RHS head valve train??

-
The stem height 'which u can cut down' will effect the geometry not necessarily the spring height.., only when the spring height has been jacked to the hilt be means of pop up locks or retainers...does the inability the just 'cut stems for geomtry' come into play due to them ending up recessed below the lock itself.jmo
 
1wild&crazyguy said:
really...if all was correct in the design, it most likely the larger after market rocker....but if u say the 273 rocker hits a 1.437-1.45 spring, then it could be the head design/copy is off some or based on a shorter spring/stem height..
Click to expand...

No, the 273 rocker clears with a 1.44" OD spring. It doesn't clear by much (I don't think you could go any bigger), but it DOES clear.

Springs are Hughes #1110.
 
Looks like FABO is the place to be when dealing with the Magnum style cylinder head. I'll add another option although it is pricey--unless you can find them on the cheap, like I was lucky enough to. This is the best rocker setup going. J.Rob p.s. These are the EngineQuest versions.
 

Attachments

  • T&D 001 (1024 x 768).jpg
    100.3 KB · Views: 377
It is called Glyptol or you can call it electric motor insulating varnish. J.Rob
 
IQ52 said:
2010MoparNatsandChenowethcontestengine037.jpg
Here is another method if you want to spend the time.

RHS LAX head with the stud bosses drilled and tapped for 7/16 studs. Scorpion Chevy rockers, .150" long valves, Jomar Mopar Magnum stud gridle, 1.55" diameter springs, 1.900" IH, .750" lift.
2010MoparNatsandChenowethcontestengine050.jpg
Click to expand...

Nice rockers and nice girdle. .750" on a Magnum? How'd you even get the heads to remain stable that far? Have you had this running? If so what was the combo, if you care to share. Thanks J.Rob
 
J.Rob,

Yeah its a RHS LA head that we put the stud mounted rockers on. I'd have to look at my build notes but I think I could have gone to .800" lift.

Flow stability at upper lifts or rocker arm stability at rpm?

Flow stability is hush, hush.

Rocker stability? Well I don't have a high speed camera, so who knows if it was stable or not. But, the aluminum stud girdle has it's own girdles bolting it down to the head at each end and the middle using the head bolts and the shaft rocker stands. I don't think it is gunna move around even if we tried dynamite and tire tools. We spun it to 8,000+ RPM on a 292ci/273 and made 473HP. I believe it should have made much more horsepower, but there was no time to try different cams, timing, carburetors, anything. The owner let us use the engine for a dyno contest. Basically it was, build it, figure out where the WATER LEAK was (I either have too much water or NO water), fix that, spin it up, record the horsepower, tear it down, put stock heads on, replace the cam and give it back to the owner. Some R&D time would have been great but it just didn't happen.

The head assemblies are in boxes in the storage room, so........someday...........

That EngineQuest set looks good. What kind of valve spring diameters can you run and how much lift?
 
IQ52 said:
2010MoparNatsandChenowethcontestengine037.jpg
Here is another method if you want to spend the time.

RHS LAX head with the stud bosses drilled and tapped for 7/16 studs. Scorpion Chevy rockers, .150" long valves, Jomar Mopar Magnum stud gridle, 1.55" diameter springs, 1.900" IH, .750" lift.
2010MoparNatsandChenowethcontestengine050.jpg
Click to expand...

Interesting set up. You are lifting the valve way more than I have seen with these heads. Can you share what they flow & what else has been done to them? Did you need to hog out the pushrod holes in the heads also? I know it gets tight when using a 3/8 Pushrod. From what I can see it looks like you went after the exhaust ports pretty good, I cant see the intakes very well in the pictures.

I attempted a set up like that when the RHS Heads first came on the scene but a BUTCHER drilled the Studs Crooked as all get out and messed up the whole job. They are now Boat Ancor's!

Any Information you can share would I am sure be appreciated by all.
 
