Fox T-Bird/Cougar Forums

Technical => Engine Tech => Topic started by: ZondaC12 on December 23, 2010, 03:58:22 PM

Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 23, 2010, 03:58:22 PM
As the title admits, I was not proactive about this and you can beat me up over it, whatever. Lesson learned. I seemed to recall a member here having had GT40 heads on top of a flat-top pistoned 5.0 and so I went ahead, bought 'em threw 'em on, got everything sealed up and painted and I REALLY don't want to tear this fresh thing apart again and either a) screw the GT40s and use my E7's like I had originally planned way back with this engine bay teardown or b) flycut the pistons.

I have .045" of clearance on intake, and .085" on the exhaust. I took the spring off, bolted the rocker back down, held the rocker tight against the pushrod, and with the valve sitting against the piston, used a feeler gauge in the gap above the stem.

How hard and fast is this ".080 on intake, .100 on exhaust" rule? How close is "close enough"? What does it account for? So that the worst case scenario won't cause destruction, AKA the engine is grossly overheating while being spun at 6 or 7 grand? These cars' tachs redline at 5 grand. The electronic limiter is 6150 or 6250 depending on who you ask LOL. The red car has then naturally seen that limiter numerous times, through donuts and burnouts. It's never gotten rough or made any weird noises during that time. Always sounded like it wanted to be there honestly. Would that mean no [significant] valve float happened?

A chart I have says that F3ZE heads like mine have 60-63 cc for the chamber. 60-64 for E7TE. What's the difference? Just the design? Milling it? Or is the only PTV issue with GT40's because of the bigger valves? If I wasn't going to work in an hour I'd sit down the do the trigonometry and find out what my clearance might have been with the E7's.

I found these, shockingly: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Ford-stud-302-1-5-Scorpion-roller-rocker-arms-1080-_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQhashZitem43a388c131QQitemZ290506457393QQptZMotorsQ5fCarQ5fTruckQ5fPartsQ5fAccessories

Assuming of course I can get the right stud blah blah valve covers etc...might these help the clearance enough? If the motor isn't going have the piss wound out of it (which is how I intended to treat the thing *anyway*, the silver cat is the whipping boy), could this work?

I know I'm going to get a lot of "only way is to check" responses. At least that's my gut feeling. Can't hurt to try though, right? If I have to buy them and test them and possibly flush $300 down the toilet, at least I'd have a 50/50 shot as opposed to nothing.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: 86T-bird on December 23, 2010, 10:35:21 PM
Wow.  Tough not to give a cryptic answer here.  Some people learn by others mistakes, some by their own. 

If you'd like to learn by your own, fire it up and see what happens.  The most likely result will cost far more than some paint and a set of gaskets. 

If you'd like to learn from the mistakes of others.  Pull the heads and measure. 

How hard and fast is the guideline for valve clearance?  The pistons are pretty hard on the valves really fast!  The valves, guides and maybe pistons become junk. 

Putting studs in a stock head to use those roller rockers is a waste of $.  Besides, you'll have to pull the heads and send them off to the machine shop to have studs installed.  Not what you'd call a simple solution to the problem...

Hope you have good luck, which ever route you choose:D
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: vinnietbird on December 24, 2010, 12:23:41 AM
I had ported E-7 heads and an E303 cam with aftermarket double valve springs and no issues with the other engine before the GT40-P. BUT,each engine is different.Personally,I'll bet a set of head gaskets,that with good valve springs and an H.O cam with those heads you'll be fine.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 24, 2010, 12:39:32 AM
Okay, didn't realize machining was required to put those rockers on. I guess I'll cut the pistons. I just don't have much confidence in not getting metal shavings where they shouldn't be :(. I'll have to plan out a creative way to contain it.

I do have the H.O. cam vinnie. Definitely no intention of a high profile cam in this motor, ever. I could also just clean up the old E7's it had, now sitting on my bench, paint them and then put em back on and sit on the GT40s for something else or try and sell them. Does anyone make thicker head gaskets or is that just another stupid idea? LOL
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: Haystack on December 24, 2010, 05:29:37 AM
I would not use those scorpion rockers. I have just heard alot of bad things about them, and that their machine work is not always up to par. For less the $100 more you could have very good rocker arms. You will need new springs, if you have not already. Use the GT-40 heads, tape the top of the pistons, or you could try cutting foam out and put it around the piston. Maybe shaving cream?

