FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: Hotrodjohn71 on January 22, 2026, 11:15:47 AM
-
Goodmorning,
I would like to ask the group for suggestions on the specs of the cam for this engine that Im going to be putting together to go into my 67 Mustang GT.
I want to use a solid lifter cam and utilize stock ford adjustable rocker arms.
The engine is the 390 original motor from my 67 Mustang GT. Standard bore. It will have 428 Cobra Jet heads, Ford low Riser dual quad intake with 600 CFM carburetors, and Tube headers.
This will be a street driven car, not necessarily for going to the track every day. I'm looking for a decent idle.
Thank you
-
i would suggest a stroker crank of 4.250 and a hydraulic roller cam.really runs better and more power than flat tappet.
-
Well...
That was a helpful suggestion to a new member (4 posts). Should keep him around, right?!!
Mike
-
Thank you,
I appreciate and welcome all input.
I am new to the forum but not to FE Fords.
Been out of the game a couple decades.
Im trying to recapture the feel of the solid lifter 67 mustang I used to have and have lost alot of knowledge over the years.
I respect the experience shared here.
-
Are you wanting to stay with flat tappets or up grade to rollers?
SFT lobes are harder to source for street cams than HFT's. Are you looking for the tappet noise in your build?
-
Ok, what RPM range are you looking for?
-
For a street driven cruiser, and to capture that late 60's feel, you may just want to stay with a stockish cam profile. Something that came in the 428CJ (which would be a bit rowdier in a 390), or an early 60's 390HP solid lifter cam, or a faithful reproduction there of. Flat tappets are getting hard to come by these days as everything is transitioning over to rollers. Talk to Brent Lykins about having one custom ground for your application.
-
Automatic or 4 speed ?
If it's an automatic what stall speed do you have ?
-
Need the CR, too but, all the info you have for the engine helps. Do you have power brakes?
-
Thank you.
I didnt realize the SFT's were getting hard to find.
It is a 4 speed car and presently has a booster for power front discs (GT model), but if vacuum should be an issue, I would think I could add a vac reservoir cannister.
I do like the sound of a solid lifter cam. Do they offer a solid roller lifter the same height as a SFT?
-
If willing to take the risk of a solid flat tappet, plenty of options out there and I would still go with a custom grind.
-
For power brakes, you can add a electric vacuum source. That's what I did to keep from converting from vacuum wipers, to electric.
Here are a couple of Howards cams that are probably in the range your looking for:
252342-10 CL252342-10 265 265 230 230 .560 .560 110 106 .022 .022 1,13
251672-08 CL251672-08 275 275 240 240 .589 .589 108 104 .022 .022
Custom cams are the same price so, since you need more ex duration, you could substitute the 240 duration lobe, for the 230.
These are the smallest SFT cams that Howards offers in SFT. The smaller one is more cam than the famous 360 to 4v 427 LR HP cam and depending on your CR, could cause to high of DCR.
The biggest problem in SFT, is their short .020 duration that can cause problems with DCR but, you can mitigate that by opening up the LSA. But, that effects the idle and idle vacuum. It's a real balancing act :)
I think Howards are the best choice on FT cams, as their cores and lifters are the best you can get. AND, they have cores in stock now (I just called). They were out of stock for over a year.
-
n/m
-
Thank you.
I didnt realize the SFT's were getting hard to find.
It is a 4 speed car and presently has a booster for power front discs (GT model), but if vacuum should be an issue, I would think I could add a vac reservoir cannister.
I do like the sound of a solid lifter cam. Do they offer a solid roller lifter the same height as a SFT?
I've had access to cores for quite a while. No issues with making hydraulic/solid flat tappet cams.
I wouldn't do a solid roller for the street and it will open up 10 cans of worms, as far as head prep, rocker arm selection, etc.
Nothing wrong with a hydraulic or solid flat tappet camshaft. Hydraulic roller will work too, but it requires some work to the heads so that a modern spring locator will sit down on the head.
