FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => Private Classifieds => Topic started by: dozz302 on March 15, 2023, 05:18:32 PM
-
Hello, just wondering if anybody is planning on making a plain steel end support stand for a Ford High Riser head C4EA-F. Something you can just bolt on a stock head. Steel> because there will not be a lot of material on the bottom for support and aluminum wouldn't be strong enough. Surprised nobody makes these yet. Doesn't have to be anything fancy. I'm sure there are plenty of guys with High Riser heads who would buy them. The only alternative is the Dove System which is very nice but too elaborate for a street engine and nobody is going to want to loosen and replace head bolts on a running sealed engine.
-
Nobody?
-
There are aluminum stands already available and they are plenty strong enough. If it comes to a point where they’re not, then a paired rocker system should be used in place of standard FE valvetrain.
-
Could you not take a set of standard height steel stands, and cut them down to the Hi Riser height? As for aluminum not being strong enough, the stress on the rocker stand is upwards, with the bolts taking the brunt of the load. The area below the shaft is just for holding the shaft at the appropriate height, and preventing the stand from moving around.
-
Yes Blykins, thank you for the reply, but the aluminum ones (designed for the Low and Medium Riser and Tunnel port) are cut down for use on the High Riser and makes them much weaker. The support area on the bottom is probably more than 1/2 way cut down. That's why I was suggesting someone make a steel version for the High Riser.
But I take it you are saying that the aluminum ones even cut down add a lot of support. It just doesn't look like a lot of material would be left for support.
I am running a .600 solid flat tappet cam with no crazy spring pressures and I have already broken the end rocker off in 500 miles. Just looking for a simple solution. Other than cam motor is stock.
Rory428, end support stands.
Thanks again.
-
Sounds like you might need some better thick wall shafts.
-
Yes Blykins, thank you for the reply, but the aluminum ones (designed for the Low and Medium Riser and Tunnel port) are cut down for use on the High Riser and makes them much weaker. The support area on the bottom is probably more than 1/2 way cut down. That's why I was suggesting someone make a steel version for the High Riser.
But I take it you are saying that the aluminum ones even cut down add a lot of support. It just doesn't look like a lot of material would be left for support.
I am running a .600 solid flat tappet cam with no crazy spring pressures and I have already broken the end rocker off in 500 miles. Just looking for a simple solution. Other than cam motor is stock.
Rory428, end support stands.
Thanks again.
Aluminum works just fine on my stuff. Sounds like some end stands will fix you right up.
-
Something you can just bolt on a stock head. Steel> because there will not be a lot of material on the bottom for support and aluminum wouldn't be strong enough.
I agree here with the O.P. when referencing the typical "bolt-on" type in which the end support is shared with the last standard stands' position's retaining bolt and then bridging under the end rocker arm in order to surround the shafts' end. With the H.R. cylinder heads there may not be sufficient area between the top of the cylinder head and under the rocker arm, providing clearance for it's movement, leaving adequate cross section to the flat horizontal bridge for it to be effectively functional; this even it were steel without some sort of additional contours in order to provide adequate bending motion resistance. This issue is compounded by the need for generous area under the rocker arm for the multitude of rocker arm dimensions from the varied sum of makers; so this would need to considered, or perhaps only a selected rocker arm (for example steel generally requires less material volume than aluminum for the same effective capacity), at least in this position (might look a little odd if not matching, but once the valve cover were on such wouldn't be so apparent . ::)) this in order to make available the most in material possible in this critical area. :-\
The 'reach' distance of the horizontal plane from the retaining bolt to the intended supported position is the issue, so particularly in the application of the H.R. head perhaps just adopting the end-stand engineering that incorporates the cylinder head retention fasteners (special length, perhaps stepped size stud) might truly be best?
But before I ran out to reinvent the proverbial wheel, perhaps as stated previously by another: maybe just a good set of H.D. shafts might be all you really require in this instance? :-\
Scott.
-
Unless I'm misunderstanding the issue, both the POP and the T&D aluminum rocker stands work just fine. I don't know of any other manufacturers that make them. In almost any case, however, I would suggest the use of an end stand. Any FE application will suffer without an end stand, whether it's LR, MR, or HR.
-
Harland Sharp - and for a while Blue Thunder - supply/supplied stands in steel. I'd wager you could cut down a Sharp end stand and have it be very strong
-
Unless I'm misunderstanding the issue, both the POP and the T&D aluminum rocker stands work just fine.
