When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I posed some of this in my original thread, E6TE Heads.
I am currently trying to put together a set of heads for my 1986 5.0 EFI. The original rocker arms are worn to the point of my machine shop guy telling me to find better ones.
The original heads are not E6SEs as I expected but E5TEs. So I found a cheap set of E7TE heads hoping they might have good rockers. They look better, but not much.
I am not building a high horse power engine. Cam at the top of my list is Competition Cams 31-255-5. Going for low end torque and fuel economy.
If I'm going to have to buy new rockers, which would a good upgrade from stock which I find expensive at nearly $200?
I would be happy with used stock but am concerned that they will be hard to come by.
Kind of pricey, but they bolt on with no machine work or modification, with stock camshafts. I don't know about your aftermarket cam however.
I bought mine used on ebay for about half the new price.
I think stock ratio is 1.6. A ratio of 1.7 would have a different effect than stock I would have to guess.
Pricey, yes. But it seems the cost of adding a more energetic cam ain't cheap. I need to put it in perspective, do I want the peppy cam this many dollars more than what stock would cost. Since stock ain't cheap either, the answer is probably yes.
Yes, you're right about the ratios. The roller rockers as a result give a tad more lift than the plain type.
And they also reduce friction a smidge, and last forever, or at least a few engines. They were originally used on a couple years of '90s Mustang Cobra as original equipment, which is why they are a true bolt on and are very reliable.
If you could find a good used F4TE camshaft, it and the Cobra roller rockers make a nice combo using stock parts, which has been discussed in other threads.
I'm not sure about the 94-95 Mustang, but the F4TE cam was used in 351 and I believe 302s in trucks from 1994 up.
The earlier Mustangs used what we commonly called the (stock) HO cam, possibly this continued into the '94 to '95 Mustangs.
Others may have more insight into using the Mustang cams in the trucks, I think that the F4TE cam is a great truck camshaft, especially with the Cobra roller rockers.
I guess stuff is getting more expensive and I notice that most items, even used, on ebay are fixed price. When I bought my rockers I paid something under $200 on an auction, but had to buy a set of pedestal bases (about $20), as some of those were damaged.
Regarding the rockers. Yes, stock is 1.6. Going to 1.7 will increase total valve lift. Using the Comp CCA-31-255-5, for example, would take lift from .462/.474 to .491/.504.
If you wanted roller rockers with the stock ratio you could run SCC-SCP1021. These are pedestal mount rockers as well. One thing to remember about roller rockers is they are bulkier and take up more room. You may end up needing tall valve covers.
Regarding the rockers. Yes, stock is 1.6. Going to 1.7 will increase total valve lift. Using the Comp CCA-31-255-5, for example, would take lift from .462/.474 to .491/.504.
By this logic, merely adding 1.7 rockers would increase stock lift from .390" to .414". I wonder if I would notice that?
It's 6.25% increase in lift over the entire duration. If you started with a small cam, the increase may be too small to notice. With a bigger cam, the gain will be greater, which you are more likely to feel.
I installed it onto my stock 1987 Mustang GT with the .50 HO engine, and I barely noticed it.
The difference in lift is .030. YOU do not need taller valve covers. The interference point is the oil baffles in stock covers, except for the covers used on the 90's Cobra 5.0 and possibly the Explorer 5.0, both used many of the same parts
The difference in lift is .030. YOU do not need taller valve covers. The interference point is the oil baffles in stock covers, except for the covers used on the 90's Cobra 5.0 and possibly the Explorer 5.0, both used many of the same parts
Looking ahead, would it be common practice to simply modify these baffles on the valve covers I have?
I did not have any interference problems with the Cobra rockers with my stock 87 5.0 HO covers. Any interference would come from the fact that the rocker itself is a big casting or extrusion that's thicker than the stock stamped steel type. The cam lift is the same whether you use a 1.6 or 1.7 rocker. The added valve lift, which goes DOWN into the head, comes from the short side of the arm being slightly shorter on the 1.7 arm than the 1.6 arm. Stock sled fulcrum rocker 1.6 ratio Cobra aluminum rocker 1.7 ratio
If you do have interference with the oil baffles, the simplest thing to do is to grind off the rivets and remove them. You could even grind down their mounting bosses for more clearance.
As I am planning no high HP, I believe I will be staying with stock stamped rockers. The 55k mile rockers in the Crown Vic engine (other thread) should last a while. Possibly reusable for next build.
I'm building a 351w roller with E7TE heads. Running stock dish pistons, rods and crank all new bearing and rings. Running a Motorsport F303 cam lifters and matched springs. I have ordered a set of 1.6 full roller rockers from proform pedestal mount . I am trying to figure out what pushrods I am going to need. The stock measure roughly 7.5. The block and heads have not been shaved. Any help is appreciated.
Your not going to get the torque your after with a stock F4TE cam.
Call compcams, they will recommend the best cam for you application.
You are going to want to home port your E7 heads, to get best performance out of them.
As expensive as rockers are, I went with Scorpions. Kept the ratio the same 1.6.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.
