Need a number for Edelbrock valve springs

-
DueceDuster

DueceDuster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2010
Messages
70
Reaction score
21
Location
Summerfield, Florida
I have a set of Edelbrock Performer 6077 heads on my 340. I am going to a bigger cam so I need new valve springs. I looked in their catalog and come up with 5767 H as a part number but I can't find them with the H at the end. Any suggestions?
 
Are you looking through replace the stock springs with stock springs?

I'm not getting what your asking or your what your intent is.
 
rumblefish360 said:
Are you looking through replace the stock springs with stock springs?

I'm not getting what your asking or your what your intent is.
Click to expand...
I am moving up to a.540 lift cam. I believe the stock Edelbrock springs will be ok. I am looking at max rpm around 6 grand. The springs I have now float, previous owner changed them. Open to suggestions but I want a drop in replacement.
 
DueceDuster said:
I am moving up to a.540 lift cam. I believe the stock Edelbrock springs will be ok. I am looking at max rpm around 6 grand. The springs I have now float, previous owner changed them. Open to suggestions but I want a drop in replacement.
Click to expand...
There is more to picking springs than lift# alone, fast acting ramps(esp. those possible w/Mopar's .904 lifter)/ or rollers need much more stable springs for the same lift
than smoother profiles, sooooo what does the cam mfr. tell You to run...type/& open/closed load................................
 
DueceDuster said:
I have a set of Edelbrock Performer 6077 heads on my 340. I am going to a bigger cam so I need new valve springs. I looked in their catalog and come up with 5767 H as a part number but I can't find them with the H at the end. Any suggestions?
Click to expand...
The 'H' in their listing is for footnote H, which says 'Fits #60179, #60779 & #61779'. So just go for PN 5767. You may also need the retainers and locks.... no way for us to know what is on there now.

Killer6 said:
There is more to picking springs than lift# alone, fast acting ramps(esp. those possible w/Mopar's .904 lifter)/ or rollers need much more stable springs for the same lift than smoother profiles, sooooo what does the cam mfr. tell You to run...type/& open/closed load................................
Click to expand...
This is a good point; the Edelbrock application notes says that their springs are good for 'all Performer and RPM cams'; i.e., Edelbrock's catalog cams. Looking at their cams for the SBM, the ramps are pretty doggone slow, so these springs may indeed not be suitable for your new cam if it a fast ramp cam. These 5767 springs are a single spring with damper.

Can you share the new cam PN and brand?
 
Do you happen to have the current for use cam card?

What the cam card will have is a bunch of info. We could use what info like;

Cam company
Type of cam
Grind number

The cam company's have there suggested spring for use. Which may not work with the head. The Edelbrock heads have a 1.800 installed height. A bit taller than OE height. And the differences go on and on.
 
IMG_0334.JPG
Just opened up the cam and here is the cam card.
 
Yeah, the Comp 995-16 is for an installed height of 1.650" or 1.700" (varies with the engine brand). They look to be heavier than the Edelbrocks but not by a ton: 402 lb/in versus 327 lb/in. Both look to use an inner damper as the 2nd spring.

The Comp 987-16 look to be good for the Edlebrock heads' 1.800" installed height and deliver close to the same spring rate specs as the 995's: 370 lb/in for the 987 versus 402 lb/in for the 995.

FWIW, I personally would guess that the Edelbrock 5767's would work up to 6000.... I'd do it, but have no real proof to offer that it is fine with your cam. YMMV.
 
I ran the stock eddy valve springs with a cam lift of .535 shifting just over 6 grand for a couple of year....make sure you shim them to 1.80,
 
That is a very aggressive cam profile, I would call Comp & get the correct springs for the Eddy's installed height, no way I would use anything weaker than the recommended
springs on that cam. [email protected]" & [email protected]" = fast ramps...........................
 
Wonderful, the OP is buying new springs based on His belief the valves are already floating w/the ones He has, and this cam is aggressive. Why suggest buying what He may
"get away with" or "may be just enough not to notice it's not", when buying what is clearly recommended is just as easy??
 
comp 995 are designed for 1.67 install height...eddy heads want 1.80....SO he can not use what is recommended....and we do not know what valve spring is on the heads now...
Stock eddy valve spring is 120 lbs on the seat with 320 over the nose and take up to .570 lift...

But since I have used them...and apparently other have not SO my experience does not count....
 
I'm suggesting their load specs, not part#, fair enough if the heavy Eddy springs match those #'s. Also note the cam is 10deg larger @.050" & the OP is using 1.6 rockers as
well. I am simply advising the OP to call & verify Comp's load recommendations w/that installed Ht., & rocker ratio, not questioning Your experience.
 
Well, we don't know what springs the OP has now; they may be /6 springs for all we know LOL.

Yes, it is a fast cam, with only 44* difference between the advertised and @.050" durations. I'm not sure what the complaint is...... if one actually looks at the Comp specs the Comp recommended ones are not right, as they are for the wrong installed height as pointed out. The 987's are the closest in terms of spring rates AND closed and open spring loads that Comp shows (in dual springs) for the 1.8" installed height..... as compared to the 995's in stock head. See here.

