I ended up ordering a pair of new Sealed Power rocker shafts, I did some research and I'm assuming mine are caked with grease (as aforementioned in a previous post). At $25 each, I think it's cheap insurance!

I see both rocker end supports as well as rocker stands that replace the stock aluminum ones. Is there a kit that sells them both? Since I'm essentially starting fresh with new rocker shafts, I'm tempted to splurge and do it right the first time 

I've heard of people installing Holley jets on stock heads to restrict oil, but what's the general consensus for Edelbrock heads? I've read that Edelbrock has already corrected the oiling issues by shrinking the oiling hole where the rocker assembly bolts on, but I've also read that they did not shrink the hole enough.

What have people been doing with these heads? Ideally I don't have to take brand new heads to the machine shop to have them drilled out for restrictors. I'm also skeptical of some these homemade restrictors where people simply drop in a metal rod and call it "good enough".

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

I'm in the process of building a 428 for my '68 fastback and I'm approaching the stage where I need to pick a rocker arm assembly. I'm using Edelbrock aluminum heads with springs rated for a roller cam (150lbs on the seat) with a relatively mild Lunati hydraulic roller cam:

Advertised Duration (Int/Exh): 262/270
Duration @ .050 (Int/Exh): 211/219
Gross Valve Lift (Int/Exh): .559/.559
LSA/ICL: 112/106
Valve Lash (Int/Exh): Hyd/Hyd
RPM Range: 1600-5600

The heads will utilize Edelbrock's stud kit for the rocker arms.

I currently have the factory adjustable type rocker arms:

IMG_6800.JPG by armon7, on Flickr

IMG_6802.JPG by armon7, on Flickr

Would these suffice for my build? I see the Harland Sharp setup for nearly $1000, but I feel that might be slightly overkill for my application. I'm not opposed to swapping the stock rocker arms in favor of roller rockers if that's necessary.

If these are suitable, any tips or tricks for rebuilding them? Anything I should look for?

C5AF-12127-E dual points distributor in excellent condition. Shaft rotates smoothly with no binding, cam gear looks great. I was going to use it for my 428, but figured someone else might need it more than I do.

Per mustangtek, this distributor is correct for:

65-71 390 All_HIPerf

65 427 Ford Special 4v ST exc/trans.idn.

65-70 427 428 All_HiPerf

65-67 427 Hipo Ford Fairlane 4v,6v.8v

67 428 Shelby GT500

65-67 427 Cobra

Asking $400 OBO. Please PM if interested. Thanks!

IMG_6742.JPG by armon7, on Flickr

IMG_6743.JPG by armon7, on Flickr

IMG_6745.JPG by armon7, on Flickr

Quote from: happystang on August 26, 2018, 11:55:40 PM

That sounds a little... Excessive? I wasn't even planning on balancing my rotating assembly as this is going to be a very mild build. The 306 windsor I built that regularly turns 6600 RPM didn't get balanced, 50k miles later it's still running strong.

My 428 was actually a rebuilt short block that was never run and then sat for a long time. I pulled it apart and had the crank polished and along with a quick hone of the cylinder walls and lifter bores.

From what I've gathered, I would simply use a regular spacer with a stock 390 balancer and matching flywheel?

You are correct that a regular spacer and a stock 390 harmonic balancer will work with your combination.  However, a 428 crank will normally use an externally balanced flywheel.  These flywheels have a 28 ounce weight of some sort attached to them.  If you have the flywheel, see if it has that weight on it.  If it doesn't, look for evidence of balancing on the crank, there would be some slugs of mallory metal added to one or more of the counterweights on the crank.

If you just bought a 428 engine with no flywheel, I'd bet that it wasn't internally balanced, and you will need a 428 flywheel to make it work.  You could probably get away without balancing if you KNOW that the 428 crank was not internally balanced, and you have a 428 flywheel, or if you KNOW that the 428 crank was internally balanced and you have a 390 flywheel.  If you aren't sure about this, I'd really suggest you get it balanced.  If you put a stock 428 crank together with a stock 390 flywheel, you will have a significant vibration problem.

Jay, I was planning on using a 428 specific flywheel anyways:

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/fiz-186541/overview/make/ford

I have a ACT lightweight flywheel in my '69 and absolutely love it, the Fidanza unit actually has provisions for an external balance and internal balance. I'm assuming this is through a weight that is simply bolted on (I had a McLeod flywheel similar to this).

The flywheel is unfortunately missing, however, there isn't any evidence of the crank being balanced; there aren't any slugs of mallory anywhere.

The hatchet style crank spacer was only used on 428 Super Cobra Jets, which were fitted with heavier LeMans connecting rods and needed the external counterbalance.  Any standard FE crank spacer should work for you, since you will probably internally balance the engine anyway.  Often you will see that the area where the seal rides on the crank spacer is grooved or torn up; you can get a sleeve for about $5 that presses on there and provides a new sealing surface.  Of the aftermarket crank spacers I've seen, some of the aluminum ones are hard anodized and the ones I've purchased  press onto the crank really hard; I've gone as far as cutting the anodizing off the internal bore of the crank spacer in a lathe to get them to fit properly.  They should slide on fairly easily, with only minimal "convincing" required.  IMO, best bet is to find a stocker in good shape, or else one that is torn up at the seal surface, and install the repair sleeve.

Jay, that opens up another question. I've been having some difficulty figuring out what rods I have. They are marked C6AE-C, which I *think* is for a Cobra Jet. Wouldn't that warrant the use of a hatchet style spacer?