change lifters and rods with rockers?

[Numax]

Just spitballing here, and it would be more work- but since you spending the time and money on those expensive ajustable rockers and custom made pushrods and I heard talk about springs ? Just an idea, take the cam out and send it to someone (like I did) oregon cam grinding and definitely know what you have and totally have what you want for like $75 ??

I didn't know cam grinding was so cheap, an old friend of mine used to build stock car sb mopars back in the day I'm hoping he will be able to accurately measure the cam for me. If it wasn't right I was going to buy a new one but if its that cheap to regrind then I'll have that done instead. Thanks!

 

[Numax]

How are you measuring? Calipers? Micrometers? Center of the lobe or ends, and is there a difference?

How many times do you measure it? I like to do 3 repeatable measurements within .001" - .002".

If a measurement is not repeatable, it's not accurate.

Digital Calipers, I was holding it as centered as I could.I measured close to ten times and my final measurements seemed the most accurate. I have a Dial indicator on the way so I can scrap all my old measurements and get it 100% dead on.

 

[Numax]

Ummm..... he WANTS Harland-Sharp rockers but can afford Speedmaters....

Are the speedmasters bad? I know they wouldnt be anything like harlands but is there any horror stories I should know about before going with them?

 

[nm9stheham]

FWIW, there has been at least one person using them fine here for drag racing.... I only can suggest doing general searches for them and trying to filter out the objective reports. My searches were not all that encouraging..... but I have no direct experience, and realize that you have to take all internet stuff with a grain if salt and sort out the racing usage from street usage IMHO and apply it to your use.

We are tying PRW's but one member here did not have a great experience with them; we modded them for better oiling before installing. Just 300 miles so far so they are working but that's hardly enough to make a fair conclusion for long term street operation.

The one definite issue that some searching around seemed to turn up on shaft mounted roller rockers is that the hardness of the shafts is important... not hard enough, and the needles dig in and it all falls apart.

 

[Numax]

FWIW, there has been at least one person using them fine here for drag racing.... I only can suggest doing general searches for them and trying to filter out the objective reports. My searches were not all that encouraging..... but I have no direct experience, and realize that you have to take all internet stuff with a grain if salt and sort out the racing usage from street usage IMHO and apply it to your use.

We are tying PRW's but one member here did not have a great experience with them; we modded them for better oiling before installing. Just 300 miles so far so they are working but that's hardly enough to make a fair conclusion for long term street operation.

The one definite issue that some searching around seemed to turn up on shaft mounted roller rockers is that the hardness of the shafts is important... not hard enough, and the needles dig in and it all falls apart.

Thanks for the insight. I had a feeling the shaft would be low quality but I planned on using one of the stock sets I have. I also read that people have had problems with the shaft size being off a few tenths but as long as the rockers fit on the stock ones i was just gonna junk the one that came with them. Also I planned on moddig for better oiling regardless of what brand I end up with.

 

[j par]

It was 70aarcuda who says he uses them and on his recommendation I'm going to try them also, but I've called Speedmaster and they are out of the 1.6:1 rockers now but they do have the 1.5:1.
I bought a set of those Proform rockers and couldn't get them back to summit fast enough, oh boy they were cheap junk

 

[nm9stheham]

Thanks for the insight. I had a feeling the shaft would be low quality but I planned on using one of the stock sets I have. I also read that people have had problems with the shaft size being off a few tenths but as long as the rockers fit on the stock ones i was just gonna junk the one that came with them. Also I planned on moddig for better oiling regardless of what brand I end up with.

Mmmmm, maybe stop and think about this a bit more... what info do you have on the stock shafts that says they are hard enough? Without knowing what hardness you need to have, and then testing the hardness of the stock shafts, there is no way to know if they will be adequate. We are talking surface hardness, that gets tested with a Brinnell hardness tester, or similar.

BTW our oiling modes were for adding valve and roller tip oiling to the PRW's.

 

[340dartley]

What are you trying to gain by changing the rocker arms? It sounds to me like your stock rockers are more than sufficient for your state of tune. If you are wanting to build a more race oriented motor then go ahead and upgrade. You will see little to no gains by changing rocker arms with stock ratio. Also you can't measure your valve lift at the valve with out a solid lifter . The hydraulic lifter will collapse under pressure. There are several guys here with low buck motors who can run down into the high 11s with stock rockers. Just hate to see you waste your money.

