ROLLER ROCKERS-DO THEY REALLY WORK? HOW TO: 350 SBC POWER MODS-TIMING, JETTING, SPACERS & ROCKERS

[@802Garage]

Your channel is so valuable it's crazy.

[@richardholdener1727]

I appreciate that!

[@george1la]

These dyno tests are reality of what does and does not work, and if it does what happens. I bought roller rockers, 1.7/1 for the free extra lift and because of the roller tips. Roller tips prevents side loads on the valve from the rocker. I want power and longevity. They have been in my motors for years now.

[@alltherpm]

Longevity, and reliability I would stay stamped steel If ur not racing, less parts to explode and put needle bearings though ur engine

[@michaeldose2041]

@@alltherpm What you are saying is ALL roller rockers are prone to failure. What George is saying is he has been using them for years without failure. Clearly, roller rockers have an advantage in preventing side load on valve guides, which is the number one cause of oil burning and valve failure. So one guy is talking from experience and sharing his success and the other guy is just talking out his azz. I let you figure out which one is which.

[@alltherpm]

@@michaeldose2041 anything with needles can fail, on side load with a stud will always happen unless u run shafts to keep them sturdy, but on street engines with soft springs is not really a huge issue

[@michaeldose2041]

@@alltherpm Yeah anything with an engine, and gears CAN fail. LOL ''but on street engines with soft springs is not really a huge issue'' Oh, okay, there is an issue but you should ignore it, because you cousin's buddy had an uncle that knew someone that had needles explode and ruined his engine with 100 miles on it. Every heard of a roller tip rocker? Now go put your dunce cap on and sit in the corner.

[@alltherpm]

@@michaeldose2041 I've seen lot more lifters send needle bearings through engine, we had to call jesel to ask how many they put in them,rockers I've seen had alot break, but no needles explode, & y they don't wear cause they never turn enough, y there really not worth the money on most street engines with small cams under .575 lift, in my opinion which never claimed to no anything, just truth or keep my mouth shut

[@slowg9706]

So similar power to the 5.3 ls but more torque, without any significant mods, thats pretty cool for such an old motor.

[@recoilrob324]

The biggest problem I've found tuning performance engines is that the idle mixture adjustment screws are unresponsive because the throttle is open too far and the transfer slot is feeding the fuel. Transfer system is fed by the idle jet and bleed but above the mixture screws so if you can turn the screws in all the way and the engine still runs...you need to close down the throttle plate enough to get off the transfers so you then have control with the idle screws. Sometimes you can do this by cracking the secondaries or end up drilling holes in the plates to get the idle speed you want with the plates in the right position so you have idle control. This will cure much of the stinking exhaust that most performance engines make and also greatly help the fuel economy as well as keep the plugs from wanting to foul. At cruise the vast majority of performance engines with large carbs are not running mostly on the main jets...they're still on the transfers so rather than trying to jet the mains you get better economy by opening the idle air bleeds to lean down the transfer side. This also leans the idle mixture so you need to adjust the idle screws to compensate. I open the idle air bleeds until my idle mixtures need 2-2.5 turns of the mixture needles with the throttle plates closed and off the transfers. Then tune the mains as normal. My last 454 with dual 500 AFB's easily got 20 mpg's on the highway in a 78 Z-28 but the carbs took a LOT of leaning on the idle and transfer circuits to do this. As installed the car got the usual 8-10 mpg's that everyone says Big Blocks get....don't believe it! Get the engine on the idle screws....meaning you can shut it off by turning them in and run 10+ degrees of vacuum advance on manifold vacuum and even large engines can get good efficiency.

[@bens8696]

Very interesting… I hear new vrs carb has provision for idle air

[@derekmelyndadeckens2982]

That all sounds great and I'll apply what I can, but even computer controlled fuel injection big blocks don't get 20mpg on the highway.

[@richardholdener1727]

we adjust idle speed, many perf carbs have rear holes in secondaries, we can get them to idle on the idle circuit and 20 mpg from a 454 with dual quads?

