POP Rocker stands

[67xr7cat]

GalaxieX  I'd put it together and run it.  If it was fine at .030", should be fine at .040".  Keep in mind it is only another .005" off the bore wall thickness.  Most important part of engine building is machine work and attention to detail. Is all too easy to keep changing the combo which is a good way of never getting any place and end up with a pile of parts and a lightened wallet.  Finish it up and get it running.  If you want more worry about that then. With what you have it should run good on the street and be lots of fun. 

Well that is just eminently sensible and practical advice. 👍

FWIW the stock rods have been beam polished, magged, resized big end, new pin bushings and balanced along with the reciprocating assembly.
I didn’t mention before but it’s a 1U crank.

Guys turned what you have 7k and got away with it. For what you have no reason to turn it more than 5,500 - 6k.  I'd just make sure you have a good 7qt. baffled oil pan and I like the factory windage tray too.  Not for power, but keep from blowing the oil around in the pan. 

Now a days everyone tell you to buy a stroker kit as cost to re-do the stock stuff not that much cheaper. Yes times have changed and most of this stuff these  days is get the plastic out and buy it, but what you have worked well for decades and still will. A 428 with those heads will make good useable power provided the rest of the combo is matched.  That intake may hold it back some, but trips are cool so is that to balance it out against.

[blykins]

GalaxieX  I'd put it together and run it.  If it was fine at .030", should be fine at .040".  Keep in mind it is only another .005" off the bore wall thickness.  Most important part of engine building is machine work and attention to detail. Is all too easy to keep changing the combo which is a good way of never getting any place and end up with a pile of parts and a lightened wallet.  Finish it up and get it running.  If you want more worry about that then. With what you have it should run good on the street and be lots of fun. 

Well that is just eminently sensible and practical advice. 👍

FWIW the stock rods have been beam polished, magged, resized big end, new pin bushings and balanced along with the reciprocating assembly.
I didn’t mention before but it’s a 1U crank.

I just don't trust factory rods on engines that are gonna make horsepower.   I have a shop rule that I don't use them on anything much more than a factory engine.   I did a 390 hp 5200 rpm 390 with them and that's about my limit. 

You can search the forum for all the factory rod failures.   Years of fatigue get to them and they break up in the beam.  One guy had some break while just cruising down the road. 

See if you can dial in the geometry on those Crane rockers.  I've had to shim some rockers up almost .200" to get the geometry right on them (not on TFS heads), so you may be able to use them on a TFS head without much finagling.  If so, save your rocker money and buy a set of Molnar rods for your engine. 

Also, I'm curious to see how your factory rods have ARP 2000 bolts.  Do you have pictures?

[67xr7cat]

and don't trust L-19 Rod bolts, Eagle crankshafts, or KB hyper pistons, but get off the internet and you find a lot of very knowledgeable guys that have not had such bad luck.  Of course everyone should do what makes them sleep good at night.

[blykins]

and don't trust L-19 Rod bolts, Eagle crankshafts, or KB hyper pistons, but get off the internet and you find a lot of very knowledgeable guys that have not had such bad luck.  Of course everyone should do what makes them sleep good at night.

I always look for trends.   There will be failures with any part, as any statistical analysis will have a bell curve with outliers.   Trends among respected builders also mean a lot to me. 

The L-19 bolt and Eagle crank warnings have some credibility though, even without looking on the internet.   Not sure about KB pistons, I don't see a lot of issues with those, except for guys who don't gap the top ring enough. 

[My427stang]

I had a set of Crane in 2006 when I did my 489, they a new full set that had just came out and a very affordable and complete kit.  No amount of realistic shimming could get me there with Edelbrock heads and they pushed the pushrods way out toward the intake manifold that hurt clearance.

If they are that style, I was not too happy.

I have the Crane set 34791-1

I did have these mocked up on the Edel heads some time ago.
The geometry looked ok but ya, pushrod to intake clearance may have been an issue.

I looked around the web, couldn't find a good pic, but did see a few "maybes".  Those do not seem to look, or be priced like, their early-2000s kit.  The kit I tried to use could not have been shimmed up, or I would have done it.  They were just unusable, but looked pretty.  Potentially reused from a different application.  At the time, Crane knew it and very easily refunded my money and at the time, quite a few guys were fighting them.   Pic of mine attached

[fe468stroker]

With all the talk about stand height and geometry, what is the best way to determine if anything needs moving?  Simple please for us back yard builders.

[galaxiex]

..................................

