I've been meaning to update my E55's build thread but been super busy and haven't had time. The engine is ready to drop in but I've been holding off for a few reasons and hope to get it back together this week perhaps.

Here's the link for those who want to follow
https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/...5-project.html

This valve spring setup will be super useful for anybody getting past the valve covers on their schnell Benz for a multitude of reasons and I put a ton of work into something seemingly simple so hopefully folks get some use from the setup.
Benefits-
-Stable high RPM valvetrain due to favorable harmonics of beehive design
-Depending on choice of steel/Ti retainer, saves between 1.3 and 1.5pounds of valvetrain mass
-No more interference of inner dampener on OEM spring, valve lift up to .500 now possible
-Ability to tailor seat pressure to compensate for increased boost. You can do this with stock springs as the Pros like Brooke (shimmed stockers work great with stockish cams)do but you take away from the max lift when you do this.
What you want to start with is a beehive spring Comp 26123/Ferrea S2008 There are many crossovers to this spring from different manufacturers ( although you'ld be surprised to find out how many of them come from the same place ) but it comes down to budget. You can get them polished and nitrided but you won't need those upgrades most likely. This spring also works with Mustang 32V cobras and some V/night Rod Harleys.

However if this were simple someone would have dropped these on HP Mercedes a long time ago. The heights and pressures are compatible with the AMG engines, but the rest of the parts aren't compatible. Yet.

There's 2 ways to run this spring. The "right way" and the "eh, I guess you can do that" way. I'll start with the right way.


The retainer used on the SVT (comp 799-32)is good because it's very light, even in steel form. The steel version weighs 8.28g, and the Ti saves 4 more off that. In comparison to the AMG steel retainer 18.04g and 10.20g for the Ti version.
The problem is , that the diameter and pitch of the hole in the center is not compatible with the Mercedes locks/keepers. They will pull halfway through and increase your installed height. This isn't acceptable. Also The Ford locks have three grooves and won't fit the Mercedes valves.


What you'll need as a liaison between the Yank springs and the Kraut valves will of course be a Japanese lock! Get some locks/keepers designed for a Nissan 240SX and these will have the correct diameter valve, and the correct top radius groove to work with the Mercedes valves (Ferrea K10062)

Now that we have parts that will work, there's one last problem.
The spring cup doesn't fit. It's close, but still too small.
So some massaging is needed to the interior wall of the spring cup to gove clearance for the spring to articulate. Less than .020 needs to come out, but this is hardened steel and it doesn't give up its thousandths without a fight. If you have a lathe this will be easy, if all you have is a Dremel and some sandpaper rolls this will work too but don't make any other plans for the night

This is what I used. Its got to be flat on the bottom so you dont affect the spring seat area and cause spring height issues. If you do, you can always shim but it's best to avoid more work.

 

Vendors who will probably want to bundle this all together to make it easy for folks would probably be best to have some new spring seats cut rather than trouble with clearancing stockers. Clearancing stockers is almost free if you're a DIYer but time is money when you're in business. You can use the Seats made for a Cobra but theyre too thin and will need about .100 of shim under them to get the installed height back to 1.470. Is another option but a simple new seat would be best.

Here's where you want to clearance. Use oil if using a carbide cutter or a milling bit because it's hardened and will slaughter your bits otherwise. Also don't be a jackass and hold it in your hand like this, put it in a vise that was just for illustation



Here's what you'll end up with


And heres a complete assembly ready to provide some extra seat pressure with a whole lot less weight. 7500 RPM anyone?

 

Here's the assembled parts next to the AMG springs fitted with Ti retainers from Bruce @TTM.


Total weight savings for this engine-
AMG springs 57.70
Beehives. 42.87

Steel retainers 8.28
AMG 18.04
TTM titanium 10.20

The locks/keepers are the same 2g

Total valvetrain weight reduction of 1.32 pounds with the steel retainers
Potential for another 96g of retainer savings with Ti ( not needed but won't hurt) = 1.53 pounds

Boomskeet

 

Looks very similar to what I've got if it ever goes back together Titanium retainers and all.

