W2 - Harland Sharp rockers, but no valve tip oiling?

So I've started the work on my W2 Econo heads, in the shop now, all valve train parts having been acquired. In parallel to this work the question of "best" street/trip rocker arms came up. I currently have the MP blue ones (from some years ago), still in the box, so presumably in good shape. But since my heads are the Econo heads I still needed to source the shafts, mounting hardware, etc.

Well, my machinist suggested that I simply bite the bullet on this expense and go Harland Sharp and never worry again. Alright, I have read plenty of good reviews here about these, I reached out to the HS folks, spoke with Randy Jr. who agreed to send me a test rocker arm so I could confirm that my CompCams #930 valve spring, which is 1.550" OD will clear their rockers, which are good up to 1.500". They did, so I thought "awesome, I'm all set"! To boot I have been looking at the 1.6 ratio rockers, heck, why not. I have it all taken apart and now is the time to "design" for max benefit (so to speak).

Hmm...that lasted a couple of hours, b/c as I kept on wanting to order them and twirling the rocker in my hand I couldn't force myself to overlook the fact that these do not have the valve roller oiling provision.

Is that a big deal? I am worried that it may in fact be for my application: this is not a 1/4 mile hauler that I'm building, it is a street (90%) / strip (10%) car, which will see plenty of idle and off-idle time.

Every single rocker I've ever owned, the CompCamps Mangum, the Crane ductile iron or the W2 MPs to name a few, have always had valve tip direct oiling provision. I emailed HS about this, but haven't heard back. In the meantime I figured I'd reach out for some forum feedback.

So what say you? Is this something I am overthinking? I will say that the roller wheel diameter on the HS rocker is much bigger than the MP one (0.610" vs 0.477").

Maybe a "test" rocker is a "blem" or not finished as one that will be sold in a set. Make a phone call.

agreed

Yup, got it. It was already after-hours today when I posted so I thought I might as well get smarter about this topic before I call tomorrow. Anyways, will do that and will update the thread with the info.

Thanks!

I just got done putting my W2 harland sharp rockers back on the motor. I don't recall seeing a hole for oiling the tips but I didn't look for it. They do have good oiling to the adjuster and pushrod.

Mine have around 2000 or so miles on them and they have been great.

They don’t have oil holes to the spring side of the rocker.

At least, none of the ones I’ve ever used had them.

Of course........ the Jesels I’ve used didn’t either.

HS rockers do not have valve tip oiling - PERIOD. I've called them regarding this and they claim its not necessary, Personally I was more concerned about the lack of oil to cool the springs, there is enough "splash" to lube the tips and rollers.

My T&D does oil the tip & spring.

You can ask for the oiling he did mine on the indy heads

Alright you guys...I talked to Ryan Jr. again this moring, to give him credit he took the time to answer all my questions and did not rush through any of this. For a guy like myself who sees this kind of expenditure once in a blue mooon this was pretty important.

OK, so what's the story here?

Well, on the point of "why no direct roller/valve tip oiling" his answer was: normally this is not required. There is enough splash lubrication, even in a street setup that is sufficient to coat things. In fact, he did say that they specifically put up the "potential need for oiliing restriction" message on their webitsite since some setups, like those which run the full-time oiling to the heads (by having the cam journals machined for oil passage) can in fact put too much oil up there. He did allude to the cases where this happened and too much oil was simply causing other problems. In such cases they recommend that at least a provision be made in the heads to install a threaded plug, so should the need arise now or in the future to restrict the oil flow this does not require an additional trip to the machine shop. We did not talk about the spring cooling impact of the oil splash, which is something I was well aware of and yet in the "heat" of the conversation completely forgot to mention.

On the subject of the size of the valve tip roller diameter, he did say this design change allowed them to provide for more spacing to clear larger valve spring retainers. Some rockers are still made with the smaller rollers, however the SB Mopar stuff uses the larger stuff, not just the roller but the pin as well. This has been bulletproff in "...hundreds if not thousands of applications...".

What else?

Well, I asked him about a higher rocker arm ratio like 1.7 (I am purchasing 1.6 which will get me a valve lift of approx 0.590" with my hudraulic roller cam). His response was: tried it, but it had proven to be problematic. That ratio required a lot more clearance in the body of the rocker (machining by the pushrod side) which made for a thin area of the rocker fulcrum, that was not a comfortable situation for them, so they decided not to pursue this any further. I am thinking depending on the rocker material this maybe a less significant issue, so using steel as opposed to aluminum would have a bearing on this.

OK, that's about it. Hopefully I am not forgetting anything...as I called him he was literally in the process of finishing up a set of the precise rocker arms I ordered, which as it turned out was my Summit Racing order.

All in all this was a very pleasant experience with the Harland Sharp folks!

The few times I have talked to them on the phone it has been a good experience as well. Thanks for sharing your conversation.

Personally I think the spring cooling is OK, most fo the oil is going to puddle around the springs before draining.