Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Big Bore, post: 116170, member: 760"] I'm not misunderstanding the principle at all. I'm fully aware that the point load is either magnified or reduced based on the area of the load. In this instance, I would venture the area of pressure of the spring and that being affected by the boost is almost equal. The spring exerts pressure in an area the diameter of the spring. Boost exerts pressure on the backside of the valve, however only part of that pressure is in direct opposition to the spring, since the valve curves and the directional forces of the boost will be reduced as the surface becomes closer to perpendicular to the valve face, and, the area of the diameter of the valve stem is not being acted upon by the boost at all. The area of pressure from boost is not the area of the valve face, it will be less than that. If I were to hazard a guess it would start exerting pressure in opposition to the spring somewhere around 45*, but that will be significantly reduced, so it's probably almost equal to the area of the spring pressure being exerted in opposition, possibly even less, which in turn makes the higher pressure spring even more overkill. Heres the thing, there may in fact be a boost and performance level where this spring might be applicable. I doubt many on this site are at that level. And it would be at a cost of extremely increased wear on all valve train parts, and those parts would need to be a lot stronger, i.e. solid roller lifters and roller rockers. IOW not even remotely practical for a daily driver. [/QUOTE]