See if you can dial in the geometry on those Crane rockers.  I've had to shim some rockers up almost .200" to get the geometry right on them (not on TFS heads), so you may be able to use them on a TFS head without much finagling.  If so, save your rocker money and buy a set of Molnar rods for your engine. 

Also, I'm curious to see how your factory rods have ARP 2000 bolts.  Do you have pictures?

Thanks, I'll keep the Crane rockers for now and see how the geometry works out when I get to that stage.

I mis-remembered on the rod bolts, they are the ARP 255-6402 Pro Series Wave-Loc.
For some reason (old age) I thought they were the 2000 series.

If I go for some Molnar rods (or other) I'll likely have to re balance, Yes?
Currently it's still external balance with the weight on the flex plate.

[galaxiex]

I had a set of Crane in 2006 when I did my 489, they a new full set that had just came out and a very affordable and complete kit.  No amount of realistic shimming could get me there with Edelbrock heads and they pushed the pushrods way out toward the intake manifold that hurt clearance.

If they are that style, I was not too happy.

I have the Crane set 34791-1

I did have these mocked up on the Edel heads some time ago.
The geometry looked ok but ya, pushrod to intake clearance may have been an issue.

I looked around the web, couldn't find a good pic, but did see a few "maybes".  Those do not seem to look, or be priced like, their early-2000s kit.  The kit I tried to use could not have been shimmed up, or I would have done it.  They were just unusable, but looked pretty.  Potentially reused from a different application.  At the time, Crane knew it and very easily refunded my money and at the time, quite a few guys were fighting them.   Pic of mine attached

Mine are bright shiny aluminum, not the gold colored type.
Solid steel stands with end supports.
I'll try to get a pic up later.

[galaxiex]

Crane rockers and one end stand.


These have drilled 5/16 cup adjusters so pushrod oiling is possible.


Another question... how effective would the pushrod oiling be, since the oil comes in at the top of the rocker,
rather than under like oiling thru the shafts?


BTW that top oil slot in the rocker is also drilled to oil the roller tip.

[blykins]

..................................

See if you can dial in the geometry on those Crane rockers.  I've had to shim some rockers up almost .200" to get the geometry right on them (not on TFS heads), so you may be able to use them on a TFS head without much finagling.  If so, save your rocker money and buy a set of Molnar rods for your engine. 

Also, I'm curious to see how your factory rods have ARP 2000 bolts.  Do you have pictures?

Thanks, I'll keep the Crane rockers for now and see how the geometry works out when I get to that stage.

I mis-remembered on the rod bolts, they are the ARP 255-6402 Pro Series Wave-Loc.
For some reason (old age) I thought they were the 2000 series.

If I go for some Molnar rods (or other) I'll likely have to re balance, Yes?
Currently it's still external balance with the weight on the flex plate.

You would at least need to check your bobweight.  Molnar rods are pretty light and they may even be lighter than what you have. 

[manofmerc]

As far as the crane rockers and valve tip contact with my edelbrock heads I had to have my stands milled I believe it was .100 .After that I had a good centered up contact pattern .Before milling the contact pattern was way toward the exhaust side .I believe I bought one of the first sets of these about 2006 .At that time they were cheap (for Fe parts) about $490 from Barnett Performance in Atl. So far trouble free 6000 is all I turn this engine with its solid flat tappet cam .Doug

[67xr7cat]

If I go for some Molnar rods (or other) I'll likely have to re balance, Yes?
Currently it's still external balance with the weight on the flex plate.

The Molnar rod is listed as 769 grams. Have a stock rod that is 742 grams. That is a 27 gram difference, maybe yours are different don't know.  What I do know is big end weight difference will affect balance more then small end, but most will say rebalance at a 20 gram bobweight change (actually a lot will say so at 10 grams) and considering it will be heavier not lighter it matters more. I'd plan on a re-balance.

While we are on the suspect parts subject may want to replace that factory 428 crankshaft too. Are threads on here of them failing too for no good reason.  All I will say is either go buy that stroker kit or if you think the shop knew what they were doing trust in that.  Engine building is like Domino's when one falls a bunch of others do too and you can end up forever changing things. Well is all I will say on the subject. Good luck with it.

[galaxiex]

If I go for some Molnar rods (or other) I'll likely have to re balance, Yes?
Currently it's still external balance with the weight on the flex plate.

The Molnar rod is listed as 769 grams. Have a stock rod that is 742 grams. That is a 27 gram difference, maybe yours are different don't know.  What I do know is big end weight difference will affect balance more then small end, but most will say rebalance at a 20 gram bobweight change (actually a lot will say so at 10 grams) and considering it will be heavier not lighter it matters more. I'd plan on a re-balance.