Precision Oil Pumps does not make any form of an end support stand for the H.R.; at one time he was attempting engineering that utilized the cylinder head retention bolt but has surrendered further efforts thus far.
T & D claims to be making a rocker arm/shaft/stand system (components not being interchangeable with anything else) so although it might be a "bolt-on" it's not just a matter of acquiring some end-stands and popping them on. :)
The only concern I have with the T & D product, as I have not used this system (Part #7024 for the H.R.), is that as described to me these stands place the shaft center-line at something of about .450" +/- (T & D refrained from providing exact measurements :( ) higher than the O.E. production units! ??? So how does one move the rocker arm pivot trunnion up that much, this with as stated by T & D "intended for stock-length valves" and end up with something reasonably correct in geometry? I have done a few H.R.'s and have not noted in these instances and in my perspective that Ford Motor Co. had mispositioned the shafts that greatly? With insistent inquiry of T & D, the final statement was "We know what we are doing, with great study we move the fulcrum lengths and trunnion positions until we establish the ideal geometry for each application, after all we are..................." And of course the "We've sold hundreds of these (for H.R.'s? ???) and nobody else complained"! And with greater effort on my part for an understanding of how this was accomplished including perhaps some specific dimensional values of the stands, suggesting perhaps even simply e-mail me an engineering print (many manufactures over the years have done this) so perhaps I could better understand the execution, I was told: 'We don't send out prints anymore"; "to many knock-off efforts encountered" :-\ , and "we don't just spell-out such values over the phone either"; "because I (T & D) don't have that information in front of me >:( ". And then: "you just need to have 'faith' in the fact that we know what we're doing" and .............................. "your just way 'over-thinking' this"! :o
I don't generally feel that 'leaps-of-faith' should be mixed with practical mechanical engineering discussions. ::)
So, as I have not utilized this product (I have used T & D products on other engine applications; and they still sell S.B.C. rockers for the S.B.F. applications even though we have repeatedly explained it 'is less than ideal' ::) ) has anyone here worked with this T & D system; and is/was it as has been described to me dimensionally; and did it 'work-out'.............O.K.? ???
Scott.
-
If it was me, I wouldn't hand out my engineering either, it would just save the Chinese from having to reverse-engineer the parts ;D
-
Unless I'm misunderstanding the issue, both the POP and the T&D aluminum rocker stands work just fine.
Precision Oil Pumps does not make any form of an end support stand for the H.R.; at one time he was attempting engineering that utilized the cylinder head retention bolt but has surrendered further efforts thus far.
T & D claims to be making a rocker arm/shaft/stand system (components not being interchangeable with anything else) so although it might be a "bolt-on" it's not just a matter of acquiring some end-stands and popping them on. :)
The only concern I have with the T & D product, as I have not used this system (Part #7024 for the H.R.), is that as described to me these stands place the shaft center-line at something of about .450" +/- (T & D refrained from providing exact measurements :( ) higher than the O.E. production units! ??? So how does one move the rocker arm pivot trunnion up that much, this with as stated by T & D "intended for stock-length valves" and end up with something reasonably correct in geometry? I have done a few H.R.'s and have not noted in these instances and in my perspective that Ford Motor Co. had mispositioned the shafts that greatly? With insistent inquiry of T & D, the final statement was "We know what we are doing, with great study we move the fulcrum lengths and trunnion positions until we establish the ideal geometry for each application, after all we are..................." And of course the "We've sold hundreds of these (for H.R.'s? ???) and nobody else complained"! And with greater effort on my part for an understanding of how this was accomplished including perhaps some specific dimensional values of the stands, suggesting perhaps even simply e-mail me an engineering print (many manufactures over the years have done this) so perhaps I could better understand the execution, I was told: 'We don't send out prints anymore"; "to many knock-off efforts encountered" :-\ , and "we don't just spell-out such values over the phone either"; "because I (T & D) don't have that information in front of me >:( ". And then: "you just need to have 'faith' in the fact that we know what we're doing" and .............................. "your just way 'over-thinking' this"! :o
I don't generally feel that 'leaps-of-faith' should be mixed with practical mechanical engineering discussions. ::)
So, as I have not utilized this product (I have used T & D products on other engine applications; and they still sell S.B.C. rockers for the S.B.F. applications even though we have repeatedly explained it 'is less than ideal' ::) ) has anyone here worked with this T & D system; and is/was it as has been described to me dimensionally; and did it 'work-out'.............O.K.? ???
Scott.
