What size Oil Restrictor

[PRHeads]

Bob, first let me say I haven’t tried using those lifters myself, so no first hand experience.
If you look at the pic of the OP’s lifters sitting in the tray with oil, you can see it has the small holes above the big holes on one side of the lifter, and on the opposite side it looks more like a keyhole where they connected the two holes.
With an unbushed block, neither of those holes would be lined up with the oil gallery in the block with the cam down near the base circle?
With his lifters, installed so the link bar is towards the center of the block, the “keyhole” side is towards the oil gallery.

As for the noise.
I’ve used that particular lobe series countless times. I’ve never found them to be particularly noisy.

What I’d suggest is making sure there is no binding between the pushrods and the heads.
The problem would likely be on the intakes.
With the cam on the base circle, loosen the adjuster screw and make sure the pushrod has some available side to side free play in all directions.

I’m not a fan of having drag on the rockers.
I’d machine the spacers between the rockers a touch so I had some free play.
I like .015-.020 total per pair.

Are you adjusting the valves per the “EOIC” method?

 

[PRHeads]

Has anyone seen a clearance issue for this combination that needed more clearance in the pushrod area.

Every set of used 440-1’s I’ve had come thru the shop, that hadn’t been clearanced for the intake pushrods....... had witness marks where the pushrods had been rubbing.

I always clearance them.

 

[2quick]

Every set of used 440-1’s I’ve had come thru the shop, that hadn’t been clearanced for the intake pushrods....... had witness marks where the pushrods had been rubbing.

I always clearance them.

Maybe that's my issue the T&D rockers could have changed the pushrod angle/location enough to rub the head?

 

[2quick]

Bob, first let me say I haven’t tried using those lifters myself, so no first hand experience.
If you look at the pic of the OP’s lifters sitting by in the tray with oil, you can see it has the small holes above the big holes on one side of the lifter, and on the opposite side it looks more like a keyhole where they connected the two holes.
With an unbushed block, neither of those holes would be lined up with the oil gallery in the block with the cam down near the base circle?
With his lifters, installed so the link bar is towards the center of the block, the “keyhole” side is towards the oil gallery.

As for the noise.
I’ve used that particular lobe series countless times. I’ve never found them to be particularly noisy.

What I’d suggest is making sure there is no binding between the pushrods and the heads.
The problem would likely be on the intakes.
With the cam on the base circle, loosen the adjuster screw and make sure the pushrod has some available side to side free play in all directions.

I’m not a fan of having drag on the rockers.
I’d machine the spacers between the rockers a touch so I had some free play.
I like .015-.020 total per pair.

Are you adjusting the valves per the “EOIC” method?

Yes using EOIC setting feeler guage with good amount of drag on the blade.

 

[2quick]

I’m not a fan of having drag on the rockers.
I’d machine the spacers between the rockers a touch so I had some free play.
I like .015-.020 total per pair.

Bob, first let me say I haven’t tried using those lifters myself, so no first hand experience.
If you look at the pic of the OP’s lifters sitting by in the tray with oil, you can see it has the small holes above the big holes on one side of the lifter, and on the opposite side it looks more like a keyhole where they connected the two holes.
With an unbushed block, neither of those holes would be lined up with the oil gallery in the block with the cam down near the base circle?
With his lifters, installed so the link bar is towards the center of the block, the “keyhole” side is towards the oil gallery.

As for the noise.
I’ve used that particular lobe series countless times. I’ve never found them to be particularly noisy.

What I’d suggest is making sure there is no binding between the pushrods and the heads.
The problem would likely be on the intakes.
With the cam on the base circle, loosen the adjuster screw and make sure the pushrod has some available side to side free play in all directions.

I’m not a fan of having drag on the rockers.
I’d machine the spacers between the rockers a touch so I had some free play.
I like .015-.020 total per pair.

Are you adjusting the valves per the “EOIC” method?

Edited, The lack of clearance is due to the rocker shaft pedestals, the heads are in the car, I took some material of the inside to make some clearance, like I said it's snug not really tight, but definitely not .015!

 

[Challenger340]

Really only Rockers! Had to send the pushrods back to Smith-Brothers to get the ends changed out from the Dove style (ball-cup) to Chevy style (ball-ball) and resized as needed.

Ends merely changed in the same/same tubes used ?
I/we build our own Pushrods here from raw tube stock/various radius ends that we purchase/stock, only because of the myriad goofy V/Train geometry things we're always getting stuck with.... suffice to say,
by the time we remove the ends we have trouble shrinking the end to re-broach/size to then refit and get the press back sufficiently for the new ends in the old tubes ?

That said,
Smith Bros is a GREAT Company with FANTASTIC product and service.... and far more capable at resizing tube ends than we will ever be !
so I don't believe it's a pushrod problem...
other than
I was wondering as it relates to "length" of the pushrod itself ? and the rocker starting point on the V/Tip ?

