Shaft Mounts for TFS 255 LS3 Heads
11-14-2015, 07:29 PM
#43
I highly recommend the Crower SS shaft mount rockers.
A lot of people are afraid of the SS rockers and go aluminum as they believe the rockers are going to be harder to control valve train wise. What a lot of people fail to see is that even though the material is a little denser and does tend to weigh a few grams more, a SS rocker has MUCH less mass than an aluminum rocker.
With the SS rocker having much less mass, it becomes easier to control at higher engine speeds. Not only that, but you get the added benefit of the better material having a much longer fatigue life as Jake mentioned.
I pretty much only recommend the Crower SS shaft mounts for solid roller and high HP hydraulic applications that use a shaft mount rocker. It is an awesome product with Crower's legendary name behind it.
I can't wait to cam a few engines with those shorter FAST runners. I know they're going to want an earlier IVC event due to the shorter runner, and an earlier EVO event to help carry power. I wonder how that plenum design along with the shorter runners is going to respond to overlap though...
A lot of people are afraid of the SS rockers and go aluminum as they believe the rockers are going to be harder to control valve train wise. What a lot of people fail to see is that even though the material is a little denser and does tend to weigh a few grams more, a SS rocker has MUCH less mass than an aluminum rocker.
With the SS rocker having much less mass, it becomes easier to control at higher engine speeds. Not only that, but you get the added benefit of the better material having a much longer fatigue life as Jake mentioned.
I pretty much only recommend the Crower SS shaft mounts for solid roller and high HP hydraulic applications that use a shaft mount rocker. It is an awesome product with Crower's legendary name behind it.
I can't wait to cam a few engines with those shorter FAST runners. I know they're going to want an earlier IVC event due to the shorter runner, and an earlier EVO event to help carry power. I wonder how that plenum design along with the shorter runners is going to respond to overlap though...
Last edited by Martin Smallwood; 11-16-2015 at 10:47 AM.
11-14-2015, 07:46 PM
#44
If that ever comes out for the FAST intake... Then the LS3 setup would be very strong.
But right now, FAST LS7, MAST 265 LS7, and LLSR vs FAST LS3, TFS 255s or MAST LS3s, and LLSR... That's a tough choice. Outside of the manifold, pretty much identical given how the aftermarket LS3 heads "copy" the LS7 design.
But the LS7 setup is also proven. And it's hard to beat.
Btw, Martin, do you have a PN for the Crowers for the MAST heads? Is it 74147F? That's what Crower lists for the "MAST LS7" but the 265 is 11-degree vs 12-degree for the 285/305 and didn't know if it worked on all of them.
But right now, FAST LS7, MAST 265 LS7, and LLSR vs FAST LS3, TFS 255s or MAST LS3s, and LLSR... That's a tough choice. Outside of the manifold, pretty much identical given how the aftermarket LS3 heads "copy" the LS7 design.
But the LS7 setup is also proven. And it's hard to beat.
Btw, Martin, do you have a PN for the Crowers for the MAST heads? Is it 74147F? That's what Crower lists for the "MAST LS7" but the 265 is 11-degree vs 12-degree for the 285/305 and didn't know if it worked on all of them.
11-16-2015, 10:53 AM
#47
If that ever comes out for the FAST intake... Then the LS3 setup would be very strong.
But right now, FAST LS7, MAST 265 LS7, and LLSR vs FAST LS3, TFS 255s or MAST LS3s, and LLSR... That's a tough choice. Outside of the manifold, pretty much identical given how the aftermarket LS3 heads "copy" the LS7 design.
But the LS7 setup is also proven. And it's hard to beat.
Btw, Martin, do you have a PN for the Crowers for the MAST heads? Is it 74147F? That's what Crower lists for the "MAST LS7" but the 265 is 11-degree vs 12-degree for the 285/305 and didn't know if it worked on all of them.
But right now, FAST LS7, MAST 265 LS7, and LLSR vs FAST LS3, TFS 255s or MAST LS3s, and LLSR... That's a tough choice. Outside of the manifold, pretty much identical given how the aftermarket LS3 heads "copy" the LS7 design.
But the LS7 setup is also proven. And it's hard to beat.
Btw, Martin, do you have a PN for the Crowers for the MAST heads? Is it 74147F? That's what Crower lists for the "MAST LS7" but the 265 is 11-degree vs 12-degree for the 285/305 and didn't know if it worked on all of them.
I have sold a few sets of the Crower rockers for MAST heads before Jake, but I have no access to any of that information part number wise. I wish I could back through my old emails and find it, but I can't.
Give Crower a call and ask to speak to Kerry. He is very sharp and was my contact there when I worked at Tick. I'm currently working on getting Crower offerings as well for SRD.
Feels good to be back!
Thanks for the words of support.
Thanks Jake!
I have to say it feels good to get back to doing what I did when I first entered this industry. Helping people on the forums achieve their goals with their builds was always a rewarding experience. I really enjoyed all the builds and the time I spent with each and every one of you guys.
Hope to be here for a long time to come!
11-16-2015, 01:13 PM
#51
11-17-2015, 10:13 PM
#55
So, I've read about the fatigue issues that plague aluminum rockers, but I've also read that stainless steel rockers don't absorb any of the shock and help beat up a valvetrain.
With a LLSR and fairly light spring pressure, would there be any concern for valvetrain issues with the Crowers vs the T&D? They end up being about the same price and are both nice pieces.
With a LLSR and fairly light spring pressure, would there be any concern for valvetrain issues with the Crowers vs the T&D? They end up being about the same price and are both nice pieces.
11-18-2015, 10:25 AM
#56
So, I've read about the fatigue issues that plague aluminum rockers, but I've also read that stainless steel rockers don't absorb any of the shock and help beat up a valvetrain.
With a LLSR and fairly light spring pressure, would there be any concern for valvetrain issues with the Crowers vs the T&D? They end up being about the same price and are both nice pieces.
With a LLSR and fairly light spring pressure, would there be any concern for valvetrain issues with the Crowers vs the T&D? They end up being about the same price and are both nice pieces.
11-18-2015, 11:07 AM
#57
So, I've read about the fatigue issues that plague aluminum rockers, but I've also read that stainless steel rockers don't absorb any of the shock and help beat up a valvetrain.
With a LLSR and fairly light spring pressure, would there be any concern for valvetrain issues with the Crowers vs the T&D? They end up being about the same price and are both nice pieces.
With a LLSR and fairly light spring pressure, would there be any concern for valvetrain issues with the Crowers vs the T&D? They end up being about the same price and are both nice pieces.
11-18-2015, 11:38 PM
#58
So, I've read about the fatigue issues that plague aluminum rockers, but I've also read that stainless steel rockers don't absorb any of the shock and help beat up a valvetrain.
With a LLSR and fairly light spring pressure, would there be any concern for valvetrain issues with the Crowers vs the T&D? They end up being about the same price and are both nice pieces.
With a LLSR and fairly light spring pressure, would there be any concern for valvetrain issues with the Crowers vs the T&D? They end up being about the same price and are both nice pieces.
I have too many combo's running steel rockers with no issues whatsoever to believe that.
I can't count how many aluminum rockers I've had break on customers over the years.
11-19-2015, 04:54 PM
#60
Actually, Russell from MAST got back to me today. Crower 74160F is the right one for the 265 heads. Same for the medium bore LS3. Same essential design... just the manifold is different between them. Which is what I was saying. All these aftermarket LS3 heads are just using the LS7 architecture with a less than stellar intake manifold.