Ok, gotcha now. I knew that POP has the center stands for the high riser, but just wasn't putting 2 & 2 together on the end stands.
I have used the T&D street rockers (single shaft, like a factory FE setup, not paired rockers) for the high riser. I was pleased with it. Geometry was good.
-
Yes Blykins, thank you for the reply, but the aluminum ones (designed for the Low and Medium Riser and Tunnel port) are cut down for use on the High Riser and makes them much weaker. The support area on the bottom is probably more than 1/2 way cut down. That's why I was suggesting someone make a steel version for the High Riser.
But I take it you are saying that the aluminum ones even cut down add a lot of support. It just doesn't look like a lot of material would be left for support.
I am running a .600 solid flat tappet cam with no crazy spring pressures and I have already broken the end rocker off in 500 miles. Just looking for a simple solution. Other than cam motor is stock.
Rory428, end support stands.
Thanks again.
Since you say the motor is stock except for the cam, I would venture to say stock rocker shafts are not up to handling a .600 lift solid flat tappet camshaft.
I ran a 454 inch Hi Riser for quite a few years in my Mustang. Street and track raced it as well as put a lot of street miles on it too. It also had a .600 lift cam.
I ran Ford Power Parts rocker shafts, stock Ford rocker arms, double rocker shaft springs, stock Ford stands, and Ford Power Parts rocker studs. I had Isky 8005A valve springs set up at 135lbs. on the seat. I bought Dove roller rocker arms and their end support system and resolved myself to thinking if I ever have a problem with what I have, I'll replace my rockers and stands to the "good stuff".
I never did because I never had a problem.
The Dove Hi Riser end support, if you can find one, is a good set up. It will not damage your engine to pull a couple of head bolts and install it.
I can't honestly say I drove my 12:1 Hi Riser 500 miles though.
-
I have used the T&D street rockers (single shaft, like a factory FE setup, not paired rockers) for the high riser. I was pleased with it. Geometry was good.
Did you receive product that as I explained would position the shaft center-line .450" +/- higher than the O.E.M. H.R. stands? Now this discussion is of the 'High-Riser" head only, not other 390-428 applications with which the dimensions spoken to me would be more reasonable for. :-\
Somehow, as clear in the communication as I attempted to be, I don't think the product dimensions I received were for the H.R.; this even though T & D determinedly stated so? :-\
But then, when your as dense as I am, usually it takes a good wallop to the back of the head to make me understand! ::)
Scott.
-
It's been a couple of years since I built that particular engine with the T&D rockers, so I don't remember the dimensions. I looked up a YouTube video that showed partial progress and about the only thing I can say is that the stand stud stuck up past the rocker stand by a good piece. Typically there's only enough stud to get full thread engagement on the washer and nut (and sometimes just the nut), but this one showed to have about a 1/2" sticking up past the nut. Best I can do LOL
-
I think it is hard to talk with manufacturers at times... I have asked specific questions and had issues with answers a few times, and in the end it is just communication. Some times they get hung up about something and can't understand what you are asking even though it should be simple. Basically they are talking apples and we are asking about oranges, it is frustrating for sure. My guess is they are stuck on saying it is .450 higher than OEM, but likely that the high riser is plus .450 VERSUS the medium riser... just a guess. I have used several T&D rocker assemblies on high risers but they have all been Blue Thunder heads not Ford or Dove, they are totally different and not interchangeable so can't help you there. I am thinking their street rockers would work for you if they have a specific part number for high risers, likely just a different stand. They do have good stuff, and basically all I'll use on a race FE engine anyway. I have thought about using the street set-up for the stocker, but haven't had any issues with what is on there now.
-
My guess is they are stuck on saying it is .450 higher than OEM, but likely that the high riser is plus .450 VERSUS the medium riser... just a guess.
I would say the answer would be no, it isn't. Although I can't say that I have actually plotted out the positioning (relative to what? ??? ), but if one considers that the positions seem constant for: crankshaft to camshaft to deck of the block and all else below the heads as the blocks and related componentry are not unique to the H.R.. No unique dimensions of camshaft, lifters, pushrods, shafts, rocker arms, valve lengths & installed heights, or any other valve train componentry (except the stands) critical to this conversation. The only real change seems to be that the roof of the inlet port was raised (yep, "High-Riser" ::) ) which also acts as the mounting surface for the rocker-shaft stands, and it would appear that the stands were shorten the commensurate sum offsetting this in order to position the shafts in the same location relative to say.........up from the cylinder head's deck face or about anything else of relative concern. This obviously would also be most cost effective as beyond the unique castings for the cylinder head and the stands there were only two simple engineering and machining execution changes required in order to provide an extremely different application product. :)
For reference: in my observation standard (aluminum) FE stand heights (base to shaft center-line) generally are found to be of somewhere just short of 1.420"; medium-riser & tunnel-port generally something of approximately 1.330"- 1.340"; and high-risers are of the shorter somewhere of .945" height. all plus or minus say .010", or even more (aka. certainly not very consistent! :o ); so I also always equalize each sets' height for consistency and so as to not induce additional bending stresses on the shaft as otherwise would be presented when installed. :)
Scott.
