Printable View
I'm looking at roller rockers for my build and I have narrowed it down to 3 choices.
They will be in a stock 1.5 ratio.
My budget for rockers is 250.00
I'll be running a dual pattern Comp 12-239-3 cam
#1. Scorpion part # SCP1002BL 214.95
#2. Crane Cams part# 11744-16 239.95
#3. Harland Sharp part # S1002 221.95
I dont think I can go wrong with any of the above listed but I'd like some other opinions.
AND:
HEI Dist. What should I be looking for in a good HEI
Thanks.
JImmy
What is your reason for roller rockers? The stock ones are good to 6000 rpm plus a little.
There may be better ways to spend 250.00 Just my opinion though.
I was between Comp Cams and Harlan Sharpe for my sbf and only went with the Sharpes because I have a set for my 460 and liked the look of them and the feedback I have read. But I think as long as you stay with any name brand you will be ok.
Don
I have researched every part of my build down to every last bolt and washer and 250.00 for 15-20 HP is a good deal as far as I'm concered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce lee
My 350 build now stands at 387-395hp with 418-426 ftpnd. So yes I think they are worth every penny in HP and lifespan of the parts. :D
If your going to spend the money for the rollers, why not go with the 1.6?
1.6 will make your cam bigger
well ok you do know you may or may not see the 15-20 hp if you valve train has not the proper geometry . roller rocker will not fix this if your not doing a mild lift check . a stock steel stamp shoe rocker arm will go for 100.000 miles roller rockers will not . really never use roller for the 12 hp ? more for hi lift cams and were you get very hi spring lbs thats were you use them and see a gain.if you added the 10to 20 hp every one claims your have 500 hp before you get the pistons in the engine :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JBoss
Pat.
If I added up everything everyone told me i'd have well over 500hp with a little bitty cam and be able to pull a house down with this 9.5CR motor. :whacked: :D:D
The Proper Valve Geometry is something that I'm learning about right now so that I can have everything as close to "Perfect" as one can get. :D
You may want to look at this option instead,a stainless steel full roller rocker would give you a longer life than aluminum would if you plan to put miles on it.Click on this:www.kmjent.com then put KMJ 0235001 in search,and it is in your budget and has a stout warranty.
First of all, believe what Pat McC says - he is our sites resident super expert, especially with Chebbie engines.
Now - my opinion - why 1.5 ratio rockers? You gain exactly nothing as far as enhanced performance. A wee bit of rolling resistance has disappeared - a couple found horse power, maybe, but you haven't done a thing except install a set of "break in" rocker arms. I used this site to do my calcs for my Ford labeled Crane 1.7's in my SB Ford: http://www.wallaceracing.com/rockercalc.php
My original ratio rocker was a 1.6, the new cam lift was .498. With the 1.7 rockers, my effective lift is now.529. A heluva lot better with .031 more lift - that's 1/32nd of an inch which in camshaft language, a lot more air/fuel in for Hp out
Your camshaft is a pretty mild dual pattern, I'll use the .480 lift first. Doing the calcs, with the 1.6 ratio, you would end up with an effective lift of .512. With the .462 side, the lift would then be .493. Now, that's where you will probably see some Hp gains.
Brands - I don't know who makes Crane now since they went out of business, but I would guess that they are no longer made in the USA. And whatever you buy, make sure they are full roller, not just rollers on the tips/valve stem end.
wow what can i say dave thanks:3dSMILE: yep there still alot of nos crane stuff still floating around .there trying to get crane up and running hard to say who or what will be comming out of the new place when all is said and done. i hope the same rocker arms they were very good . if all the tooling was sold they may not make them here .i hope they do make them here in the usa
I thought Crane had reopened???
http://www.enginebuildermag.com/Arti..._ss_cycle.aspx
They have a new 2010 catalogue??
http://www.cranecams.com/catalog.php
Is there something else I don't know of???
I have seen some of that information as well - but is it the same product is my question - and what I mean by that - is it still made to the original standards or has much of the manufacturing been shipped to low salary countries with lower quality standards, i.e. no ISO 9001 or 2 at a minimum. I probably wouldn't be concerned if it was the old Crane Co. but reorganized under a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. Is a motorcycle parts mfr qualified - not a clue. Until I know a lot more, I will not use a current Crane product - I can't afford potentially catastrophic engine failures.Quote:
Originally Posted by Two8tyThree
Has anyone out there dealt with the new Crane Cams?
Please post your what you bought and your impressions.
I am very interested in their quality also.
One of the first cams I ever bought was a Crane Fireball cam for my 396 Nova.
Had bought many products up to the close, would really like to know if they are same on the reopen.
Thanks
Sorry didn't mean to hijack your thread.
Will start a new thread in Lounge area to discuss this.
Sorry again
Your headline says opinions wanted. OK, here are mine....
1. Stamped steel rockers can be all over the board as far as ratio. It might not be unusual to find a 1.5 ratio rocker that actually measured 1.45.
2. It makes sense that friction, and thus oil temperatures, will be reduced with roller bearings instead of a sliding ball/socket arrangement. Further, it makes sense that some additional hp would be unleashed. Reduced friction at the rocker should also be a little easier on the lifter/lobe interface.
