I got into a conversation with my machinist a few days ago. I started wondering if there would be any advantage to using two different rockers in the assembly. Lets say you use the 1:43 for the exhaust and the 1:54 for the intake cycle, or visa verse... would there be any advantage?

Spending my children's inheritance one Y Block at a time.

There was a good article in the AUG/2012? Hot Rod magazine about varying rocker ratios from intake to exhaust. I did 1.54's on the IN and 1.43's on EX. And by the calculation numbers it should have liked it. And I am pleased with the results using ECZ-C heads on a 298ci (292+0.040") with mild cam and still 350cfm two barrel holley. Better torque to pull up hills. It seems to dig deeper into torque and pull even though not needing more pedal input. And vacuum guage reads higher at cruise. It may not sound right but I had driven it for about 1000miles with all 1.43 rockers. And read the article so tried it. Two Thumbs Up.



Scott

I wonder if the 1.54s on the exhaust and the 1.43s on the intakes would be good for a basicly stock motor to get the exhaust out better,I know the small blocks need help on the exhaust side but dont know about the Ys.

Butchering up everything I can get my hands on in Dayton Ohio

If you have partial sets of 1.43 and 1.54 rockers, then you can match the 1.43’s to the exhaust and 1.54’s to the intakes and see an improvement over just using a full set of 1.43’s.  On the Y with only moderate head work and camming, that seems to work better than putting the higher lift rockers on the exhaust side.  When using the oem rockers, the best overall improvement is seen when converting both valves to the 1.54 rockers.  Unless the engine is severely flow limited, switching to 1.6 rockers on both valves will garner even more improvement.  Contrary to popular belief, Y’s do like increased lift at the valves and an increase in rocker ratio is an easy way to get there.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

This is a slight diversion from the original topic, but I have an early set of the oil baffle plates that go between the rocker stands and the heads. I know that these were designed to distribute oil more evenly to the valve stems, but they are also lifting the rocker shaft 0.045" up from the head. Would there be an advantage/disadvantage in using these with my ported 471 heads with 1.54 rockers?

Thanks,

Rono

  Ron Lane,  Meridian, ID

I didn't know such a critter was out there. I love these forums, I have learned so much since joining and reading the wealth of knowledge you folks have to offer, on that note... what he said, is there an advantage, and if so where do i get a set of these so called baffles?

Spending my children's inheritance one Y Block at a time.

Potentially better geometry to squeeze out a couple more ponies.


Lawrenceville, GA

I believe the heads utilizing these had slightly longer pushrods to keep geometry correct.

They were on 54 heads and some later, I don't know exactly when they went

Away with them but I think trucks still using the 239's carried them later

Than the cars.

55 Vicky & customline

58 Rack Dump, 55 F350 yard truck, 57 F100

59 & 61 P 400's, 58 F100 custom cab, 69 F100, 79 F150, 82 F600 ramp truck, 90 mustang conv 7 up, 94 Mustang, Should I continue?

Ghsthrss;

I think Ford discontinued these baffles in late 1956 to save money. I rarely see them on Epay and they are not being reproduced, so keep an eye out for them at swap meets. Here is what they look like. The curved side towards the springs with a weep hole in betweenRono

  Ron Lane,  Meridian, ID