The advice here is sound just not sure if you need to worry about it. Most hydraulic purple cams are designed to work with stock rockers and push rods..

 

[AJ/FormS]

When I was ruminating about my engine build, I decided I wanted roller-tipped adjustable rockers, and had no opinion as to roller pivots,or ratios.
I had read from various sources, that the Mopar 1.5 stamped arms might not be a true 1.5ers.I also read that the roller pivots put most of the spring pressure into just one or two rollers.
I wanted to run a hydraulic flat tappet cam, for several reasons. 1) the retro-rollers in '99 were more than I needed and very pricey, and needed block mods to work, and did I mention they were pricey ?But more than anything I was building a DD, and after having several solid-lifter set-ups in the past, I was kindof done with lashing. I just wanted to drive it.
I also knew that having lived with a stick-car since 1970, that missed shifts were inevitable, and I really wanted a SBM that would more than survive that. Plus I was done with short-shifting, to avoid lifter pump-up. My baby was gonna rev. So that lead to high spring pressures and very low lifter preload, which lead to adjustable arms.
I wanted the roller tips cuz I had just blown a major amount of the budget on the Eddies, and I didn't want to wear out the guides any time soon.Since I was buying arms I might as well buy 1.6ers, was my thinking.
I had chosen the Eddies cuz I wanted closed chamber heads, and I wanted to get away from that dog-leg factory exhaust port.
Then I also wanted to exploit the "tight quench" theory and max out my compressions.
Keep in mind that in 99, there were very limited head selections. I could have machined the snot out of Ma's heads but that would have brought the cost up to that of the stock Eddies, and I was still stuck with that ugly exhaust port, and now I might be married to whatever intake I stuck on there.So Eddies seemed the logical way to go.
I knew I wanted a torquey motor, so a big cam was out. But I wanted the big-cam pull at the other end. After some time spent searching, I found that there were only two or perhaps three companies out there that build cams to sortof address this idea. I wanted a short period advertised cam, with a lotof 050 time and as much lift as the Eddies would support. That's a tough call. It requires a very fast rate of lift, and very generous springs.So I found a guy that I thought knew what I was trying to achieve. He made his recommendation.
Then I got side-tracked, and greedy, and stuck in the 292/508 cam. I knew right after the break-in that I had made a mistake.You know that cam made a heck of a top-end run. But it was a slowmobile til it got going. So I bumped up the compression with thinner headgaskets. Still soggy. So I messed with cam timing. But no change. So I installed some 4.30s. Now we were talking. 'course I no longer had a DD.
I pulled the cam.
I went back to the drawing board. I remembered what that cam-guy had recommended. I installed his itty-bitty 2430 cam. 223@050! Are you kidding me. However I had made up my mind that I knew chit about cams, and would have to trust somebody who did.That cam is a 276/284/110 advertised. Pretty teensy I thought.
I stuck it in, and reusing the felpro .039ers. I was prepared to test-drive that beast around the block, come back, and pitch that little guy.
Well surprise,surprise. That little guy was capital B,Big on performance. It was everything the cam-guy said it would be.But the big surprise was that it didn't know when to quit. It just pulled to no end, 5500,6000,6500,6800. I quit.
Well that cam, I expected to be in there forever, but around 2004, the beast dropped two lobes into the pan. So sad.So I called that same cam guy. After a little discussion we moved up to a 3037 cam. This is a 230@050. Just a little hotter.This cam lost a bit on the bottom, but I had had so much before, that after a while, I got used to it. But the midrange was terrific! And again, it didn't know when to quit.Since I had missed a few shifts with the earlier cams, I knew the engine could rev, and survive, deep into the 7s, so I decided to push it a little. I quit at 7500. It was still pulling. Now 7500 with 4.3s is 100mph in 3rd gear/1 to go.Fast enough I said.
Out came the 4.30s, in went the 3.55s, and I already had the GV by this time. The 2430 cam had registered some phenomenal mpgs with a double O/D. But I knew this cam was not gonna be able to pull that combo(1.97final drive). So now with the 3.55s and .78 O/D the final drive is2.77. She pulls that easy enough, requiring just2200 to vacuum peak which makes 64 mph.
-So finally, here's what has worked for me; 1.6 arms(roller tips only), Eddies, .035Quench, a fast-rate cam,designed for the.904 lifter,.020lifter preload, Static compression right around 11/1. a Dcr around 8.7,a starter gear of 3.55 x 3.09 =10.97.
I offer this cuz I spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours, figuring it out.It may not be a DD anymore for some guys, but the diaphragm clutch makes it so for me.It burns 87E10 at WOT with full-power timing of 34*, +/-2