Before anyone could determine any specs or give any recommendations, there's a whole long list of data that would need to be gathered.
Also, FWIW, tightening the LSA up does nothing to help with octane tolerance/DCR/cylinder pressure. You can go from a 120° LSA to a 102° and if the ICL stays the same, the DCR will not budge. I could understand this statement if the LSA was *widened* and the ICL retarded to move along with it, but tightening the LSA by itself does nothing for DCR.
-
What is the projected life of a solid roller on the street? A milder lobe , pressure fed axle lifter, bushing or needle bearings? Maybe under 6500 rpm and compatible springs. I know most “toy” cars will never see any real run time as opposed to a daily driver , and was wondering if a solid would live long enough ?
-
Glad you caught that Brent, I changed it. My dyslexia got me.
Yes, you have to close the intake valve later (IVC) to lower DCR.
-
What is the projected life of a solid roller on the street? A milder lobe , pressure fed axle lifter, bushing or needle bearings? Maybe under 6500 rpm and compatible springs. I know most “toy” cars will never see any real run time as opposed to a daily driver , and was wondering if a solid would live long enough ?
Before pressure fed lifters came out, most guys were getting around 2500-3000 miles on a set of lifters. The Comp Endure-X and Crower HIPPO lifters came out and changed things dramatically. The bushed lifters are even higher step ups, but they are not comparable to a hydraulic lifter that stays in contact with the cam lobe all the time.
The lash and spring load of a solid roller is what hurts them over time.
And yes, most "toys" do not see enough mileage to really be concerned about it, but every so often there are guys who really wanna rack up the miles on their rides.
-
Glad you caught that Brent, I changed it. My dyslexia got me.
Yes, you have to close the intake valve later (IVC) to lower DCR.
Yes, closing the intake valve later will lower DCR. Gotta be careful on the semantics though, just changing the LSA by itself will not affect the DCR. The ICL has to be changed with it.
-
I guess it can be looked at in different ways but, by widening in my mind, the intake lobe will move the same amount as the LSA.
i.e. if with a 270° lobe, you go from 108 LSA x 108 x ICL with a 63° IVC to 114 LSA x 114 ICL, resulting in a IVC of 69°
But, of course it's a juggling act and the intake lobe can be moved in any direction to obtain the desired IVC resulting in the desired DCR
-
What is the projected life of a solid roller on the street? ...
This comes up a lot. The answer depends upon where you ask the question. I look to a bigger brain trust with Speedtalk. Here's a link to this question: https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=43176
If you search the site, you'll see it's not the first time the questions has been asked and bench raced. In that particular thread, there is a response from CamKing. He is a cam grinder and designs custom pieces for many of the NASCAR and other race series teams. But with anything, it always depends on how the particulars stack up for you. Maintenance is very important and has a lot to do with valvetrain life when working with a solid roller.
-
What is the projected life of a solid roller on the street? ...
This comes up a lot. The answer depends upon where you ask the question. I look to a bigger brain trust with Speedtalk. Here's a link to this question: https://www.speed-talk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=43176
If you search the site, you'll see it's not the first time the questions has been asked and bench raced. In that particular thread, there is a response from CamKing. He is a cam grinder and designs custom pieces for many of the NASCAR and other race series teams. But with anything, it always depends on how the particulars stack up for you. Maintenance is very important and has a lot to do with valvetrain life when working with a solid roller.
I'll give you my experience, 2002-2005 in Las Vegas. Got tied up with the guys who couldn't keep a Rat chevy together, kept eating solids and taking out crank and rods. Usually around 1500 miles, sometimes up to 3500. I did not build the solid roller motors but inherited them and fixed them. Most were mellow lobes high 290 adv, 240-250 @ .050. At the time lifters were either bushed or needles and not oiled pin. Not racers, streeters, and probably did not take care with lash settings but also didn't run them for long.