While we are on the suspect parts subject may want to replace that factory 428 crankshaft too. Are threads on here of them failing too for no good reason.  All I will say is either go buy that stroker kit or if you think the shop knew what they were doing trust in that.  Engine building is like Domino's when one falls a bunch of others do too and you can end up forever changing things. Well is all I will say on the subject. Good luck with it.

Thanks.

A little more info...

I had the block, crank, and rod work done so long ago it's hard to remember,
tho the machine shop was well known and did good work. (Pro race engines)

Prior to assembling the short block, a buddy was over visiting and the crank was standing on end in the corner.
Well... he being a klutz somehow knocked it over and it hit the concrete floor with a big KLANG!

I took it back to the shop to check for straight and make sure it was still good.
Told them what happened and they checked it and said it was ok....

I'm still considering the stroker kit.
For what I have in the bottom end right now, (not much)
It wouldn't be too much of a hardship to spring for a stroker kit.

I can probably sell the existing bottom end to offset some of it.

My main concern is the .040 overbore and how much the stroker would stress the cyl walls.

I guess I could always go for a stock stroke aftermarket crank and related parts.

[67xr7cat]

Well getting knocked over and hitting the floor would concern me. Is hard to argue against a stroker kit if you have the money.  Get a Scat cast crank and Molnar 6.7 rods and the Mahle pistons certainly an upgrade both in strength and more modern stuff.  Also the BBC rod journal is a better deal and you end up with a lighter piston.  I would not be concerned with a stroker being any harder on the cylinder walls.  If you are concerned have the block sonic checked, but if it was good at .030" another .005" off the wall is not going to kill it.

[blykins]

If I go for some Molnar rods (or other) I'll likely have to re balance, Yes?
Currently it's still external balance with the weight on the flex plate.

The Molnar rod is listed as 769 grams. Have a stock rod that is 742 grams. That is a 27 gram difference, maybe yours are different don't know.  What I do know is big end weight difference will affect balance more then small end, but most will say rebalance at a 20 gram bobweight change (actually a lot will say so at 10 grams) and considering it will be heavier not lighter it matters more. I'd plan on a re-balance.

While we are on the suspect parts subject may want to replace that factory 428 crankshaft too. Are threads on here of them failing too for no good reason.  All I will say is either go buy that stroker kit or if you think the shop knew what they were doing trust in that.  Engine building is like Domino's when one falls a bunch of others do too and you can end up forever changing things. Well is all I will say on the subject. Good luck with it.

Thanks.

A little more info...

I had the block, crank, and rod work done so long ago it's hard to remember,
tho the machine shop was well known and did good work. (Pro race engines)

Prior to assembling the short block, a buddy was over visiting and the crank was standing on end in the corner.
Well... he being a klutz somehow knocked it over and it hit the concrete floor with a big KLANG!

I took it back to the shop to check for straight and make sure it was still good.
Told them what happened and they checked it and said it was ok....

I'm still considering the stroker kit.
For what I have in the bottom end right now, (not much)
It wouldn't be too much of a hardship to spring for a stroker kit.

I can probably sell the existing bottom end to offset some of it.

My main concern is the .040 overbore and how much the stroker would stress the cyl walls.

I guess I could always go for a stock stroke aftermarket crank and related parts.

I'd base it all on how much horsepower you want and then do a pro/con of each scenario.  The TFS heads make a lot of power, but I think the cork would be your 3x2 intake and that would become more apparent on a larger engine. 

It's hard to know what to do in this situation.  When you start looking at other options, then you open Pandora's box. 

I don't think I'd be scared to run the stock 428 crank and remember, when you add displacement, the camshaft needs change.  It takes more duration to fill the cylinders of a larger engine.  Keeping the same cam and adding cubes would make the peak hp rpm go down.

I just built two 428's and used Molnar rods.  One rod set averaged 757g and the other set averaged 759.  I haven't built a factory rod FE in awhile, but a reference book lists 62-up factory rods at 761-775g.   Not sure how ARP rod bolts play into that, but it could be that you may not need a re-balance at all.  Just have to weigh some parts and see, or ask for the balance card from where your crank was balanced.

Factory cranks don't really scare me, I've used a lot of them over the years.  This isn't a race application, or high rpm application, and the factory cranks are pretty stout.  I was going to stick a 428 crank in JJ but decided to stick with the 3.500" stroke just because it's an underdog stroke.   I'm sure if it's been ground that it's been magged as most crank grinders do that as a default.