Hughes rockers

-
yellow rose said:
You let your sister marry a Chevy guy? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

He is either a good dude or you don't like your sister!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Lol, wife's sister. Of course, I can't tell her anything either.

He's a pretty good dude, too. He says he would drive my Mopar. Well Duh!
 
B3RE said:
If I'm going for the best geometry, I go with my custom T&Ds. If I'm working with Hughes, I like to convert them to a cup adjuster, and then relocate the shafts with SPACERS, not shims. Shims break things.

No matter what the marketing hype says, you can't just bolt them on, because it's not the rocker that requires the shafts be relocated, it's the head. And, I have yet to see a head that has the shaft placement correct. That's an impossibility for the manufacturer, because no one position is correct for every application. You have to put it where it needs to be.
Click to expand...
you need to come look at mine then, they are perfect , right outa tha box.
 
famous bob said:
you need to come look at mine then, they are perfect , right outa tha box.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to argue with you, but I doubt that. I've done enough Hughes rockers to know better. Look at some of the photos of the conversions I've done on my FB page. With .750" lift, it is less than .050" wide. Yours should be less than .035". That isn't happening without relocating the shafts.
0427171544.jpg
0520171541.jpg
0520171544.jpg
0520171543a.jpg
 
I remember years ago I asked Indy how they decided where to mount the shaft and how high to make the stand.

All I got was a CLICK.

It's almost a statistical impossibility the shafts are correctly positioned for almost anything when you factor in all the variables.

But the damn sweep is centered.
 
B3RE said:
I'm not going to argue with you, but I doubt that. I've done enough Hughes rockers to know better. Look at some of the photos of the conversions I've done on my FB page. With .750" lift, it is less than .050" wide. Yours should be less than .035". That isn't happening without relocating the shafts.
View attachment 1715184543 View attachment 1715184544 View attachment 1715184545 View attachment 1715184547
Click to expand...

Nice.
Question...how do you oil the cup adjusters as opposed to the ball adjusters? Mine have the oiling hole behind the adjuster pointing at the ball so it slot looks like it would be too low for cup adjusters.
20180604_163542.jpg
 
B3RE said:
I'm not going to argue with you, but I doubt that. I've done enough Hughes rockers to know better. Look at some of the photos of the conversions I've done on my FB page. With .750" lift, it is less than .050" wide. Yours should be less than .035". That isn't happening without relocating the shafts.
View attachment 1715184543 View attachment 1715184544 View attachment 1715184545 View attachment 1715184547
Click to expand...
Well to e truthful, I don`t give a tinkers dam what u think! The stands happened to be right on my heads, the rockers worked great W/ THEM. I THINK ITS MORE IN THE STANDS MYSELF.
 
threewood said:
Nice.
Question...how do you oil the cup adjusters as opposed to the ball adjusters? Mine have the oiling hole behind the adjuster pointing at the ball so it slot looks like it would be too low for cup adjusters.View attachment 1715184625
Click to expand...
You would need oiling lifters and pushrods to oil the adjuster, and use the shaft oiling for the rockers. I have also modified the rockers to pushrod oil everything, but the lifter bores should be bushed for that option.
 
famous bob said:
Well to e truthful, I don`t give a tinkers dam what u think! The stands happened to be right on my heads, the rockers worked great W/ THEM. I THINK ITS MORE IN THE STANDS MYSELF.
Click to expand...
Oh, all right Bob. You roped me in again. If you go back to previous posts, you will see where I said it was the heads that placed the shafts in the incorrect position, AND, it is impossible to place it correctly for every application. But, the rockers have been designed for that incorrect position so it looks nice. Now, both are incorrect. Just because it passes the eye-crometer test doesn't mean it's right. It has to pass the math and engineering test.

If that isn't convincing enough, then there is nothing I can say or do that will make a difference, so carry on. If you're happy with it, I'm happy for you.
 
B3RE said:
Oh, all right Bob. You roped me in again. If you go back to previous posts, you will see where I said it was the heads that placed the shafts in the incorrect position, AND, it is impossible to place it correctly for every application. But, the rockers have been designed for that incorrect position so it looks nice. Now, both are incorrect. Just because it passes the eye-crometer test doesn't mean it's right. It has to pass the math and engineering test.

If that isn't convincing enough, then there is nothing I can say or do that will make a difference, so carry on. If you're happy with it, I'm happy for you.
Click to expand...
I`m happy w/ them , so far ! LOL
 
Little update, got the motor in and all hooked up, fired right up and ran it for a while between 1800-2300 rpm ( even though they say you don’t have to with a roller) then made a couple passes down the road. A few little bugs to fix, the old blue pump finally gave up so new fuel pump is on the way, and need some new valve cover gaskets. Other than that the car ran 100% better than last time, I will keep a very close eye on the lash and valve train in general, that way if a problem does arise I have a better chance of catching it!
 
twayne24365 said:
Little update, got the motor in and all hooked up, fired right up and ran it for a while between 1800-2300 rpm ( even though they say you don’t have to with a roller) then made a couple passes down the road. A few little bugs to fix, the old blue pump finally gave up so new fuel pump is on the way, and need some new valve cover gaskets. Other than that the car ran 100% better than last time, I will keep a very close eye on the lash and valve train in general, that way if a problem does arise I have a better chance of catching it!
Click to expand...
As a side note; I have alum. heads, and a tite lash , solid roller cam. I set the valves .006 tighter (cold) than recommended for a hot running engine . Has worked out very well so far ! After a coiuple of adjustments and checks, they seem to be holding well.
 
famous bob said:
As a side note; I have alum. heads, and a tite lash , solid roller cam. I set the valves .006 tighter (cold) than recommended for a hot running engine . Has worked out very well so far ! After a coiuple of adjustments and checks, they seem to be holding well.
Click to expand...
What's your lash hot? after setting them .006 tighter cold. And what's your recommend lash. .022?
 
Thenwhat85 said:
What's your lash hot? after setting them .006 tighter cold. And what's your recommend lash. .022?
Click to expand...
.016 and .018. I set the all at .011 or .012 so far so good. I was told that
.006 tighter, cold,was right for an alum. head, by a lifelong mech. friend , works for me ! Thot it might help someone.
 
Seems like it runs good, hard to tell on the street... but the track doesn’t lie!
 
B3RE said:
Oh, all right Bob. You roped me in again. If you go back to previous posts, you will see where I said it was the heads that placed the shafts in the incorrect position, AND, it is impossible to place it correctly for every application. But, the rockers have been designed for that incorrect position so it looks nice. Now, both are incorrect. Just because it passes the eye-crometer test doesn't mean it's right. It has to pass the math and engineering test.

If that isn't convincing enough, then there is nothing I can say or do that will make a difference, so carry on. If you're happy with it, I'm happy for you.
Click to expand...

Here are my results using Hughes rockers...
Bolted up out of the box on Stealth heads...
20180610_145410.jpg


And using B3Racing shims...
20180625_135954.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top