-It has gone 93ish in the 1/8th, using the GearVender as a splitter. First,1od,Second, 2od, equals 93@7200,with 4.30s.Once out of the hole, the tach drops about 1400 at the shift. Shazzam!!
It's not real quick tho, with street suspension. 60fts are 2.00 to 2.24 with 325/50-15DRs, and the only successful ET I have is 7.92@92.9x@3650 total lbs.

-Summary
--Long story short those 1.6 aluminum arms,roller tips only, purchased from the Chrysler dealer in 99, are still on there; and the heads have never needed guides.After the cam break-in, I readjusted the preload, and in the 11 years since, I only recall 2 readjustments, one of which was a test. 1/4 turn preload is not enough.

OOps I think I got sidetracked. I might be in the wrong thread, again.
But no way I'm gonna erase an hour and a half's worth of typing, sorry Numax.
So for you, after reviewing your posts, about the only thing here that could be useful,to you, might be the summary.

 

[Blind Squirrel]

Holy crap AJ. Switch to decaf and get some sleep.

 

[j par]

I'm still waiting for the long version ! ??

 

[AJ/FormS]

Oh you guys............

 

[Numax]

haha its ok, great story. I had a feeling it was out of place but I couldn't stop reading. After reading for a few days I've decided that the cam I have is definitely way to big. Since this is going to be a street car I'm going with a small cam, probably just a hair larger than stock with a short duration. Ill swap the 360 heads that are on it for the original X heads after fitting them with 360 valves and a home port job and match, adjustable roller rockers somewere between 1.6 and 1.8 ratio and some beehive or conical springs. then throw on the dual plane eddie intake that it had on it before. I'm going for high to mid 300hp with the curve low on the rpm range, but anyone have any reason it wont make that?

 

[70aarcuda]

It was 70aarcuda who says he uses them and on his recommendation I'm going to try them also, but I've called Speedmaster and they are out of the 1.6:1 rockers now but they do have the 1.5:1.
I bought a set of those Proform rockers and couldn't get them back to summit fast enough, oh boy they were cheap junk

Still using them on 73 duster 360..with eddy heads...using the stainless steel ones....hughes 230/237 hydraulic cam...548/560 lift with the 1.6 ratio..using stock ball and ball pushrods since the rockers have cups on them.

 

[nm9stheham]

I'm going for high to mid 300hp with the curve low on the rpm range, but anyone have any reason it wont make that?

I am thinking you won't have the breathing in the heads to make the high 300 HP range. Low 300's is what I would expect. But 300HP + 325-350ft-lbs of torque is going to be a very nice street engine; work on the torque band being wide... which means start it low as you are thinking. I can't recall what you have for pistons... and that usually has a significant effect on torque down low; with the open combustion chambers you will need to be looking at your project compression ratio.

 

[Numax]

I am thinking you won't have the breathing in the heads to make the high 300 HP range. Low 300's is what I would expect. But 300HP + 325-350ft-lbs of torque is going to be a very nice street engine; work on the torque band being wide... which means start it low as you are thinking. I can't recall what you have for pistons... and that usually has a significant effect on torque down low; with the open combustion chambers you will need to be looking at your project compression ratio.

Stock flat pistons, honestly if it broke over 300hp I would be happy but if I just try to make that I know I wont get there. Im hoping that the heads will be enough with porting and 360 valves. I might have them decked as well to lower cpr. 10:1 would be ideal but it will probably end up being 8-9:1

8-8.5:1 is stock I think

 

[nm9stheham]

Get a head off and see how far down below the deck a piston is with it at TDC. Hope that the PO put in some better CR pistons than stock ones.

That 8-8.5 is the factory number.... reality is in the 7's for standard flat topped 318 pistons. Going with the 360 heads has the breathing but the CR will be even lower with the larger combustion chambers. So it requires head shaving (and matching cuts on the intake) or smaller chambered heads if you want CR and low end torque. Or go the other way, and rev it up and look for HP with a large cam and forget the low end.... but that is really only a usable formula for drag racing.

