The Diesel Garage banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
849 Posts
Discussion Starter #1


I see no 'performance' Ford/IH diesel sub-forum here so I will just post this here. The rocker arms in the picture are from a 6.0L, but the thread can be dedicated to any Powerstroke displacement concerning the rocker arm and building this portion of the valve train for more severe duty applications. This weekend I had the time to sit down and actually look at these ones and measure.

These are rough measurements, not exact but it gives you an idea of them.
Top rocker arm from Pushrod cup to pivot = 1-27/32" + or -

Tip/nose to pivot = 2-17/32 + or -

Should be noted the tip or bridge contact point of the rocker is removable, moves as needed for operation too. I will display the rocker scrub on the valve bridge too to show the movement the rocker itself does during engine running time. These rockers just so happen to be 3/16" thick material.

The bottom rocker
Pushrod cup to pivot = 1-5/16" + or -
Tip/nose to pivot = 1-27/32" + or -
 

·
Eddy
Joined
·
85 Posts

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
721 Posts
Return on investment is not great for 6.0 roller rockers. I waste(spend) money on performance parts, just cannot justify rollers.
 

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
849 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Well guys, get the lathe and mill rollin. if you know here to get your material from and can follow a conditioning process to make them last a test run, why not? if I didn't have a Cat scroll pump, Bosch P pump and Dmax heads to work on for my own knowledge I would definitely give it a shot!
 

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
849 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I looked at those Sharp rockers, I would say yes we need to develop a more cost effective set.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bootcamp

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
721 Posts
I only have a small lathe and really don't know how to use it. We will give you some time on your other projects but get moving.
 

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
849 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Haha, that is funny 'get moving'. Grab a basic machining book and start trying different thingsLenz! I will have to figure where I can get some machine time and material. Probably end up speaking to my buddy back home in MN on some things.

IMO, the attributes seen in Sharp's picture I see maybe a 'half'-roller rocker. I think the trick will be the valve bridge to roller tip companionship. Any other views on what is being looked for in the rocker arm assembly?
 

·
Stuck in Commiefornia...
Joined
·
1,296 Posts
So your thought is that a rocker arm that uses ball bearing friction suppression at the three main contact points is insufficient and that a roller bearing design will make a significant improvement in friction losses? Curious. Strength wise, the arc-beam design is strong enough, and rather light weight for a steel rocker arm. Perhaps a roller tip would benefit, but with the bridge being 45° to the arm, you have to look at how much area you even have for a roller, the bridge would likely need be slightly wider to keep the roller on it.
 

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
849 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Show me a picture the displays ALL 3 roller. He website only shows the roller aspect visually on the pivot point.
 

·
Stuck in Commiefornia...
Joined
·
1,296 Posts
Show me a picture the displays ALL 3 roller. He website only shows the roller aspect visually on the pivot point.
Take a closer look at the picture you posted, the following points are all visible. The pushrod cup rides a ball on the pushrod. Center pivot rides a ball bearing. Tip has a captured ball with a flat to keep it on the bridge (look closely, you'll see it).

I don't think you're grasping my previous post.

What I'm saying is that ALL rocker arms that rely on a pushrod for actuation rely on a ball and cup relationship. Changing the pivot from a ball bearing to a roller bearing could potentially create a misalignment to the bridge because the current ball design provides for dynamic movement. The same can be said for replacing the articulating tip with a roller design.

Without doing a motion simulation of the parts, I'm not quick to criticize the stock design, which is actually rather good and an elegant solution to the packaging constraints of this engine.
 

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
849 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Very true, however the pushrod is not so much a roller per say, its just a cup or half moon 'slide' by arm movement.

The tip is a slide style tip in a similar fashion to the slide rockers on a 2.3 Ford gas. Again, similar to the pushrod side that we use to operate the arm etc. We aren't rolling, we are pivoting in the tip as our flat surfaces are sliding. Simplicity its great, however when we grow in rpms we grow in friction.

Talking true rollers we must venture further.
 

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
849 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
With the pedestal mounts

 

·
Junior Member
Joined
·
849 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Hope I get a few replies, I am wondering what you pullers etc see rpm-wise with the 6.0L.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top