
     
  18. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Sounds like you have a spring tester...I've never had access to one. If you have the time for a couple of extra tests and a post, it would be cool to know actual difference in pressure between stock, 2", and 1.98".
    With a Max one you shouldn't have any troubles with springs at all, though. Action isn't violent, and new stockers should be good beyond the useful range of a mild flathead.
     
  19. I don't have any NEW stock springs --- can't use old ones, they'll tell us nothing! If you have a couple, I'll test and send them back ???

    Dale
     
  20. If you are going to check all of your springs, the old wisdom was to put the weakest springs on the exhaust. The logic was that you want to have the exhaust valves float first so that you can hear them.
     
  21. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I mean Zephyrs...stock 2.13 down to 1.980...it would be nice both to know stock pressure (does it meet original spec?) of modern offering ones, and how much you get with a bit of shimming.
    These are I believe currently made springs (from Red's) and so it's good to know how stiff they are, stockish or beefed up some as a general purpose hotrod spring.
    I remember a note in Hot Rod in the fifties saying that real LZ springs had become a bit hard to find, as most of the aftermarket suppliers had normal Ford spring listed when the parts store looked up the LZ. On a stocker there wouldn't have been any issue, probably.
     
  22. I don't have any of Red's stuff -- only used them for a hot street motor we built last year for a buddy. I know that I have some older LZs, but they are not new. If somebody wants me to checkout a Reds or other aftermarket LZ spring - PM me and send it my way. I'll do the testing, post the results and send it back.. If you lookup some of my posts on porting, I tested LZs, Isky 185Gs and Isky duals -- I see no value in the duals at all.

    Best I can do . . . as my motors are typically much more radical and I use Isky 185G's on them - have boxes of those :D
     
  23. Vergil
    Joined: Dec 10, 2005
    Posts: 783

    Vergil
    Member

    '50 (edited) on right and '52-'53 rotator on left.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2010
  24. quickgene
    Joined: Aug 7, 2009
    Posts: 141

    quickgene
    Member
    from duluth mn

    My engine builder says springs like mine in his book say they are 51-53 merc-ford & should measure 2.200" free length. The ones that won't fit mine becase they are to long are for a 49-50 merc-ford @ 2.480" free length. Looks looks like Virgel's pic shows the same lengths.

    My builder claims my setup is not a rotater. He got pissed off when I said that a rotater used a shorter spring. I guess he can call them what he wants as long as it's all in good shape and parts match. Thanks Gene
     
  25. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    He is maybe used to fancier rotators with a ball-bearing filled thingy. From memory I think the '52 ones I worked on looong ago just used lower clips that made a full circle with a bit of clearance in groove.
     
  26. KS Fats
    Joined: Aug 19, 2005
    Posts: 83

    KS Fats
    Member

    Gene, you can't use the zephrys with the two piece retainer....tell your machinist to use the one piece retainer and an installed height around 2.060"....bruce is right :most modern machinists have never seen a non positive rotator....if you're having hook up length problems sbc offset keepers will work on the ford 11/32 valve stem....sounds like more like a semantics problem than anything else....good luck and don't give up on flatheads (even if you have to find a different machinist)....fats
     
  27. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,683

    Bruce Lancaster
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I am NOT very up on the late stuff, but I think valve length as well as groove differ for the rotater. I am not sure I even own any specs that late, prefer to stay earlier on all stuff, bu check the spec. It should not be difficult to locate. I think you are going to need to swap everything.
     
  28. blown49
    Joined: Jul 25, 2004
    Posts: 2,213

    blown49
    Member Emeritus

    Here you go from Mac VanPelts website:

    [​IMG]

    Jim
     
  29. KS Fats
    Joined: Aug 19, 2005
    Posts: 83

    KS Fats
    Member

    Groove on the stem is the same: Pioneer part number 526 (long spring) fits 48-50 Part #527 fits 51-53 (short spring)...short spring accomodates for the rotator length....fats
     
  30. quickgene
    Joined: Aug 7, 2009
    Posts: 141

    quickgene
    Member
    from duluth mn

    The Zepher springs from Reds showed up today. They are 2 7/16" or 2.48". I needed 2.200". Guy at Reds said they would fit 49-53 no problem. He didn't know the length. Just reciting off the description I guess.

    My machinist is about 70 years old. Not a rookie should know about this. Guess he doesn't think that design is a rotater. He said come over here I'll show you what a rotater looks like. He showed me a different engines rotater & said you don't have that. He told me to get the short 2.200" springs and I will be ok. He is right on that. If I tell him to use a one piece retainer with a 2.060" installed height that would be a .42" squash on the spring. Sounds like a lot. Wouldn't leave very much gap between the coils. And a very high spring pressure??

    I guess Monday I will get ahold of Reds to see if I can exchange them for something that is 2.200" Whatever that might be called.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.