If the engine is not to be pulled apart for new pistons, I would go with shaving the heads and intake to get the combustion chamber volume down into the 67 CC range or smaller to have at least a true 8+:1 CR... which is what comes out with 67 cc chambers and a typical .080" piston top below the deck, and using as thin a head gasket as you can, like .028. (The originals were thin metal ones.) With that, at least with a smaller duration cam, the DCR will stay up a bit.

This thread sure has moved around a lot..... but is all good and hopefully useful.

 

[Numax]

Get a head off and see how far down below the deck a piston is with it at TDC. Hope that the PO put in some better CR pistons than stock ones.

That 8-8.5 is the factory number.... reality is in the 7's for standard flat topped 318 pistons. Going with the 360 heads has the breathing but the CR will be even lower with the larger combustion chambers. So it requires head shaving (and matching cuts on the intake) or smaller chambered heads if you want CR and low end torque. Or go the other way, and rev it up and look for HP with a large cam and forget the low end.... but that is really only a usable formula for drag racing.

If the engine is not to be pulled apart for new pistons, I would go with shaving the heads and intake to get the combustion chamber volume down into the 67 CC range or smaller to have at least a true 8+:1 CR... which is what comes out with 67 cc chambers and a typical .080" piston top below the deck, and using as thin a head gasket as you can, like .028. (The originals were thin metal ones.) With that, at least with a smaller duration cam, the DCR will stay up a bit.

This thread sure has moved around a lot..... but is all good and hopefully useful.

not discouraging at all, if it was easy everyone would do it. you think the stock 318 heads with the larger 360 valves crammed in and fairly extensive porting would pull the best from both worlds?

I know this thread has gone a bit off topic but my original question was answered in the first few comments so anyone reading on at this point is at their own leisure haha. Its awesome how helpful everyone is here. Once I learn more I'll be able to help others out too instead of constantly asking

 

[j par]

Still using them on 73 duster 360..with eddy heads...using the stainless steel ones....hughes 230/237 hydraulic cam...548/560 lift with the 1.6 ratio..using stock ball and ball pushrods since the rockers have cups on them.

I thought that's what they had (cups) rotest: when I called they said they had ball ends. I wonder if I can use the locking ball adjusters I bought for my 273's ?
Sorry Numax, just busting in for the one question. :happy1:

 

[nm9stheham]

I thought that's what they had (cups) rotest: when I called they said they had ball ends. I wonder if I can use the locking ball adjusters I bought for my 273's ?
Sorry Numax, just busting in for the one question. :happy1:

Looks like balls.....
http://www.jegs.com/i/Speedmaster/746/PCE261.1087/10002/-1?parentProductId=1558363

 

[nm9stheham]

not discouraging at all, if it was easy everyone would do it. you think the stock 318 heads with the larger 360 valves crammed in and fairly extensive porting would pull the best from both worlds?

IMO, the porting to get the 318's up to get that HP with a moderate cam will be non-trivial. All indications are that it would be money poorly spent to have someone else do that; the money is better spent on other heads.

But maybe not if you did it yourself. (Warning: Lotsa work!) If I wanted a real 300 HP with a moderate cam that maintained some low end torque, then I would be shooting for a flow in the low 200 cfm range in the intakes for the .400 to .500" valve lift range. To see where this is for the 318 heads, you can understand a lot by reading the 'porting 318 heads' sticky here: http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=167865&page=5

As a comparison to other heads, you can look at the flows tables published (and recently updated) on the Hughes site: http://www.hughesengines.com/TechArticles/1headflowchartscomparisons.php#X

So I personally would stick with the 360 heads.....but being me, I would HAVE to change the pistons LOL

BTW, your use of 1.6 rockers will help in the torque department by allowing a bit less duration. You should read up on 'rocker geometry' so you can become familiar with that topic; keeping a lower lift and duration mitigates a lot of those potential issues.

 

[Ironmike]

"Getting adjustable roller rockers to make up for the cam". Please explain further.

 

[j par]

Looks like balls.....
http://www.jegs.com/i/Speedmaster/746/PCE261.1087/10002/-1?parentProductId=1558363

Those are the big block rockers. I'll take a look and see if the small black ones look that way. it's been a little while since I looked at the website