So many choices for aftermarket rocker arms!!

[Kern Dog]

With all of the choices out there, it is hard to know what brand and model to go with.
I recently was scanning through the Summit Racing site and saw this:
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/crn-64791-1/overview/make/dodge

Now here is my combination:
440 block, .030 over. 4.15 stroke. Flat top pistons sitting .017 below deck. .039 head gasket with Edelbrock 84cc heads.
292/509 cam installed straight up. 2" TTI headers.

The rocker arms in that link are 1.6 ratio, which will push the '509 lift up to .543.
I use the car mainly for spirited street driving. I may drag race it someday but with a suspension built for cornering, I don't expect to drag race much.
What do you think?

 

[cdr]

that is just the arms,no shafts or hardware,from all my research i am going with huges,rockers,also 1.6.

 

[Kern Dog]

The ad reads that the shafts and bolts are included. Maybe I missed something?
I looked at Summit to save on shipping. Hughes is in Illinois and I am in CA. Both Hughes and Crane have great reputations and are priced pretty close to each other. BOTH require a different pushrod with the cup and ball design.

 

[benno440]

pretty sure that is just the arms, seems cheap for a good set of complete rockers.

imo 1.6 ratio will be good with that motor you would probably want around .540 lift anyway.
make sure your springs can handle the extra lift.

comp cams roller rockers and hughes are good and recommended

 

[747mopar]

I highly recommend going with a reputable brand, I had an X brand (cheaper) rocker originally but after testing the roller tip to valve stem contact pattern I quickly discarded them. The ratio once measured wasn't a true 1.5 and had poor tip to valve geometry. A lot of the cheaper ones I've found use a big block Chevy rocker mounted on a shaft instead of being designed for it. I like Harland Sharp and Comp Cams Magnum rockers myself which is what I bought (Comp Cam) I bolted them on all things being the same and the contact pattern was perfect. Do your homework, good luck

 

[Cranky]

I don't understand the roller tip rocker mind set very much. For a low to medium lift cam, they're really not needed and won't show any increase in HP on a dyno.

 

[Kern Dog]

It isn't so much the roller TIP that interests me, it is the ratio of the arms and the adjustability. Some manufacturers claim that stock steel rockers are rarely 1.5, they have been measured as low as 1.38-1.45. This makes for an inconsistant lift and duration from one cylinder to the next.
There are some cheap sets out there. Those do not interest me. I'm not made of money either.

 

[747mopar]

It isn't so much the roller TIP that interests me, it is the ratio of the arms and the adjustability. Some manufacturers claim that stock steel rockers are rarely 1.5, they have been measured as low as 1.38-1.45. This makes for an inconsistant lift and duration from one cylinder to the next.
There are some cheap sets out there. Those do not interest me. I'm not made of money either.

Exactly, plus a roller tip puts a lot less wear on the valve stems and guides.

 

[Cranky]

It isn't so much the roller TIP that interests me, it is the ratio of the arms and the adjustability. Some manufacturers claim that stock steel rockers are rarely 1.5, they have been measured as low as 1.38-1.45. This makes for an inconsistant lift and duration from one cylinder to the next.
There are some cheap sets out there. Those do not interest me. I'm not made of money either.

I wouldn't use stock stamped rockers either but there are many aftermarket non roller rockers that have an accurate ratio. Also, this is something that serious builders check instead of relying on claims that "ours is better". Isky, for example, had at one time a very good non roller rocker and the price wasn't nearly as high.

Exactly, plus a roller tip puts a lot less wear on the valve stems and guides.

In tests, it's been proven that roller tipped rockers do not have any advantage vs non roller rockers when using low to medium lift cams....unless of course your oiling to your valve train sucks and then you'll have a quick death to even the best roller system.

 

[Kern Dog]

I spoke with a guy at Mancini Racing. He agreed that the springs in the Edelbrock heads are rated to .600 lift and the '509 cam would be fine with them. I went ahead and ordered THESE:
http://chucker54.stores.yahoo.net/b16alrowibih.html

These kits are made by Harland Sharp and sold exclusively through Mancini. The price included the holddowns, hardware and spacers. In a week I'll be able to install them and establish a pushrod length. The 1.6 ratio will put the .509 cam to .543, still within the limits of the valvesprings.