I personally would not use thicker head gaskets. But yes you can get them.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: Haystack on December 24, 2010, 05:46:39 AM
Read here.

http://sbftech.com/index.php/topic,57.0.html
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: V8Demon on December 24, 2010, 08:12:19 AM
Quote from: Haystack;346881
Read here.

http://sbftech.com/index.php/topic,57.0.html


How many times have I quoted the original post from that thread on this board?  A lot.  Not worth converting to stud mount FWIW.  Buy stud mount heads if you want stud mount.  Otherwise get RR's in pedestal mount for those heads if yer set on keeping them.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: vinnietbird on December 24, 2010, 08:22:56 AM
I have roller rockers in the classifieds.They are SVO 1.7 roller rockers. The E-7 heads,1.7's and the H.O cam would really make you happy. Have some port work done on the heads as well. If not,it would still be a fun car.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 24, 2010, 11:14:00 AM
I wouldnt even consider the rockers anymore. I thought they would just bolt on. I was surprised I even found that ratio at all. Chebbies use 1.5 stock, we're 1.6. I fully understand why max lift isn't what's important, I have seen you quote that thread those many many times V8Demon ;) But my thinking was that the bigger ratio made it open faster as well, sounds like that's not the case. Even still, I'm not going to change anything with the valvetrain. If I go back to my E7's I'm just gonna leave it with what it had, because I know that worked and would make me feel most comfortable.

How touchy of an issue is flycutting with the overall balance in the rotating assembly? I read in more than one spot that if you take off too much you'll upset the balance. It looks like I'd only need to grind a reaaaally small amount off for each relief...about .050 - .060 and I'd be golden for both valves.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: jcassity on December 25, 2010, 11:29:19 PM
there isnt any way you could fly cut by hand and have the same amount of weight removed unless you have a jig that guided a dremal to do the work.  IE- like have a piece of ply wood cut to allow the dremal to follow a curve / depth while the piston stays stationary.

hard to explain but you get my point.  I wouldnt ever consider doing a fly cut by hand and know all my pistons weight remained the same.  Not to say it hasnt been done free hand, its just that free hand would not be my best suggestion.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: turbo_88_XR7 on December 25, 2010, 11:32:14 PM
wait, wtf am i talking about.. it lmao

REedit..

it's easier to just spend 100 bucks on a set of speed pro pistons.. their valve reliefs are deeper than the stock HO's
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: Haystack on December 26, 2010, 12:05:48 PM
But, with new pistons your going to upset the balance anyways. Could be more or less then flycutting. Unless your going to pull it all apart anyways to balance it, just pull the valves out of your e7's, and use them as a guide. Do some reading on that SbFtech. You will learn alot.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: thunderjet302 on December 26, 2010, 08:38:38 PM
At this point I would just pull it apart and put in new bearings and pistons. The engine is already out of the car so you might as well do it now.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: turbo_88_XR7 on December 26, 2010, 08:41:13 PM
Quote from: thunderjet302;347173
At this point I would just pull it apart and put in new bearings and pistons. The engine is already out of the car so you might as well do it now.


:headbang:

you're not building a full blown race motor where the correct pistons aren't available, they're plentiful so i would just go new.. not to mention, it's nice knowing you have a fresh set in there with zero miles ;)
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: TurboCoupe50 on December 26, 2010, 08:55:03 PM
Get some Trick Flow heads... No valve reliefs necessary and are far better than any cast iron Ford head...
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 27, 2010, 02:34:09 PM
Quote from: Haystack;347127
But, with new pistons your going to upset the balance anyways. Could be more or less then flycutting. Unless your going to pull it all apart anyways to balance it, just pull the valves out of your e7's, and use them as a guide. Do some reading on that SbFtech. You will learn alot.

