Page 2 of 2

Re: comp cams 68-232-4 with pontiac springs

Posted: December 17th, 2013, 10:43 pm
by redrider2911
Just dug up the specs for the 3.8 and 3.1/3.4 springs. The 3.1/3.4 springs p/n vs-1642 are the correct springs. The 3.8 springs have too small of a diameter.

Re: comp cams 68-232-4 with pontiac springs

Posted: December 21st, 2013, 1:42 pm
by danimal
Has anyone looked into these springs? They are stock Ford 3.8/3.9/4.2 springs. I grabbed one from the junkyard and it easily compresses to 1.07" Slight modifications would have to be done to the head as the id of the spring is about the same diameter as the boss on the head, so it should be slightly clearanced. The LS1 retainer might be a hair tight in the spring, but i can OD grind a c-hair off of it if needed.
http://www.sbi-e-catalog.com/PartDetail ... %20Springs


I'm curious about pairing them with ls1 retainers. Does anyone know the height of the spring seat of an LS1 retainer on a jeep valve compared to the stock jeep retainer?

I'm also planning on using the 232 cam.

Re: comp cams 68-232-4 with pontiac springs

Posted: December 26th, 2013, 9:27 am
by 6TIME
Ditto with Lafrad on grinding valve springs....They are by far the most neglected and abused component of an engine. They are shot peened to compact and create a uniform surface on the wire to minimize stress risers that can lead to cracks. Grinding the coils can potentially lead to unwanted stress developing in the wire by compromising the surface uniformity in a given area. Spring failure can lead to dropping a valve.... Some high end companies like PAC and PSI do special surface treatments such as nano peening, polishing and surface nitriding for their severe duty springs to increase service life.

Re: comp cams 68-232-4 with pontiac springs

Posted: December 28th, 2013, 5:50 pm
by SilverXJ
6TIME wrote:Ditto with Lafrad on grinding valve springs....They are by far the most neglected and abused component of an engine.
I don't know what the hell I was thinking when I said that wasn't a problem.