Andy, What is the valve timing, opening and closing @ .050

Thank's

OK, I figured it out.
Thank's

I was planning on using the Comp rocker arms but when I mocked it all up I got this interesting result. The cam has a .392 lobe on it so the Comps are acting a little short for some reason.

So I pulled a set of 1.60 RAS rocker arms off the shelf and tried them. Bingo, exact ratio. Not sure what is up but I think I'll run the RAS arms this time around. The springs are Comp 26094 so they'll handle the .600+ lift.

excellent info- good looking heads. btw, what kind of oil pump is that?

Play with the pushrod length with the comp rockers before condemning them to the scrap heap

Good point, but I can't play too much since the Comp rocker arms deliver oil to the adjuster thru a waisted area and that area needs to be lined up in the rocker arm body to work right. So at most, there is only a few turns of adjustment that can be used before you start to restrict the oil path to the adjuster ball.

As for the previous question: the oil pump is a standard dual inlet Milodon. I don't recall the part number but it is just the classic aluminum pump that Milodon has been selling forever. I bought this pump used in 1982 and have used it on a lot of engines over the years. It might be the oldest speed part in my entire collection that is still in use.

IIRC the waisted area is around 3/16 to 1/4" wide? There should be enough area to play with there.

In my case with (almost) the same cylinder heads and rockers, .050 difference in pushrod length above or below 8.550 resulted in less actual valve lift than the theoretical cam card number. 8.550 ended up giving the same lift as the cam card at zero lash. I couldn't argue with that.

Naturally that number does you no good at all with an RB, just stating my limited experience....

but it'd be nice to see another article get out with the ras rockers, they're fantastic looking pieces.

Yeah, I really like the RAS rocker arms and I like the guys at RAS. Gary and Blaine are both cool guys to work with, laid back but very sharp.

I think I'll run the RAS rocker arms just because the motor should make a little more power with the extra lift. Also, the 1.60 arms give me quite a bit more pushrod clearance. The Comp rocker arms were pushing the pushrods out so close to the head that I was thinking I needed to grind more clearance. The 1.60 arms pull the pushrod in enough that I don't need to grind on the heads so the knocks another issue off my to-do list.

I'm going to do a little shoot out between the new Edelbrock Super Victor intake and the Mopar Performance M1 with the 4500 flange. So far the winner is MP since they actually delivered their intake on time.

I like this M1 with the big 4500 flange. I hadn't seen one of these before but it looks like a nice manifold. Not sure why they aren't more popular, the price is fair and it looks like it will make some power.

The M1 4500 actually works well, big plenum combined with nice turn radius to the outboard runners.

To be a real test of the manifolds I might have run a bit bigger cam, with small ports and a big manifold it'll want a bit more cam timing to really feed the holes up high and TAX the runners to see what they can really do.

I'll give away a nugget here...what I find works well on strokers is going bigger on the intake lobe and phasing it early (like for yours maybe a 270/276 in at 102-104). I discovered this years ago that big U/D solid cams always made MAD POWER in 500 BB's....108 center cams that were often factory ground +6 for a 102ICL....one of Harold's pioneering 'tricks' that worked very well with his ramps. The assymetric lobes (I believe) actually advance the ICL slightly compared to asymmetrical lobe measured at the same .050 up/.050 down but advancing the cam (especailly with a roller) seems to work as well. The early center gets the cam up "big" earlier in the Cycle whan the big arm is trying to fill the hole with air, also by advancing the cam on the other side the closing event is sooner making the cam act 'smaller', but also remember since a long stroke comes back up the hole at a faster rate per degree of rotation, you give back more effective displacement per degree after BDC..I never liked 108 ICL's on my big arm stuff...if it works great....to me that means the cam is still probably (usually) ~10 degrees @ .050 smaller than the motor really wants. The bigger cam phased early will make as much powerband torque in many/most cases plus also make more power up high with no trade-offs.

The HUGE advantage of a roller, especailly in an under-ported 500" BB or even SB wedge is the valve can hang around at or near peak lift longer than a FT..this is true for ALL motors with a roller of course but with a stroker the piston speed is higher at any given RPM so it has more hole to feed in the same amount of time.

works for me...your results may vary

Did I put them on right? I wasn't too sure if the grey boot was different than the black boot or not. I put the grey boots on the distributor end since they were a little smaller and took up less space there.

Streetwize - yeah I suppose a bigger cam would make more power but this is supposed to be a street type buildup and the torque curve is supposed to start at 2500 rpm. In fact, depending on how this test goes I might pull the roller out and put a big hyd flat tappet in there just to see what a super low maintenance motor would do on the pump.

Throw in a Team G 4500 in your shootout. It's not as pretty or racey looking as the M1, but I'll bet it will out perform it.-Tom.

Andy...yeah, guess I really didn't make my point....IMO you can go bigger and make more overall power AND have great streetability by phasing a bigger cam in early.

This is a 517 with a BIG hydraulic (>265@.050...comparable to a ~275-ish Solid)roller and the MW Stage VI Chaps, at 12:1 it's got an awesome throttle response punch and a great powerband even in a 3700 pound 3.54 gear car. Even at 2500 rpm (if I swapped in a stall that tight) it would pull a freighliner truck with the MW ported Indy dual plane. I may go to the Indy rat roaster and 2 x 4 later (like the one you tested) but it'll probably be swapped into another car at that point.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=jd8GeXYYkKU

I had a Team G and M1 on both my Duster and Belvedere. For sheer drivability the M1 won hands down. It ended up staying on the Belvedere and ultimately the car went faster as well. The Team G went on and won out on the Duster as it just had a bit more up top than the M1 did. Both good intakes just depends on what you are after is all.