[@recoilrob324]

@@richardholdener1727 Yep....had 2.75 9" Ford with Richmond Super T-10 and ran from PA to Atlanta and back averaging a little over 70mph and got 19.8 mpg's true. Dual 500 Edelbrock AFB's on their low rise dual plane manifold, 9:1CR, large valve Oval port small chamber heads and 224/224 cam. Good running package up to 6000 rpm. It's easy to make power on a dyno.....you ought to try a gas mileage experiment which is a little tougher while still having good driveability. Even if you have extra idle air through the secondary plates (or primary or PCV feed) the transfer circuits are normally WAY too rich for good mileage. One fellow said to run 13.5 A/F which is nearly a full power mixture...we run high 16's or more at cruise if the mixture distribution will allow it which was part of the reason for the dual quads on the 454...each cylinder had a fuel delivery point nearby and both AFB's opened together with no progression. This intake system was able to run leaner than a single spread-bore two plane while maintaining crisp throttle response.

[@Texassince1836]

With my quadrajets I drill out the idle bypass air until I get a proper idle throttle opening

[@joealbert7773]

I ran roller rockers on my race engines (sprint car on dirt) not so much for any gain in power, but for longevity. I alway figured they didn't do much for power.

[@Gregoman89]

I think they tend to float less at high rpm’s

[@2003evodave]

Also depends on how high you rev your engine, bet 6000rpm and up would be more beneficial with rollers.

[@lurebenson7722]

I was totally into learning how the roller rockers worked to plain GM non rollers rockers, so I am glad I watched this. I did one 383 full roller cam to roller rockers and then the GM value covers won't fit. Now I have second engine started a 385 stroker going to use the GM TBI 65.5 chamber heads, so I know just used the old GM rockers and not have value cover not fitting issue.

[@gordocarbo]

@@Gregoman89 They are heavier than stock rocker arms. Less flexing and stronger though

[@gordocarbo]

@@lurebenson7722 Summit sells spacers to run stock valve covers and PMC? Makes stock looking covers that are taller

[@GaryH-pw9cm]

In the past used Rhoads lifters for more low end power. But they do make some noise. If you don't mind the noise they work great.

[@mph6502]

Very valuable info! Years ago I read a Car Craft article about running a higher ratio rocker arm on just the intake valve of cylinders 1,2,7 and 8. The thought behind it was those cylinders are farther away from the carb. I've searched and can't find it now, I more than likely still have the magazine somewhere, but would love to see someone try to duplicate it. They did a baseline test with 1.5 on all 16, then 1.6 on just the intakes valves on the outside 4 cylinders. Then they did 1.6 on the other 4 intake valves. They also tried it on both a dual plane intake as well as a single plane.

[@richardholdener1727]

I've run that type of test-it works best with 1.6 on all cylinders

[@gordocarbo]

@@richardholdener1727 Roger that! Spacers...as said are tuning tools not every engine needs one. Drives me crazy seeing guys tell others to put xyz on a never fired engine just 'cause.

[@3800TURBO]

Geometry, rigidity and valve tip and guide ware are the main reasons to upgrade rockers but basic factory bolt or stud mount still flex and move about with decent spring pressure. Some add a girdle to join all the posts, most opt for shaft mount rockers. Big boost cars need steel exaust rockers as alloy can break trying to open the valve.

[@mikef-gi2dg]

First thing...YES I want to see more testing like this. I might never get an engine on a dyno so this helps a lot. I have never tried locked out timing on my mild street engines. I would imagine it would be hard to hot start, with detonation, but I might be wrong. At what point would locked out ignition be practical? Moderate street/strip, hot street/strip, wild very large cammed motor? Have you tried the MSD 6 ULTRA bluetoothed ignition boxes yet? Keep testing.

[@richardholdener1727]

You are right, locked distributors are not great on the street-hard starting with 35 degrees of initial

[@VIKING-SON]

Great video Richard as for the roller rockers. Sticking with the stock ratio I didn't there would much of a gain. I say do a ratio change next and see if there's that much of a gain in doing so... Another one I like to see is header primary tube size and length. Again thanks for your hard work and efforts. Great site to learn basic and advanced tuning... Sincerely a retired US Army veteran and gear head...

