What happened to beehive springs?

-
D

Dragonbat13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2012
Messages
379
Reaction score
18
Location
lake charles Louisiana
Three or four years ago beehive springs were all the rage. I know they are more of a chebby thing, but I dont even see them much in other, lesser mags.

I havent been able to follow the engine building scene as much as I would like and sorta missed the whole beehive spring thing right after it had started.

So was there too many disadvantages or something?

Just curious. I kinda liked the idea of reducing retainer weight and was thinking about trying some on a 318 street build.

Thanks.
 
They are still really common, and I am keeping an eye out for a set (I have lots of time before I need them)
Pricey little mothers.
 
They're alive and well. They are better at thier jobs, but require some homework and you have to buy the retainers and locks - which would be an added expense some epople don't like. They do reduce valvetrain weight but in most circumstances that is a very small advantage. It probably should be something anyone running a hdyraulic roller camshaft should be doing as a trade off for the heavier lifter. The better attributes are better valve control with less spring pressure and wider operating range.
 
moper said:
they're alive and well. They are better at thier jobs, but require some homework and you have to buy the retainers and locks - which would be an added expense some epople don't like. They do reduce valvetrain weight but in most circumstances that is a very small advantage. It probably should be something anyone running a hdyraulic roller camshaft should be doing as a trade off for the heavier lifter. The better attributes are better valve control with less spring pressure and wider operating range.
Click to expand...
x2
 
moper said:
They're alive and well. They are better at thier jobs, but require some homework and you have to buy the retainers and locks - which would be an added expense some epople don't like. They do reduce valvetrain weight but in most circumstances that is a very small advantage. It probably should be something anyone running a hdyraulic roller camshaft should be doing as a trade off for the heavier lifter. The better attributes are better valve control with less spring pressure and wider operating range.
Click to expand...


In my instance the weight actually is that I am compensating for heavy lifters (Hyd. roller, its a pre mag 302 headed 318).
 
chevy just came out with a kit for there sealed racing crate motors gonna save lotta circle track races a bunch,..kits had springs an locks an retainers for like 150 bucks,..but spect bee hives for a mopar gonna cost lot more!!
 
dirty white boy said:
chevy just came out with a kit for there sealed racing crate motors gonna save lotta circle track races a bunch,..kits had springs an locks an retainers for like 150 bucks,..but spect bee hives for a mopar gonna cost lot more!!
Click to expand...

If MP sold them, you're damn right they would...good thing the springs don't know they're installed on a Mopar head...all that matters is a matched application, correct installed height, and proper hardware use. I've seen a few part numbers used on Mopar heads in these forums that are typically LS application. They may not be a drop on deal, but many times, valve springs require cutting spring pockets, or using increased height retainers to get the installed height correct anyway-especially when you're talking big cams. I understand those types of operations likely will alter rocker geometry, but if you're using something that requires that much spring, you might already be in need of corrected geometry.

On that note, Trick Flow sells their sets for a little less than COMP, and they're the same spring with a different prefix on the part number.
 
Seen those heavy mopar hyd rollers spin up to 7000+ on occasion using beehives.
 
I bet that's music...I've thought strongly about buying them for my 383...not a roller, but a solid flat tappet
 
They're on the list of things I wish I would have budgeted for when I first built my motor.

You live, you learn.
 
Your saying the Buzz has died down?.....

Installed height of most beehives is more than what stock SBM's use, so that becomes the first problem. Cost is quite a bit higher , but well worth it in the right application. There is some that drop in but IH works better when you install Chevy valves.
 
Just a fad that came and went. Like afros.
 
skrews said:
Like electronic ignition lol.
Click to expand...

No, electronic ignition actually has merit. Beehive sprAngs won't do anything a good properly chosen conventional sprang won't do. It's still a valve sprAng.
 
RustyRatRod said:
No, electronic ignition actually has merit. Beehive sprAngs won't do anything a good properly chosen conventional sprang won't do. It's still a valve sprAng.
Click to expand...

Its a sprAng that doesn't carry 50ish grams of useless spring/retainer weight. Thats huge in terms of gaining valve train stability.The OEMs have all gone to beehive springs and 8mm/5/16" stem valves for that vary reason. Its progress not a fad. I grant that if the valvetrain isn't having stability issues they probably won't do anything for you.
 
Exactly. Mopars have one of the most stable valve trains ever with shaft mounted rockers. GHEYhive sprAngs are for chebbies and phords with inferior valve trains, or for Mopar guys that wanna bench race and waste money.
 
RustyRatRod said:
Exactly. Mopars have one of the most stable valve trains ever with shaft mounted rockers. GHEYhive sprAngs are for chebbies and phords with inferior valve trains, or for Mopar guys that wanna bench race and waste money.
Click to expand...

ah. not so grasshopper! you guys may not know it, but chysler recommended them in the factory supercar clinics (dragracing schools) way-way back. i went to a dragracing seminar in okc that tom hoover gave back about 1970, he was one sharp dude. one of the orig. ramchargers too. they used them on the old prostocks back then. -----just for your information!-----------bob:coffee2:
 
I don't know about all that. About 8 years ago I put a Hughes solid cam in my 340. Couldn't get that thing to rev over 6700. Chased my *** for a few races trying to figure out why as my old cam turned 7000 easily. Talked to Dave Hughes, he told me it was likely valve train stability. Recommended running beehive springs at 145# seat pressure, so i tried them. Motor now turned clean to 7300 on a gear change. Car went from 11.60s at 113 to 11.40s at 115. Have had similar scenarios play out on other motors in the shop.
 
Beehive shmeehive. They weren't around when Landy, Sox and Martin, Glidden, McCandless and the like were winnin races and settin records. hooha I say. lol

Besides all that, all my stuff from here on out will be strictly street . So I will be happy as a lark with slow, lazy old school ramps that conventional springs will be just fine on. Argue with that dammit. lol
 
RustyRatRod said:
Beehive shmeehive. They weren't around when Landy, Sox and Martin, Glidden, McCandless and the like were winnin races and settin records. hooha I say. lol

Besides all that, all my stuff from here on out will be strictly street . So I will be happy as a lark with slow, lazy old school ramps that conventional springs will be just fine on. Argue with that dammit. lol
Click to expand...
---
ur wrong! hoover recommended them back then. sox`s barracuda had them on at tulsa, when he match raced(and won 2 out of three) against bill jenkins. they highly recommended checking multiple sets, and picking the best ones,seems that there were quality problems w/ the wire the spring manufacturers were buying. and yes, we had them on the hemi when we set the ahra record in 1977, w/ one broken on # 5 cyl.---bob
 
hoover hoover,blah blah blah. lol I know they work, I am just bein contrary. Now hush up and lemmie have my fun. lol

I did use some in a phord 5.0 roller motor once. Does that count?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top