When I called Comp to ask they said "not for street. rebuild solid roller lifters every 75 passes" 75 runs X 1/4 mile...no kidding, their words not mine (again 2002-2005 not now)
So, we add modern oiled bushed pins, we add tight lash to stop hammering, cam profiles get better, and more than anything, we aren't talking a Rat that seems to side load a lifter unnaturally. It should be better, and some guys run the heck out of them for years, but some don't
My issue is, I had to repair someone's carnage so many times, and we fixed them with hyd flat or solid flat and everyone was tickled pink, chosen depending on RPM, and they just lasted.
So if we start at 75 1/4 mile passes or even use 3500 miles that I saw on these builds, I have a hard time believing in a solid roller on the street for anything more than a race wolf in sheep's clothing, and with that comes risk. If it's 10 times better with a tight lash, oiled pin, you are at 35000 miles, but no warning with a solid roller, when it breaks, it breaks good.
Nowadays, for 6500 peak or under, I'd do hyd roller. My customers aren't racers, but for those that want more RPM and reliability, I'd do a modern tool steel or DLC coated solid flat tappet. Racing, you generally need to run a solid roller for the profile, so I get it.
I do know there will be 50 guys that say they last, and stuff has changed, but I am not a fan for a street strip vehicle.
-
...
I do know there will be 50 guys that say they last, and stuff has changed, but I am not a fan for a street strip vehicle.
Running a solid roller on the street is just putting the Devil on the door. That's just my opinion. They last anywhere from 1,000 miles to 100,000 miles. There are more consistently reliable choices. Hydraulic flat, solid flat, or hydraulic roller for a street car. Again, consistent reliability.
-
...
I do know there will be 50 guys that say they last, and stuff has changed, but I am not a fan for a street strip vehicle.
Running a solid roller on the street is just putting the Devil on the door. That's just my opinion. They last anywhere from 1,000 miles to 100,000 miles. There are more consistently reliable choices. Hydraulic flat, solid flat, or hydraulic roller for a street car. Again, consistent reliability.
Agreed.
And they may last a little longer on belly button engines with light valves, rev kits, etc., but different engine families handle them differently.
-
Oregon Cam grinders have several different lobes to pick from and Ken is familiar with FEs
-
...
I do know there will be 50 guys that say they last, and stuff has changed, but I am not a fan for a street strip vehicle.
Running a solid roller on the street is just putting the Devil on the door. That's just my opinion. They last anywhere from 1,000 miles to 100,000 miles. There are more consistently reliable choices. Hydraulic flat, solid flat, or hydraulic roller for a street car. Again, consistent reliability.
Agreed.
And they may last a little longer on belly button engines with light valves, rev kits, etc., but different engine families handle them differently.
X 3
Oregon Cam grinders have several different lobes to pick from and Ken is familiar with FEs
He does, but I would want to see the exact lobe choice. I have all his lobe profiles here, use them now and then, and have made power with them, but I have had to pick and choose from the list for individual lobes, some are just not as perfect as then can be when combined as he lists them.
Cerainly markedly better than many of the off the shelf Summit offerings, but need to look close if trying to run it upstairs
-
Hydraulic roller will work too, but it requires some work to the heads so that a modern spring locator will sit down on the head.
If the head retain the original +/- 1" cast/machined locating step on the guide, their is a PAC beehive that will snap into place and do a reasonable job without a locator (iron heads).
I would steer toward a hydraulic roller if at all possible.
I don't really put much faith into the whole DCR deal.
It's useful guidance. But you can be led down an improper path if you try to "optimize" that number.
It does not take into account a host of very critical factors - chamber shape, piston dome shape, intake manifold and port efficiency, exhaust system efficiency, etc.
At peak torque cylinder pressure is gonna be cylinder pressure no matter what cam you use to crutch excess compression.
An old school iron Hemi chamber with huge ports, big domed pistons, zoomies, and tunnel ram can "poop out" the same DCR number as a modern chamber and piston with a long runner intake and a highly tuned exhaust.
One is gonna have different fuel tolerance than the other....
