Just curious if you can use RM valve springs with ctr cams? Will it have too much spring pressure and cause premature wear on the ctr cam lobes?

 

yes you can use the RM gen 2 springs with ctr cams.

 

I have that set-up in my car and they work great , no problems yet.

 

Yes you can. They will not cause wear. Rocket actually prefers to use his stuff even with stock cams.

 

Whast were the differences between the gen 1 and gen 2 springs? What were the improvements?

 

GEN-1 springs have 95 lbs. on the seat and 265 lbs. at 12mm of lift. They can handle up to 13+mm of lift when used with our retainers.

GEN-2 springs have 55 lbs. on the seat and 180 lbs. at 12mm of lift. These springs can handle up to 14mm of lift.

 

sorry for all these questions. But if I went with the gen 1 with ctr that would be still ok? Or the gen 2 would be more cam lobe friendly?

 

Why do you want to use the Gen1's?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why do you want to use the Gen1's?</TD></TR></TABLE>


Because I think I have the gen 1's because it came with a head I purchase and plan to install on a b16.

 

Slightly off topic:

Do Rocket springs and retainers snap fit together to reduce retainer wear? Seems like Omni is the only one that advertises this feature.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by stumpyf4 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Slightly off topic:

Do Rocket springs and retainers snap fit together to reduce retainer wear? Seems like Omni is the only one that advertises this feature.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes, i am currently using rockets gen 2 valve springs and Ti retainers and they snap fit together. Very very high quality!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why do you want to use the Gen1's?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Especially with all the posts about rocker arm wear as a result from them being WAY too damn stiff.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Especially with all the posts about rocker arm wear as a result from them being WAY too damn stiff.</TD></TR></TABLE>

What posts? It depends on what cams they are used on.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

What posts? It depends on what cams they are used on.</TD></TR></TABLE>

They are out there and not that hard to find. I have yet to find any reason that warrants why one would need a spring with that much seat pressure.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">They are out there and not that hard to find. I have yet to find any reason that warrants why one would need a spring with that much seat pressure.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Link me then. Most of the ones I have seen can be attributed to other things. Mostly using them with cams ground in Taiwan, like Skunk2.

These springs tend to work best in motors that spend a great deal of their lives at very high rpms.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Link me then. Most of the ones I have seen can be attributed to other things. Mostly using them with cams ground in Taiwan, like Skunk2.

These springs tend to work best in motors that spend a great deal of their lives at very high rpms. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Thats the problem. The posts that show up here on Honda-tech seem to somehow magically get locked and then vanish. There were even a few on m24x.com that reported rocker arm wear. I recall one was even with M22's... so that kind of rules out the old "only with taiwaneese cams" theroy.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Thats the problem. The posts that show up here on Honda-tech seem to somehow magically get locked and then vanish. There were even a few on m24x.com that reported rocker arm wear. I recall one was even with M22's... so that kind of rules out the old "only with taiwaneese cams" theroy.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I said mostly, not only. Like I said, all of the ones I have seen, including the ones on RM, have been attributed to other things and not the spring pressure. There are tons of people running them with no problems. If the spring pressure was truly a problem for a good condition valvetrain, a great deal of the customers using them would be reporting problems. In reality, the percentage of problems is extremely low.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I said mostly, not only. Like I said, all of the ones I have seen, including the ones on RM, have been attributed to other things and not the spring pressure. There are tons of people running them with no problems. If the spring pressure was truly a problem for a good condition valvetrain, a great deal of the customers using them would be reporting problems. In reality, the percentage of problems is extremely low.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

Tell me what they were attributed to, please. If its not the excessive spring pressure, and its not the cam itself, then what is it? I suppose you are going to tell me now the rocker arms aren't made out of strong enough material, right?