Yeah I'm gonna get on there. I very much appreciate everyone's advice and I thank you all for it, but it's probably wasting everyone's time honestly, kinda feel bad. I need the nitty gritty. As thick-headed as it might sound, I am staying iron heads, not only that, but iron heads that are ford factory parts, and the bottom end is NOT going to be touched. Period. I see it as a bragging right that its the original bottom end still going strong (which it is) and I want that. Just how I feel. I have seen pictures of people gluing sandpaper to the bottom of a valve and spinning it with a drill in the valveguide. I think this is what I'll do, I like the idea best for accuracy. Definitely not going to do anything until I know as much as I can. by no means did I even think about just "crank n hope" either. That's completely irrational.

The more I think about it, if I don't get to play with more power than E7's can offer on this engine, it's NOT the end of the world. With the list of demands that I have? I should consider myself lucky as it is. Ya can't have it all...
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: V8Demon on December 28, 2010, 08:07:40 AM
Quote from: TurboCoupe50;347181
Get some Trick Flow heads... No valve reliefs necessary and are far better than any cast iron Ford head...

Someone had a deal on them -- $1000 for an assembled set.  I'm not sure which springs they were equipped with though.


Why the desire to stay with iron heads?
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 28, 2010, 02:49:36 PM
It would be more obvious if I had this with the other project thread....but that's in the body/appearance forum because that's more what it is. But I'm trying to keep a stock appearance so I sure don't want to see a smooth polished finish of an aluminum head. And yes I would paint it anyway, so then I'd have to scuff it up etc etc. GT40's were of course not conceived yet in 1987, but to me that's close enough to be period correct as they're in every way externally like the awful stock heads this car came with, aside from the 3 bars. which are masked by the front accessories. Would anyone ever really see the difference? No. But I'll know that it's not right.

Not to mention cost. I *could* afford a grand on heads. Not comfortably enough for me though. And it doesn't make sense to I believe. If I'm gonna go nuts on heads like that, it'll be on the silver car.


Update as of this evening -- http://www.mifbody.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?29607-How-to-flycut-pistons-in-an-LS1-for-free!-%28almost%29  Definitely gonna do this. Took it apart tonight, ordered another set of HG's and intake gaskets. I'll use the E7's so they can get filled with bits of metal and I won't care LOL. But their idea of how to get the same depth every time is genius. As well as the simple idea of cutting a piece of sandpaper just bigger than the valve to ensure the relief is a little bigger in diameter for heat expansion. I'm excited.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: Haystack on December 29, 2010, 01:24:22 AM
Buy some cleveland valves from a parts store. There dimensionally bigger, and cheap. I think its $5 for both intake and exhaust. You should look it up and check for sure first. And Btw, I am not sure I would be okay with just the chuck holding it in place, but it would probably work with how much you would be pull it out.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 29, 2010, 09:09:41 AM
As in 351 cleveland valves? And you mean as far as the chuck gripping it square and evenly so it doesn't try to flop around? I would definitely check it up several times to make sure it's straight and also I'd take my sweet ass time, no need to go full speed and risk heating up the valve guide or binding it up or something.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: turbo_88_XR7 on December 29, 2010, 01:11:09 PM
Quote from: ZondaC12;347479
I would definitely check it up several times to make sure it's straight and also I'd take my sweet ass time, no need to go full speed and risk heating up the valve guide or binding it up or something.

i was about to say that as my final suggestion lol.. and keeping the valve stem as lubricated as possible will keep you safe as well.. you just need to make sure you're 100% TDC or else your reliefs won't be accurate and WHOOPS, a bent valve :(

good luck though, and make sure you clean those cylinders/pistons up exceptionally well.. don't want any of those metal shavings finding a permanent home on your rings lol

EDIT: that guy drew a winking smiley face.. WIN!!!!! hahahah

(http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/9396/img9329.jpg)
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 29, 2010, 03:08:12 PM
Yeah I got a good laugh outta that one lol. I like their idea of taping the ENTIRE deck, or at least what *I* would do if I hadn't seen that, is I would tape everything besides the surface area I needed to use on the piston. So I'd cover the crevice between the piston and wall etc, so filings won't get anywhere in the first place. Screw trying to fish that stuff out. No way to know for sure that you got everything.

