Factory Valve-Spring 'Load Rates'

[69 Cuda 440]

Factory Valve-Spring 'Load-Rates'

1964 thru 1967 {'Mechanical' Camshaft}
273/180 HP ~ 2-Barrel ......... #53 lbs. @ 1.69" ...... #143 lbs. @ 1.31"

1965 thru 1967 {'Mechanical' Camshaft}
273/235 HP ~ 4-Barrel ......... #83 lbs. @ 1.69" ...... #177 lbs. @ 1.31"
......................................................................... #189 lbs. @ 1.28"

1968 and 1969 {'Hydraulic' Camshaft}
273/190 HP ~ 2-Barrel ......... #103 lbs. @ 1.69" .... #142 lbs. @ 1.31"

1968 and 1969 {'Hydraulic Camshaft}
318/230 HP ~ 2 Barrel .......... #103 lbs. ~ 1.69" .... #142 lbs. @ 1.31"

1968 thru 1973 {'Hydraulic' Camshaft}
340/275 HP 4-Barrel ............ #96 lbs. @ 1.65" ..... #242 lbs. @ 1.21"

1970 and later {'Hydraulic' Camshaft}
318/230 HP ~ 2-Barrel ......... #92 lbs. @ 1.65" ...... #189 lbs. @ 1.28"

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Factory Valve-Spring 'Load-Rates'


273/180 HP ~ 2-Barrel ......... #53 lbs. @ 1.69" ...... #143 lbs. @ 1.31"

273/235 HP ~ 4-Barrel ......... #83 lbs. @ 1.69" ...... #177 lbs. @ 1.31"
......................................................................... #189 lbs. @ 1.28"

318/230 HP ~ 2 Barrel .......... #103 lbs. ~ 1.69" .... #142 lbs. @ 1.31"
___________________________________________________________

1970 Engines

318/230 HP ~ 2-Barrel ......... #92 lbs. @ 1.65" ...... #189 lbs. @ 1.28"

340/275 HP ~ 4-Barrel ......... #96 lbs. @ 1.65" ...... #242 lbs. @ 1.21"

Rico-Suave,

Mopar did offer 'High Performance Valve Springs'.

In 1965 Mopar offered up a 'Dual Valve Spring for the 273.

It had a Load-Rate of >
... #98 lbs. @ 1.69"
.... #210 lbs. @ 1.295"

The 'Inner' Valve-Spring was rated @ 28 lbs. @ 1.53"

Mopar did offer a 'Extra High Performance' Valve Spring for the 340.

Mopar #5249847

It had a Load-Rate of
.... #103 lbs. @ 1.65"
.... #260 lbs. @ 1.21"

 

[krazykuda]

Factory Valve-Spring 'Load-Rates'


273/180 HP ~ 2-Barrel ......... #53 lbs. @ 1.69" ...... #143 lbs. @ 1.31"

273/235 HP ~ 4-Barrel ......... #83 lbs. @ 1.69" ...... #177 lbs. @ 1.31"
......................................................................... #189 lbs. @ 1.28"

318/230 HP ~ 2 Barrel .......... #103 lbs. ~ 1.69" .... #142 lbs. @ 1.31"
___________________________________________________________

1970 Engines

318/230 HP ~ 2-Barrel ......... #92 lbs. @ 1.65" ...... #189 lbs. @ 1.28"

340/275 HP ~ 4-Barrel ......... #96 lbs. @ 1.65" ...... #242 lbs. @ 1.21"

318's had .373" and .399" lift

340"s had .429" and .444" lift


I think it's good to see how the lift and spring rates correlate....

 

[69 Cuda 440]

318's had .373" and .399" lift

340"s had .429" and .444" lift


I think it's good to see how the lift and spring rates correlate....

The 318 Valve Springs,

Can handle a Lift of up to .440", and can provide enough Load-Rate for up 4800 RPM's.

 

[krazykuda]

The 318 Valve Springs,

Can handle a Lift of up to .440", and can provide enough Load-Rate for up 4800 RPM's.

Ok, how about the 340 springs???

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Ok, how about the 340 springs???

I have used the 'Factory Stock' 340 Valve Springs with the
'Hydraulic' .484" Lift /284* Duration Camshaft.

But that is as far as I will go, and with 3.91 Gears as a 'Maximum' Rear-End Ratio.

 

[Abodybomber]

I have used the 'Factory Stock' 340 Valve Springs with the
'Hydraulic' .484" Lift /284* Duration Camshaft.

But that is as far as I will go, and with 3.91 Gears as a 'Maximum' Rear-End Ratio.

That's good info, lock in my memory toolbox.