mrr23

iTrader: (3)

yeah i saw lou in the vettenuts thread. but you are still avoiding my question for the third time. the dip is still at the same 5800-5900 rpms. why is it? is it because of the after market rockers? after all, you made the blanket statement, if there's a dip, it's valve float. and again, my question refers to the RED line only. there's only one dip.


oh and so sorry about the 500 miles. i did what vinci said to do. put some miles on it so the computer can 'learn' with the rockers on. oh stupid me.
oh please waste your time. don't make a comment if you don't want to have to explain yourself then. again, what makes the sponsors you listed any more credible than the ones i list? just because they agree with your beliefs?

it's great that you took whatever rockers you had off and put stock ones back on fixed your problem. as far as the dip goes, Xtrooper got his to go away just by swapping springs. left the vinci/crane rockers on. of course, you left that out. make sure you only bring up what benefits you.

so, if makers of products and magazines always lie, then who do you believe? you? me? who?


so, you just site back and not reply for awhile. ponder how you'll answer my question you keep avoiding. ah never mind, you won't.

vettenuts

iTrader: (4)

I don't want to get in the middle of this, but does anyone have the specs on the new Crane springs (I think they are 833's). Spring rate, coil bind, seat pressure, etc.?????

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

i saw some info sitting on roger's desk on monday. didn't read all of it. just kinda sneek peeked at it while his back was turned. i'll see if he'll let any info out yet.

CAT3

iTrader: (9)

You should edit your posts to say 11rwhp! Thats all I counted from run 9 to 11. Run 14 has more mods listed, as well as springs and stuff. Not to mention that 11rwhp can be from gas, weather, time, shortbelt etc.

The fact remains, those that have spent the money will die knowing they have some nice roller rockers they believe to make mroe power, and those that never buy them will die knowing the stockers seemed to work just fine.

This bickering reminds me of the YT's, later discovered to have been a cause for concern, or many other parts some will swear by and some will swear at. To each their own. I run stockers, and will continue to with a larger cam, more near the "threshold" posted earlier of .650 lift.
Lastly, I would hope to hell that a longer duration rocker would give a couple ponies up, hell SLP has 1.8 and 1.85 ratios, I bet you install them and you'll easily get 11rwhp as mrr23 did, and the SLP's are not roller tip.

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

no i shouldn't edit. just because i listed the parts later doesn't mean they weren't on there before. how about this: try asking, were all those parts on dyno 14 the same when dyno 11 was done? you'll get the answer, yes they were. then i'll explain that i was doing a comparative dyno test. i went to macedo motorsports and dyno'ed there. jumped off that dyno and went straight to vinci and dyno'ed there. i was comparing the dynojet224 WINPEP7 windows based dynojet to vinci's older DOS based dynojet 248e.

as far as weather goes, it's amazing i made more power in hotter weather according to the dyno sheet. damn, there goes that theory of hotter weather produces smaller numbers. i wonder what i would've made had it been the same cool temps as the before runs.

as far as those wonderful SLP 1.85's go, xtrooper did a dyno where he removed the SLP to the vinci/crane and got 10 more rwhp. do that search as well.

and for your record here's the macedo dyno i did that day. both were within an hour apart. i'm sure the discrepancy is because of weather right? i've done more dyno testing that i can count. last time i actually counted my personal graphs, i was over 100. what's really neat, is that larry macedo did the pulls himself. he watched the dynojet tach say 6000 rpms. yet the graph stopped recording at 5500 rpms. go figure.

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

now this i'll agree with. as usual, what works for one, might not work for another. in the end, you'll just have to make up your own mind and then do it.

Gman2002Z06

Well...I don't care what any of you non believers say...I used the stock rockers for a while after my cam install...The car ran great, but was noisy (tap, tap, tap) as all get up...So I switched to the Crane Gold Adjustables, so that I could set the preload and hopefully quiet the motor down...

Now, after 10,000 miles of driving with the Crane Rockers, 918 springs and a good size lift cam (0.600")...I've had absolutely no issues what so ever...The engine pulls smooth as silk up to and beyond 6800 rpms (ran rev limiter at 7000 for a while, but I kept hitting it because the engine rev'd so freely)...

I noticed a solid .15 second increase in my 0~60 mph times after the rocker swap...

As for the heavier arguement...It's the balance of the rocker that one rocker better than another, not so much the total weight...Also, the roller tip definitely reduces friction compared to a stock rocker and at 6500 rpms, that little bit of friction reduction is going to go a long way...

Some of you don't like the roller rockers...Well don't use them...I for one have always been a believer in roller rockers over sliders...

