![]() |
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 246
|
Aasco TI retainers compatibility
Hi guys.
Can somebody tell me with absolute certainty if the Aasco TI retainers, for 9mm valve stem, can be used with stock valve springs? Cheers Eskild Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,254
|
perhaps call Aasco directly. They can better inform you of their product than anyone on here could.
I've talked with them in the past and have always received great support and knowledge from them.
__________________
1987 Porsche 911 Carrera Coupe |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 246
|
Quote:
Thanks for the tip. Have tried to reach them throgh email( I live in Norway) but still no answer. I relly need to know fast because I am about to change the valve springs the next coupe of days. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 246
|
Quote:
Called Aasco now. They confirmed that the TI retainers can be used with stock valve springs ![]() Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
||
![]() |
|
abit off center
|
Make sure to get the bases too or you will not be able to set the proper installed spring height or its real close with out any shims? Or you can thin down the originals for more adjustment
__________________
______________________ Craig G2Performance Twinplug, head work, case savers, rockers arms, etc. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Posts: 7,275
|
If you know a good machinist - like cgarr - you can have the stock bases machined so the spring base is at only one height. Remove the step inside.
|
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 246
|
Quote:
So you are saying that the stock bases are to thick to work with stock springs and Aasco TI retainers WITHOUT having them machined thinner? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
||
![]() |
|
abit off center
|
From what I remember I could only get 33 to 34mm installed height using the stock bases.
__________________
______________________ Craig G2Performance Twinplug, head work, case savers, rockers arms, etc. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: So. Ca.
Posts: 521
|
The Stock bases only have to be machined to accomodate a slightly larger inner spring the top retainer is the same step as stock, this is only when using the Aasco spring.
regards |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 246
|
Quote:
Thanks racing97. This is what I thought also. Cheers Eskild Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Posts: 7,275
|
My bad - I was thinking of the base cup machining needed for the AASCO spring. I din't think using TI retainers with stock springs was too common, but no reason it shouldn't work.
Assuming the geometry for the keeper is the same, the outer flange on a used TI retainer from my parts bin is ~0.091" thick, the inner step ~0.137", and the total (as measured) 0.231", pretty close to adding the two. These aren't machinist accuracy measurements, but do show the difference. The stock flange measured 0.067, 0.127, overall at 0.200 vs adding at 0.196. Anyway, this would account for the base part above the shims needing to be thinner for stock springs for stock installed height. I only used the TI parts with AASCO springs, which needed the step removed in the base cup. |
||
![]() |
|
It's a 914 ...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ossining, NY
Posts: 4,703
|
Litle bro - you probably know this, but I’ve heard that it’s not recommended to use ti retainers for engines that aren’t disasssembled on a regular basis (a la race motors), due to potentially accelerated wear for ti parts.
|
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: So. Ca.
Posts: 521
|
Ti retainers are coated it was the early ti material that notched technology sometimes out paces the
previous info that gets passed down. regards |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 874
|
Whenever you change something on an engine, there needs to be a reason. If you are doing only because its sound good, I can think of a lot of other things to add to your engine to give you that feeling without adding risk.
Removing weight is always a good thing but you need to balance out the risk. Lowering valve train weight is done to allow for lighter spring numbers and to allow for higher RPM's to be achieved. If your engine will never see higher revs and or will not make power up there, you are adding un necessary risk. If you need to lower the weights involved, then you access the risks involved and make a good engineered decision. Many aftermarket cam shaft designs induce huge harmonics into the valve train where more spring force is required to dampen such forces, going against the reason to lighten up the retainer weight. Certainly the stock retainers are suspect as many have failed, so choose your course wisely. For a street engine I would not choose to go this way. I would chose a Tool steel retainer where weight is lowered without the risk involved with a Titanium retainer. There is nothing wrong with the mentioned brand, but understand what and why you are making such a change. |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Rate This Thread | |
|