3. Roller rockers will not last as long as stamped steel rockers due to being more fragile in their construction.
4. In a day and time when we should be considering less pressure at the lifter/lobe interface of a flat tappet design, you have chosen the worst possible lobe profile, a high energy grind. Doing the math, you will find only 22 degrees difference between seat to seat duration and 0.050" duration on the opening and closing ramps of the grind you have chosen. This is right at the limit of lifter rise per degrees of rotation and seems to me to be the wrong way to go unless you are trying to make max hp in a racing class that is limited to a hydraulic flat tappet cam. While this profile will get the valve open and closed quicker than a less violent grind, it also imparts maximum pressure on the lifter/lobe in a time when extreme pressure lubricants have been eliminated from off-the-shelf motor oils. The only way you could make this worse is to increase the pressure at the lifter/lobe with 1.6 rocker arms. In my opinion, anyone who isn't willing to spend 500 bucks for a retro-fit roller cam hasn't thought all of this through.
5. Here's a list of camshaft install tips and tricks that was compiled from years of experience installing and running flat tappet cams. Paying attention to all these warnings will still not make the installation bulletproof, but your odds will be better than if you didn't pay attention to them.....
http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/w...ips_and_tricks
well hell yes... a roller cam and roller rockers sure i build them this way all the time. i never look at his cam .if a flat lifter cam .they are wast of time .i would spend money on a roller cam kit .and if money is hard to find run steel stamp rockers the nitro carbided long slot s will work and they say there not all over the map on ratio. rocker arms are not hard to swap out at a later dat and buy some roller rockers . a cam is abit more work if i had to pick i would take steel stamp rockers arm any day over a flat lifter cam come to think about it i am doing two engine s this way a hyd roller cam 289 ford and a 283 hyd roller chevy :) and the last 4 engine before that were one 427 with crane gold roller rockers one 355 with comp gold rockers . one with 351 W with T&D shafts rockers and a 445 W with howards rockers arms so there is a place for steel and roller and hi rent:3dSMILE:
does your budget include new pushrods for the roller rockers?
I about crapped when I found out I had
to spend 219 for pushrods for my application.
(rollers on aluminum heads for an Olds 455)
probably yours are less expensive in a more
popular application, but don't forget the
original pushrods aren't necessarily going
to be a length you can use with rollers.
yep well i did post he needs to check is mid lift so you get the right push rod length get that wrong you not going to add any thing .i get most all my push rods from TREND PERFORMANCEQuote:
Originally Posted by t0oL
Y'all keep talking. I'm still learning from the replys. :)
And thanks for the http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/w...ips_and_tricks tech1
So much has changed over the last 15-20 years.
Update 10/27/10 I went with the Comp Hi-Tech Stainless steel rockers with a 1.5 ratio. Note: Tech staff at Comp says they have not reported any troubles with these rockers going for well over 50,000+ miles with a mild cam and mild seat presures like mine.
Maybe just a sales pitch but i'll find out.:HMMM:
Checked ALL 16 valves for geometry
I used a soild lifter and an adjustable push rod(7.5-8.7) with a black felt tip pen. I have 5 that did not have a real good pattren(centered and narrow) on valve tip and may need a shorter push rod.
A local racer says change out the 5 studs first before buying differant push rods? Is there anything to this theory? :confused:
He may be thinking, and rightly so, that the heads have been tossed around, bending some of the studs. Lay a good straightedge on the side of the studs from end to end near the top of the studs. You'll be able to see pretty quickly if any are bent.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBoss
i tru-deck all my builds. i face the heads then do the valve job i hold the decks under .002 and my valve jobs are never more then 004 up or down i do mid lift check on number 1 less its a big chief head bbc if you taking roller tracking to valve stem i check that and buy adjustable guide plates. i do not check mild lift on all 16 not needed.you only going to get pushrod up or down by 050 increments has for your studs you hope your studs are bent if not then the fun starts
I dont have a "straightedge" per say. Will the edge of a 6ft level should work? I would think it would.Quote:
Originally Posted by techinspector1
Wow! Your talking way above my level now.Quote:
Originally Posted by pat mccarthy
Pat.
Your gonna owe me a new laptop by the time I get done googling all this info your putting out. :D
Yeah, that'll work. Lay the level first on one side and then the other side of the studs and look closely between the studs and the level with a good strong light.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBoss
Pat is also saying that some of the valves could be at a taller or shorter installed height due to the depth of the valve seats. If you cut one valve seat down farther into the head than another valve seat, the valve on the deep seat will have the valve stem sitting up higher on the spring side of the head and that valve could have a different pattern shown on the valve tip because the geometry is a little different.
With all the springs in place and the valves seated, lay the level across the top of the valves to see if one or more stick up above the adjacent valve stems. That will tell you that the seats are uneven or the valves are of unequal length. If the valve stems have been cut to equalize the length, the shop may have ground down past the initial hardening that is on the valve stem. This will result in the rocker pushing off to the side of the valve stem after it rounds off the stem tip.
Update 10/29/10:
Checked Studs as suggested and found one that was bent down .006 using a feeler gauge under the level. REPLACED it on the spot.
Checked valves tips. Also with level. I could not get a .002 feeler gauge under the low ones. By what I have learned so far this is very good and nothing more needs to be done.
I installed the rockers arms and adjusted lash.(zero lash + 1/2 turn)
Rechecked #1 and the #8(bent stud) Everything looks good.
Thanks very much for the help and the info. :D