Been so long since I've even SEEN an INDY/DOVE Rocker(15+ years because we DO NOT use them), let be compare one to anything else ? that I can't comment on Offset difference to a T & D which is an entirely different LEAGUE Rocker ?
IMO,
Potential pushrod/head interference should be checked when changing to any "different" Rocker system
as well as...
checking for actual Rocker Geometry changes on the Valve Tip which may dictate corrective action(lash caps/shimming/shorter or longer Pushrods and on and on)

just imo...
NOTHING these days is a common setup, such a PITA with today's parts from anybody, that a guy's gotta check/check/check and check some more.
We see it almost daily even with the formerly good company's, names I won't even mention....
* Pin-Fits on Custom built Pistons at .003" OOTB
* V/Springs 20% OFF rated Seat Pressure @ installed, and 50 Lbs shy of their Rate, BRAND NEW OOTB !

* 4340 Crank runout at .0025" OOTB, so phone them and ask their runout tolerance ?
"our tolerance for runout is .0015".....
so I tell them I have one here at .0025"
he says..."OK we will go check our stock here and drop ship you a good replacement"
Then he calls me back the next day....
"Sry, we don't have one here less than .002" runout"
So THEIR "tolerance" on THEIR 4340 Cranks is .0015" maximum..... but they DON'T HAVE ONE LESS THAN .002" ??

My point being.....
it is incumbent on the end user to check EVERYTHING.... and never "assume" anything with today's parts !

 

[PRHeads]

The lack of clearance is due to the rocker shaft pedestals, the heads are in the car, I took some material of the inside to make some clearance, like I said it's snug not really tight, but definitely not .015!

Are there no spacers between the pair of rockers?

 

[2quick]

Are there no spacers between the pair of rockers?

 

[2quick]

Ends merely changed in the same/same tubes used ?

Yes, used a adjustable pushrod length checker with rocker adjuster set to 1 turn in from stop. Pushrods sent back to SmithBros with the length checker so no interpretation of sizing, the ends were changed and they were sized.

 

[PRHeads]

There are spacers between each pair of rockers.
I just put them in the lathe and thin them as required for the proper side to side clearance.
Your particular combo has three spacers per pair of rockers, any one of the three could be thinned to gain the clearance.

My experience is that it needs to be done on virtually every brand of rockers out there.

I mock all that stuff up before putting the pushrods in so you can really get a good feel for what the clearance situation is.

As Bob stated above....... you shouldn’t assume any of it, no matter how expensive, is going to fit correctly with the rest of your parts....... as it comes OOTB.
Almost everything needs to be finessed in some manor or another.

 

[2quick]

There are spacers between each pair of rockers.
I just put them in the lathe and thin them as required for the proper side to side clearance.

My experience is that it needs to be done on virtually every brand of rockers out there.

In your situation you have three spacers per pair of rockers....... you could modify any one of them to get the clearance.

I mock all that stuff up before putting the pushrods in so you can really get a good feel for what the clearance situation is.

That's funny I called T&D to discuss this and when asked if I should take some material of the spacers between the rockers they said absolutely not that if it were tight I need to machine the pedestals, so i took a couple thousands off the inside off the pedestals (as shown in the picture above) with an air file, (making sure not to get **** into the engine) which helped, but still tighter then I think they should be. But they also said there supposed to be tight that they will "burnish" in.

I think my inner pedestals were machine on a taper, they get tighter as I seat the shaft. I think i'm just going to take the entire thing apart (again) an check everything including pulling the intake and valley plate cover. Then I'll be able to check for pushrod clearance and while I'm at the lifters for oil leaks.

 

[PRHeads]

Everyone handles things their own way.

I never would have bothered to make the call, since it’s an extremely rare occurance for me to get actual useful help from a manufacturer “tech” line(and on several occasions the info I got was just flat out wrong).

I would have machined the spacers, like I always do, and carried on with my business.

If you get a chance, prime the motor without the pushrods installed.
I’m curious about how much oil you’ll have flowing from the pushrod cups in the lifters.

 

[2quick]

Everyone handles things their own way.

I never would have bothered to make the call, since it’s an extremely rare occurance for me to get actual useful help from a manufacturer “tech” line(and on several occasions the info I got was just flat out wrong).

I would have machined the spacers, like I always do, and carried on with my business.

If you get a chance, prime the motor without the pushrods installed.
I’m curious about how much oil you’ll have flowing from the pushrod cups in the lifters.

If I get it apart today I'll try and get video of me priming the oil pump while bumping the motor to get the lifters in various positions to check oil flow in and around them. I'll also pull the pushrods and check oil flow there and check for signs of contact with the head while they are out. I'm just going to go through everything the best I can with the motor still in the car. I'll also take some material off the center spacers to get .015 clearance as recommended and see what happens. My back is starting to hurt just thinking about it.[/QUOTE]

 

[PRHeads]

A couple things about the cam......
I don’t recall there being talk about EFI when we were discussing it.
If you’re using a fully tuneable system, then it doesn’t matter.
It’s just a case of getting it set up properly for the cam.
But if you’re using a system that’s employing some “self learning” software....... I can see where it might not like that cam at low speeds.

