Close



Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 47 of 47
  1. #26
    FEP Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZephyrEFI View Post
    Wait a minute... The thing i kept hearing about stud mounted rockers was that they are stronger because they don't use press-in studs. But no Ford head I've seen apart uses press-in studs anyway! It's bolts going in to threaded holes! It's just the studs being stronger than bolts bandwagon that ARP wants us all to jump on! Well, that makes me feel better about using pedestal mount. Maybe I'll get some upgraded bolts to go with them... I see the Crane ones seem to be back in stock on Summit.

    That's not to say studs AREN'T stronger than bolts... I know they are, but still, probably beyond my needs. Not worth the money and trouble to me.
    Old SBF before the advent of the pedestal mount rocker used pressed in studs. The D0 heads on my '91 Crown Vic have pressed in factory studs.

    I personally wouldn't feel bad at all about using factory style pedestal mount rockers for your application. Obviously now would be the time to have the heads machined for screw in studs, and it would be awesome to have full roller rockers, but I don't know if that is the best use of your money on this engine.
    '89 XR-7 5 Speed
    '95 SC 5 Speed
    '91 Crown Vic P72 351W
    '97 Thunderbird
    '85 Ford LTD Squire

  2. #27

    Default

    Every single combination is different so I can't sell you on them. I remember the magazine tests back in the day though. They put them on an otherwise totally stock HO 5.0 engine and got 6 HP. That was it. I think it was 2 or 3 ft lb of torque but I know the HP was 6. Nothing anyone could feel. The same car on two different days might have a 6 HP difference on the same dyno. That being said, I have had a set of brand new Crane pedestal mount "Cobra" 1.7 rockers still wrapped in the box for probably 20+ years. I guess I was waiting on the right build to install them on, LOL. I just can't see taking off the upper intake for 6HP. I realize your engine will not be stock which is why I said every combo is different. Seemed like a good idea when I bought them and then I saw the dyno tests.

  3. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinVarnes View Post
    Old SBF before the advent of the pedestal mount rocker used pressed in studs. The D0 heads on my '91 Crown Vic have pressed in factory studs.
    Interesting, I didn't know that (obviously )!

    Does anyone have a ballpark idea of what it costs to have your heads machined for stud mount? Mostly just curious at this point.

    I see the Scorpion rockers are less than the Crane ones.

    I'm also curious what purpose the valve cover baffle serves. If it's beneficial, I'd rather not get rid of it. I see LMR has a set of SEFI ready valve covers that cost LESS than the valve cover spacers they offer that are higher to fit roller rockers. They are unfortunately chrome, so I think for my engine I would want to probably paint them to match my intake or at least put satin clear on them. I found some '94-95 Cobra valve covers and they wanted more than the spacers, even. Nice try, guy.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  4. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by homer302 View Post
    Every single combination is different so I can't sell you on them. I remember the magazine tests back in the day though. They put them on an otherwise totally stock HO 5.0 engine and got 6 HP. That was it. I think it was 2 or 3 ft lb of torque but I know the HP was 6. Nothing anyone could feel. The same car on two different days might have a 6 HP difference on the same dyno. That being said, I have had a set of brand new Crane pedestal mount "Cobra" 1.7 rockers still wrapped in the box for probably 20+ years. I guess I was waiting on the right build to install them on, LOL. I just can't see taking off the upper intake for 6HP. I realize your engine will not be stock which is why I said every combo is different. Seemed like a good idea when I bought them and then I saw the dyno tests.
    Yeah. Well yours are a different ratio though, so shouldn't that make a difference itself?

    I think I'm getting that they are selling you the durability and consistency of them rather than the power gain....
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  5. #30

    Default

    Yes, the 1.7 would simulate or imitate a larger cam. A cam that has more lift than it actually is. So technically, a 1.6 ratio should not even gain 6 HP all other things being equal. Back when I bought these, the fact that Ford was using them OEM made them much cheaper than a 1.6 ratio rocker in another other form. Of course as I said, that was decades ago. So none of that applies now. Newer heads and CNC machining, CAD designed and developed cams etc. I was just relating my experience.
    Unless you are prepared to do a before and after dyno run the same day with only changing the rockers on the same car, we will never know. Butt Dynos have about a 40% error factor, LOL. The Dyno....She don't lie. Everything else we all say and anything else is pure conjecture. Because it ain't your car and your engine.
    Last edited by homer302; 06-22-2018 at 06:39 PM.

  6. #31
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    The dyno tests back in the day showed decent results with stock HO cam and E7 heads. Especially once a 1.7 is added on the exhaust side. No increase with intake only. Most of the increase seen when the 1.7 on exhaust was added.

    the higher ratio effectively increases both lift and duration. the valve spends more degrees at or above 0.050 lift. You get a split duration favoring exhaust with a 1.7:1 only on exhaust.

    Add great heads to the equation and a 385HP 302 with 1.6’s became a 403HP 302 with 1.7’s.

  7. #32
    FEP Power Member Ourobos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Waikoloa , Hawaii
    Posts
    1,879

    Default

    If that 302 was making even 385 crank horsepower, I'd guarantee it had more than a stock cam, plus good heads and intake
    1986 CHP SSP Coupe

  8. #33

    Default

    Interesting stuff. How much more of a concern is piston to valve clearance with them out of curiosity?

