'06 Quicksilver Z06

I can't help but think, in reading your post, that you believe that money, or something which could be substituted for it, in other words, anything which could be "traded" is changing hands when you mention the word "purchased".

I was once accused of being a shill for a cylinder head business, which I now go out of my way to no longer mention by name in my own posts, and know that it is quite an implication, having been on the receiving end of it myself. I even shy away from quoting posts with the name in it.

Could it be, and I'm just throwing this out there, that the gentleman whom you say had the issue with the valve stem, may have felt it more appropriate to contact the shop which did his heads before coming onto this open forum with his concern?

And having realized that, then elected to go the route of having his concern managed by his engine builder, instead of having his concern used as yet another "political football" in these discussions which tend to become heated?

I like to think that while there are many vendors in here, large and small, and with the stakes being high in this whole mess, that there comes a point where we draw the line and appeal to the good in us all, as opposed to the bad.

As such, I'm not thinking that the member's position was "purchased", but rather that a conscious decision by that member to take whatever concern he had, up with his engine builder, as opposed to allowing it to become a 300 post thread, and fodder for one group or another to advance their agenda, complete with moderators stepping in, posts being deleted, people possibly being banned, and fellow Zo6 owners at each other's throats, and all of the carnage we have seen thus far in this matter, continue.

propain

I know exactly why the thread was removed so I don't need to speculate.

He didn't contact the shop before posting the thread. If he did it would have been completely unknown to everyone including me. He posted it here first. It was removed in the interest of making things right. His silence purchased for trade of making things right and not hurting said vendors rep or the rep of the "fix".

You should also stop pretending you don't know every detail of what transpired as I know you are in talks with said vendor on a regular basis.

Regardless of the reason the thread was removed however, you cant have it removed and then state facts and data about the thread that was removed. I understand you are privy to information about said vendor but you are also heavily biased toward them as well.

So instead of taking this completely off course any further the data should simply be thrown out as its inconclusive in either direction. Suspicious, but inconclusive.

'06 Quicksilver Z06

Well, if that is your take on it, I don't think that there is anything that anyone can say to change your mind.

I will however reiterate that which has already been said to observers of this thread.


If "The Fix" were not working, well then no amount of money would keep all or more accurately (all but one) of the people quiet about it.

So far, we have one "potential" legitimate description of a SS valve failure following "The Fix", and that one is forum member Corvee.

I think that it is a stretch to imply that all of the others who have had failures, have had their silence "bought", because it begs the question as to why Corvee didn't sell his silence, as long as there was a "going rate" for silence, when it comes to "The Fix".

Secondly, I think that it goes without saying, that some vendors in here probably have deeper pockets than others.

In other words, if a relatively "small time" outfit could theoretically "purchase" silence, or perhaps even "favorable testimonial", then how much more could a big time outfit do the same?

With an accusation of this magnitude, I have to say that I feel compelled to ask you to post up, or otherwise point to, proof of these "talks" to which you refer.........or better yet, talks with ANY vendor and myself.

While I am flattered by the thought, I still have to ask, just what vendor, anywhere would place any "value", monetary or otherwise, on any "testimonial" or "good word", from some guy who calls himself '06 Quicksilver Z06"?

When you really get down to it, how would any "endorsement" from me help any vendor?

I'm hardly the "Peyton Manning" of valve trains. "Talks", you say?????? With a "vendor"?????? I don't have enough influence in here to stop a passing garbage truck. What vendor would want to talk with me???

As much of a "lightning rod" "loose cannon" and controversial figure as I am, it would seem to be more cost effective for vendors to offer me financial gain to "stay away as far as possible" from their products as opposed to being vocal about them.

Having me as your pitchman, is like having Mike Tyson as your pitchman. Looking back at the toes I've stepped on, I'm the guy you court to be your spokesman if you don't want your products sold.

You mention a "said" vendor.

How do you know that this "said" vendor, is the same vendor who was even involved in the work done on the car in the thread which you say was "removed"?

So far, I'm hearing you refer to a "removed" thread.