 

So the other way I mentioned to run these springs only gets you some of the benefits, but it's still an option. You can flip the spring upside down and put the smaller diameter on the bottom. The ID of the small end of the spring hugs the MB guide pretty nicely and negates the need to clearance the seat cup. Then the AMG retainer almost fits into the big end of the spring. So you'll instead need to either turn the retainer down a few thousandth on a Bridgeport or equivalent, or just sandpaper cartridge roll it until it fits.

You'll lose some weight here, especially if you already had Ti retainers and just wanted to freshen up your worn valvesprings without dropping big bucks on the OEM units, plus have the benefits of the increased seat pressure and high rpm stability. You've giving up one of the key features of a beehive in the reduced retainer mass but hey, it's a compromise not without merit.

 

You're a freaking genius Chris. I learn something from each one of your threads!!! Great info

 

I wish I had the knowledge to follow these threads. Apart from the english words , I don't understand one damn thing and when the Mechanical terms come in I just go
o_O -_- :'(

All I can say is I commend you on have the guts and know how to take the engine apart on your own lol

 

just curious but what are stock springs capable of on lift? it now makes some sense to me why throwing cams in these motors dont pick up a lot because you cant get too radical with them. nice to see a build like this though, keep sharing

 

What is the seat pressure on the stockers vs the beehives? Are you going higher lift or longer duration or both?

 

Sounds like someone is looking for the extra tenth! I like where your head is a sir boost a lot.... Pretty far advanced for the average mercedes end user.

What we need is a more radical cam.... Hmmm I do know a good cam grinder. Maybe, I will come up with my own. >:-)

 

Thanks gentlemans!

It depends if you re talking about new OEM springs or your used 7+ year old units. At 1.470 height the 26k mile AMG springs had 70something.. I didn't write it down.. 72,75 something like that. Now put 20 pounds of boost in the intake runner and how much seat pressure do you have? No wonder the joke stock cams float valves at RPM according to the pros

These beehives had 90 on the seat and 240 on the nose @.460 lift. Expect a few pounds to go away after the first few heat cycles. More pressure is just a spring shim away, and since .500 lift is possible with this installed height ( coil bind @ .570 lift) you could theoretically shim these to 115 pounds on the seat and still run a cam with .460 lift. This is excessive considering the huge reduction in valvetrain mass will require less spring pressure to control.

Thanks Max, I'm not looking for the extra tenth although that's probably what a light stable valvetrain would probably be worth on an otherwise stock setup. This is to unlock the door to safely run much more radical cam setups. You've still got to be aware of PTV contact although peak lift has almost nothing to do with interference.

This engine I just built for the car has some decently improved valve timing events, way more radical than the "practically stock" SLR/Kleeman cams but not as choppy as the PTEs. It should be a really great driving 10 second street car with any luck. The other MID engine I have been working on will have a pretty grumpy setup in it in the 230/240+@.050 range and hopefully govern accordingly in the 7500+RPM range. Keep in mind custom pistons are needed at that level due to the need for valve notches.

The RPM is something I think will be useful to cars that are traction limited, moving the peak power to a range where the vehicle already has traction and momentum on its side. The nice torque converters available now will squash any heartache over the little bit of low speed tradeoff, and the RPM range will help keep the modded Hayabusas from getting too far ahead in a roll race

 

Sounds like you know what you're doing Chris... Tips hat. I cant wait to hear your results with your new cams! Is it a regrind or billet core? One is clearly way pricier. If we had variable valve timing we could have a very radical cam profile and still have smooth stock like drivability. That's why the new biturbo are so great. 7 speed gearbox and direct injection motor with variable valve timing.

I really like the rpm. But, one think you should consider with high rpm and our existing setup.... Gearing? Depending on what you plan to do mostly drag springs and what not. You will very likely want to tighten up the gearing if you plan to rev to 7k or even 7500 rpm. More rpm will make more power but it will also throw off your stock gearing I fear... Enough that it may actually hurt your 1/4 mile times. Because you will be passing the traps at a lower rpm due to later shifts from 1-2nd. We are talking the same distance so something has to give....

My friend guy mentioned going with some 4.10 gears and really revving this motor out. I disagreed and felt the existing rpm and the perfect amount of surge you get throughout the gears screaming through the traps was perfect and to just add boost, air flow and cooling. Now, Im starting to like it. But, a very lopey cam will be needed, valve train I think we are already there with some stiffer springs and titanium retainers. But, something like 4.10 final drive will be necessary to pull this off.

 

There's no doubt about it, 4 cam VVT is a forced induction engine's best friend but only if the editing software available makes it feasible to optimize everything.

Me personally I definitely don't want any more gear. More gear is more torque multiplication and that's counterproductive on a car that's heavy and traction limited.more gear will help at the drag strip with really gummy tires and I'm not really a drag racer honestly. I mean I run everything I build myself down the track at one point or another but I'm more of a craftsman that likes to build things just because it's fun to do, and fun to try new things and when they're all done I drive and play for a while then sell to finance the next thing that's interesting.

In regards to the race RPM though, the whole setup has to be thought of at once. If you're close to shifting out of 4th going through the traps than the extra rpm will allow you to go much faster before going into power sapping overdrive.
Ideally you'ld want to gear it so you can run as tall a tire possible for the wheelwell and buzz through the traps just past peak power in your rpm range. I think 4.10 will be waytoo much honestly because the Trans has a 3.93 first. That is equivalent to an automatic Corvette with a 5.30:1 rear gear. You'll boil your tires into molasses the first time you hit the gas!

 

I agree 4.10's would be insanely useless. By the way Chris great work with the springs!

 

This is the next project: twin turbo, supercharged nitrous.
Forget bubbles and bulges, Forget hoods altogether...just keep stacking it up.
Maybe I'll do that so I can cram a bigger intercooler under my blower.

 

The most surprising thing is that you don't have a small lathe. Is that the one thing missing in your arsenal? Just giving you ****. Great work and thanks for posting your leg work for others.

 

Got a Bridgeport for sale? I'll gladly pay you Tuesday!

 

thats hilarious.. 4.10 is quite aggressive i know but something like that With some gummy tires at the track and a good launch. It could do quite well. Not to mention the upper end power on highway rolls should get more interesting. As it is my car pulls hard till shifting to 4th. It's ok. but, I know it can be pull harder. Thats why I was starting to warm up to my friends idea. But, ya agreed. Im happy with my gearbox just the way it is.

 

Chris, is that a little port work I see? Hmm nice.

 

Hell if you'll pay me Tuesday ill give you a deal on two bridge ports and my ocean front property in Arizona.

The lathe is the one thing my Dad kept when he sold his machine shop. (He started off building cosworth BDA for formula atlantics but then moved to primarily building cylinder heads.) He gave it to me but I don't have room for it so it's at my brother's shop. It's ancient now but still spins true. Damn that bring back memories.

 

Just thought I would update that I bought everything in this thread OP list to test.

The Ti retainer (and steel, to see) and the springs. Springs still need to test the pressures, but one issue I see is that the k10062 is a bit lose in the actual keeper groove radius. Technically it locks together but I’m concerned about the matchup.

The radius of the male groove is not technically (as expected) exactly the same as the female groove in the valve itself. I can see homework was done here. I’d love to run this but just a bit concerning.

 

 

Gosh, maybe I should have opened the millionth ****ing thread about airbags or wheelz.

 

I do not like how that looks my friend. Those keepers need to be locked on top and really they are seeing a "ramp" effect so will try and climb the valve ??? Also they will rotate a bit when under high rpm
But....than again where could they go ???

 

or headers, or split cooling, or tire sizes or ......... hahahahaha.

I enjoy reading your threads but can’t give any advice on something I dont know about. I’m still learning the mechanicals myself with the help of my son.
If you want to know how to straighten body damage or refinish it I’m your guy.