-
(relative to what? ??? ) the deck maybe? Like you said... without a print it is hard to say what they are talking about for sure.
-
Thanks for the input, so you have used the T&D stands for the High Riser cut down and they worked OK if I read correctly? I am assuming of course with the end stands cut down.
Yes, Presision Oil Pumps said to me that he was working on exactly what I described but that was a couple of years ago and I don't get any responses when I recently inquired about it.
Harland sharp and Blue Thunder having STEEL end support stands, if they were made I don't think they are any longer available nor have I ever seen a set for sale.
Everything being said it would be nice for someone to make them in steel for previous reasons noted.
It just isn't reassuring that when you remove almost all of the material on the bottom which extends to the actual end of the stand it would be very strong in aluminum.
-
It just isn't reassuring that when you remove almost all of the material on the bottom which extends to the actual end of the stand it would be very strong in aluminum.
You are correct, It won't be! :o
It would seem that the only way in the conventional manor for T & D to accomplish this for the H.R. was/is to raise the shaft and hence the rocker arm to permit a reasonable void to be taken up by the horizontal flat web that connects the two engagements of the shaft by the singular stand.
Thank you Mr. Lykins for the advice to view your u-tube video, and with this observation I feel that the numbers given to me by T & D (though were somewhat vague :( ) are probably physically as similar as indicated. So this leads me back to the question of how does one raise the shafts fulcrum pivot point this much and (given we acknowledge that Ford Motor Co. wasn't that far off) maintain reasonably proper geometry?
In looking at your video of Feb. 11th 2021 at the 3.21 + min. point, though not really definitive and a poor format for attempting to draw absolutes for sure, as this really does require a hands-on observation, but this video does seem to reinforce my concerns as looking at the number one cylinders' intake and exhaust rocker arm positioning, it does seem to display quite the plunge in the rocker arm angle with the roller tip chasing the valve stem tip and the comparative angle relationships on the pushrod side this on the intake set and with in comparison to the exhaust set which is at rest though also the intake may not actually be at full lift? I really would be interested in the realized motion in the relationship of the roller tip and the valve stem tip? :-\
But I wasn't there, saw nothing, and there is more than one concern and even different intentions in establishing "proper valve-train geometry" !'m just attempting to establish if this engineering is somewhat sound before one puts forth to effort and expense or advises another to do so. :)
Scott.
-
I started to make one for my High Riser. Since there isn't room under the rocker I was making it as a long bar over top of the four stands and rockers with tabs down from each end. It needs to be above the tops of the stands to clear the rockers with pretty large reliefs for the rocker adjusters.
-
Tom, well that is an idea. Never heard of that approach of a bar overhead and the end support hanging down. How about just a single overhead piece for each end? Do you have any pictures to post? Were you planning on stock rockers or roller rockers?
-
Does anyone have pictures of a standard end support stand that has been machined down to fit a Factory Ford C4AE High Riser Head as I have read here?
-
...............well that is an idea. Never heard of that approach of a bar overhead and the end support hanging down.
This idea has been around for a while, probably adopted from viewing the typical stud-girdle engineering of the overhead bar tying the studs together of a stud-mount system type cylinder head (think S.B.C. ::) ) though the functional solution intention is somewhat different. The issue seems to be that by the time an aluminum bar (bridge) of sufficient rigidity is raised high enough to clear typical aluminum rocker arms and their adjusters your also going to need awfully tall valve covers. Not to mention that if one needs something this racy are the four 3/8" fasteners going to actually prove sufficient to hold the entire conglomeration onto the cylinder head! :-\
I think in the O.P.'s original inquiry of a "flat-Tappet" camshaft, with the use of the stock H.R. steel stands and a pair of good hardened steel shafts, coupled with appropriate hardware, this should prove sufficient; as though perhaps less than ideal, we have run mechanical rollers with such successfully in the past. ;)
Scott.