 

Alot of the older cam material was too harsh for the soft honda folower pad material, Im hoping im not going to have a problem with my blox b's.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by civicgsr19 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Alot of the older cam material was too harsh for the soft honda folower pad material, Im hoping im not going to have a problem with my blox b's.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Well, I've seen stock valvetrain components work for years with no problems and even with some of these supposedly "bad" aftermarket cams. I ran the infamous taiwaneese Skunk2 cams on my stock valvetrain'd head with never a single issue when it came to excessive wear...

Also, lets think a little about this. Rocket sells these GEN 1 springs with a whopping 95lbs of seat pressure. For a while, this is all he had to offer.. Mysteriously, a few complaints surface regarding rocker arm wear and walla, the GEN 2 springs show up. The GEN 2 springs feature a substantially less, 55lbs of seat pressure and are even rated to handle more lift as well. M22's are a pretty "large" cam by design and yet the GEN 2 springs are still able to support them with no problems. What again is the need for these GEN 1 springs with so much seat pressure?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Tell me what they were attributed to, please. If its not the excessive spring pressure, and its not the cam itself, then what is it? I suppose you are going to tell me now the rocker arms aren't made out of strong enough material, right?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Every example I have seen has been with high mileage rocker setups, sometimes in combination with too tight valve lash. When you use higher pressure springs, this stuff needs to be at least check out, and preferably replaced if there is a lot of use on them already.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well, I've seen stock valvetrain components work for years with no problems and even with some of these supposedly "bad" aftermarket cams. I ran the infamous taiwaneese Skunk2 cams on my stock valvetrain'd head with never a single issue when it came to excessive wear...

Also, lets think a little about this. Rocket sells these GEN 1 springs with a whopping 95lbs of seat pressure. For a while, this is all he had to offer.. Mysteriously, a few complaints surface regarding rocker arm wear and walla, the GEN 2 springs show up. The GEN 2 springs feature a substantially less, 55lbs of seat pressure and are even rated to handle more lift as well. M22's are a pretty "large" cam by design and yet the GEN 2 springs are still able to support them with no problems. What again is the need for these GEN 1 springs with so much seat pressure? </TD></TR></TABLE>

The Gen2 springs were designed EXPRESSLY with those Taiwanese cams in mind. We are not by any means the only company to notice severe issues with the wiper pads on the rockers when these cams are used with high pressure springs. It has been shown many times over that you need to be very careful with seat pressure when using cams that made with cores like this.

Higher spring pressures control the valve better, meaning a much lower tendency to float the valves. Especially when the motor is subjected to extreme accelerations, such as a mis-shift situation.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by civicgsr19 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Alot of the older cam material was too harsh for the soft honda folower pad material, Im hoping im not going to have a problem with my blox b's.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The BLOX cores are actually quite good.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Every example I have seen has been with high mileage rocker setups, sometimes in combination with too tight valve lash. When you use higher pressure springs, this stuff needs to be at least check out, and preferably replaced if there is a lot of use on them already.

The Gen2 springs were designed EXPRESSLY with those Taiwanese cams in mind. We are not by any means the only company to notice severe issues with the wiper pads on the rockers when these cams are used with high pressure springs. It has been shown many times over that you need to be very careful with seat pressure when using cams that made with cores like this.

Higher spring pressures control the valve better, meaning a much lower tendency to float the valves. Especially when the motor is subjected to extreme accelerations, such as a mis-shift situation.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Exactly. Stiffen up the spring and you reduce the chance of float. BUT you increase the wear on other items. Such as keepers, valve stems, valve faces, and of course rocker pads. So the question is, is it worth it? You can increase seat pressure all day, but eventually the drawbacks will far outweight the benefits. When I ordered my M22's from Rocket, I got the gen 2 springs. I was told on numerous times by Rocket himself that these springs could easily handle 9,500+rpms and even got a hint that 10k shouldn't be an issue at all. On the dyno, these cams were not still making power at 8,500rpms, much less 10 grand. Obviously I am sure I could change a few things in my setup and rectify this, but I am sure the cams will not make power much past 9,500rpms. My point is this. For a while, Gen1's were all he sold. It seems to me that after the complaints started to filter in, the Gen2's popped up. Seems rather ironic to me if you think about it. I've pointed out quite a few points of the valvetrain above that will suffer from excessive spring rates. Since the "early" batches of his cams were sold specifically with the Gen1 springs, I think its more of less an "oops" in the R&D part. I have other reasons for my train of thought, but I am trying not to turn this into a complete "anti rocket" thread.

