|
|
![]() |
#1 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Glendora,Calif.
Posts: 1,137
Likes: 172
Liked 719 Times in 220 Posts
|
![]()
Seems that the last several posts have verified what I wrote in my post on page 2. We need to look at some absolutes- two sources of absolutes come to mind- those provided by the engine designers, and those mandated by the sanctioning body.
Absolute #1-- Valve lift must be OEM or as specified. Absolute #2-Rocker arm ratio must not exceed OEM. Cam lobe lift isn't too well specified. In order for #1 above to be achieved in a desireable fashion,#2 has to be followed as well. In the case of a small block Chevrolet,ideal results are when valve lift is half again lobe lift.In the event lobe lift is correct,and valve lift is lacking, then another means has to be employed to achieve it. That is where push rod length comes into play. Now, you don't really want exact specs here, you want to be safe by .005-.010". This is because the tech guy at teardown might not read mikes the same way I do. Also, expansion due to heat might cause results to vary. If my intake lift spec is.390". I would love to see an actual.379-.382".Now, if I achieve this spec with a very long pushrod, I'm getting the maximum extra duration and rate of lift out of that valve train. Now, the other booby trap has to be recognized. If you checked lobe lift, it passed right on the number, used a very close to optimum, a long push rod, you could still result in a rocker ratio that is a bit over, however,that couldn't help but make the valve lift over as well.Optimally, a cam lobe with the correct lift, a valve with lift good by .008-.010, and a rocker arm ratio of 1.47-1.49 would be the best of all worlds. Now, good luck getting it! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,203
Likes: 1,047
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Glendora,Calif.
Posts: 1,137
Likes: 172
Liked 719 Times in 220 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lake Placid, Florida
Posts: 3,203
Likes: 1,047
Liked 235 Times in 110 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Last edited by X-TECH MAN; 01-22-2012 at 08:46 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Avon, Indiana
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
![]() Quote:
I have a friend who worked in a job shop that made the pivot pins for aircraft wings during the Vietnam War. I can't post here what went on in that shop.
__________________
Scott Wilcox 2193 3x National Champion SS/A, SS/B, SS/K, SS/L, SS/AM, A/SM, C/SM, B/A, C/A, G/A, H/A |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
![]()
We need to be carfull of what we ask for.
I am trying to get ready for next year and I've checked several rocker ratios. Com Cams 1.5's came out between 1.526 and 1.572 all over 1.5. Pro Comp's 1.6 came out 1.506, some over and some under the 1.5. Crane 1.5,s came out 1.427, all under the 1.5. There was considerable differances from rocker to rocker on all of them. What they say there ratio's are may not be what they really are. Jerry Stk.4168 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 5 Posts
|
![]()
Maybe the old stamped rocker arms aren't so bad after all.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 5,136
Likes: 1,614
Liked 1,923 Times in 432 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Alan Roehrich 212A G/S |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|