So I horse traded my 1960 292 runner for a 58 F250s that did not run for its heads.

This is what I found,

A 292 painted teal green with 3.80 bores and a cast 292 crank.

Had a good camshaft and mismatched short and long pushrods with no rhyme or reason to their location.

Though I kinda sorta scored on the heads. I got 1 ED-ECZ-C and 1 5752-113. How the thing ran in the first place is kinda amazing with mismatched heads and pushrods.

So here is the part where the opinions come in.

Should a guy horse trade the 5752-113 off for another ED-ECZ-C or pay and get another 5752? The CR on the heads is nearly identical could a guy just put a big valve in the ED-ECZ-C and run them like that.


Also, Today I went to replace a few bad valve seals on the runner in my 64. My rockers are coated with crud! I bet the inside of the shaft is full too. Does anyone know if I can get the rockshaft endplugs anymore? Murrmet did not list them in my looking.. also some of the rockers were fairly stiff. I sprayed deep creep down the supply hole in the head and it dissapered quickly so I think that is clear.

Is the full pressure mod still highly advised?

Anyone who wants to rant chime in......

 

.The diff in the combustion chamber volume between a C and 113 is only 1cc. If a high performance engine isnt the object and rpms stay below 5K, the diff in the heads is minimal in terms of noticeable performance, especially so if you more closely port match the C to the intake manifold.

It might make you feel better if the 113 was fitted with 1.84 or 1.78 in. intake valves. That would require new hardened seats on the intakes to go along with the hardened seats on exhausts. And the C could have new hardened seats on the intakes for a 1.84 in. valve.

Or, find another 113.

It sounds like your rocker assemblies need to be removed and at least cleaned. I tried something a little different recently on cleaning. All the hardware from the shaft was removed. With end plugs still in place, a diner style ketchup container was filled with gas. Stuck its conical end into the larger oil inlet hole of shaft and squeezed bottle irrigating insides of shaft. After quite a few repeats and different variations, the gas exiting shaft finally ran clear. It is a mess so best to hold over some large pan to catch all the crap. And wear old clothes. It used up less than a gallon of gas. Oh, and blasts of compressed air several times in the process helped break loose caked crud.

 

The end plugs were readily available from napa the last time I checked. I do not remember the size but it's just a core plug.

I'd find another 113.

 

Found out why the oiling issue from the rock shaft standpoint. There is severe galling on four of the rockers. Looks like sand sat and ate the shaft and the rocker. Having a pig of a time finding new shafts localy, I may just order them online.
Still cant get the valvespring to compress correctly to pull the keepers out. But, I belive I have that licked tomorrow.
I will have the heads tanked tomorrow so I sould get them back on thursday or friday. Then off to get magnafluxed. Then we will truly know what we are dealing with.

So ,I could SHRINK the valvesize in the 113?
Then I would have matching valve sizes! That might be feasable I almost like it. Who is reasonable on doing Y heads? The one local machinist is a heck of a guy if you want a stock or mild engine but he tends to shy away from trick work as he is 75 years old.

Will go check murmmet for 1.84 valves. thanks yall.

 

It isnt trick work to put smaller valves in the 113. The original cast seat which is part of the head is bored and a hardened seat installed. The exact same process as is done when hardened exhaust seats are installed. Numerous seat sizes are available to the machinists. I dont know which one is appropriate to the 1.78 inch valve.

I have an engine with a G and a 113 head on a test stand. Both heads have 1.78 in. valves. A 1.78 in. valve in a 292 cu in engine isnt a slouch.

There is a positive benefit to be gained by putting in intake seats, whatever size valve is used. After a half century the original intake and exhaust seats have sunken. That results in more valve stem sticking out the other end. To then get proper spring pressures excess shimming can be required. The stock valve spring installed height is 1.780 inches. I measured some heights which have been 1.84 and more. This is the distance between the spring seat on the head, and the underside of an installed spring collar. The measurement is done without spring installed.

Or, subsitute 1.84 diameter valve above, if that is what your thinking about.

 

Flip, I thought of a couple more things regarding seats.

Sunken seats also increase combustion chamber size. Not good. That is how a non milled head with an original chamber size of say 72, can be 74 when cc'd. Everytime the head is rebuilt the seat is ground, sinking the valve more.

When the valve pocket is bored, the bore needs to be square in relation to the guide. If not, when the new seat is pressed in, it wont be square, and the grinding of the seat also wont. Like building a house.

The seats should be set with the final installed spring height in mind, and equally deep. The final step of grinding the new seat should put the spring height close to target. You might ask the shop what their tolerance is for the final heights. A sloppy job at the machine shop can result in spring heights all over the place. One head I had rebuilt by a quack in KS had all these problems, and all the intake and exhaust seats had to be redone before being installed. It is a long story, but this 113 head is the basic reason I have a G and 113 currently installed with 1.78 in. valves.

The new seats must be wider than the valve, but shouldnt be excessively wide. John Mummert once gave guidance in this area, but I cant remember it.

 

Having a PIA time finding the damn rocker shafts localy. I am going to call murmmet tomorrow and order some from him as I feel he would be selling good quality stuff.

I see what your saying on the pocketed valves. I may go that route as it would be fairly balanced. and leave some tin between the valves.
I see murmmet sells a set of stainless valves in that size. I understand the virtue of stainless on an exhaust valve but I am shooting for a clean stock type engine. I canot figure out why one would need stainless on the intake in a stock engine!

Heads are tanking as I type. Will pick them up tomorrow and have them taken to be fluxed. Our local machinist does good work but is a old stoner so it is hard to get things done quickly. So fluxing may take a while.

 

I got mine directly from John. He shipped them quickly. I wouldn't get them from anyone else!


Cheers,


Rick

 

Got my rocker shafts on thursday. Picked through my rockers and junked about ten. Five of them are great and the remainder are usable.

Found out the machinist in the town over will reface and hone my rockers. "I aint done it in a while but I can for about $20-$25 while you wait." I will take them over next friday after work.
The shafts from murmmet look great. Going to do the pressurized rocker mod while I am at it. I assume one of you has done it. Any improvment noted?

 

Seen the machinist yesterday. Twoo good heads. Having them milled clean new guides and a full set of seats. 1.84" on the intake and stock exhaust.

Pick them up in a few weeks.

Rockershafts went together beautiful. Save one issue. One shaft that I bought from John was .002 smaller and caused the rocker stands to be loose. I now have oil flowing good from both heads thanks to deep creep and a piece of mechanics wire.
My dual circuit MS swap is nearly done as well. I am waiting on one adaptor fitting, got to install the lines for the front and bleed her out.

Got somthing done today but it took six long hours.