COMP Cams® - Valve Springs By Design

And I kinda suspected..... 70aarcuda is a head of the game by having actually tried them. But K6 makes a good catch on the 1.6 ratio.... I did not catch that. It will indeed challenge the ramp speed.

Honestly, with the tech support setups these days, I personally would want some backup info from FABO than just trusting someone with unknown actual knowledge levels at Comp. (But that does not mean I know what I am doing LOL!)
 
Killer6 said:
Wonderful, the OP is buying new springs based on His belief the valves are already floating w/the ones He has, and this cam is aggressive. Why suggest buying what He may
"get away with" or "may be just enough not to notice it's not", when buying what is clearly recommended is just as easy??
Click to expand...
Because buying the "Easy & recommended spring" for a stock head is a insane choice since he has Edelbrock heads with a taller installed height and 1.6 rockers.

The current valve springs would show the engines power curve nose over pretty good instead of hanging on longer.

I myself would look deeper into the catolog for a different spring than the ones listed just to be sure there isn't a better one. Even IF the engine was using a 1.5 rocker, I'd still look. There is more than just a few pounds difference NOT to worry about and call good enough to just get away with.

It just makes good sense.
 
One thing I consider from the cam mfr's springs recommendations is that they rarely are going to be 'spot on' some exact optimum number for a spring selection. Looking at the different spring families by installed height, there are always steps in the spring rates, and some computation of the ideal spring for a particular cam is rarely going to end up pointing to some exact spring model. I am sure they just pick the closest one; whether they pick high to add margin to float, or pick low, to reduce lifter loading, I cannot say.

So that's why being off by 10% or so on rates or pressures should not worry anyone too much. Unless you are right up there in pushing RPM's or lift/rate...

rumblefish360 said:
I myself would look deeper into the catolog for a different spring than the ones listed just to be sure there isn't a better one. Even IF the engine was using a 1.5 rocker, I'd still look. There is more than just a few pounds difference NOT to worry about and call good enough to just get away with.

It just makes good sense.
Click to expand...
I was gonna look at the beehive springs and this comment got me interested again. It might be good solution in this case, as they are made to fight valve float with their progressive spring rates. And they can do so with lower spring pressures, which IMHO would be good for this fast ramp cam WITH the 1.6 rocker ratio, both of which are going to increase lifter-to-lobe contact pressures.

Now, how to pick the right rate for a beehive..... I have yet to learn this. The Comp link I provided above also leads to their beehive springs....
 
BTW, OP, do you have just single springs right now, or duals, or singles with dampers? And what rockers are being used?
 
A pair of good posts. Also like the link. Good idea/mention!

nm9stheham said:
BTW, OP, do you have just single springs right now, or duals, or singles with dampers? And what rockers are being used?
Click to expand...

Oooooooo, good post/questions.
*I thought* (possible problem right there LMAO! ) the springs are OE Edelbrock and the rockers 1.5.
 
Ok to wrap this up. Thank you all for your wise and helpful advice. I am using 1.5 roller rockers, I bought the heads used with the stock springs but the inners weren't there. With the current cam, about .480 lift, I floated them at 5500 rpm. After confirming suggestions with Comp Cams technical this morning I ordered the 987 springs and the 4754 shim package to reach the required 1.8 installed height. After I install them I will be checking my push rod lengths and ordering those as well. Any suggestions on a push rod would be appreciated since the ones in the engine now are stock.
 
I went through Hughesengines & ordered the pushrods length adjustable pushrod. Sent it back to them and they have them made up. Cost of the tool rental comes off the price of the pushrods.
It's an ez way.
 
I have an adjustable push rod and a 12" digital caliper to measure the right length. Looking for advice about a good supplier. Hughes is good but I'm wondering about Smith, Manson and others as well and diameter for my use. It will mainly be Street/strip use.
 
I do suppose no damper might be an issue.... LOL And tnx on the 1.5 rocker info....it does not add up with the lift on the cam card vs stated in the original post but the lower lift makes things easier.

I can't comment on Hughes. Smith Brothers seems to get good reviews overall. I made ours from Comp parts.... saved only about $60 over Smith Brothers but saved at least a week of time for us out here on the east coast. (Summit and Jegs are only 1 day ground shipping for us.) I wrote it up somewhere....it is not necessarily for the new mechanic.
 
DueceDuster said:
Ok to wrap this up. Thank you all for your wise and helpful advice. I am using 1.5 roller rockers, I bought the heads used with the stock springs but the inners weren't there. With the current cam, about .480 lift, I floated them at 5500 rpm. After confirming suggestions with Comp Cams technical this morning I ordered the 987 springs and the 4754 shim package to reach the required 1.8 installed height. After I install them I will be checking my push rod lengths and ordering those as well. Any suggestions on a push rod would be appreciated since the ones in the engine now are stock.
Click to expand...
Did the valves float with the stock rockers, or did you start off with the rollers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top