    I will be doing 1.6 ratio on mine if I go to rollers. That's what my cam is designed for. It showed up yesterday, by the way!
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  9. #34
    FEP Power Member gmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Chicago, south subs
    Posts
    2,136

    Default

    what does fti recommend ? Higher lift might require rollers. Or at least stamped with a longer slot.

  10. #35
    FEP Senior Member droopie85gt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Cordova, TN
    Posts
    994

    Default

    Check out Engine Masters video series. They tested this! Stamped steel rockers versus roller rockers. HP difference not even in the error tolerance of the dyno. What was a standout was 3/8 vs. 7/16 studs. 3/8 flex so bad it was very noticeable that the HP dropped a measurable amount at higher RPMS. The main reason for converting to studs on a stock head is that higher spring pressures will pull the pressed in stud out of the head. No bueno.
    1985 GT, Sunroof, 5 Lug, Rear Discs, 01 Graphite Bullets, 88 forged piston shortblock, 2.02/1.60 Alum heads, Weiand Stealth, Holley C950 TBI, BBK Long tubes

  11. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droopie85gt View Post
    Check out Engine Masters video series. They tested this! Stamped steel rockers versus roller rockers. HP difference not even in the error tolerance of the dyno....
    This. There is no perceptable gain. It's a popular mod and I am not sure why exactly. The new $26,000 (nope, not a typo) Chevy LS9 crate motor does not even have FULL roller rockers, only roller trunions and it has 638 HP.

  12. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gmatt View Post
    what does fti recommend ? Higher lift might require rollers. Or at least stamped with a longer slot.
    He said the springs do not require going to stud mount rockers. But I should make sure the mounting bolts are of premium quality.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  13. #38
    FEP Power Member gmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Chicago, south subs
    Posts
    2,136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZephyrEFI View Post
    He said the springs do not require going to stud mount rockers. But I should make sure the mounting bolts are of premium quality.
    When you get into higher lift, the length of the slot in your stock rockers might not be enough to accommodate the extra lift, causing bind or other mayhem. I'm not sure how high you can go with stock rockers which is why I asked about Ed's recommendation. If they will work for your application, that's great.

  14. #39

  15. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThunderStruck View Post
    The Ticking
    The originals tick more than rollers? I've never made a comparison myself.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  16. #41

    Default

    Been running the Proform 1.6 roller rockers for about 1.5K now. No issues. Spun to 6-6.2K RPM a few times. Installed on a mild GT40 / F cam build. Bought the shim kit, new rocker channels, stock length pushrods, TFS spring kit and Comp Cams spring locators at the same time when I had the heads redone in 2016. Just couldn't see myself reinstalling the original stamped rockers back on my nice shiny newly rebuilt heads :-).
    05 Corvette Z51

  17. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 84lxvert View Post
    Just couldn't see myself reinstalling the original stamped rockers back on my nice shiny newly rebuilt heads :-).
    Yeah, that's kind of where I'm at with it, to be honest. I'm glad yours are working out for you.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  18. #43

    Default

    I ended up getting the Scorpion ones. They came yesterday and they are ohhhh sooo prettyyyyyyyyyyyyy...... They make me happy.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  19. #44

    Default

    Nice choice!
    Matt
    1984 Thunderbird -- 1989 302 HO, GT40 heads w/ Trick Flow springs, E303 cam, Edelbrock Performer 289 intake, Edelbrock 600 4bbl, 85 Mustang dizzy, Jegs o/r h pipe, Dynomax mufflers, Mustang AOD & shifter, Mustang 8.8 w/ 3.73s, Mustang front & rear sway bars, KYB 87-88 TC struts & shocks, and Mustang 11" front brakes.

    1988 Mustang GT hatch -- Explorer intake, GT40 heads with Trick Flow spring kit, Crane 1.7 rrs, E303 cam, 70mm MAF, 70mm throttle body, o/r H pipe, Dynomax mufflers, Kirban Kwik shifter w/ Pro 5.0 Deluxe handle, clutch quadrant & firewall adjuster, and 3.27s
    (86 Mercury Cougar 5.0, 89 Lincoln Mark VII LSC 5 speed, 80 Mercury Zephyr 4 door) sold

  20. #45

    Default

    Thanks! I enjoy looking at them most of all.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  21. #46

    Default

    Brad,

    I installed a set of Scorpion roller rockers in my 347 when I built it 5 years ago and they've worked well for me. Granted, I've only put about 2000 miles on the motor so far. Couple things that sold me on them is that they're made in USA and claim a lifetime warranty. I'd venture to guess they will work well for you.
    Thomas

    1985 Mustang GT - Build Thread
    347 (Stock Block, Scat Crank & Rods, Probe Pistons, 11:1 CR, AFR 185's, PP Crosswind Intake, Custom-ground Comp Hyd Roller Cam, Scorpion 1.6 Roller Rockers, Holley 3310-4), T-5, 8.8 w/3.55's, MM SFC's, T/A, PHB, LCA's, Strut Tower Brace, K-Member Brace, Bilstein HD Struts/Shocks, MM/H&R Springs, SN95 5-Lug, Cobra Brakes, '04 Mach 1 Steering Rack

  22. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 85MUSTANGTGT View Post
    Brad,

    I installed a set of Scorpion roller rockers in my 347 when I built it 5 years ago and they've worked well for me. Granted, I've only put about 2000 miles on the motor so far. Couple things that sold me on them is that they're made in USA and claim a lifetime warranty. I'd venture to guess they will work well for you.
    Good to hear! They sure do seem solid!
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Focus ST
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •