Modifications on the 352's C6AE-R heads...

[67xr7cat]

The rocker stands are moving because there is not enough clamping force to hold them in place. All been done here is try to limit the hula hoop movement which cannot hurt the situation. How well it will work guess see, I'd say will still fret, but a lot less. Real problem is the design. Four poorly placed 3/8" bolts is weak spot in the FE design.

I think if clamping force was the culprit then nightmist66 would still be seeing fret marks.

Nightmist setup is not the same and reduces the needed clamping force IMHO.  Your trying to fix the weak factory setup by stabilizing it with that bushing, but as GT350H rightly commented below "fretting" is the stand "dancing" up and down." this is about what it comes down to and without changing how the force gets distributed like in Nightmists setup other than constraining the movement like your doing all is left is the holding force applied.

Anyway I'd like to see how what you did works, I'm sure it will improve the situation, just wonder how much. It could turn out to work well and hope it does given anything that can make the factory setup work better without big modifications is a plus.

[Nightmist66]

That's a really nice job, Jared. Every aspect of your engine is well thought out.

Much, much too kind. Mediocre at best compared to the pro's. I have been fortunate to speak to a couple individuals much smarter than I and discuss some of my stupid ideas.

That's a really mediocre job, Jared. Every aspect of your engine is moderately thought out.

There, I fixed it 

Better. 

A long stud has more potential for stretch than a short 1-1.500 bolt. That is why I suggested what I did. Aluminum dampens harmonics better than steel but Jessel and T&D use steel.

Excuse the ignorance. That slipped my mind when I read it. I agree with that. I put a few extra pounds of torque on the short head studs for that reason.

The Harland Sharp setup uses steel stands if you buy the kit.

[Nightmist66]

Attempting to get back on track. Brent, did you bush the stand the whole length of the hole(top to bottom) or is it a short bushing in the bottom of the stand? I have mine tight top to bottom, hoping it would eliminate any flex or movement for the stud in the entirety of the stand. 

[cjshaker]

I always wonder why the Oregon Cams rocker support system isn't brought up during conversations like this. It seems to be a pretty stout system for using the stock 4 bolt set-up. The supports are much shorter, theoretically making them more stable, and they would be super easy to pin to the base, as has been brought up, which would probably help even more. If you had to raise or lower the base to get correct geometry, that would even be pretty easy.

Several guys have been using them for many years, and I've had a set on my Mach 1 for the last 6 years, with thousands of miles of use and no issues at all.

http://www.oregoncamshaft.com/428-FE.html

[blykins]

I think if their stand holes are sloppy we are right back to where things can move.

[Gregwill16]

Doug, it appears on that Oregon Cams setup that the base, stands, and end stands are all individual pieces held together by fasteners?

[cjshaker]

Doug, it appears on that Oregon Cams setup that the base, stands, and end stands are all individual pieces held together by fasteners?

The stands simply clamp the base when bolted down, but yes, the end supports are held by 2 allen head bolts. All they have to do is stop the end of the shafts from bending upward, which they do. The end supports are a tight fit, with even the allen head bolts being a rather tight fit through the ends. The base is one piece that is held down by the stands, so there are no more fasteners than any stock type system.

I'm not saying they will cure any issues, but the shorter stands, along with the solid base to help spread the load out, work quite well.

Brent, just going by memory, the stands did seem tighter on the bolts than typical aftermarket aluminum stands.

Sorry, I just don't get all the discussion and debate here. If someone is using enough spring pressure to have the stands start moving around, you're much better off with the race T&D system. If the engine is built to that level, why risk stuff with a cheaper system? The valvetrain is NOT where you want to save money at! You've obviously spent some serious money on the engine already (not directed at you, Brent), so bite the bullet and do it right. It just doesn't make sense to do it otherwise.

What Brent did seems like a sound idea, but he has easy access to the machining equipment to do it, and probably already had the tools for reaming to the proper size. He also isn't paying anyone for the labor. If you had to pay someone to do all the machining, the cost of the bushings, and pay to have them reamed, the price has to start climbing pretty significantly. I'm sure he has several hours in work invested. Add the original cost of the stands and spacers and I'd think you're well on your way to the purchase of the T&D system. Again, just talking about the average person who doesn't have a mill and reaming tools.

[blykins]

Doug, it appears on that Oregon Cams setup that the base, stands, and end stands are all individual pieces held together by fasteners?

The stands simply clamp the base when bolted down, but yes, the end supports are held by 2 allen head bolts. All they have to do is stop the end of the shafts from bending upward, which they do. The end supports are a tight fit, with even the allen head bolts being a rather tight fit through the ends. The base is one piece that is held down by the stands, so there are no more fasteners than any stock type system.

I'm not saying they will cure any issues, but the shorter stands, along with the solid base to help spread the load out, work quite well.

Brent, just going by memory, the stands did seem tighter on the bolts than typical aftermarket aluminum stands.

