Moparts

0.800 lift on EZ heads

Posted By: AndyF

0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 06:20 AM

Well it hasn't been easy and I'm still not done. Basically the EZ heads don't really like this much lift! The standard valve setup gives you about 1.900 installed height which isn't quite enough to get 0.800 lift. I went with a +0.050 retainer and a +0.050 lock to get to 2.00 but that combination made the rocker arm rub on the retainer. With a standard lock and some fudging around it looks like I can get setup at 1.975. The PSI springs I'm using coil bind at 1.100 so I should have room to get close to 0.800 lift.

Here is a picture of the EZ heads with the cam at full lift. This cam has .830 gross lift so with lash it is about 0.800 net.

Attached picture 4123002-800_lift.jpg
Posted By: 540CUDA

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 06:27 AM

Posted By: JohnRR

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 07:28 AM

Quote:





Posted By: DV8

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 07:58 AM

Whoaaa boy! That is steep! What ratio rocker are you using?

~S~
Posted By: 67_Satellite

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 12:59 PM

O.K., maybe I missed a previous post or something,but why so much lift? Is this just an exercise to find out how much is possible?
Posted By: CH3NO2

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 02:26 PM

What do they flow Andy?
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 04:23 PM

Those are Jesel 1.70 ratio rocker arms. Here is a picture from the other side showing the pushrods. To clear this much lift we had to use a tapered pushrod. That still didn't clear so I had to set up the pushrods in a lathe and touch them up a little bit on the ends. Jesel makes a pushrod that clears but they cost about $30 each.

Attached picture 4123554-800_pushrod.jpg
Posted By: Bob_Coomer

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 05:52 PM

I run the Jesel 1.7's on my -1 heads, I dont remember the pushrod being that close to the rocker, I also run standard ball on ball pushrods (Non Tapered 3/8) from Manton. Andy, Do you think this would help clearance problem? Im running bout .790 gross lift before lash. The way the cup style adjuster srews set in the recess, it might give added pushrod clearance over the ball cup style pushrods.

Posted By: TS3303

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 06:17 PM

Quote:

O.K., maybe I missed a previous post or something,but why so much lift? Is this just an exercise to find out how much is possible?



is this an allout max horsepower headsup type engine?

IMO opening the valve that far past the useable range of the intake port is a waste of energy, reduces durability, increases wear on the valve train. not worth the extra 2-5hp that you might get. springs will have a very short life.
Posted By: BDS871Cuda

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 06:45 PM

Quote:

Well it hasn't been easy and I'm still not done. Basically the EZ heads don't really like this much lift! The standard valve setup gives you about 1.900 installed height which isn't quite enough to get 0.800 lift. I went with a +0.050 retainer and a +0.050 lock to get to 2.00 but that combination made the rocker arm rub on the retainer. With a standard lock and some fudging around it looks like I can get setup at 1.975. The PSI springs I'm using coil bind at 1.100 so I should have room to get close to 0.800 lift.

Here is a picture of the EZ heads with the cam at full lift. This cam has .830 gross lift so with lash it is about 0.800 net.





Andy,
is this for a class that must use EZ heads?

What's the info on this?
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/20/08 07:00 PM

I'd think the ball end pushrod type would have more clearance but it has other problems. Jesel is promoting the cup end pushrod design these days so that is what we went with on this motor. It does make it harder to find pushrods though. Smith Bros did some custom ends for me on this motor.
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/27/08 01:10 AM

I got the Jesel tool (made by DRC) so I can change the valve springs on the motor. I didn't think the short handle would have enough leverage for these 300 lb on the seat springs but it seems to work just fine. I might make some thin shims to protect the retainer when using this tool. I'm not too keen on marring up the retainers when they are under so much load.

Attached picture 4141292-spring_tool.jpg
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/27/08 02:24 AM

Andy, is there enough flow at .800 to make it worth
your while? I would have figured it stalled by then
Its surprising that the tool is strong enough to
pop the springs off, I have the same and on my
W-9 I have to pull 4 springs per head to get to
the head studs
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/27/08 10:47 PM

Well even if the flow doesn't increase at .800 lift the port will see more area under the curve since the valve will be open higher and longer. We'll see what the dyno says.

Here is a shot showing a standard Ti retainer with a +0.050 lock. This gives me 1.985 installed height and the Jesel rocker arm clears. I might be able to run this setup since it is just a hair under the recommended 2.00 installed height. The springs coil bind at 1.100 so there would be 0.085 clearance at full lift.

Attached picture 4143499-installed.jpg
Posted By: Cab_Burge

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/27/08 10:58 PM

I think a lot of people forget that a running motor never sees the valve held open very long like a flow bench measure flow at. As Andy said when you lift the valve open more the motor has the opportunity to suck in more air than it does at a lower valve lift for the same duration Now when you introduce valve train components like the Jessel rocker system, single tapered pushrods and the exotic valve materials and super good valve springs why not bump the valves open more Isn't hopping up a motor basically about getting more air and fuel into the motor so it will make more power.(IE: heat via a controlled explosion)
Posted By: TS3303

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/27/08 11:23 PM

yes you may get more area under the curve by over lifting the valve than a cam with less lift but the same duration and ramp angles. I'm no cam/head expert but I would rather do it with duration and ramp angles. size max lift to the head flow and duration/ramp angles to the size of the engine. The same head on a 440 vs a 540 will want very different grinds and custom ground cams are not that much more money. Theres more than one way to skin a cat as they say. Sounds like a good test scenario for a magazine article.
Posted By: Chuck@Best_Machine

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/28/08 12:25 AM

Quote; " We have also learned that low-lift flow (meaning anything below .400-inch valve lift in a Pro Stock engine with a .900-inch lift camshaft) is relatively unimportant. Think about the valve events in a racing engine: From the point when the valve first moves off its seat until it reaches mid-lift, the piston is either going the wrong way (that is, it is rising in the cylinder) or it's parked near TDC. The piston doesn't begin to move away from the combustion chamber with enough velocity to lower the pressure in the cylinder until the valve is nearly halfway open. Consequently it is high-lift flow that really matters in a drag racing engine."