-
I have done the beehive thing, but don't really like being locked into one spring.
Agree on the DCR calculations. I use it as a coarse assessment if something's going to work or not. I've found that there's no real DCR number where things magically work and where they don't. At a point, volumetric efficiency plays a larger role.
-
I have done the beehive thing, but don't really like being locked into one spring.
Agree on the DCR calculations. I use it as a coarse assessment if something's going to work or not. I've found that there's no real DCR number where things magically work and where they don't. At a point, volumetric efficiency plays a larger role.
Definitely agree on the single spring - - but it's a working solution to an otherwise challenging situation - especially when you don't want to alter a valuable set of castings.
-
I like this Howards cam suggested by Frnkeore:
252342-10 CL252342-10 265 265 230 230 .560 .560 110 106 .022 .022 1,13
Is anyone using this cam? Id like to know how the idle and idle vacuum is.
-
Idle vacuum will be "plenty"
However, I am not a fan of that cam at all. A set of CJ heads really need some split, a single pattern cam is giving up along the entire curve. Even stock Ford knew it.
Vacuum is easy to control with LSA and lesser extent ICL.
Although there are many ways to skin the cat, my opinion without knowing all the details is something closer to a 270S intake lobe with a 282S exhaust lobe, maybe even a little more duration on the exhaust side, centers spread to meet vacuum and ICL between 105 and 109 depending on SCR. Seems very specific, but is really a generic recommendation, I would take all the engine and use data and likely use much better lobes, just trying to show thought process of what I think the heads would benefit from.
-
I like this Howards cam suggested by Frnkeore:
252342-10 CL252342-10 265 265 230 230 .560 .560 110 106 .022 .022 1,13
Is anyone using this cam? Id like to know how the idle and idle vacuum is.
Without doing some measuring, you can't just choose a camshaft that easily.
What if your CJ heads have been milled to death? What if your compression ratio ends up at 10.5:1? The cam up above would never work with something like that.
No single pattern cams for most Fords. You're just leaving horsepower on the table. In some cases, lots of it.
Here's an example of where I would start the conversation on choosing a cam:
*Application (street, street/strip, drag race, pulling truck, etc.):
*Desired camshaft type (flat tappet, roller):
*Any specific journal diameter or core requirements?:
*Desired peak horsepower rpm (what rpm where peak hp is produced, not shift point):
*Desired idle quality:
*Vacuum brakes?:
*Vacuum rules?:
*Forced induction/Nitrous?:
*Engine Family (Windsor, Cleveland, FE, 385 series, Modular, etc.):
*Bore & Stroke:
*Rod Length:
*Lifter bore diameter:
*Cylinder head manufacturer and model:
*Valve sizes (stem and head diameter, length if possible):
*Compression ratio:
*Intake manifold:
*Carburetor:
*Transmission:
*Rearend gear:
*Vehicle weight:
*Fuel that you're running:
*Rocker arm ratio:
That usually gets enough information to get the ball rolling and initiates further conversation on desires/expectations.
There's several guys on this thread that could spec and sell you a camshaft, I'm not jonesing for business, I'm just saying that you can get in some pretty bad trouble by pointing at a cam in a catalog without knowing exactly what you have. The compression ratio is a big thing that I have to really stress with my customers. These engines have been rebuilt, milled, and cut to death over the past 60 years. You just can't take at face value what you have. It all needs to be checked out and measured.
In addition to all of that, a solid camshaft will lose duration at the valve due to lash. Depending on the lobe, you can end up with manners that you're not expecting. Everything has to be taken into account.
