426 Hemi Valvetrain Question

I have a question if you guys can help. I am building 472 aluminum Mopar Performance block and heads and like to know if anyone has installed Product Innovation rocker arm assembly. They make roller and non roller styles. The company is based in Canada.

I haven't heard of them before. Hopefully someone can report their experience.

I've looked at their stuff on ebay. The prices are sure good. I think I have some of their regular rockers. They look fine. The price is so good I think you should give them a shot. I would buy with the roller rockers.

I have not heard rave reviews for those rockers on ebay. They are cheap for a reason and cheaping out on rockers , especially on a Hemi , is not something one should do.

Look similar to the DLI roller rockers.

I almost went with a set of those rockers on my Hemi but choose not to take a chance by cheaping out, so I decided to go with the Barton rocker system.

Cheep parts get real expensive
I just tried to search them (Product Innovation) on the WWW and came up empty... Conversely I've been on the lookout for some used rocker for a cackle motor (no Spring pressure or RPM) and these may fit the bill.

I can tell you, I called Indy on a complete set just the other week as I have a brand new Hemi block sitting here, and they are $3600 with everything but push rods, but they are at least 18 weeks or worse as the foundry hasn't made any in a year....Called Barton, and those are $4900 and 10-12 weeks...

I am willing to part with my complete Indy set WITH push rods for less than new so I can upgrade to the Bartons if someone is interested. I can't go $.50 on the dollar, but I could go $.75 on the dollar...And they are available today! Maybe even the block...

I may upgrade anyways and just save these for the other block.

I am in Lockport NY...

I do love the cacklefest videos.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/274044247904?hash=item3fce4f5f60:g:hMEAAOSwcWpbe3Qd

Personally I think they look similar to the Mancini house brand rockers. With the long adjuster and design. Might be worth a call to Mancini first, they will tell you who makes the ones they sell. Also if they are the same company maybe they can give you some feedback. For the roller version they do look like DLI.

https://www.manciniracing.com/indy14.html

Their stock and roller rockers looks like the Mopar/DLI

I bought the barton a little over a year ago and thought they were 3800-4000.... so I checked rays site and they list for 4200.... I wasnt going to chance anything, I know what my plans are with the motor and rocker gear isnt the place to cheap out when you want to run some RPM.... Now with that being said, Ive ran some steel bodied norris rockers, and that motor got shifted at 8k and never had any issues.

So what do you guys think on the T&D systems. They look better than the Barton stuff tbh.

Barton's are T & D's. All 426 Hemi's are hard on the guides.

I see that now...I guess I was looking at the setup used for the edelbrock head comparing it to the regular Barton setup..I know the edelbrock is a rolled valve angle head..but the base looks awesome

I am thinking Bartons also. I wanted to see if anyone used the ones on ebay and to see if they worked well
Thanks guys

Anyone here broken a factory Hemi rocker arm as a direct result of arm failure?

Wonder why the bad rap on factory arms. Except the ratios being off from time to time.

Does the Edelbrock head not use the typical Barton setup? What would be the reason?

I don't think anyone has broken one. It's just that the roller rockers look sexier. And in your mind the roller tip has to be easier on the guides. Not that anyone is going to actually be driving a 426 Hemi any miles to speak of. This isn't the old days. I've never torn down a stock street hemi that the guides weren't worn out.

and you really think a roller tip that operates the full sweep closer to the stem center ISN'T easier on the guides than the stock rockers that hang off the edge of the stem at the beginning of the sweep?

A stock street Hemi with how many miles ?

You took me backwards there. I'm saying I wouldn't put one together without roller rockers. Partly because I think they have to be 10 times better on the guides. And of course I think roller rockers are pretty.

Most that I have torn down had 20, 30 or 40,000 miles. They were worn out. People used to drive these cars. 4:10 Dana and 70 mph speed limit. Those were the good ol days.

