Adjustable rockers adjusters problem?..

-
Sometimes, there's nothing you can do on those factory adjustable rockers but clearance them, even if you have relocated the rocker shaft. I do wholeheartedly agree that it's not best to grind on them. A machining broach is best if they have to be clearanced. Sometimes, there's simply no way around it.
 
Last edited:
RustyRatRod said:
They fail on the pushrod end. The pushrod pokes a hole right through them. I've seen a few.....quite a few if I include what I've seen online. They cannot stand the spring pressure.

Now the old HD Mopar Performance style are thicker. They're a different story....but hard to find.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about dumb dumb?.. poking a hole through adjustable rockers?...
 
He had to grind the rockers for clearance for the retainer &/or spring. BHs are smaller near the rocker & should not need grinding. Also, rocker geometry is controlled by valve length, not spring length or load.
 
Bewy said:
He had to grind the rockers for clearance for the retainer &/or spring. BHs are smaller near the rocker & should not need grinding. Also, rocker geometry is controlled by valve length, not spring length or load.
Click to expand...

Well stupid me and here I thought it was controlled by relocating the rocker shaft.
 
[1] Post #61. What do you do if the shaft needs to be lowered to correct geometry with shaft rockers?

[2] Post #44. Rockers clearanced for springs.
 
Bewy said:
[1] Post #61. What do you do if the shaft needs to be lowered to correct geometry with shaft rockers?

[2] Post #44. Rockers clearanced for springs.
Click to expand...


I can’t think of a single time the shaft needed to be lower. Ever. That would mean the valve tip is less than OE and the lift is much less than OE. So that makes zero sense.


Rocker design and tip, lift, stem height all affect geometry. If you are grinding on a rocker you have geometry issues. Fix that and leave the rockers alone.

Again, since you are carrying the flag for beehive springs (which aren’t new BTW) I’ll ask you again. How does going to a beehive spring correct bad geometry?

Looking forward to your answer.
 
Bewy said:
[1] Post #61. What do you do if the shaft needs to be lowered to correct geometry with shaft rockers?

[2] Post #44. Rockers clearanced for springs.
Click to expand...

Nothing, because it never will.

Sometimes you have to clearance the rockers.
 
yellow rose said:
I can’t think of a single time the shaft needed to be lower. Ever. That would mean the valve tip is less than OE and the lift is much less than OE. So that makes zero sense.


Rocker design and tip, lift, stem height all affect geometry. If you are grinding on a rocker you have geometry issues. Fix that and leave the rockers alone.

Again, since you are carrying the flag for beehive springs (which aren’t new BTW) I’ll ask you again. How does going to a beehive spring correct bad geometry?

Looking forward to your answer.
Click to expand...

Of course it doesn't correct geometry. The beehive springs came about when a dual spring was needed and there wasn't the room for one. At least, that's always been my understanding. I'm not sure who did it first, but I believe it was one of the foreign car companies that used a really cramped OHC head. You know, one of those where the springs are down in a HOLE in the head? lol
 
Beehives also have a dynamic resonance frequency due to the way the mass distributes as it compresses. This can be a major benefit that can result in lower spring pressures before the valvetrain goes unstable. Plus a reduction in the reciprocating mass.

But none of that fixes bad starting geometry which needs to be corrected for valve length and total actual lift.
 
Phreakish said:
Beehives also have a dynamic resonance frequency due to the way the mass distributes as it compresses. This can be a major benefit that can result in lower spring pressures before the valvetrain goes unstable. Plus a reduction in the reciprocating mass.

But none of that fixes bad starting geometry which needs to be corrected for valve length and total actual lift.
Click to expand...

Well.....I was tryin to keep it simple. lol But yeah, they are very similar to the old Moog variable rate coil springs. Remember those? They had like half the coils really far apart and the other half closer together.....somewhat similar theory. They worked well.
 
Phreakish said:
Beehives also have a dynamic resonance frequency due to the way the mass distributes as it compresses. This can be a major benefit that can result in lower spring pressures before the valvetrain goes unstable. Plus a reduction in the reciprocating mass.

But none of that fixes bad starting geometry which needs to be corrected for valve length and total actual lift.
Click to expand...

I would also just "guess" that between one or the other, correcting rocker geometry has a much advantage than just adding beehive sprAngs.
 
RustyRatRod said:
I would also just "guess" that between one or the other, correcting rocker geometry has a much advantage than just adding beehive sprAngs.
Click to expand...

Two different things. Proper geometry is necessary no matter what. A well applied beehive setup can extend rpm and open up power, but can't be guessed at. Takes more engineering to get it right, but the results are well worth it - but there's also a point at which you can't get a good beehive to fit the loads required for the lift..
 
Phreakish said:
Two different things. Proper geometry is necessary no matter what. A well applied beehive setup can extend rpm and open up power, but can't be guessed at. Takes more engineering to get it right, but the results are well worth it - but there's also a point at which you can't get a good beehive to fit the loads required for the lift..
Click to expand...

Well I know that......I was sayin if you're gonna do one or the other....the geometry is by FAR more important. Especially on a budget. The beehives are nice, but costly and do nothing for geometry.
 
YR,
You are getting confused with what I said.....& what I didn't say. I never said BH springs fixed poor geometry. Post where I said that. What I said was for the OP to use BHs in response to his post #44, where he said he was grinding rockers for spring clearance. In other words, no grinding of rockers reqd if you use BHs.

My 'suggestion' to lowering the rocker shaft was a reply to RRR's #61 post where he said geometry was corrected by 'relocating' the shaft. A bit of sarcasm was what it was.

As for BHs not being new, I am well aware of that since I have been doing this since 1965. I have used BHs in many engines for at least 15 yrs, & will be using them in a 440 I am currently building. Anybody who doesn't use BHs/conical springs when they can with all their advantages needs their head read.
 
Bewy said:
YR,
You are getting confused with what I said.....& what I didn't say. I never said BH springs fixed poor geometry. Post where I said that. What I said was for the OP to use BHs in response to his post #44, where he said he was grinding rockers for spring clearance. In other words, no grinding of rockers reqd if you use BHs.

My 'suggestion' to lowering the rocker shaft was a reply to RRR's #61 post where he said geometry was corrected by 'relocating' the shaft. A bit of sarcasm was what it was.

As for BHs not being new, I am well aware of that since I have been doing this since 1965. I have used BHs in many engines for at least 15 yrs, & will be using them in a 440 I am currently building. Anybody who doesn't use BHs/conical springs when they can with all their advantages needs their head read.
Click to expand...


Exactly my point. You suggested a bad fix for a geometry problem. The shafts are too low and too close to the valve. So why not fix it correctly instead of using a different spring? That makes ZERO sense.

If you fix the geometry he won’t have to grind the rockers, change springs or anything else, AND he will fix the real issue.
 
YR,
You need glasses. For the umpteenth time, I suggested BH springs so that the rockers would not need grinding......not to fix geometry.
 
YR,
Pressed the wrong key before adding I clearly stated in post # 57 the BHs were for spring CLEARANCE, not to fix geometry.
And speaking of 'geometry', I do not see anywhere that the OP was unhappy with the rocker contact on the valve tip, only that he was having issues finding suitable adjusters for the rockers.

And you have probably got it wrong with your statement 'the shafts are too close to the valve'. If you meant the rockers are too close to the valve, & hence spring contact with the rocker, it is quite possible the spring OD is a tad too large. There will be a limit with some engines as to how large the OD of the spring can be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top