Re: sodium Vs SS?

[Aleksander Mierzwa <alex@matrix.com.pl>]

At 09:38 3.06.98 -0400, quattro wrote:

>I believe that SS valves can handle higher temps Vs regular carbon steel
and will hold >up under the most demanding applications, but SS valves are
expensive. SS is capable of >handling the higher heat that carbon steel
and/or sodium-filled carbon steel valves. I >think the SS Manley valves ran
about $20 each for the KUQEFH. Most high-perf and race >engines use SS and
not sodium-filled that I am familiar with. Manley is well known as >the
>leader in SS automotive valves. Unfortunately, I could not find a website
for them >with >any technical info....

So it's only $200 for a set of valves for 10V engine. Audi has used $25
titanium studs to bolt the turbo to the manifold, so I don't think the
$200-(cost of sodium filled valves) difference was much of concern when
building $40K car. 

Aleksander Mierzwa
Warsaw, Poland
mailto:alex@matrix.com.pl
87 Audi 5000CS turbo (mine)
88 Renault Medallion wagon (mom's)
91 mountain bike (just in case both cars broke at the same time :-)