-
If by "good idle", you mean fairly stockish, I am very happy with the mild Oregon flat tappet solid that I have in my .030" over 428. It has .528" gross lift, and 228 @ .050 duration. It idles almost like a stock Cobra Jet, pulls strong from idle up to 54-5500 RPM, has the solid lifter "sound" and is very street friendly. In my 4025 pound 59, it has gone 12.5s at 108 MPH thru the mufflers and full tailpipes, and on the dyno, it made 470 HP and 515 ft/lbs of torque. It has a pair of TFS heads, a Performer RPM with a Holley 780 vacuum secondary carb, with iron adjustable rocker arms, a Duraspark distributor and module, with a pair of FPA mid length headers. I am running a wide ratio 4 speed Toploader and 3.50 gears., and it is very driveable in town, and decent on the freeway, although I do change to 2.91 gears for longer freeway trips.
-
Thank you.
I greatly appreciate and highly value all the advice. I take everything into consideration.
-
I like this Howards cam suggested by Frnkeore:
252342-10 CL252342-10 265 265 230 230 .560 .560 110 106 .022 .022
Is anyone using this cam? Id like to know how the idle and idle vacuum is.
I take it that you don't want to measure all the things that are being suggested and/or you want it ASAP?
If so, this would be a good "safe" shelf type cam with a CR of 9.5 - 9.7 and good pump gas. You can run it at 10/1 if you retard the timing 4° to 112 ICL.
Call Howards and ask for Kirk. Tell him you want the following:
Intake lobe - bf230320 265 230 0.320
Exhaust lobe- bf240337 275 240 0.337
with a LSA of 114 and a ICL of 108
You'll have .030 more valve lift on the ex side so, make sure you account for that, when setting up the springs.
Have them send that cam info to Competition Products (they own Howards) and order it from them. Make sure you get the lifters from them, also. You'll get free shipping that way.
I just ordered a HFT & lifters, last week, it was $360 shipped. Make sure you get their lifters and use high zink engine oil.
-
Want it bad...get it bad....
I certainly make no money if the cam is ordered from Brent, but buying without knowing where you are is not how most do it. That being said, you never know what could have been or what a little change in taper or .200 duration could deliver if you never tried.
-
As I said, It would be a "Shelf" type of cam but, a dam good one for a SFT FE. It would be of the type that would be similar but, much better than the Ford HP era.
-
Want it bad...get it bad....
I certainly make no money if the cam is ordered from Brent, but buying without knowing where you are is not how most do it. That being said, you never know what could have been or what a little change in taper or .200 duration could deliver if you never tried.
I can agree - and disagree at the same time. When I was doing the EMC deal I had the "opportunity" to try multiple cams in an engine on dyno. I think we had three in a single day once. We were looking at a 3500 or 4000 RPM wide average, so it was not just chasing peaks. After ordering the "right" cam I would usually end up trying prior year's sticks or alternate ones based on initial results. It was eye opening to see how some stuff that was drastically different on paper ended up giving startlingly similar numbers for average output. I think the punch line might be to get as close as you can - and tune from there. As hot rodders, we all get fixated on horsepower and torque peaks. The "right" cam decision might - maybe should - be based on expected behavior at throttle positions other than WOT. That's where the expertise come in to play.
-
Want it bad...get it bad....
I certainly make no money if the cam is ordered from Brent, but buying without knowing where you are is not how most do it. That being said, you never know what could have been or what a little change in taper or .200 duration could deliver if you never tried.
I can agree - and disagree at the same time. When I was doing the EMC deal I had the "opportunity" to try multiple cams in an engine on dyno. I think we had three in a single day once. We were looking at a 3500 or 4000 RPM wide average, so it was not just chasing peaks. After ordering the "right" cam I would usually end up trying prior year's sticks or alternate ones based on initial results. It was eye opening to see how some stuff that was drastically different on paper ended up giving startlingly similar numbers for average output. I think the punch line might be to get as close as you can - and tune from there. As hot rodders, we all get fixated on horsepower and torque peaks. The "right" cam decision might - maybe should - be based on expected behavior at throttle positions other than WOT. That's where the expertise come in to play.
I'd buy that, but you also knew the heads you were running, the compression, valve job, even more importantly the goal of average power was defined, with some experience mixed in. However, we still don't even know if the original poster wanted or needed truck style idle, or something rowdy, or something in between. Acceptance of vacuum canister and sound of the 60s made it sound like we were sort of getting there.