One more thing to think about a little... I've seen a few posts of people saying they were told to run clearances as tight as .005" by Rocket himself back in the "earlier" days. Perhaps this in combination with the excessive spring pressure would be the reason for rocker failure? Not "high mileage"?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Exactly. Stiffen up the spring and you reduce the chance of float. BUT you increase the wear on other items. Such as keepers, valve stems, valve faces, and of course rocker pads. So the question is, is it worth it? You can increase seat pressure all day, but eventually the drawbacks will far outweight the benefits. When I ordered my M22's from Rocket, I got the gen 2 springs. I was told on numerous times by Rocket himself that these springs could easily handle 9,500+rpms and even got a hint that 10k shouldn't be an issue at all. On the dyno, these cams were not still making power at 8,500rpms, much less 10 grand. Obviously I am sure I could change a few things in my setup and rectify this, but I am sure the cams will not make power much past 9,500rpms. My point is this. For a while, Gen1's were all he sold. It seems to me that after the complaints started to filter in, the Gen2's popped up. Seems rather ironic to me if you think about it. I've pointed out quite a few points of the valvetrain above that will suffer from excessive spring rates. Since the "early" batches of his cams were sold specifically with the Gen1 springs, I think its more of less an "oops" in the R&D part. I have other reasons for my train of thought, but I am trying not to turn this into a complete "anti rocket" thread.

One more thing to think about a little... I've seen a few posts of people saying they were told to run clearances as tight as .005" by Rocket himself back in the "earlier" days. Perhaps this in combination with the excessive spring pressure would be the reason for rocker failure? Not "high mileage"?</TD></TR></TABLE>

You don't get it. There are situations when "just fine" isn't enough. Sheer rpm isn't the only thing that can cause valve float. All things more aggressive than stock increase wear, but its not a proportional increase. Springs with twice the seat pressure don't make components last half as long. I have told this to another person and I will repeat it: IF WE MADE THE GEN2S BECAUSE WE WERE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE GEN1S, WE WOULD NOT CONTINUE TO OFFER AND SELL THE GEN1S. We still sell these springs on a regular basis, so to suggest that we think they are bad is ridiculous.

Those "earlier" days would have to be a LONG time ago, because I have ALWAYS seen .007 and .009 as the recommended lash settings.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

You don't get it. There are situations when "just fine" isn't enough. Sheer rpm isn't the only thing that can cause valve float. All things more aggressive than stock increase wear, but its not a proportional increase. Springs with twice the seat pressure don't make components last half as long. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Do you get it? You keep telling me how there are situtations that warrant the use of such a high seat pressure and how you sell numerous sets of these springs each day. Name the situations. Show me you know what you are talking about and I will go away.


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

IF WE MADE THE GEN2S BECAUSE WE WERE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE GEN1S, WE WOULD NOT CONTINUE TO OFFER AND SELL THE GEN1S.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Name your source for those springs and prove to me they were made with your R&D to your specs. Be truthfull, its ok.

Rocket sent me GEN2's for my M22 order. Wonder why he wouldn't have just sent the GEN1's since, by your statements, they would work just fine and not cause any issues. If you have a "better" product available, why not send it to the customer?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
We still sell these springs on a regular basis, so to suggest that we think they are bad is ridiculous.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Oh no. I think you THINK those springs are just fine.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Those "earlier" days would have to be a LONG time ago, because I have ALWAYS seen .007 and .009 as the recommended lash settings.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I am not sure how old the claims are. I have seen posts on this specific board where people were informed by Rocket himself to set lash as tight as I said earlier. I was told .007 and .009 for my cams.