David Reher, from Reher-Morrison
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/28/08 03:11 AM

I last ran this motor on the dyno with a Comp MM305 flat tappet cam. Next time on the dyno it will have a roller with about the same seat duration but a lot more lift. We'll see if it likes it or not. One thing I know for sure, it costs a bunch of money to step up like this. I've spent about $3000 so far and I still don't have it running yet. So the HP/$ ratio isn't so hot.
Posted By: TS3303

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/28/08 04:22 AM

That must be an old RM article, only .900 lift cam? David, Bruce, and Darrin have tested almost every combination and usually share most of their findings publicly. I would be interested to get his feedback on putting an extra .100 lift over max flow on one of their pro stock motors because you know they've tried every conceivable option. I could be wrong but I think theres more efficient ways to gain area on a head thats basically done at .700 than opening the valve .800+


Quote:

So the HP/$ ratio isn't so hot.


Andy when you figure this out please share
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/28/08 06:06 AM

Well PipeMax says I need .809 lift minimum to have peak hp at 6500 rpm and it recommends more lift than that. PipeMax does seem to like a lot of valve lift though and I don't fully understand the assumptions that went into that program. The engine builders that follow that program though seem to get pretty good results so I think it has to be treated with some respect.
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/31/08 05:10 AM

I got a set of Manley +.100 Ti retainers today and tried them. Bad news is they have the same 2.020 installed height as the Comp +0.050 retainers! (evidently the guys who design these things don't agree what standard is). Good news is that they have a different shape on the top so they clear the Jesel rocker arms. Not much clearance but at least I can see daylight.

I need to double check the clearance with full spring load and then I'll snap some pictures. Maybe this setup with the Manley retainers will work. If not, I'll keep trying parts until I find something that works.

I also figured out that if I mount up two of the spring removal tools on the same shaft the job goes a lot easier. Too bad Jesel doesn't sell the tool this way, it is a big time saver.


Attached picture 4152816-jeseltool.jpg
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 01/31/08 12:36 PM

Quote:

Well PipeMax says I need .809 lift minimum to have peak hp at 6500 rpm and it recommends more lift than that. PipeMax does seem to like a lot of valve lift though and I don't fully understand the assumptions that went into that program. The engine builders that follow that program though seem to get pretty good results so I think it has to be treated with some respect.



Yeah when I run my pipemax program it always calls
for a big lift, I have always figured its high but
I've never tried their suggestion on lift(max)
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 02/03/08 12:22 AM

Here is a picture with the Manley +.100 retainers. Actually these Manley retainers are identical to the Comp +0.050 retainers except for the profile on the top part. They both provide an installed height of 2.020 inches when used with the +0.050 locks. The Comp retainers hit the Jesel rocker arms but these Manley retainers provide some clearance all around. It isn't a ton of clearance but it should be enough.

Attached picture 4160746-manley.jpg
Posted By: fast68plymouth

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 02/03/08 01:46 AM

Andy,
i dont know if you covered this in an earlier post or not, but did you check to see how much difference there was in rocker ratio with the Jesel rockers between unloaded and loaded?

as for the .800+ lift requirement to make peak power at 6500......i guess my first response would be.....where did it make peak power before with the .650 lift flat tappet cam?
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 02/03/08 08:36 PM

I've checked the lift numbers with the triple valve springs and there doesn't seem to be much lift lost in comparison to a checking spring. The Jesel's appear to be right on the 1.70 ratio.

Here is a picture of the final configuration of parts that I ended up with. Manley locks and Manley retainers did the trick. I ended up with 2.005 installed height and plenty of clearance for the rocker arms. I had to work my way thru a few hundred dollars worth of parts to find this combination but I guess that is good for the economy!

Attached picture 4163221-manley2.jpg
Posted By: AndyF

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 02/03/08 08:38 PM

Just for reference, here is a picture that shows the parts used. PSI 1246 springs and the Manley retainers and locks.

Manley retainers 23640-16 will work with Manley 221424-16 springs and the Manley 13198 locks to provide a 2.00 installed height setup that is good for 0.850 lift roller cams. Manley says the 424 spring is good for .880 lift but that seems to be pushing it. The Jesel rocker arm geometry is good up to a little over .900 lift and then it starts to run off the side of the valve. I'm not sure what rocker arms a guy would use if they wanted to run more lift that that. Guess that is a different problem to solve some day.

Attached picture 4163226-parts.jpg
Posted By: ccdave

Re: 0.800 lift on EZ heads - 02/04/08 01:16 AM

Quote:

Andy, is there enough flow at .800 to make it worth
your while? I would have figured it stalled by then
Its surprising that the tool is strong enough to
pop the springs off, I have the same and on my
W-9 I have to pull 4 springs per head to get to
the head studs






© 2024 Moparts Forums