Peace...Gman

CAT3

iTrader: (9)

Robert, I actually wasnt trying to bust your chops. Just thought I would post up since I noted the "discrepancy", much like the difference b/w your two runs from macedo an hour apart, run one from run two, ECT? Lose 9rwhp gain tq. Anyway, I have no need to try n search around for OPO (other ppls opinions) or to argue internet style.
Much like Gman, I believe in roller rockers over non, but the arguement has been made that there is an issue of the weight, be it lack of proper distribution or not, I dunno. Seems like GM made it pretty hard to get a better rocker in this engine without modding the head walls for clearance, or gainin weight. I have considered the Crane rockers, still might, especially with the new phat cam I have. My issue, seems a PITA to setup, I know I must be lazy as hell since I'd rather torque stockers down to 22 and call it good then to possibly gain a couple rwhp and have to go through the setup I am lazier than I thought, hell.

vettenuts

iTrader: (4)

Mine is extremely quiet as well. Which are you using the 1.7 or the 1.8 rockers?

XTrooper

If you have a problem, you fix it. It's that simple. I too initially had valve float with my roller rockers, but instead of just wringing my hands and crying about it, I fixed the problem with a different set of valve springs and the results were definitely worth the effort. I picked up 10 rwhp over my SLP 1.85 rockers and 15+ rwhp over stock.

P.S.- Five dyno graphs showing valve float certainly don't make your blanket statement that no one will see gains any less wrong than it is as just one case to the contrary makes it so and there are a lot more than that.

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

i'm alright with you asking questions. just don't like people making assumptions about things i do before getting all the information. i'm all for discussing. people take it as argueing.

it's really not a pain to adjust. the main problem people have when setting up the rockers is getting the inital zero lash. i just put the 062 cam in the wife's car last week. even with me just turning he nuts by hand, i saw the pushrod pressing the plunger down. that's how easy it is to push the plungers in the lifters. and that's where the problem lies. once you get zero lash established, then it's just a matter of doing the 7 1/4 turns. then on the final turn, locking the nuts down.

ah, i'm just as lazy. i'd rather just bolt something on and go. hell, i use the vinci tuner over a laptop editing program. just don't feel like learning right now.

MountainMotor

iTrader: (2)

What do you guys think of the SLP 1.85 rockers?

1slow01Z71

iTrader: (36)

Go to aftermarket rockers for strenght. I killed two factory rockers on my 5.3 engine after two WOT runs from 0-120. On my 408 I will be using the Jesel Sportsman series shafted mounted for strength, they may be a bit heavier than stock but they are a hell of alot stronger than the factory and they also have the roller tip for less friction. I will be putting my truck on the dyno when I get it tuned for the 408 and just so I can see if there really is dip where EVERY engine with aftermarket rockers supposedly has one.

BUYAMERICAN

I maybe selling some Comp Cams 1.85's with 1,300 break in miles on them. Paid $525
Have some new 7.4 hardened push rods. Paid $140
Will sell the above for $400.

and some new Ferrea Double Springs. Paid $550. Will sell for $375

Going F/I on my stroker. Cam in lift well into the .600's is no good for that.

XTrooper

I went from a set of SLP 1.85 rockers to the Crane 1.80 Quick-Lift roller rockers I have now and even though I lost ~.010" of valve lift in the process because of the lower rocker arm ratio, I gained 10 rwhp and 8 rwtq with the Cranes vs. the SLPs.

vettenuts

iTrader: (4)

Since both the Crane 1.8 and 1.7 rockers are the accelerated lift, I wonder how much you would lose in going from the 1.8's to the 1.7's everything being equal.

TTPMatt

iTrader: (18)

We use stock rockers on most applications. We hold the dyno record for stock bottom end 346ci @ 505rwhp with the stock rockers.

- Matt

vettenuts

iTrader: (4)

But at what RPM is the HP. I think one thing that a lot of people miss in this and other threads is that there are those who are looking for peak numbers and use their car on the track, and that's great. But then there are folks like me who don't track their car and are trying to achieve the best performance they can working within the established GM rev limiter of 6,200 RPM for street driving. I personally have no interest in spinning my motor any higher then 6,200 RPM. I guess my point is that while not all our goals are the same, we are all trying to find combinations that work the best to get to our individual goals.

As discussed earlier in this thread, I do have a dip in my dyno curve and I would like to understand where it comes from. Other then that, the power produced and the way the car runs has exceeded my expectations.

TTPMatt

iTrader: (18)

Note: The red graph is another shop's h/c package, so you can ignore that.

Yes this car is more geared towards the track. We have numerous people in the 470+ rwhp range that are running stock rockers on a daily driver.

vettenuts

iTrader: (4)

Why does it roll off at 6K and then continue up? Just curious?