As for the noise, you can run the lash quite a bit tighter to quiet it down some, although that probably won’t help the EFI situation.
But for street use, tighter lash is easier on the lifters....... although that’s not to say the car will be quicker with the lash tighter.
.012-.014 Hot would be no problem though.

 

[2quick]

A couple things about the cam......
I don’t recall there being talk about EFI when we were discussing it.
If you’re using a fully tuneable system, then it doesn’t matter.
It’s just a case of getting it set up properly for the cam.
But if you’re using a system that’s employing some “self learning” software....... I can see where it might not like that cam at low speeds.

As for the noise, you can run the lash quite a bit tighter to quiet it down some, although that probably won’t help the EFI situation.
But for street use, tighter lash is easier on the lifters....... although that’s not to say the car will be quicker with that lash tighter.
.012-.014 Hot would be no problem though.

Yes, I run FAST Sportsman XFI (fully user tunable) and it used to run very well something changed!

Really that tight? So you think I should shoot for .012 - .014 lash hot?

At this point I don't care how fast it is, I just want a somewhat reliable car that I can drive for a awhile. Been wrenching on this thing too long and just need a break. I'm starting to get discouraged...my wife is getting pissed and I'm about out of money! Sometimes I hate this f-in car.

 

[PRHeads]

You can run them that tight no problem........ but you’ll be using some of the clearance ramp as part of the lift cycle, so it adds seat timing, which makes it act like the cam is bigger at low speeds.
Just try tightening up in stages...... like .002 at a time and see if you can find a balance where the noise is less, and it hasn’t adversely affected the drivability too bad.

The area where the pushrods are close is at the bottom of the head, where the pushrods run close to the inner row of head bolts.
They’re usually closest with the valve closed.
The exhaust usually have no clearance issues....... just the intake.

As I said before, on the base circle, if you loosen the adjuster screw and the pushrod has some movement in all directions...... it’s not a problem.

You’d have to check all 8.

 

[2quick]

While I'm at it and cause I'm going have to set timing anyway. With my combination what do you recommend a good starting point for timing. I run a Programmable MSD with a locked out distributor so I can do just about anything with it. Currently I run (24 deg at idle), (34 deg total) (all in by 4000) with a linear advance from 1100 to 4000 does this sound close?

 

[PRHeads]

If there is a way to correlate the timing to rpm and engine vacuum, I’d run way more timing for high vacuum cruise.
Like 40-45*.
You’d want it to default back to something lower as the vacuum dropped.

I don’t remember what your Cr is, and what you’re running for fuel.

I’d run as much initial advance as I could.

I have no EFI experience, but if it’s possible to have the timing at a point where the motor starts easy(like in the 20’s), then went right to full advance once it was running, that would help with drivability....... if you can do it without encountering detonation.

But to answer your question, fundamentally..... how you have the timing set up is “fine”, other than total by 4000 seems too late.
You won’t know if it’s optimum without playing with it.

At the track, with enough octane, my experience with stock stroke Indy Head motors is they usually want total timing in the 38-40* range.

 

[2quick]

If there is a way to correlate the timing to rpm and engine vacuum, I’d run way more timing for high vacuum cruise.
Like 40-45*.
You’d want it to default back to something lower as the vacuum dropped.

I don’t remember what your Cr is, and what you’re running for fuel.

I’d run as much initial advance as I could.

I have no EFI experience, but if it’s possible to have the timing at a point where the motor starts easy(like in the 20’s), then went right to full advance once it was running, that would help with drivability....... if you can do it without encountering detonation.

But to answer your question, fundamentally..... how you have the timing set up is “fine”, other than total by 4000 seems too late.
You won’t know if it’s optimum without playing with it.

At the track, with enough octane, my experience with stock stroke Indy Head motors is they usually want total timing in the 38-40* range.

11.5:1 (93 pump gas)

The MSD has a start retard function. It will allow for any curve starting at any rpm and ending at any rpm the only thing it won't do is correlate to engine vacuum or load. It's fixed to RPM.
So basically feed it as much timing as possible throughout the rpm range without detonation. In other words is running 30* at idle fine and if the rpm increases from the increase in timing is the engine wanting that to be the new base timing?[/QUOTE]

 

[PRHeads]

I’d be very surprised if the idle rpm didn’t increase with the timing advanced more...... with a carb....... but I would have thought the EFI would keep the idle speed where you set it.....no?

If the octane were high enough you could just lock the timing at 38* and it would run great.
But I don’t think that’s going to fly with 11.5:1 and 93.
I’d start by sneaking up on the initial timing.... 1-2* at time, and bring down the point of full advance like 200rpm at a time...... and keep listening for detonation.
For the track, just put some good gas in it and crank up the total to 38*.

Imo, you really want to have it at full advance by the time you’re at cruising rpm...... whatever that is.