I know you get it, and in general, a 10 degree split is a decent cam for the head, but is 42 degrees of overlap at .020 and 7 at .050 right, then consider lash effects? I'd want a reason or two to pick something like that with a head that can use some help to pull on the port (especially if the intended use needed it) and I'd want to know compression before I flirted telling a guy it would be happy.
I am solidly in your camp with the comment of picking the cam based on where and how you want it to behave. I am not a peak guy unless that's the goal and that's rare for me. I'd recommend "plan the flight, fly the plan", and I wouldn't advise someone to buy parts without digging deeper
-
Agreed. 42/7 degrees of pre-lash overlap is not a direction I would head with a factory cylinder head. On a cam that small, you could run that cam on a 109-110 LSA, still make enough vacuum to work a brake booster without issue, and potentially make a lot more average/peak hp/torque because of the extra overlap.
Doesn't matter, we are all just sitting here going back and forth on a combination that no one knows the details on. We're all just basically practicing our typing/grammar skills.
-
Agreed. 42/7 degrees of pre-lash overlap is not a direction I would head with a factory cylinder head. On a cam that small, you could run that cam on a 109-110 LSA, still make enough vacuum to work a brake booster without issue, and potentially make a lot more average/peak hp/torque because of the extra overlap.
Doesn't matter, we are all just sitting here going back and forth on a combination that no one knows the details on. We're all just basically practicing our typing/grammar skills.
Indeed!
-
I know you get it, and in general, a 10 degree split is a decent cam for the head, but is 42 degrees of overlap at .020 and 7 at .050 right, then consider lash effects? I'd want a reason or two to pick something like that with a head that can use some help to pull on the port (especially if the intended use needed it) and I'd want to know compression before I flirted telling a guy it would be happy.
Food for thought:
First, I never said my cam would be optimal, for anything!
But, I believe my cam specs will give better fuel mileage, and higher hp, above above 4k. As well as be a bit better on octane tolerance, up to 10/1 CR using a 4° adjustment.
That's assuming Brent's would be 109 LSA +4° but, he didn't say.
Average hp to 5.8k would be very close.
Cam challenge anyone?
-
I know you get it, and in general, a 10 degree split is a decent cam for the head, but is 42 degrees of overlap at .020 and 7 at .050 right, then consider lash effects? I'd want a reason or two to pick something like that with a head that can use some help to pull on the port (especially if the intended use needed it) and I'd want to know compression before I flirted telling a guy it would be happy.
Food for thought:
First, I never said my cam would be optimal, for anything!
But, I believe my cam specs will give better fuel mileage, and higher hp, above above 4k. As well as be a bit better on octane tolerance, up to 10/1 CR using a 4° adjustment.
That's assuming Brent's would be 109 LSA +4° but, he didn't say.
Average hp to 5.8k would be very close.
Cam challenge anyone?
A person cannot state any of those things you just said without just estimating general behavior based on the few cam specs provided, and that's my point. We still haven't heard all the details of the use, fuel, gear, etc. The term "better" cannot be determined without more info.
If the original poster got us even a few of those things on Brent's list, we could have a recommendation building. If he was close to me, I'd cc the heads, measure deck clearance, at least eyeball the dish, if not measure, then dig in with the guy to see what he intends for the car. However, there is not enough info to jump to a part number. An hour or two of work and the owner to have exponentially better choices and a real prediction of what the car will do.
If you want to play though, my gut (without almost no information on the engine and use) tells me you are undercamming by a little on lobes, by a lot on LSA, and thinking ICL will offset the peak RPM. That is indeed how they did it from the factory, but they were hobbled back then.
As far as a cam challenge, I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole, especially with no stated purpose and engine variables.
-
There is so much more to this camshaft decision than I imagined. I am learing alot just reading your responses.
