Good point. If it's border line I'll probably test all 8.

Right now I just want a base line on one cyl.

Let's say they're .120 clearance, I'm not sweating the other 7. If they're .90, I may take a look.

I find it hard to believe that Brodix would manufacture heads with "barely" enough clearance without milling.

I have to believe that there was AMPLE clearance BEFORE the milling. And AMPLE is .150" or more.

There is a chance I may just get away with this.......I don't know.

 

The higher the rocker ratio, the harder it is to open the valves. There would be more pressure on the cam, lifters, and pushrods. I'd stick with the factory 1.5 for valvetrain longevity. I had 1.6s before on the modded 89 and there was barely any difference in power. Ok so there was a tiny 5 hp difference. I just didn't feel like all that time and effort invested to do a rocker ratio changeover for a whole 6 hp was worth it. So they are back in the shelf...

 

I haven't looked at these heads, but I'm going to aSSume they have bigger valves, upgraded springs, etc... Brodix isn't really at fault, they have to build a head for alot of different combo's. It ultimately falls on the builder to check for valve to piston clearance. That being said, I wouldn't sell the heads just because you made an error calculating the cat on the heads. I don't remember who off hand, but someone (Comp Cams and Powerhouse come to mind) makes a tool for cutting the valve reliefs bigger while the short block is still assembled. It's a cutter that takes the place of the valve in the head, and the valve guide holds it steady while you use a drill to enlarge the valve reliefs in the piston. It's not the best solution in the world (as compared to having the motor out and a machinist do the work), but it used to be a pretty common procedure with the 5.0 Mustang crowd from my understanding.
I perfer the clay method for checking clearance, do to the variations in cam lobe profiles, cam timing (advance of retard), valve timing, etc.... the point at which the piston and the valve are closest together isn't necessarily the point of max valve lift. Worse case, just put the heads on the shelf as the begining of your new engine parts pile till you are ready to pull the engine, and run the stockers till then (assuming they aren't damaged).

 

I didn't do it and would be scared to try it.....and like I said I don't know how long it lasted. I would be willing to try it before I would trash a new set of heads tho. With any luck it won't come to that. Sounds like if jsup gets the clearance problem cleared he will have a nice combo.

 

Rocker ratio increase along with good heads will always pick the power and torque up. You want to have as much of it as possible. The limiting factor will be the valve springs as this really works them hard. You will need something better than $5 springs if you decide to try it.

 

first, as to the the quote in your post, what amazes me is anyone even considering stacking a head gasket for any reason, with that in mind, for that person to be choosing r. arm ratios might not be a good idea.

The other post "not for any reason should 1.6 rockers be used" is advise w/out knowing additional specifics. Good valve train parts (springs , retainers etc.),inspecting geometry etc., and then using good 1.6's should not be a problem. However, before any of this, measuring v. to piston and inspecting rocker geometry should always be done regardless. I know from measuring mine the stock 90 platform he is using should not have issues w/a 56 cc.head and should still have over .100 valve to piston, BUT who knows, and w/out seeing the heads, etc. I would never advise someone of this way w/out doing some inspecting and some real measuring. (cfi, and I believe others have said the same thing , and that is GOOD advise)....MO
and how was this determined ?

 

I'd never stack the head gaskets. That's not an option. I had the heads, Brodix Race Rites, shaved to 58CCs, taking off .072.

I am expecting it should be OK, however, .072 seems like a big number....

 

never said you would, and I'm glad that isn't an option. I have been reading/following this thread and I believe that members cfi, Greg Gore, and some others have given you some good advice. Inspecting everything will cost you time now and not money later. Additionally, take your time we are already at the end of the season so more than likely it will next year before you get to do some real run time and tuning.

 

I did 4 runs on the dyno with 1.6 rockers. 323 rwhp/330 ft lbs with the standard 1.5 and 328.5/333.5 with 1.6s. So I gained an average of 5 hp and 3.5 ft-lbs and spent $200 for them as well as the 4 hours of my time installing them. Pain in the *** if you ask me. It was just 5-6 hp on my Lunati cammed, Dart iron head 350. The water temperature (185 deg F) was the same during all runs, so I think that shows whether or not 5-6 more hp is worth it at the expense of valvetrain longevity. IMO 1.6s are NOT worth it.

 

A feature of the 1996 LT4 was a bump up to 1.6 ratio Crane rocker arms.

 

CFI-EFI>>>> <<<< hooblyboobly

 

Hooblyboobly,
Hang in there. As was said before, we are ALL entitled to our own opinions, and just because it differs from the "only true source" of information (CFI-EFI) doesn't mean we are not allowed to present it on this "open" forum. Hell, maybe we ALL should just let the professor (of insults, and degradation) be the only source of information on here.
I for one, am sick of his know-it-all attitude, but it does end up good reading at times, albeit, more like a novel. Lastly, people who read these forums for information, many times get numerous opinions about the same subject (use cam selection for instance), and either form their opinion from what they have read or ask more questions. But in the end they decide what they think is true, and what is not, who is trying to help them, and who is just an arrogant ASSuming bully who it seems thinks this is HIS forum alone. Bash away, for I could care less what you think of MY opinion, and that is just what it is, MY opinion.

Rich K

Case in point: Read the 4 links provided by Aardwolf. Interesting reading and ALL facts, but it surely did not help me to decide which gasket to use, and I doubt many others who read it, although it was his intention to do just that. So I will read more, and ask more questions before picking a gasket, just like most everyone else who is not sure.

 

We don't know the rest of the specs on your setup, so nobody here can give you a real answer.

Reading through the posts, I see some guesses, personal attacks, and a whole lot of horse crap. But I don't see any engine specs. (maybe I missed them).

Generally speaking with aluminum heads, on a street motor with 55-65 degrees of overlap most folks would recommend keeping compression between 10:1 and 11:1, which a compression distance of .040-.045. You can run less distance depending on the pistons you are running. Low expansion alloy forgings can run tighter, old school 'forgings' will tend to expand quite a bit.

With that said, and with the specific information on your combo you can calculate what gasket to use based on the compression distance and bore diameter. I use a Felpro 1010 gasket on most of my builds, but I also machine the block with the piston down .005" into the hole.

-- Joe

 

This is ancient history. I went with the 1010s.

The build is:
Stock 30,000 mile bottom end.
Lingenfelter 219 cam
Super Ram
1.6 Comp Cam RRs
Brodix 180CC heads Race Rites
Long Tubes with X pipe and high flow cats