 

[747mopar]

I spoke with a guy at Mancini Racing. He agreed that the springs in the Edelbrock heads are rated to .600 lift and the '509 cam would be fine with them. I went ahead and ordered THESE:
http://chucker54.stores.yahoo.net/b16alrowibih.html

These kits are made by Harland Sharp and sold exclusively through Mancini. The price included the holddowns, hardware and spacers. In a week I'll be able to install them and establish a pushrod length. The 1.6 ratio will put the .509 cam to .543, still within the limits of the valvesprings.

I checked on those exact same ones and even spoke to Harland Sharp about them, they are big block Chevy rockers fitted to Mopar shafts, aren't a true 1.5 as a result and are all aluminum (no bushing or bearing). Having said that, they will work fine as long as the tip is correctly positioned on the valve stem. Sorry, I just went threw all this because of a set (not the ones your buying) that was way off, rocker tip never even made it to the valve centerline at max lift "horrible". I just really try to make sure people are aware of the garbage being sold.

- - - Updated - - -

I wouldn't use stock stamped rockers either but there are many aftermarket non roller rockers that have an accurate ratio. Also, this is something that serious builders check instead of relying on claims that "ours is better". Isky, for example, had at one time a very good non roller rocker and the price wasn't nearly as high.

In tests, it's been proven that roller tipped rockers do not have any advantage vs non roller rockers when using low to medium lift cams....unless of course your oiling to your valve train sucks and then you'll have a quick death to even the best roller system.

That may be true, I looked at non roller rockers but they really weren't much cheaper. With the luck I was having I wanted something from a company that I'd already had good experiences with so it was either Comp Cam or Harland Sharp.

 

[383man]

My brother and I both use Hughes rocker ams and shafts and have had great service with them. We have not had any valvetrain problems at all with the Hughes parts and I use the 1.6 roller rockers. Ron

 

[YY1]

I too, was looking for stamped rockers that had a better tolerance on the ratio.

The only ones I could find were the MP brand, and another member here said they were just stock replacements with no better accuracy.

I'd love a link to some that claim a true 1.5.

 

[747mopar]

If I remember correctly the crap rockers I had measured 1.42 from shaft center to roller tip center (horrible, they traveled the inside edge of the valve tip threw the lift). I measured the Comps and they measured 1.5 and had a perfect contact path (started just inside of center and traveled evenly over center with it being centered at half lift). When it comes to something like rockers I don't trust just anybody especially with Mopars (not as easy to correct geometry as Chevies).

 

[Kern Dog]

I went ahead and ordered THESE:
http://chucker54.stores.yahoo.net/b16alrowibih.html

These kits are made by Harland Sharp and sold exclusively through Mancini

The kit arrived today. The rockers are plain aluminum color instead of the red anodized appearance in the picture. No BFD since I care more about function rather than appearance.
There were no instructions at all in the kit. This means it is up to me to figure how to get everything spaced correctly. To save time, I'll take a spare BB head and lay it on a table. This will make it easier to get the rockers and spacers arranged right. This makes more sense than hanging over the fender, repeatedly turning and lifting as i get it figured out.
Really guys... HOW hard would it be to include a basic layout for these kits? My friend bought Hughes rockers and went through the same crap... NO instructions. This is stupid and lazy

 

[Kern Dog]

I checked on those exact same ones and even spoke to Harland Sharp about them, they are big block Chevy rockers fitted to Mopar shafts, aren't a true 1.5 as a result and are all aluminum (no bushing or bearing). Having said that, they will work fine as long as the tip is correctly positioned on the valve stem.

The ones I ordered were supposed to be 1.6 ratio but had no external markings. How do you determine the ratio other than by rigging a setup to measure the rocker arm lift?

 

[RustyRatRod]

I don't see how they are "big chevy" rockers since they are 1.72 ratio stock. The red and blue remind me of the Pro Comp rockers or something similar. I would certainly measure the lift at the valve retainer when you assemble them to make sure.