If there ever was such a thread, and if there was, then I am unfamiliar with it, well then the first question I would ask, is since it is now absent, then how does one even know any of the specifics, other than taking your word for them?

Personally, I think it more productive, to actually discuss the threads on this forum, and the information contained within those, as opposed to speculating about those which don't.

propain

I said in this instance of a removed thread his silence was bought. Not every failure. As stated by me many times not enough time has passed to call this fix a fix. You could run plastic guides and not have failed yet with the amount of test data there is.



That is true. But a vendor who is so much larger than a smaller vendor going against their assessment of a proper fix stands to gain them nothing as the smaller vendor poses no threat. To add even more fun to it the bigger vendor uses the smaller vendor to do their work. So no matter the fix the smaller vendor gets the work.




Again, I know the specifics and the thread was pulled at the owners request so I am not at liberty to say. The thread was removed for a very specific reason however and it shouldn't be too hard to figure out.

Yet you are giving me specifics on it regarding how many valve stems were damaged. I thought you were familiar going by those posts and statements. Now I am confused. What were you referring to then?


Cute, but not for me. A valuable thread about a WCCH build with bronze guides and SS valves was posted with damaged heads with lots of speculation as to why and quickly removed (purchased) before any data or information could be collected. Seems pretty conclusive to me. I saw it and many others did as well.

'06 Quicksilver Z06

What Clark was referring to below. The case of Nick 02 Z06.

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...post1584192423

And what I thought you were referring to, until I looked closer and saw that you are referring to a thread which you indicate no longer exists.

Nick shows one valve involved in his pic.

Clark mistakenly said ~1500 miles in his response to you. Nick actually says less than 1000 miles is the number of miles on the valve.

I'm wondering why, if it was "valve bounce" only that one valve was affected. ...And also like Clark, I'm wondering why in so few of miles.

I am inclined to believe Nick when he points to a hardening issue here. Especially considering the mileage.

Well, I think that anyone can reason, that if the methods were not working, that they would have long ago fallen out of favor.

And that is clearly not happening.

Also, the curious thing here, is that there is no way to tell, other than your word, just who did the build of the heads you refer to, as the thread that you say that you are referring to, no one else can see.

Just asking, but could it be that you are mistaken as to who actually did the heads in the thread which you say has since been deleted?

I ask, because anyone can make a mistake and I saw earlier where your recollection was off here.

Frank actually has headers and a tune. Furthermore, and this is just my opinion, but I would consider any car with worked heads, as "modded"?

Thus Howie's car is modded, and anyone else who has done only their cylinder heads.

Surely one could not expect to have an engine covered under warranty, should one of those heads lose a valve into a combustion chamber, as it would be considered "modded".

Well, I, (and perhaps others) can see no reason, why anyone would seek to perpetrate a "cover up" over something like what you are describing. What would happen if they didn't agree to a "cover up", or helping to promote one?

However I can see why someone would elect to not have their own incident involving a valve with what could very well be, and likely is, a manufacturer's metal hardening issue, "parlayed" into "valve bounce", for the purpose of producing a weeks long thread, ending in another locked down flame fest.

The case of Nick 02 Z06, mentioned by Clark here, is the case discussed in the thread discussing Madsen's failure whereby Madsen was running the stock valve guides and SS valves, and ended up with a failure.

You say that you know of another such instance where the thread was deleted, and have made reference to "valve bounce" regarding it.

I find it impossible to debate a thread, or even the merits and validity of it, if it does not exist.

About the only thing that I can say, is that if an owner had an issue of any sort, and decided it better to take it up with his engine builder as opposed to have it hashed out on this forum amongst total strangers looking to grind their axes, and make hay, no matter which side of the "debate" they lean toward, well then I can understand that.

Blackonblacksls

Just like there many cars with stock valves and no issues?

So I could say the same to you about feeling the need to swap to ss valves

Rock36

DH did you mean the OEM valves did too good of a job removing heat and the guides can't take it?

I only ask, because part of my hypothesis on this issue (untested of course) was that using a solid valve reduces the heat path through the guide so more heat is then transferred through the valve seat instead; which reduces the heat effect on the guides.