Sorry, I just don't get all the discussion and debate here. If someone is using enough spring pressure to have the stands start moving around, you're much better off with the race T&D system. If the engine is built to that level, why risk stuff with a cheaper system? The valvetrain is NOT where you want to save money at! You've obviously spent some serious money on the engine already (not directed at you, Brent), so bite the bullet and do it right. It just doesn't make sense to do it otherwise.

What Brent did seems like a sound idea, but he has easy access to the machining equipment to do it, and probably already had the tools for reaming to the proper size. He also isn't paying anyone for the labor. If you had to pay someone to do all the machining, the cost of the bushings, and pay to have them reamed, the price has to start climbing pretty significantly. I'm sure he has several hours in work invested. Add the original cost of the stands and spacers and I'd think you're well on your way to the purchase of the T&D system. Again, just talking about the average person who doesn't have a mill and reaming tools.

And that pretty much sums it up.  I use T&D race rockers on any engines that I build for customers with over 600 lbs open pressure.  It's not even a consideration. 

However, I'm cheap, it's my junk, and I didn't want to whack these C6 heads, so I'm giving this a shot.  It may serve to be an option for someone on a budget sometime.  We will see how it works.  To be honest, the old system probably would have went right on (unless the threads in the head gave out at some point) but it's an exercise in the spirit of hot rodding.   

I'm having more fun with this 352 than I ever thought.  It showed its love for me after I bought it and showed it some care.  I like underdog stuff.  I'm gonna beat her on the dyno with the ported heads and I'm hoping it will let me see 500 hp.  If I get to that point, then I have some other tricks further down the road.  I'd really like to see this thing knock on the door of 600 hp with factory heads.  Time will tell. 

[Gregwill16]

I thought they looked like separate pieces Doug. Certainly a good design but Jared's appears to be all one piece that adds alot of strength.

Brent we are having fun watching as well. If you want, we have a TW and 660's right down the road that you can try for your next step up.

[Nightmist66]

Sorry, I just don't get all the discussion and debate here. If someone is using enough spring pressure to have the stands start moving around, you're much better off with the race T&D system. If the engine is built to that level, why risk stuff with a cheaper system? The valvetrain is NOT where you want to save money at! You've obviously spent some serious money on the engine already (not directed at you, Brent), so bite the bullet and do it right. It just doesn't make sense to do it otherwise.

I think we are all splitting hairs here. I mean that in a nice way and no disrespect to anyone. It has been an informative discussion so far. I feel for 80-90% of the setups out there with a flat tappet(solid or hyd.), hydraulic roller, or even a real mild solid roller that most of the rocker setups out there will handle the job just fine as is. Except for that cheap China stuff. That junk is just junk, lol. Of course a good blueprinting never hurts, no matter the setup. If you are pushing the envelope with a schmedium to full-on solid roller, then yes, the race T&D are the best choice. I only did what I did because we have gotten by with the bushed Harland Sharps in the past with over 700lbs and nothing crazy for the stands like the race T&D. This was also on a drag only setup and the rockers were removed for winter to save fatigue. I was actually going to run the HS rockers with a good blueprinting, but during cam degreeing I noticed valve to wall clearance was a bit tighter than I felt comfortable with. So, I mocked up the Erson's and rechecked. They killed a little lift as I expected. I may have been fine with the HS rockers once I put the "real" valvesprings on and got a bit of deflection, but I felt the slightly less lift would benefit more with valve unshrouding. I also didn't feel like spending another 1500 or so for the T&D setup with milling included, when I already had a few sets of rockers laying around. I have about half invested in this setup right now compared to the T&D.

My apologies Brent, I should have never posted and caused this mess. I'll step out now. Good luck on the build.

[427John]

Would a setup similar to nightmist's but with removable tops with the base having a half round and a cap with a half round for retaining the shafts have an advantage here?Have the caps use straddle bolts or studs similar to OHC cam towers and use capscrews to retain the bases to the head allowing the elimination of the hold down stud and attendant hole in the shaft,it would allow you to use larger capscrews to retain the bases withiout fear of weakening the shaft due to a larger hole.It would increase the complexity of the assembly procedure  but not terribly so.It would probably necessitate making the stands wider across the shaft to accommodate straddle bolt/studs but there appears to be room for that,you could even make the base so that the straddle bolts could inserted from the bottom of the stand so that your not depending on aluminum theads to hold them.Has this been tried before?

[blykins]

Sorry, I just don't get all the discussion and debate here. If someone is using enough spring pressure to have the stands start moving around, you're much better off with the race T&D system. If the engine is built to that level, why risk stuff with a cheaper system? The valvetrain is NOT where you want to save money at! You've obviously spent some serious money on the engine already (not directed at you, Brent), so bite the bullet and do it right. It just doesn't make sense to do it otherwise.

