Roller Rockers ?

Started by Roadkill, June 26, 2008, 07:45:22 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions

Roadkill

June 26, 2008, 07:45:22 AM
As the LT1 I have for the Camaro is low mileage and appears to be in good shape I'm looking to reduce potential, future, wear.

I'm not looking to spend a fortune, just a few tweaks here and there.

One obvious option is roller rockers . . plus there's theoretical HP gains there, too.

The choices, in price order . . . Stock Ratio is 1.5

Crane Gold £168 (1.5 Ratio)

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=004&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=140195893170&rd=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=004&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=140195893170&rd=1

Scorpion £137 (1.6 Ratio)

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=190227042663&rd=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=190227042663&rd=1

ProForm £94 (1.6 Ratio) - (1.5 available)

Now.  I've never heard of Scorpion, but they claim theres are stronger than Crane's . . . Crane were, of course, my first thought but seem over-priced - paying for the name ?
The last ones are obviously cheapies . . . a last resort but still better than stock pressed efforts, surely ?

Thoughts ?

Also stick with 1.5 ratio or "upgrade" to 1.6 ?

55starchief

#1
June 26, 2008, 07:49:42 AM
If you go 1.6 you might need to do some machine work to ensure the geometry stays the same, you might also need longer pushrods. I know this is fact on pontiac motors not sure on cheby.

As far as brands go, they probably all come out of the same factory with different color anodising and packaging.

Roadkill

#2
June 26, 2008, 07:51:40 AM
Quoting: 55starchief
As far as brands go, they probably all come out of the same factory with different color anodising and packaging.


That's where the scorpion ones are definately different - they have increased clearances . . .



Quoting: 55starchief
If you go 1.6 you might need to do some machine work


I can't find any mention of this but will have another look . . .

55starchief

#3
June 26, 2008, 07:54:22 AM
Quoting: Roadkill

I can't find any mention of this but will have another look . . .



You normaly need to machine the pushrod hole in the heads as the 1.6 rockers move the pushrod towards one side of the hole

55starchief

#4
June 26, 2008, 07:59:06 AM
You might also want to check what your valve lit is going to be with the 1.6 ratio as with stock pistons you might run into clearance issues

Jamieg285

#5
June 26, 2008, 08:48:07 AM
Aftermarket stamped are much better quality than stock - they will actually be the ratio specified, and be a pretty well mached set.

Unless you are going into higher rev ranges, I don't think there's much point in full rollers, apart from bragging rights.

The option I will be going to use is a roller tip rocker.

HardRockCamaro

#6
June 26, 2008, 08:48:12 AM
1.6 is generally what is fitted with stock or at least tame aftermarket cams.

A worthy and popular mod as far as I know.

I think you need new valve springs though...

Jamieg285

#9
June 26, 2008, 09:33:41 AM
Quoting: HardRockCamaro
http://www.vetteweb.com/tech/vemp_0703_corvette_rocker_arms/index.html


That one is a great article, I'm going to add that to my list of research links.

55starchief

#10
June 26, 2008, 09:40:56 AM
Quoting: HardRockCamaro

1.6 is generally what is fitted with stock or at least tame aftermarket cams.


Its done to increase valve lift usualy on stock cams, or in my case to get even more lift on a radical cam. BUT you must check your pistons otherwise clater bang crash as the valve makes out with the piston

Personaly with the money dean has spent on that car to skimp on roller rockers is pointless, the saving of roller over roller tipped is small in my opinion

***edit***

Anyway, with oils being changed in america to reduce various additives we should all be looking at going full roller on the entire valve train. Flat tappet cams are a thing of the past guys, the lifters just wont work with the new oils and although some of the guys in the USA are now running diesel oils i cant see it being long vefore they reformulate those as well

http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/flat_tappet_cam_tech/index.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/flat_tappet_cam_tech/index.html

Roadkill

#11
June 26, 2008, 11:32:49 AM
Quoting: Jamieg285
That one is a great article, I'm going to add that to my list of research links.




I feel like an expert, now.

Roadkill

#12
June 26, 2008, 12:04:42 PM
Based on said article, I'm looking at $600 worth of Comp Cams' Rockers, Springs, locks and retainers.

The article doesn't mention clearance issues (push-rod or otherwise) and I can't find anything anywhere else, either.


55starchief

#13
June 26, 2008, 12:35:47 PM
Well as i said i know its an issue on pontiac motors but then again we havnt developed anything new since we got lumbered with a corporate shiteblock

Roadkill

#14
June 27, 2008, 03:37:38 AM
Quoting: 55starchief
a corporate shiteblock


You think Ponti-shat could make a better engine then the LT1, and LS series ?

55starchief

#16
June 27, 2008, 05:50:02 AM
Quoting: Roadkill

You think Ponti-shat could make a better engine then the LT1, and LS series ?



In all honest, yes. There is some serious development being done by small companies for the pontiac market like the Indian Adventures alloy block and the CV1 heads. Pontiac were always pushing the limits of what could be done after all it was PMD that created the muscle car. If GM had let pontiac stay as a seperate entity im sure that they would have their own LT/LS beating engines.

Roadkill

#17
June 27, 2008, 06:08:30 AM
And, of course, they'd run on water, get 1,000Bhp out of the box and would never need a oil change in 2,000,000 miles . . .

I'm guessing there's a reason GM gave Pontiac the "Chevy" engine . . . . Which, of course, it's not.

The LT / LS are, effectively, GM engines . . . not Chevy engines at all.

55starchief

#18
June 27, 2008, 06:14:36 AM
Quoting: Roadkill

And, of course, they'd run on water, get 1,000Bhp out of the box and would never need a oil change in 2,000,000 miles . . .


No its not a caddy motor

It was a cost cutting exercise in the late 70's, hell the way GM is going i will be surprised if Pontiac exists in the next 5 years

Quoting: Roadkill

The LT / LS are, effectively, GM engines . . . not Chevy engines at all.


They are based upon a 1st gen small block

Pontiac never had a small or a big block it was the same block dimensions from 1955-1976

Incursus

#19
June 27, 2008, 06:53:15 AM
Print
Go Up Pages1
User actions