Roller Rockers in Stock

[Dirk Olson]

For what it is worth. I had never broke a rocker until last week broke two warming the car in shop to check springs and lash and this last weekend in Brainerd broke two more. I was lucky and did not explode a lifter and did not hurt motor? Lost some ET and MPH pulling motor to check it out. So with that being said, if we we had a vote, count me in.

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

....If nothing else, this has been a great discussion, with plenty of good points, and few, if any, personal attacks. I may or may not agree with what has been posted, but I do respect and appreciate the majority of it, and I can see where it is coming from. Regardless of what happens, I hope the discussion at least helped more people see more of what goes on. ...

Yes, an excellent discussion and for the most part, stayed on track!

[Jesse Knapp]

This thread has been an exceptional read. I really enjoyed it. From my background in class racing (superstock), I see stock going too modified. Each new allowance (rule change) creates new weak links. My first engine had independent or stud mounted roller rockers. As I learned I went with larger cams, spring pressures approaching 300 on seats and started breaking the roller rockers. Ended up with a Jesel shaft system, then the 350 plus seats were cool. All I worried about then was the lifters and springs going away. Stockers are going rpms that my engine went. I think it's gone a little too far. Although the times they go is mighty impressive the cost factor is going to end up like superstock maybe with more breakage though. We, in superstock, could lighten some things in the rotating assembly. For what it's worth, and one who wants to build for stock, I vote stock to not allow the roller rockers and maybe for the eliminator to regress somewhat. Reduce the spring pressures, go back to stock size pushrods, etc. Superstock costs are high and I hate to see stock go there as well. Just my opinion.......

[Dwight Southerland]

Jesse-
I wish it could happen.

[Steve Calabro]

I have a question. Is it not true that both Ford and Chrysler motors with hydraulic lifters came with stamped steel rocker arms NOT the iron ones that most racers use that came on the solid lifter motors only?

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Steve Calabro

I have a question. Is it not true that both Ford and Chrysler motors with hydraulic lifters came with stamped steel rocker arms NOT the iron ones that most racers use that came on the solid lifter motors only?

Mopars, with the exception of the Max Wedge and 273 engines, they had stamped steel shaft rockers from the factory. I would say that approximately 20 years ago, they were allowed to use the ductile iron rockers based on their availability in the same engine family: 273 and 426 Max Wedge. (Big Blocks: 361, 383, 400, 413, 426 and 440) (Small Blocks: 273, 318, 340 and 360). Ford 390, 427 and 428 had ductile iron shaft rocker arms from the factory.

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by SSDiv6

Mopars, with the exception of the Max Wedge and 273 engines, they had stamped steel shaft rockers from the factory. I would say that approximately 20 years ago, they were allowed to use the ductile iron rockers based on their availability in the same engine family: 273 and 426 Max Wedge. (Big Blocks: 361, 383, 400, 413, 426 and 440) (Small Blocks: 273, 318, 340 and 360). Ford 390, 427 and 428 had ductile iron shaft rocker arms from the factory.

And to ad to that, you won't have to dig too deep to find a MOPAR racer that had problems punching out pushrod cups on his stamped steel rockers prior to the allowance of these non-OEM ductile iron rockers by NHRA. I believe that occured in the mid-to-late 1970's (1978?). Interestingly, this was a problem BEFORE dwell-nosed cam lobes and super high tension valve springs were the mainstay of fast Stock Eliminator cars of the last decade. No, this is not a new problem!

[Steve Calabro]

So which combo's use the " as produced " valve train? Completely stock?

[Jeff Lee]

Originally Posted by Steve Calabro

So which combo's use the " as produced " valve train? Completely stock?

Anybody that wants to...

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Steve Calabro

So which combo's use the " as produced " valve train? Completely stock?

Prior to the new rule that allows the use of studs and guideplates the following makes still use "as produced valve train": Oldsmobile, Buick, Ford Small blocks. One exception with the Ford small blocks is the 289 HP and the Boss 302/351 (stud/guideplate), and the Non-Boss Clevelands, that are allowed to use the Crane Cams conversion kit. All other makes have stud/guideplate provisions; Chevy and Pontiac have a great selection of rocker arm options.