kdrolt

No I'm not selling -- just passing the info along to 3rd Gen:
------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------

I wanted to wait until my set showed up before I confirmed these on the web. I removed them from the boxes and compared them directly with the GM stock stamped 1.5 rocker arms on my basement set of iron LT1 heads. They are dimensionally the SAME except that:

1. the slot that the rocker pivots about (on the rocker ball) is a little bit longer to handle the clearance for the 1.6 ratio.

2. the pushrod "cup" is closer to the slot than on the 1.5, as expected.

These rockers also have the same rail guides as the stock 1.5s used to position the rocker tip over the valve stem. These also have the oil hole that feeds the valve stem from the pushrods.

So these rockers are, in effect, a cheap way to get 6.6% more lift on the valves without any camswap. On a stock Bcar LT1 engine, this means the valve lift at the exhaust valve goes from .430" to .459". It's not a huge increase but it should be noticable. A number of people have used these in the past on Bcars, but they weren't widely available at such a low cost.

I'll add that I don't benefit at all from the sale of these rockers.

These rockers will probably help LO3, LO5, and TPI budget-minded owners even more.

OK, so all of the above (for me) was good news. Now I'll tell you the only bad news. I opened all 16 boxes, and discovered that:

A. 11 were new, unused, correct, rail-type 1.6 rockers (i.e. R1023R as I had ordered);

B. 3 more were unused 1.5 rail-type rockers (probably R1022R but placed in the wrong box);

C. the last 2 were the correct rocker, but the pushrod cup showed wear marks, as did the flat between the rails (where it meets the valve stem).... so these had been used before in an engine. In fact, the perps must have swapped them at the warehouse and they (stupidly) tried to cover their tracks by spray painting these two rockers to hide the wear marks. I was glad that I opened all the boxes to check the parts, just as my dad had taught me years ago when buying spark plugs ("..always check the porcelain for cracks...", advice which was good for both spark plugs AND toilets.)

Anyway, I called the customer service # and gave them the above info, and it looks like it will get taken care of without any problem.

The rockers themselves are covered with a limited lifetime warranty from Federal Mogul, and on top of that is a 30 day return window from Parts America.

So.... the upshot is that this is a cheap way to get 1.6 rail-type rockers for $80, you won't have to worry about a roller tip failing on the stamped steel with roller tips, or the full roller aluminum rockers showing galling in the aluminum.

Just make sure you check them ALL when they arrive. It helps to compare them to the stock 1.5s, as I did. The indentation and location of the pushrod cup, and the fatness of the metal across from the cup, is an easy way to tell a 1.5 from a 1.6 (when you have both handy). The parts themselves are high quality, which doesn't surprise me coming from Federal Mogul (an OEM supplier).

Lastly, a fairly recent auto magazine (Aug 2000, Chevy High Perf, pp92-99) tested a warmed over 383 on an engine dyno the stock stamped 1.5 rocker against a 1.5 roller tip rocker, a 1.6 roller tip rocker, and finally full 1.6 and 1.65 roller rockers. What they found, from memory, was that there were no real differences in hp or torque until they went above 4000 rpm. The roller tip rockers showed a max of 8 hp above the stamped rockers, but that was only at the rpm for peak hp, and the gain was more like 3-4 hp some 500 rpm lower. The full roller rockers showed around 20 hp gain over the stamped ones, but again ONLY at the rpm for peak power. There was still gain on either side of the hp peak, but from around 4000 rpm and lower, there was no difference among any of them. So roller tip rockers, and full roller rockers, don't provide hugh increases in power as compared to plain old stamped steel.

They also pointed out that there would be more gain from using the 1.6 rockers on a stock-type engine than there would on a 383 with a Comp Cams 286H and TFS alum heads (which is what was tested). Using some flow data on crummy stock GM heads from Vizard's cylinder head porting book, I estimate that the increase in flow would be around 8 cfm on average at the average (rms) valve lift, and that the increase in torque resulting from 1.6 rockers (swapped in to replace 1.5s) would be around 5%.

I know that even poor breathing heads will not add extra flow above 0.4 to 0.45 inches of valve lift at the peak, BUT they do provide more flow because the AVERAGE lift of the valve is higher, and the avg lift is below the stall lift for the valve. So going from 1.5 to 1.6 almost always helps, and that dovetails with CHPs comments in the article.