[@92stanghauler]

Great test Richard! Following up on our recent unchanged RR ratio discussion, stamped factory rockers can have inconsistent geometry and therefore lower actual lift vs advertised(advantage aftermarket). RRs weight more which can offset gains, some(advantage factory). Stamped rockers with mild cams and lighter springs are not going to accelerate valve tip wear to a noticeable degree so longevity is less of an issue when you factor in the risk of bearings in the motor from RR failure(advantage factory). I think in the end, a 350hp 5,500rpm combo just doesn't benefit enough from roller rockers vs the investment unless a change in ratio accompanies the swap. Thanks for confirming my assumption. But...run the same test with a higher lift cam(.550+), AFR195s(450-475hp) and a higher redline(6,000-6,500rpm) and see if it matters at that level? hmmm :)

[@Texassince1836]

Every 2hp gained in friction reduction is 1 hairdryer of heat that isn't in the oil or coolant. The gains from the roller rockers are friction reduction

[@lollipop84858]

That isn't the point of roller rockers.

[@Texassince1836]

@@lollipop84858 Reducing friction is litterally the reason to rollerize.

[@gearheadE30]

Finally, data with no ratio change on roller vs stock rockers. Been curious about that for a long time. Love the channel, I continue to learn a ton and appreciate that it is all based in facts and data.

[@richardholdener1727]

Bear in mind that this is not an absolute test-it just did this on this motor

[@BOOT]

If the lift and springs were more aggressive, then the stamped rockers may have lost power vs rollers

[@gearheadE30]

@BOOT @richardholdener1727 yep, definitely understand that every engine platform and parts combo is different, but still very interesting to see as a point of reference.

[@krusher74]

IMO rollers have never been about power they are a wear reducing item.

[@jasonjason5184]

@@BOOTyes a mopar guy did this test and after 509 lift the rollers made more power.

[@dylanfinch6186]

I love the look of those rocker arms and want to put some on my 350, but I think you'd want to do springs and lifters as well as a cam all with that change to really see the benefits.

[@richardholdener1727]

rockers need springs

[@Aph87]

This is also a very stock cam and springs where the stamped steel rockers are designed to out perform. Get a mild to wild cam, springs, and see if stock 1.5 stamped steel rockers can even hang with a 1.6 roller rocker.

[@blueyhis.zarsoff1147]

oil temp drops ( big blocks) with rollers, so friction gone hence there is free power with bigger springs and more revs there is more free power. Typically more accurate ratio in many cases

[@brentvalentine]

That is exactly what I thought roller rockers were for. Less friction during operation and less wear on guides and seals.

[@gordocarbo]

@@brentvalentine Less friction strength if running a stiff valve spring. Id run stock ones as long as I possibly can they last forever

[@lollipop84858]

None of these reasons stated are the point of roller rockers by the way

[@blueyhis.zarsoff1147]

@@lollipop84858 so the reasons are?

[@gordocarbo]

@@brentvalentine Thats correct. No other reason to want them

[@alertgasper]

Competition Cams loved to say their roller rocker arms added 15 hp...but if you read the ad, they mention a cam swap as well.

[@richardholdener1727]

we have seen gains like that on other applications

[@gordocarbo]

Hate marketing bs just to sell quantity. Its like the bolt on catalogs for cars, most do zip except empty the wallet .

[@alertgasper]

@@gordocarbo agreed, they could have mentioned longevity or strength--others mentioned the latter over stamped rockers, not to mention accuracy. many stamped 1.5:1 rockers are like 1.48-1.53 to 1

[@Haffschlappe]

Comp cant even produce a flat tappet cam that does not eat Lobes and lifters

[@alertgasper]

@@Haffschlappe back somewhere in the 1980's, one of their cam competitors ratted them in a half page ad that CC didn't even grind their own 'shafts, they just bought and re-boxed 'em. but they had a thing going with Racing Head Services to make crate engines--they had 3 page ads for "high energy" and "magnum" versions. some companies do a ton of advertising to make up for word of mouth, and some have enough word of mouth they don't have a need for much advertising.