I'll dig out my notes and flow charts and post some thoughts. I don't think it is gonna make much difference as it appears that Edelbrock is going to produce the Victor head for the LA engines.

Of course Edelbrock has announced the RPM Xtreme head for the big blocks and I've never seen one of those in real life.
 
IQ52 said:
I'll dig out my notes and flow charts and post some thoughts. I don't think it is gonna make much difference as it appears that Edelbrock is going to produce the Victor head for the LA engines.

Of course the Edelbrock has announced the RPM Xtreme head for the big blocks and I've never seen on of those in real life.
Click to expand...

Cool on the notes!

That would be interesting to see them actually do it "Victor Heads" for the LA Engines.
When did you hear that? I haven't heard or seen anything about it.
 
IQ52 said:
I'll dig out my notes and flow charts and post some thoughts. I don't think it is gonna make much difference as it appears that Edelbrock is going to produce the Victor head for the LA engines.

Of course Edelbrock has announced the RPM Xtreme head for the big blocks and I've never seen one of those in real life.
Click to expand...


Okay, my notes worked where my memory failed me. Designed it for a 5.200" length valve, I messed up and ordered a 5.110" valve, 1.940" intake, 1.625" exhaust. Used an .080" thick lash cap to keep the correct rocker arm geometry after ordering the wrong length valve.

lift.......intake flow.....exhaust flow
.100.........77.................NA
.200.......143.................NA
.300.......194.................NA
.400.......234................215
.500.......260................235
.600.......278................244
.700.......288................244

Crower valve springs 68670S 250# @ 1.820" IH 725# @ .750" lift coil bind @ 1.010" I recommended close to a single pattern cam and the cam grinder cam up with a long exhaust duration grind. I was just doing the heads and intake, others were in charge of the short block decisions.

The push rod pinch thickness was only .020" in some places between the intake port and the pushrod hole. So there was very little opening of the pushrod pinch. Tests with valves up to 2.05" only got a few cfm more flow by completely removing the pinch. Even with the large pushrod hole, the 3/8 pushrod was just touching on the intake manifold side, right at the top of the hole, so we ground some extra clearance there.

Selected the Edelbrock Super Victor intake because we knew we were going to spin this beyond 8,000 RPM. You know, 13.4 lb-ft of torque and 472.9 HP.
 
IQ52 said:
Okay, my notes worked where my memory failed me. Designed it for a 5.200" length valve, I messed up and ordered a 5.110" valve, 1.940" intake, 1.625" exhaust. Used an .080" thick lash cap to keep the correct rocker arm geometry after ordering the wrong length valve.

lift.......intake flow.....exhaust flow
.100.........77.................NA
.200.......143.................NA
.300.......194.................NA
.400.......234................215
.500.......260................235
.600.......278................244
.700.......288................244

Crower valve springs 68670S 250# @ 1.820" IH 725# @ .750" lift coil bind @ 1.010" I recommended close to a single pattern cam and the cam grinder cam up with a long exhaust duration grind. I was just doing the heads and intake, others were in charge of the short block decisions.

The push rod pinch thickness was only .020" in some places between the intake port and the pushrod hole. So there was very little opening of the pushrod pinch. Tests with valves up to 2.05" only got a few cfm more flow by completely removing the pinch. Even with the large pushrod hole, the 3/8 pushrod was just touching on the intake manifold side, right at the top of the hole, so we ground some extra clearance there.

Selected the Edelbrock Super Victor intake because we knew we were going to spin this beyond 8,000 RPM. You know, 13.4 lb-ft of torque and 472.9 HP.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting your numbers. I admire your custom work on the Valve Train and it looks trick as all get out! With all this work that was done to these heads you are probably into "Indy" Territory on Cost it would seem. Your flow numbers seem to be just about the same as out of the box RHS Heads though? I have used 3 Sets of these Heads now and with a mild clean up with 2.02 intakes and 1.65 Exhaust Valves they flow maybe a bit more at .500 & .550 lift.