Lastly I'll remind everyone that while it's not likely to bind your valve springs by just bolting these onto your engine, you SHOULD check the gap in between the spring coils to see if there is enough room to avoid coil bind when the extra 6.6% lift occurs. FYI, HTH. - Ken

[This message has been edited by kdrolt (edited June 29, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by kdrolt (edited July 10, 2001).]

FastBroker

That's not the best deal around, FYI... Summit sells Non-SA rockers for the same price. If you really need SA's, U R out of luck.

[This message has been edited by FastBroker (edited July 11, 2001).]

kdrolt

I checked both Jeg's and Summit's websites, and used the search feature on both. I couldn't find them. Please post your own findings here so readers can get the better deal.

1.6 ratio, stamped steel, rail-type self-aligning, long slot, sbc application, Sealed Power pn R1023R, from Federal Mogul.

kdrolt

I see you haven't responded with anything useful (prices from Summit and Jeg's) per your suggestion, and just provided criticism.

Here's what I had found at Summit from January 2001:

I didn't buy from them at the time because that price per rocker was a gouge. Here's what I found today from Summit, using the complete Summit version part number

(http://www.summitracing.com 9 July 2001):

The price has gone up!

So, $7.99 and $8.39 are both substantially more than the $4.69 each I found them for. I'm still waiting for you to provide the 'best deal' info from Jeg's. Seeing how helpful you were with the Summit info, I won't be holding my breath waiting for the Jeg's info. I hope your deals as a FastBroker are better than the ones you suggest here. Caveat emptor. - Ken

BOWTIROC

You can also get roller tip 1.6's through powerhouse (www.enginekits.com) for $89.95, they also have standard long slot 1.6 kits for $57.95. Also, if you wanted to go full roller on them, you can get proforms 1.6 ratio RR through www.TJJRtopfuel.com for $139 a peice. I personally have harland sharpes, I know they are more pricey, but I feel they were worth it.

------------------
Black 89 IROC...355, Solid Crower Cam, TFS heads.
12.0 @ 120.3mph with a 1.9 60ft...all motor

Jza

That wouldn't be the first time Fastbroker has stuck his foot in his mouth... *cough*.pablo.. *cough*.fuel pressure regulator..*cough cough*.. ahem.

Just ribbin' ya Fastbroker. Have a beer.

FastBroker

You guys gonna make me pull out my Jeg's and Summit catalogs, huh? I'll get back to you when I can...

EDIT: Pablo, Schmablo. When's he getting out of BASIC? He'll be a different person, that's for sure. Figured we'd see him post a bit by now.


[This message has been edited by FastBroker (edited July 11, 2001).]

FastBroker

I am correct.


$65.99 = SUM-G6801 = 3/8" rocker studs, Non-SA 1.6 ratio, long-slot rocker arms, nuts, *****. This IS CRANE hardware, rebadged for Summit.

10 bucks finder fee, pls...

Have fun, guys.

[This message has been edited by FastBroker (edited July 11, 2001).]

kdrolt

Nope. Wrong again.

And what's missing from your post???

How about the keywords "self-aligning", or "rail type" ?

Non self-aligning 1.6 stamped rockers have been available for a LONG time and for less money... and are in the catalogs by Summit and Jegs. Most people already knew that, and most people know that you need to use guide plates when using them.

But I was referring to 1987+ rail-type (aka self-aligning) rockers used on GM small block engines. Did you read, oops, R-E-A-D, the subject line and the detailed text I provided? I guess not. Maybe you should.

No finder fee for you. You're now wrong twice. Wanna go for three-in-a-row? - Ken

FastBroker

=====

[This message has been edited by FastBroker (edited July 15, 2001).]

kdrolt

.....

[This message has been edited by kdrolt (edited July 16, 2001).]

FastBroker

Thanks for allowing me the last word, ******. I'm done now. If you would like to have (or need) the last word, please do. - FB
Again, don't start something you don't want finished...


[This message has been edited by FastBroker (edited July 12, 2001).]

EDIT: Thanks for the emailed "last word"...

[This message has been edited by FastBroker (edited July 15, 2001).]