Rock36

The other question the Katech test highlighted was how a stronger beehive spring like the PSI 1511 would handle a heavier SS valve. Unfortunately that combo wasn't tested, and in retrospect, it should have been.

The Katech test showed that an OEM beehive spring did a comparable job to the dual spring in controlling the 98g exhaust valve on the OEM cam profile.

To me, this indicates that a OEM camshaft, upgraded beehive springs with more seat pressure, and a 98 g solid valve should have an even better bounce profile that would be acceptable to more people.

A PAC or PSI beehive, in this case, would add another 20-30 lbs of seat pressure over the OEM beehive to control bounce, and retain the benefits of a beehive design.

Unreal

And like I said, that was OEM cam and a torquer cam. Who knows what the bounce or characteristics are of other aftermarket cams. Maybe PRC springs control better than BT, or Manley, or Comp.

Even with "bounce" 99.9% of the time I drive my car I never get over 6k rpm. Unless I'm at the drag strip it just doesn't happen. Funny to see people worrying about a condition that may be rare on their car.

I know my line of work that testing and results would never be acceptable. Without a gage R&R, and enough samples/test to have a statistically sound result who knows if the one spring was bad, or the one test read high, or who knows.

Mark2009

I would imagine that the springs were checked in a spring tester so I would doubt that any of the springs used were faulty. Of course the vendor received so much grief in the form of personal attacks for their efforts that any further data on that or any other tests will not be shared here.

While repeatability is grand, in a straight comparison test while changing one component at a time I would think the comparison portion of the test would be valid as long as no particular component was faulty or outside of design spec. The only result that was surprising was the ability of the OEM spring to match the dual spring's performance, but in retrospect it makes sense... everything else went pretty much as expected (in fact the Rev valve performed better than I expected). So there is really nothing there to overtly make the results suspect, as well as nothing in the valvetrain engineering world to make one think or expect that replacing light valvetrain components with heavier valvetrain components to is going to result in an increase in valvetrain stability. Or that one particular brand of spring is different from any other as far as performance goes as long as the specs are similar (wire size and type, spring rate, install height, etc).

On topic, there is a report on another forum of excessive exhaust guide wear, as determined by wiggle test, on a SS/Bronze/Yella Terra rebuild after some 10K miles. No numbers yet.

'06 Quicksilver Z06

Yes, I recall Chad telling me about that case.

You can try and contact him, but I recall him telling me that this was a case where the intake valves had not been polished, as is common practice in these fixes now where the intake valves are reused.

Unreal

Variation in the test setup, operator, part to part variation, etc must be known to know the results are valid. If they repeat the same test and get different results that doesn't really help. Like I said, without a gage R&R maybe the test to test variation is all we saw in the test and if it was repeated the results swap around. I spend all day doing validation testing on heart valves dealing with testing setup and validation. There is no way to test something with 1 sample, and without knowing how the test effects the results.

Mark2009

If you're looking for an absolute number or result, then I would agree that multiple tests would be ideal, if for nothing else than to establish a baseline variance between identical parts.

However, if doing an A-B comparison of a multi-part assembly by changing only one component then I think one test would be a reasonable indication barring any component issues (e.g., one component defective or out of spec). When the results agree with what would be theoretically expected of the comparison, as well as what results of previous tests have been, then there is even less likelihood to think that the components or methodology are suspect.

Do you really think that if the Spintron tests were rerun, or rerun five times or fifty times, that the heavier valve would outperform the lighter valve? Or even perform as well? Surely the laws of physics tell us the outcome of that comparison without having to bother with a test at all, the only real variance being spring performance and in that particular area the single beehive will win every time as well, at least until the weight of the valvetrain exceeds its (the beehive spring's) design capabilities (yet another argument against valvetrain weight).

But again, debating the validity of that test is irrelevant to the issue since no valvetrain engineer is going to expect a heavy valvetrain to perform as well as a light valvetrain. That the test validated what both theory and previous practice predicts is merely inconvenient for those that are operating outside the bounds of engineering and fact (i.e., trying to argue that a heavy valvetrain is as good or better than a light one).
.