[@terrylarotonda784]

Like your show. Just watched you Dyno the 375 396 great work. Now to my question, I cannot find anybody who has dyno a 1966 Pontiac 389 tripower! Would love to see you do this for a stock set up. I ordered a 66 GTO with that engine back in 66. It was a real monster for the time. Would greatly appreciate the real dyno numbers. Thanks see what you can do. Again keep up the good work,

[@Bige4u]

Good stuff.... the L98 is similar to the ZZ4 crate engine, same "113" heads, 10:1 compression, dual plane intake, 208/221 hyd roller camshaft, rated 355hp/405tq, along with a holley 770SA carburator.

[@markgiraldes4062]

I’ve always thought temperatures would probably be cooler with rollers along with durability ? Going over the reasoning of locking out the distributor for beginners would be a great learning curve also Richard great video as usual thanks ! 👍😎🇺🇸

[@Simple_Youtube]

I run Yella Terra roller rockers in my daily C6. I think for daily driven... roller tips are the best option

[@Fergus918]

As a few have said, friction for the rockers, not strictly power. My thought also it's not a real aggressive cam with high valve seat pressure. Then I bet the rigidity would have started to yield power gains

[@SquarebodyStuff]

Thanks again for some good wholesome real world testing on a real world power level. You're living my dream bud.

[@richardholdener1727]

More to come!

[@SquarebodyStuff]

@@richardholdener1727 I would love to see more of the m90 on a 454 with a carb. I'm working on building a mild 454 for my daily 79 c10.

[@orangetruckman]

@@SquarebodyStuff I’m jealous! A daily driver big block, now that’s living a dream! My 78’ 3/4 ton 4x4 with a 454 gets about 7 mpg on a good day 😭 it’s a far and few times I get to drive it.

[@SquarebodyStuff]

@@orangetruckman my daily commute is usually less than 10 miles.

[@gordocarbo]

@@orangetruckman Dually was similar, empty or loaded. On the fwy wasnt too terrible My 'El gets 20 bux for 20 min and with todays gas prices probably less. Totally worth it.

[@GaryH-pw9cm]

On a 427 W with Ford X306 aluminum heads I used stock Ford stamped rockers, stock profile roller hydraulic cam with Comp cam stud girdles, ARP pushrod guides and they have working just fine for several years. The reason for using the stock rockers is because they are quiet unlike the roller rockers used before that made a lot of noise. I would rather have the quiet than any power gain from the roller rockers. 😊

[@ubethejudge69]

yah i agree. sowing machine noise from roller's are annoying.

[@thisisyourcaptainspeaking2259]

Dyno-mite! ;) I've found screw-in rocker studs are good for similar gains.

[@richardholdener1727]

these had screw in rocker studs

[@keithfilkins2043]

Love your channel and these kinds of dyno work! Actually I like it all,thank you for what you do!

[@richardholdener1727]

Thank you very much!

[@ecc5119]

I appreciate that you run the turbo cam in this test.

[@richardholdener1727]

#everycam

[@SpecialAgentJamesAki]

Yesss I’ve been waiting for stamped conventional rockers vs cast roller

[@danmyers9372]

They won’t add much on a low power engine like this especially without a spring upgrade.

[@SpecialAgentJamesAki]

@@danmyers9372 that’s what I figured! Just wanted to see it tested! 😁

[@BOOT]

Still the roller rockers will drop oil temps bout 20degs, at least my stock cam L98 did with 1.6 rollers vs 1.6 stamped. Also the GM 1.5 stamped rockers in this test, were the newer SA-self-aligning rockers. They are more accurate/consistent ratio vs older SBC stamped rockers that were often 1.4

[@SpecialAgentJamesAki]

@@BOOT good point! I run rollers because I like to run big cams and wind my engines out but there are other benefits like you mention!

[@kenmoule825]

​@BOOT More oil flow means more heat taken away for cooling the spring and retaier better.

[@michaelallen2501]

I need you to do me a favor and test the Trick Flow 21° Gen X 185 (54cc combustion chamber) heads on an LT1 already lol. Bonus points if you pair them with a Tick Performance stage 1 blower cam. I know, every cam is a blower cam but that's what they call it in their catalog.

[@niknasstie]

Never knew of the way to tell there was a difference in seeing primary vs secondary fuel flow. Now I have to look into that

[@richardholdener1727]

fuel turbines read the flow for each fuel line on the dyno

[@jmflournoy386]

I replaced 250 6 with SBC in my one owner 69 chevy w/ truck 4 speed , 3 speed OEM has really low gerars so big tires so I'm listening Btw I ported the stock heads and have a Rick Jones cam from when they lived on Los Alimitos or Corona

[@mikkokuorttinen3113]

It's nice to hear from you Richard and from the sbcs! It's just the right season for this video, as the driving season is about to start here in northern parts of EU. Thank you very much! I wonder @ what rpm do you measure the total timing? I also have got a stock L98 here. Were those 113-heads stock or ported? Looking at the hp/torque curves in your test, the installed cam must've been close to the stock. I'd like to know how much of hp gains to this combo would just a cam swap make?

[@richardholdener1727]

The timing is locked-so you can measure it at any rpm. 113 heads were stock.

[@mikeeaton9822]

Hey guys I'm old school but was taught on a holley the front jet should be 10 lower than the back jets. But it's also been 35 years since I've had or even fooled around with a holley too.

[@grandmasmalibu]

Still basically works. Usually the primary has a power valve and the secondary side does not. That equals about 10 jets difference.

[@thisisyourcaptainspeaking2259]

​@@grandmasmalibuI understand your point if you also say the correct power valve adds the difference.

[@hfr_ford755]

Just helped a buddy tune his holley and ended up having a 10 jet spread front to rear so it still holds true 👍

[@shadvan9494]

the best way to tune one i have found, is with a wide band O2 sensor in the exhaust. for the primary side is in the carb, at cursing speed. with the light throttle so the power valve doesn't open you want around 13-13.5:1 for be fuel economy, power and emission at cruise, its funny how all of those happen at the same time. So jet up or down until you get there. then same process but watch the AFR as you accelerate, but do not open the secondaries, it should drop in to the 12s and you should not have any hesitation, if you may have to adjust the power valve opening up or down depending on if it bogs or hesitates. if it goes lean as you tip in to the throttle, open the power valve earlier. basically, you want your power valve to open as late as possible without going lean as you tip in to the throttle, this is for best fuel economy and will vary depending on the vacuum your engine makes. after that, its all about full throttle, add or remove jets to hit around 12-13:1 at WOT. some carbs have adjustable low and high-speed air bleeds, if you find it going rich or lean as you accelerate at WOT then you can adjust the air bleeds as necessary. it best to get a baseline on a dyno. but just tuning the carb on the dyno won't get you the part throttle cruise or power valve opening adjustments. but for the most part, yes, the 10-jet size difference front to rear is because of the power valve. one other adjustment is when the secondary's open, no an issue on double pumpers, but important on vacuum secondary carbs, basically the light the car the soon you can open the secondaries and not have it bog, the heavier the car the slower you want them to open. they are adjusted by swapping the springs in the diaphragm housing. a dyno will get you close, but tuning in the real world is a lot more involved.

[@bw3506]

Do y'all think the roller rockers would show improvement on more aggressive cam and higher spring pressures?

[@68mustangmustang77]

Yep some great basic info that years ago left us chasing and spending $$$ . This was great stuff on entry level performance . 👍🍻🇦🇺

[@dh2360]

Always enjoy your content, something to learn on every video.

[@shadowopsairman1583]

Full rollers reduce friction loss but they do weigh more so you need stronger springs

[@dylanfinch6186]

Yeah, I think you want to do springs with the rockers. They look sweet though.

[@jameshendrickson8159]

You only need stronger springs if you're going higher rpm and also with a higher lift camshaft at which point threaded rocker studs are also recommended.

[@racerd9669]

The major valve train problem, is not the rockers. It is the flimsy 3/8 rocker studs. You will find a power change by going to a 7/16 rocker stud. But even when you do that the stamped steel rocker , makes the same power as a roller rocker. As long as you are only going to turn the engine 5500 rpm or less.

[@richardholdener1727]

going from 3/8 to 7/16ths rocker studs shows no change-only with very high spring rates and rpm

[@drbogo321]

Think I would've tried to stay with the TPI set up and tuned from there. I'm liking fuel injection for drivability and I've learned enough in my old age what works power wise with fuel injection systems.