Anyone with experience on Rocker Arms Unlimited - Used to be Rocker Arm Specialist and previously Rocker Arm of Torrance. Their roller rocker (PL-426). Visited their shop in nor cal in the 90's, They (back then) also offered correcting head geometry in shop.

Barton's have separate pedestals allowing you to adjust the geometry of each valve separately.
The original pedestals can be shimmed up or machined down to adjust geo, but the change affects both intake and exhaust valve sides simultaneously.

These day just like in the old days spring pressure is not your friend they get real high with a big MM hemi Cam shaft at an inch lift. This were RB. set up is nice and you can also get to a spring if you break one with the head on the motor in the car quite easy The 426 Hemi in my Challenger ran the stock rockers but back in the early 70s you did not had much of a choice. One rocker never broke it just was not the weak link yet back then.

And we’re turned 8500 then too.

Hemi's are hard on guides...on the intake side. The short sweep/radius of the intake rocker arms side load the guide quite a bit. The exhaust not so much as they are quite long (flatter arc) The biggest issue with stock rockers is they all need to be ground to correct true up the ratio. In blown application you used to see Roller rockers on the intake side and non rollers (Kluff rockers) on the exhaust. Also time spent on centering the contact patch of the rocker to valve stem will greatly reduce guide wear. I have gone as far as re-positioning rocker stands to correct this.

True, the short valve-side rocker arm lever, combined with high lift, has a large side-thrust vector at both ends of the curve.
Typically the size of the vector isn't related to the rocker arm ratio, since ratio changes are generally done by adjusting the cam-side lever length.
As the valve-side lever gets longer (392 and 426 exhausts) more of the motion is nearly vertical. An engine I'm researching has a 2.03" long rocker lever and .350" lift, a ratio of 5.8:1. By comparison, a 1.65" lever at .700" lift is 2.4:1.

Go with Bartons. Best bet in the long run. Take mine to 7900, plenty of street miles since 2007-ish.

Those look a lot like the BAE #8 rockers

That looks great. Barton’s is going to be it
Thanks

Those blue ones are beautiful, mine were red and I liked them too. Sometimes I see them natural or maybe silver. The reason I mention this is because I want you to ask what color they are going to be when you order them. I don't want you to think they are going to be beautiful blue and then get them and don't like the color. Ask when you order. You need to be happy.

I believe all of Barton's newer current rocker arm sets are natural. They quit anodizing them in colors. Probably for a cost save. Not like they aren't making a fortune off of each set already.

No, they are Barton's.

The rockers are the same with spray bars that are on my friends RB built hemi 572 CI. Was close to the first one Barton built back in 1999 and yes been rebuilt a few times and still runs 8.90s without reving the motor. Myself I like those rockers on a race cars and even a street cars. I would check them every Winter or specific period of time and make sure the oiling is super clean but we do that with this motor and have never had a problem with them. It is nice to be able to access the Valve spring without sliding the shaft out. Back in the old days whey my Challengers motor in early 70s had a shift point of 9000 an 10000 through the traps this system would of been so nice to have instead of the long shaft system. Push a 426 to those RPMs was just normal in those days and you cam up with some broken V Springs.

OH sorry Rick..I was gonna say .

Does anyone know why RB did not use an offset exhaust rocker (as are his intakes and both factory intake and exhaust rockers)?
Examine the (HT: 6PKRTSE: great, thanks) picture of the blue RB set. The intake shafts are parallel to each other and the crank axis, and 90° to the valve stem axis. Since the valve stems are only canted in one axis (cross plane, 90° to the crankshaft), the rotational path of the rocker's tip is in the same plane as the stem
The exhaust shafts are skewed at a shallow angle (appears to be 22.5°) to attain alignment with the exhaust stem tips. When the rocker oscillates, it does not push the valve straight down, but at 90° to the shaft axis, and the roller scrubs sideways on the valve stem tip.

Ideas?

It would be in the spark plug hole