Haystack, where did you even find single valves available? I checked advance auto and they don't even sell valves. I would think valves would be sold as a complete set for a head or even both heads. Ebay echoes this feeling. I'd also think any major part for a 351 cleveland would carry quite a premium regardless of what it is. That's not just any motor!
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: hypostang on December 29, 2010, 04:00:31 PM
Any good Jobber store should be able to get you single valves , NAPA. Federated , Oreilly,etc...  and Cleavland valves should be no more expensive than any other engine
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: thunderjet302 on December 29, 2010, 04:14:40 PM
Just remember that the top of the piston will be weaker with the notch in it.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: turbo_88_XR7 on December 29, 2010, 05:50:14 PM
i've bought single valves from advance before.. i replaced 1 in the old motor in my S10 when my #3 piston started breaking apart and a piece of it got jammed between the piston and valve.. i don't think they come up on their site though and it takes a decent employee to find it in their system, not 1 of the regular retards they typically have working the counter.. talk to a commercial guy if you can, they're usually the smartest guys in the building
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: Haystack on December 29, 2010, 08:35:00 PM
I have not done it. I plan on staying stock H.O. when I assemble my motor, unless I come into some money. My new block also has valve reliefs already.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 29, 2010, 11:01:57 PM
Yeah the Advance near me has a couple people that know me on a first name basis LOL. Definitely will be heading there tomorrow like I should have done today!
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: turbo_88_XR7 on December 30, 2010, 01:55:04 PM
if they can't find them, i MAY have a few chevy 2.02 valves somewhere, i can toss 1 in an envelope and send it your way if need be
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on December 30, 2010, 04:02:05 PM
Well, went earlier today, sure enough! $5.99!!! Haha. Their computer said 1.842" for this intake valve. GT40 valve is of course 1.840. So that's 20 thou bigger, I figure do what the article said and cut the paper a little bigger anyway to be sure. They had to order it, will be in on the 5th of the new year, so we'll see what we're lookin at when I get it.

Are most valves from the big 3 pretty standard in stem thickness? Would a chevy valve fit in the guide even??
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: turbo_88_XR7 on December 30, 2010, 04:23:21 PM
as far as i've noticed, ford and chevy small block valves are very very close.. same goes for the 2.3 because i've seen people put chevy valves in them.. don't know about dodge though, i don't mess with them
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: thunderjet302 on December 30, 2010, 11:07:49 PM
I know I've seen 2.02 Chevy valves in Windsor heads.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on January 07, 2011, 08:25:06 PM
Just an update:

Got the valve earlier this week, using a caliper I checked and it is just a haaair bigger than the F3ZE intake valve. The listing on the screen at Advance said it was 1.842 inches, my intake is 1.84, so everything's right.

I know, aluminum pistons, but it's really shocking how easy this is. I just did two intake valve reliefs. I'm waiting til tomorrow to do more so my "goon squad" can come watch lol. Couple of friends that compare me to Tony Stark from Iron Man or some mad scientist or what have you, so they always want me to try and make sure they're present when I do major car work lol. "How the other half lives" :hick:
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: jcassity on January 08, 2011, 12:55:54 AM
show em the socket trick
put the socket on the top, hit it with the hammer and out pop the keepers.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on January 08, 2011, 11:01:28 AM
Hmmmm I will have to try that! Lol that's always the slow part I like the sound of it.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: Haystack on January 22, 2011, 07:21:39 PM
Any update on this? Curious how well it works.
Title: Reactive as opposed to proactive solution to PTV clearance problem...?
Post by: ZondaC12 on January 23, 2011, 11:32:38 AM
LOL I didn't update here pretty sure I did in the main build thread (gotta keep yourself ORGANIZED on here hahaha) but it was awesome. Look in that thread for pictures, I suppose I should put them here too for future reference as a "tech archive" kinda thing. But I cut 16 sandpaper circles for the valve, one for each relief needed. It took a matter of seconds to dig out each relief, and what a clean smooth cut it made! The only PAIN IN THE BUTTOCKS is lifting the  head on and off each side eleventy-billion times :rollin: