Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

Is it possible to use retainers and locks that are designed for different valve stem diameters to move the installed height around (of course the angle and groove type has to be the same)?

e.g. use a retainer for an 8mm valve together with an 11/32 lock (and valve)? The 8mm retainer should sit lower (less installed height).
or the other way round: 11/32 retainer and 8mm locks should increase installed height..

Are valve locks standardized other than the angle? e.g. thickness on top, thickness on bottom, height?. Only thing that would be different is the radius for the valve stem?
If yes it would be easy to calculate the offset that could be achieved when mixing and matching retainers and locks.

and yes, I know I could use shims, offset locks, other spring locators

There arr at leats 3 types if lock grooves. Squarrbsingle, multi and beadlock.

I would use correct diameter locks for the valve stem, for sure. But who knows, might work...

You want the locks to be supported radially by meaty part of the retainer

Caprimaniac wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 3:44 am There arr at leats 3 types if lock grooves. Squarrbsingle, multi and beadlock.

I would use correct diameter locks for the valve stem, for sure. But who knows, might work...

Sure enough, changed my original post

digger wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 3:47 am You want the locks to be supported radially by meaty part of the retainer

I understand but offset locks do the same - I would just move the offset part from the lock to the retainer?

Crane used to make different collet sets to give different spring heights.
You would not be able to interchange collets to stem diameters. With the retainers, if the collets are of similar lock design and don't hang out the bottom or the collets make even internal contact in the retainer there would be no reason not to use them.

Cheers.

You should only use collets designed to work with the diam of your valves. To mix sizes would mean that the collets are not supporting the load across the full circumference of the valve groove/bead.

Geoff2 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 4:47 am You should only use collets designed to work with the diam of your valves. To mix sizes would mean that the collets are not supporting the load across the full circumference of the valve groove/bead.

Yes, locks would be the correct size. My question is about using "wrong" retainers: smaller retainers to decrease installed height and larger to increase.

According to my calculations if you use a 7° retainer designed for an 8mm valve with 11/32 valve locks (8.7mm) the installed height decreases by 0.110"

The short answer is, "yes you can do that". The tricky part of the question is should you do it for your intended application? Maybe yes, maybe no.

I have customers who either dont have the funds, or desire to do things the right way. Sometimes the best option for their situation includes using "incorrect" keepers or retainers to correct a valve train measurement that would normally require a more expensive solution. I am talking about really incorrect. Like clearly inferior to the original combo.

I am often put in situations in which someone asks me to solve their problem within a budget and often times this is part of my solution.

Through expierence i have determined that many incorrect combonations will work with increased risk of part failure. What i cant identify is how great is the risk. This is why i let the customer make the decision.

I feel you are talking about something much "safer" than i, but wanted to say there is a time and place for everything.

What you have on your hands there knucklehead is the good old "Last guy touched it rule" bailing someone out of a hole without spending money after they have just dug the hole on a tight budget without your involvement in the initial job, is a recipe for someone hanging around your workshop waiting for you to weave more magic, without spending anything of their own money [now using your time and money] to correct an irretrievable or messy situation.

This scenario is a story told by everyone who runs a shop, learn fast and early to identify this type of customer, you may loose a few so called friends but you won't find yourself exposed to too many jobs that need more investment to correct on one hand and on the other should just be walked away from. Some guys have worked out that because they paid for a job that has not worked out because they had an unrealistic idea of the cost in the first place,that they will pay no more regardless of who is involved in the rectification.

Get a catalog out and identify the correct parts to rectify the situation, price the job [with some + fat in the labor] and give it to the customer, if they balk, dont shift on your position, it is take it or leave it, also add the caveat that the price will not be fixed if other faults are identified in the course of the work.

I learnt very early in my businesses days that there is only one thing worse than working for nothing, that is working for nothing and supplying the parts as well.
Customers when given the choice of a direction for a job without even knowing what is involved in a job usually have amnesia when another dose of rectification is required.

But if you are mates working together in the shed on a joint project go into it with eyes wide open as to who stumps up for what and have fun.

Cheers.

To riff offa' hoodeng's (absolutely correct) post, IF the shop has ANY involvement in actually working on the project (including simply disassembling for inspection), making sure what was done - or refused by the customer - and why got documented in written form on an invoice. I believe in doing it, even if there is a zero charge for the labor, when I have wanted to make sure somebody's shitshow wasn't going to be accredited to myself.

My experience is that less than 2-3 minutes invested in CYA documentation improves customer memory considerably. And, if they do decide to move forward with a project, they understand the value they are receiving for their dollar, and are much more inclined to be pleased with the outcome.

Mickey Mouse solutions end up biting everyone in the ass. I completely agree with hoodeng!

ChargerST wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:15 pm According to my calculations if you use a 7° retainer designed for an 8mm valve with 11/32 valve locks (8.7mm) the installed height decreases by 0.110"

Regardless of the calculations the designed strength is not there.
No body in the industry would try it on any engine just for the simple reason is its wrong.
There are specific retainer and lock combos to do the same thing. There is off set retainers in either direction as well
as locks with the same thing.
It is an issue in this field of work where guys try to save a buck and they get bit. Most t9imes guys get parts with no regard for the finished result and have these issues. lack of proper planning is key in all aspects of this field.
In short get the parts that are made to work together.