|
|
|
Re: Rocker arm issues.
[Re: AndyF]
#3039049
05/02/22 11:50 AM
05/02/22 11:50 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 9,379
Super Spudsville
Mr PotatoHead
Half Baked
|
Half Baked
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 9,379
Super Spudsville
|
Seen two vids on the new mopar small block trick flo heads, the rockers beating the tops of the retainers and one broke valve. Wonder what the mis match in parts was here? My guess is that someone at the PRW factory stamped a set of 1.50 rockers with the 1.60 ID and then they got boxed and sold as 1.60 rockers. PRW gave me a set of their steel rocker arms when they first came out for a magazine article, but the rockers were a timebomb so I never used them. The rockers had ribs around the roller tip that were too big. The ribs hit the valve lock before the roller hit the valve stem so the load was all being carried by the valve lock. I never even started the engine when I saw that. Just boxed up the rocker arms and sent them back and never included them in the article. I assume they fixed this design flaw but I haven't looked at a set since.
STOP POTATO HATE!
|
|
|
Re: Rocker arm issues.
[Re: Mr PotatoHead]
#3039114
05/02/22 03:06 PM
05/02/22 03:06 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,490
So. Burlington, Vt.
fast68plymouth
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,490
So. Burlington, Vt.
|
Seen two vids on the new mopar small block trick flo heads, the rockers beating the tops of the retainers and one broke valve.
Wonder what the mis match in parts was here?
The only rockers I would have any real “expectation” about fitting those heads, without needing modifications to something, are the HS part numbers recommended by TF. Anything else should get extra scrutiny(although they should all be checked). If there is evidence of contact between the rocker and the retainer.......IMO, that’s on the one doing the final assembly.
68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123
Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
|
|
|
Re: Rocker arm issues.
[Re: Greenwood]
#3040015
05/05/22 04:51 PM
05/05/22 04:51 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,490
So. Burlington, Vt.
fast68plymouth
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,490
So. Burlington, Vt.
|
If the engine combo is slightly “under-cammed”, then the added ratio(area under the curve) should pay off.
Adding ratio is no guarantee of added power.
I’ve swapped rockers from 1.5 to 1.6 several times where the result was a reduction of power across the board.
We have 1.2 break in rockers for SBC.
Sometimes even when swapping from those to the normal 1.5’s or 1.6’s doesn’t result in huge gains.
68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123
Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
|
|
|
Re: Rocker arm issues.
[Re: Greenwood]
#3040055
05/05/22 07:02 PM
05/05/22 07:02 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 43,080
Bend,OR USA
Cab_Burge
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 43,080
Bend,OR USA
|
[ That's an interesting observation. I've just got a set of worked over J-heads. I have a hunch I will be able to do a real world comparison where I find out exactly what the power difference is between 513 lift and 585-590 lift, with no other changes.  Are you sure that the cam with more lift doesn't have more duration at .020, .050, .100 and at .200 lift on the lifters?   All the BB Mopar V8 I've dealt with at the track and on a engine dyno like more air with more fuel  Your on the right path 
Last edited by Cab_Burge; 05/05/22 07:03 PM.
Mr.Cab Racing and winning with Mopars since 1964. (Old F--t, Huh)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