'06 Quicksilver Z06

That's not really the argument for many in here,

The concession is made that all else equal, that a lighter valve train is "better" than a heavier one.

The problem is all else ain't equal. The "lighter valve train" referenced in this forum, has left many a fist sized hole in people's engine blocks.

I'm sure that many of us in here, are all for a lighter valve train, indeed, that is why the new Ferrea combination hollow/solid exhaust valve is probably going to be a winner, because Ferrea found a need and filled it.

But few of us are willing to to embrace a "lighter valve train", if it means increasing our risk of someday leaving a hole in the side of our engine blocks big enough to fist our way to the camshaft.

The crux is if a slightly heavier one is sufficient to get the job done from a practical standpoint in this application.

Realizing that both the "lighter valve train", as well as the "heavier valve train setups in the representative cars of this forum, both have their drawbacks, it becomes up to the owner to decide, from a practical standpoint and standpoint of risk, which "drawback" is acceptable to him.

If you want to risk the stock setup putting a hole into your engine block, and joining those who have already experienced that mishap, and that risk is acceptable to you, well then by all means, stick with the stock stuff and ride it for as long as you can, if you are afraid of "valve bounce".

If you aren't afraid of potential valve bounce at sustained higher RPMs, causing you problems, problems "predicted" but as yet seen to have caused any widespread practical issues, well then consider the heavier drive train.

Every man will have to weigh the practical or "real world" and "in the field" documented or demonstrated "risks" and make his decision from there.

propain

Well that is not the thread I was referring to.

Not enough time. Stock cars took years to show failure. Failures and guide wear has been shown already with few miles on this "fix". Katech's real word test shows you should not reline the car. So many things point to this "fix" not being desirable yet the heads remain in the sand. Just like the stock cars people wont change their minds or opinion until the failures stack up so much you cant deny it. You of all people should know this.


I have plenty proof in writing and if someone would like to see it they are free to PM me.


Everyone makes mistakes. You spent years banging a drum that nothing was wrong with the stock heads or stock LS7. I guess we should all ignore your new position now based on that huge mistake.

My mistake about Frank was easily made as there are many people on this forum with many different setups. A mistake of the magnitude described above however is quite huge.

Sure, if you do your head you are modded and your warranty void. Everyone should consider this when thinking about doing their heads if still under warranty.


Hahaha... now thats funny.

For someone who doesn't want to see such things you sure do add to every single one of those threads completely contributing to their lock down. If you were so understanding I guess we wouldn't be having this discussion.

No one is asking you to debate it yet here you are trying your hardest to debate it and wash it away. hmmmmmm....

Of course.. purchased silence in the interest in "making things right" is quite common in this situation. Its called damage control.

propain

Now that is interesting. Who did the heads?

'06 Quicksilver Z06

Sorry, my mistake, I initially thought that it was. Later I gathered that you were referring to another thread, which you indicate is now absent.

The first stock engine failure that I can find on record is that of forum member Charles Scavone, reported back on 11/26/05. Nearly 8 years ago.

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...rove-true.html

The tone of the post, and the title of the thread that I found it in however, indicate that discussion of the issue had, in fact, preceded Scavone's report.

The title of the 2005 thread was; "LS7 Valve Train Issues May Prove True!"

So even as early as November of 2005, a time during which the C6 Z06 would have only been out for a very short period of time, this matter had been discussed.


Yes, I do know it, and it is playing out before our eyes.

People simply do not care about that shop's "testing", because it cannot be correlated to actual engine failures.

This is particular crippling when prior testing back in 2008, predicted failure in such cars, and that prediction has not come to fruition.

When you predict calamity, well then it better happen.

This is why "end of the world" prophesy, coming from people telling you when the world is going to end and such is not taken seriously.

You predict calamity, well then nothing short of calamity will do.

Otherwise, people are going to keep right on doing what they're doing.

And with good reason. Life goes on. People want what they want, and they want it right now.

If people were concerned about "the future years up the road", well then fast food, good cigars, fast women and alcohol would disappear overnight.