Cool to see someone take a different approach on how to get it done.
 
Mad Dart said:
Thanks for posting your numbers. I admire your custom work on the Valve Train and it looks trick as all get out! With all this work that was done to these heads you are probably into "Indy" Territory on Cost it would seem. Your flow numbers seem to be just about the same as out of the box RHS Heads though? I have used 3 Sets of these Heads now and with a mild clean up with 2.02 intakes and 1.65 Exhaust Valves they flow maybe a bit more at .500 & .550 lift.

Cool to see someone take a different approach on how to get it done.
Click to expand...

I agree. I love to see people do different things. I was also expecting a bit more out of all the work though. Very cool nonetheless as you can lift the valve quite a bit more.

I used the magnum version with hughes magnum roller shaft rockers.
I'm not running an incredible amount of lift or crazy spring pressure so they were kind of a nice compromise between the better TD and the chevy style studmounts which I really dont like. I'm right about at .600 on a dial at the valve. These were also from brian.

The beehive spring gives a lot more clearance as you can see.

I had issues at first with roller position so I shimmed the rockers up.
I dont know why this is, but it is what it is. Not a problem really though.

perfectadjustmentandpushrodlength-1.jpg


rollerrockersandbeehivesprings.jpg
 
POS Dakota said:
I agree. I love to see people do different things. I was also expecting a bit more out of all the work though. Very cool nonetheless as you can lift the valve quite a bit more.

I used the magnum version with hughes magnum roller shaft rockers.
I'm not running an incredible amount of lift or crazy spring pressure so they were kind of a nice compromise between the better TD and the chevy style studmounts which I really dont like. I'm right about at .600 on a dial at the valve. These were also from brian.

The beehive spring gives a lot more clearance as you can see.

I had issues at first with roller position so I shimmed the rockers up.
I dont know why this is, but it is what it is. Not a problem really though.

perfectadjustmentandpushrodlength-1.jpg


rollerrockersandbeehivesprings.jpg
Click to expand...

Those rockers look like a great compromise between Chivvy and full on T&D's They seem to be like a Yella Terra design which can only be adjusted with pushrod length and shimming--I LIKE. I will use a set of these on my next Magnum build. Thanks for the pic's POS. J.Rob
 
Mad Dart said:
Thanks for posting your numbers. I admire your custom work on the Valve Train and it looks trick as all get out! With all this work that was done to these heads you are probably into "Indy" Territory on Cost it would seem. Your flow numbers seem to be just about the same as out of the box RHS Heads though? I have used 3 Sets of these Heads now and with a mild clean up with 2.02 intakes and 1.65 Exhaust Valves they flow maybe a bit more at .500 & .550 lift.

Cool to see someone take a different approach on how to get it done.
Click to expand...

Yes, I suppose we still have some things to learn about porting. When racing flowbenches, it is sometimes difficult to obtain accurate comparable measurements. Here is what the RHS stock port, with a 1.94 valve, flowed on our bench and the same head with our porting and a 2.05 valve.

Lift..........Stock Port 1.94............Ported 2.05

.100...............57cfm......................78cfm
.200..............124.........................147
.300..............184.........................203
.400..............230.........................241
.500..............255.........................275
.600..............257.........................296
.700..............249.........................306

The bigger valve can make a heap of difference!
 
IQ52 said:
Yes, I suppose we still have some things to learn about porting. When racing flowbenches, it is sometimes difficult to obtain accurate comparable measurements. Here is what the RHS stock port, with a 1.94 valve, flowed on our bench and the same head with our porting and a 2.05 valve.

Lift..........Stock Port 1.94............Ported 2.05

.100...............57cfm......................78cfm
.200..............124.........................147
.300..............184.........................203
.400..............230.........................241
.500..............255.........................275
.600..............257.........................296
.700..............249.........................306

The bigger valve can make a heap of difference!
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting the differences. I still truly admire your machining skills on this set up, Top Notch work no doubt!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top