Re: Re: RE: Re: winter projects...

From: Josh Battles (jbattles@bankfinancial.com)
Date: Fri Nov 08 2002 - 10:58:15 EST


why the 1.6 not 1.7?

""Tim Althoff"" <talthoff@yllwdkta.com> wrote in message
news:000e01c286db$f2872c60$6400a8c0@computer...
>
> ok, I've got confirmation form bernd that I should stick with the 1.6's
> rockers. so what all should I buy with this...1.6 roller rockers, cam,
> valve springs (which ones)? Also, going to do the double roller timing
> chain. any miscellaneous stuff?
>
> Tim Althoff
> 99 SY 3.9 5-Speed 'Customized' RC Dakota
> http://www.yllwdkta.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net]On Behalf Of ScSilverdak
> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:30 PM
> To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
> Subject: Re: DML: Re: RE: Re: winter projects...
>
>
>
> I added a set of Comp Cams 1.6 roller rockers, they are basically 1.6
ratio
> SB Chevy roller rockers with the correct pushrods and rocker arm studs to
> install them on a Magnum v6 or v8, expect a 12-15 hp increase at the crank
> or a 9-12 RWHP increase on average, they work fine even with a stock
> cam...........a valve spring swap is a good idea if your adding these and
a
> cam.
>
> Ron-
> '01 Dakota Sport 3.9 Supercharged
> website:http://www.scsilverdak.com
> e-mail: scsilverdak@hotmail.com
>
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: <jon@dakota-truck.net>
> To: <dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net>
> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:21 AM
> Subject: Re: DML: Re: RE: Re: winter projects...
>
>
> >
> > "Gary Hedlin" <ghedlin@theramp.net> wrote:
> >
> > : The comp cams 1.6 ratio cams (part no 1424-KIT) will work perfect.
They
> > : also are significantly cheaper than the crowers. The 1.7's really
don't
> > : give you that much HP compared to the 1.6's. If your doing the rocker
> arms,
> > : I'ld recomend a camshaft too. a Comp Cams 504/.512 Lift, 200/206
> Duration
> > : (part no 3310) should work nicely, thats what I'm using for my new V6.
> >
> >
> > I was going to suggest to Tim that as long as he was changing out
the
> > rockers, he might as well step up to the 1.7s for that extra lift, but
> > I'd have to qualify that by saying that I'm not really up on what is
> available.
> > It sounds like the 1.7s might be significantly more expensive than the
> 1.6s,
> > and if that's the case then the small additional increase might not be
> > worth the extra cash outlay. If they were the same price though, I'd go
> > with the 1.7s as long as you know there aren't any piston to valve
> clearance
> > problems. I seem to remember that if you upgrade to the rollers, you
> should
> > get higher valve covers too, or cut the baffles out of the stock ones.
> >
> > Speaking of rockers in general, does anyone have any before/after
> > dyno data? The stock ratio on our Daks is already 1.6, so the only
> > thing going to 1.6 rollers will give you is decreased friction and
> > probably closer production tolerances than the stock stamped steel
> > units. (Though it does give you the ability to rev a bit higher if
> > that is what you're into.) :-) So, it doesn't *seem* like there are
> > huge gains to be had here - I wouldn't expect any miracles and before
> > doing this swap, I would definitely like to see some dyno data
> > considering you're probably looking at dropping a few bills on it. :-)
> >
> > When I did a "performance rebuild" on my 440 Barracuda, I went with
> > aluminum roller rockers, but mainly because I needed an adjustable
> > valvetrain - if I didn't, I probably would have stuck with the stockers.
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > -Jon-
> >
> > .---- Jon Steiger ------ jon@dakota-truck.net or
> jon@jonsteiger.com -----.
> > | I'm the: AOPA, DoD, EAA, NMA, NRA, SPA, USUA. Rec & UL Pilot - SEL
> |
> > | '70 Barracuda, '92 Ram 4x4, '96 Dakota, '96 Intruder 1400, '96
FireFly
> |
> > `-----------------------------------------
> http://www.jonsteiger.com ----'
> >
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:47:25 EST