But they're still here. And they're going to be here. No matter what the Surgeon General says. And that is the reason why nobody is paying a damn bit of attention to those predictions from that shop.

People figure they'll die of something else. Just like many in here feel that their cars will die of "something else" aside from "valve bounce", and in fact, may never die on them, or while in their possession or before they trade them in or sell them.......and they're probably right.

They've been predicting the big earthquake in California for decades now, and people in Cali are going right about their business.

So far, some 8 years after LG Motorsports was among the first to use solid stainless steel valves in these cars as long ago as 2005, we have to dig and dig deep to find even one reported failure of an LS7 equipped with solid stainless valves in here failing.

That hardly bodes well for anyone predicting certain death for LS7s equipped in such a way.

Really no need, as even if the heads were done by the vendor you mention, there is the case of Nick, which we already know about.

A case where there was a hardening issue with one of his valves.

Do you believe that prior position was a "mistake"?

If so, well then I'm curious as to why you think it was.

I KNOW that it was, but I'd like to know why you think it was.

Incidentally, what you point to, with regard to my decision on a "new position" to which you refer, indicates why it is absurd for anyone in here to believe that some vendor would select me as an effective "spokesperson" for their offerings.

What assurance would they have that somebody wouldn't come along and outbid them for my "endorsement"?

Whole concept is absurd.

Ah, so you think that position was in fact a mistake.

Why??? :

and I could not agree more.

Now, what about the guy's who are out of warranty? :

Oh, and BTW, I hear some of you guys talk about "data", in your arguments.

Where is the "data" indicating any correlation whatsoever, between a "pass" of a "wiggle test", and LS7 valve train longevity?

How does anyone know that some guy who passes a wiggle test, might not go out and drop a valve tomorrow? Some of you ask where is the data proving that "The Fix" is effective. I'd ask those who keep screaming for "data"; "Where is the "data" proving that if a guy passes a "wiggle test" that he is "safe"? :

and found humor in it too.


Everybody has a breaking point, or a point whereby they've seen enough.

Or are you approaching it from the standpoint of; "What's another locked thread?"


On the contrary.

I'm not "debating" this ghost thread you continue to refer to, and indicate above in bold red, how it doesn't matter, but merely pointing out the folly of continuing to harp on this thread which you say is now gone.

I see it as you who continues to bring up this "Lost Dutchman" thread and offering for people to PM you regarding it.


Now, that's funny.

I just do not believe that there is as much of a "cloak and dagger" approach to this matter as you apparently do.

"Purchasing" silence??? Well if they're paying for "silence" then why wouldn't I, or anyone else for that matter, just copy Nick's photos, represent them as my own, or better yet, photoshop some of my own, and threaten to "talk", unless I was written a check?

I'm sure that Chad can tell you.

He told me, and it wasn't the shop you refer to above.

Mark2009

Dunno since it wasn't posted, but I'd hardly think it relevant... machining a set of heads isn't rocket science, altho indications are that GM's supplier is evidence that it can be screwed up in a mass production environment.

.

propain

Of course its not relevant in the real world. On this forum however any headwork done by anyone other than WCCH that has had issues or failure is the reason for the issues or failure. WCCH apparently is the only shop in the USA that does good head work according to a few here.

propain

Make a mockery of it all you like. That was my first reference to anyone PMing me about it since you seem to be calling BS. That sir is a lost cause as I have all the details and its a WCCH head. For someone who doesnt care you sure are going out of your way to dispute it. Hmmmmmmmmmm...



I think you are missing the concept here Quick. Quite simple really. Guy gets heads done. Has a big problem with it. Guy comes to forum and posts pics of the problem. Guy is told if he wants it "made right", meaning "No charge" he will remove the thread. Thus no longer exposing a problem to the public. Purchased silence.

What youre talking about in your quote above is fraud and libel. Good luck trying to blackmail vendors with that great idea.


As far as asking Chad there are many reasons why I don't care to. Mostly because he is very biased and he has a very big agenda on this forum. Or at least he did until...well.... "he left". I think the guy knows his stuff but his personal feelings get in the way.