I think we are all splitting hairs here. I mean that in a nice way and no disrespect to anyone. It has been an informative discussion so far. I feel for 80-90% of the setups out there with a flat tappet(solid or hyd.), hydraulic roller, or even a real mild solid roller that most of the rocker setups out there will handle the job just fine as is. Except for that cheap China stuff. That junk is just junk, lol. Of course a good blueprinting never hurts, no matter the setup. If you are pushing the envelope with a schmedium to full-on solid roller, then yes, the race T&D are the best choice. I only did what I did because we have gotten by with the bushed Harland Sharps in the past with over 700lbs and nothing crazy for the stands like the race T&D. This was also on a drag only setup and the rockers were removed for winter to save fatigue. I was actually going to run the HS rockers with a good blueprinting, but during cam degreeing I noticed valve to wall clearance was a bit tighter than I felt comfortable with. So, I mocked up the Erson's and rechecked. They killed a little lift as I expected. I may have been fine with the HS rockers once I put the "real" valvesprings on and got a bit of deflection, but I felt the slightly less lift would benefit more with valve unshrouding. I also didn't feel like spending another 1500 or so for the T&D setup with milling included, when I already had a few sets of rockers laying around. I have about half invested in this setup right now compared to the T&D.

My apologies Brent, I should have never posted and caused this mess. I'll step out now. Good luck on the build.

No skin off my nose....

FWIW, just as a builder tip, it's always best to check piston/valve or piston/cylinder clearance with the actual springs that you're going to use.  Almost guaranteed that you will gain at least .020-.030" in your favor, if not more.  I gave Jay this tip when he was mocking up his new cylinder heads and rockers and I think he gained like .070" or something crazy with his higher valve spring pressures. 

[cjshaker]

I have about half invested in this setup right now compared to the T&D.

My apologies Brent, I should have never posted and caused this mess. I'll step out now. Good luck on the build.

Jared, I was only speaking about the average builder, who isn't going to mess around with custom made stuff. Your set-up certainly isn't 'standard affair' parts. I also think it was a good discussion, with interesting ideas put to the test. It does show that some ingenuity can improve on the 4 bolt system, so I think your posts were a good addition. At least moderately...lol

[gt350hr]

Sorry, I just don't get all the discussion and debate here. If someone is using enough spring pressure to have the stands start moving around, you're much better off with the race T&D system. If the engine is built to that level, why risk stuff with a cheaper system? The valvetrain is NOT where you want to save money at! You've obviously spent some serious money on the engine already (not directed at you, Brent), so bite the bullet and do it right. It just doesn't make sense to do it otherwise.

I think we are all splitting hairs here. I mean that in a nice way and no disrespect to anyone. It has been an informative discussion so far. I feel for 80-90% of the setups out there with a flat tappet(solid or hyd.), hydraulic roller, or even a real mild solid roller that most of the rocker setups out there will handle the job just fine as is. Except for that cheap China stuff. That junk is just junk, lol. Of course a good blueprinting never hurts, no matter the setup. If you are pushing the envelope with a schmedium to full-on solid roller, then yes, the race T&D are the best choice. I only did what I did because we have gotten by with the bushed Harland Sharps in the past with over 700lbs and nothing crazy for the stands like the race T&D. This was also on a drag only setup and the rockers were removed for winter to save fatigue. I was actually going to run the HS rockers with a good blueprinting, but during cam degreeing I noticed valve to wall clearance was a bit tighter than I felt comfortable with. So, I mocked up the Erson's and rechecked. They killed a little lift as I expected. I may have been fine with the HS rockers once I put the "real" valvesprings on and got a bit of deflection, but I felt the slightly less lift would benefit more with valve unshrouding. I also didn't feel like spending another 1500 or so for the T&D setup with milling included, when I already had a few sets of rockers laying around. I have about half invested in this setup right now compared to the T&D.

My apologies Brent, I should have never posted and caused this mess. I'll step out now. Good luck on the build.

No skin off my nose....

FWIW, just as a builder tip, it's always best to check piston/valve or piston/cylinder clearance with the actual springs that you're going to use.  Almost guaranteed that you will gain at least .020-.030" in your favor, if not more.  I gave Jay this tip when he was mocking up his new cylinder heads and rockers and I think he gained like .070" or something crazy with his higher valve spring pressures.

    +1 and use CORRECT lash not zero and add the lash number. Using correct lash "picks up" the lobe far later which gives the correct piston to valve and IS about .015 or more .
    Randy

[Nightmist66]

FWIW, just as a builder tip, it's always best to check piston/valve or piston/cylinder clearance with the actual springs that you're going to use.  Almost guaranteed that you will gain at least .020-.030" in your favor, if not more.  I gave Jay this tip when he was mocking up his new cylinder heads and rockers and I think he gained like .070" or something crazy with his higher valve spring pressures.

    +1 and use CORRECT lash not zero and add the lash number. Using correct lash "picks up" the lobe far later which gives the correct piston to valve and IS about .015 or more .
    Randy

Appreciate the tips, guys. I didn't mention, but I was checking with lash. I also ended up putting the actual springs on and rechecking everything again. As Brent mentioned I did see somewhere between .020-.030" less lift(and more valve clearance) due to deflection as I expected. I believe it was close to .030". Things tend to get tight in a 390 bore at over .700" with decent sized valves. I still felt like killing more lift with the Erson's would be better due to unshrouding the valve more. And yes, I also relieved the block to help unshroud the valves...