For practical reasons and upon considering the pros and cons I have learned heretofore, I think I will want to go with a Hydraulic roller lifter cam instead of the pre mentioned solid flat tappet option.
Even though I wanted the sound and feel of a SFT that I had before, I also feel like my preferences can evolve in favor of a possibly better and more durable roller lifter which wont need a break-in and will allow me to not have to keep zddp in the oil.
I think I would rather not go with roller rockers as from my research, the good reliable kits are very expensive.
And not altogether sure my cam lift will be over .550 so would I be ok utilizing a stock Ford or Isky stock style adjustable rocker with an appropriate length pushrod with the Hydraulic roller cam?
My driving style these days will not be bracket racing or going to the track too much. I will be driving around town but want to be able to blast down the country roads from time to time.
I realize what you are saying about needing data to evaluate what a good grind would be. Head cc info, and other data.
I will gather that information over the next months as this build (and the car) are in the very preliminary stages. I have a TON of rust repair.
Meanwhile I will be reading and learning more.
-
You can run any of the factory FE rockers with a hydraulic roller. With hydraulic roller spring loads, I would run end stands and I prefer to run a solid spacer in between the rockers instead of springs.
You’ll have to weigh the costs of the items that you’ll need to buy against buying a complete kit.
-
You can run any of the factory FE rockers with a hydraulic roller. With hydraulic roller spring loads, I would run end stands and I prefer to run a solid spacer in between the rockers instead of springs.
You’ll have to weigh the costs of the items that you’ll need to buy against buying a complete kit.
Agree 100% with this. Although I really like roller tip rockers - they effectively uncouple the rocker from the valve tip - makes for better guide life.
First time I did a hydraulic roller with OE nonadjustable rockers it was for a budget conscious stroker, and I was kinda stunned at how well it ran. Removing that swinging 7/16 bolt (AKA adjuster) from the rocking mass added an easy couple hundred RPM of smooth power to an already known and tested combination.
-
You can run any of the factory FE rockers with a hydraulic roller. With hydraulic roller spring loads, I would run end stands and I prefer to run a solid spacer in between the rockers instead of springs.
You’ll have to weigh the costs of the items that you’ll need to buy against buying a complete kit.
Agree 100% with this. Although I really like roller tip rockers - they effectively uncouple the rocker from the valve tip - makes for better guide life.
First time I did a hydraulic roller with OE nonadjustable rockers it was for a budget conscious stroker, and I was kinda stunned at how well it ran. Removing that swinging 7/16 bolt (AKA adjuster) from the rocking mass added an easy couple hundred RPM of smooth power to an already known and tested combination.
I've got factory non-adjustable rockers on Dennis Towle's 390 in his Galaxie wagon. Hundreds of passes at the track, thousands of street miles, no issues. Run those with a pretty spicy hydraulic roller and about 400 lbs of spring load over the nose.
-
You can run any of the factory FE rockers with a hydraulic roller. With hydraulic roller spring loads, I would run end stands and I prefer to run a solid spacer in between the rockers instead of springs.
You’ll have to weigh the costs of the items that you’ll need to buy against buying a complete kit.
Agree 100% with this. Although I really like roller tip rockers - they effectively uncouple the rocker from the valve tip - makes for better guide life.
First time I did a hydraulic roller with OE nonadjustable rockers it was for a budget conscious stroker, and I was kinda stunned at how well it ran. Removing that swinging 7/16 bolt (AKA adjuster) from the rocking mass added an easy couple hundred RPM of smooth power to an already known and tested combination.
I've got factory non-adjustable rockers on Dennis Towle's 390 in his Galaxie wagon. Hundreds of passes at the track, thousands of street miles, no issues. Run those with a pretty spicy hydraulic roller and about 400 lbs of spring load over the nose.
X3, I love the combo in a 459 inch CJ in the pic below. 525 HP and never fell off through 6000 RPM. Easy breezy and been running like a top. I don't think there is enough side loading to make the spacers a necessity, although other than original valve covers, I do tend to use them, this worked great.