[@johnstaley2573]

If you were going to see what changes make on the dyno it might have been interesting to start with stock exhaust manifolds.

[@syntaxerorr]

Great video. Love your stuff. I wish I had access to a dyno when ever I wanted!

[@richardholdener1727]

all it takes is $ to have access

[@save16thave]

Great video. I know this information works for every engine, but I'm not gonna lie, when one of your videos pops up I always hope it's Ford related.

[@richardholdener1727]

I have lots of ford vids too

[@save16thave]

@@richardholdener1727 I know, that's why I watch your channel. I appreciate all the great Ford content.

[@StephenGiovi]

Richard: Depending on the Terra elevation numbers, It's better to jet down rather than up to achieve more significant power and, hence, deliverable gains. I have a generation 1 block with a Crower cam, and it's better with 67 size jets on the primary side and 69 jets on the secondary side...(Washington State) Ultimately, that engine should make 420 hp all day. See for yourself!

[@richardholdener1727]

the AF meter and dyno tells us what the motor responds to. This is not a 420-hp motor-telling that you would make a hp claim that contradicts the actual dyno results not knowing the cam profile or compression or head flow etc...

[@orangetruckman]

Love the data! Appreciate everything you do!

[@samthing4thetrack806]

the old school rockers, ha, yeah I think the designers actually did do the engine eering on the cost vs benefit of the design, but wow is it ever the most unsophisticated piece of that generation of motors. I am very surprised there was no change in performance in some way. there certainly is less friction and wear potential over time to use roller rockers, and as you suggest they need some ratio change to be a performance swap.

[@mikes.1882]

Quality roller rockers were always for higher rpm endurance. Dry sump oil reservoir same. Rounding square in the combustion chamber. Back in my day we were full circling mains, pinning rod bearings and running moly oil. None of which add hp.

[@mikes.1882]

Back to full oil groves on the mains. Popular opinion says it either doesn't do anything or contributes to a problem. Hmmm, who decided that? The guys running 100psi oil pump springs instead of high volume oil pumps, then not critically thinking high pressure oil hammering? Yeah, that kind of theology when race parts were very expensive and ingenuity developed the theology I'm ranting about. Richard's work on the dyno speaks volumes to what will and what won't work. Eric W. goes on about if it works on the dyno it works on the track. 20 second engine pulls define theology? Umm, No!

[@lcxu1051]

I've always found a 2 inch carb spacer to work best. I know you have a MSD distributor in it but would it help to also fit a MSD spark amplifier to like a 6AL MSD unit or the more modern version of them.

[@richardholdener1727]

You have to run an amplifier with the distributor (it's not a ready to run)-we have a 6Al or Digital 7 on the dyno. A carb spacer effectiveness is application specific

[@lcxu1051]

@richardholdener1727 no worries. It must just be the engines I've built then that always seem to work better with a 2" spacer over the 1" spacer by increasing the plenum volume under the carb with a single plane inlet manifold in the 4150 carb style. It's why I'm going to use one straight up on my LS1 build. Using the holley midrise 300 137 manifold and 2" spacer plate under a 1000cfm throttle body.

[@coryholbrook4643]

Roller rockers aren’t much of an advantage on a low lift cam with lazy lobes. They have their place when it comes to fast ramp rates and big lift. In fact that’s probably the reason why the spacer didn’t do a whole lot either, because the plenum was large enough for the displacement and RPM range.

[@waltrogers9770]

Roller Rockers are more about durability than power in my book. Ratio gets you your power

[@dannykichar9066]

Richard great video can you do this on a 347 ford engine I'm about to build one

[@xcandiottix]

Thank you for the nod toward how you go about the tuning procedure!

[@keithtobin5369]

Thank you Richard for all that information

[@chopperguy57]

You have some very good data. If you could try and give me the added power number. Not just the peak numbers, I’m lazy and don’t want to do the math. I knew the rockers would not give you any advantage on this tiny low rpm motor. They will make a gain at higher rpm. They calm the harmonics and last longer both the rockers and the valves. Thanks for the info. I had never seen you Channel before today, I watched three videos

[@richardholdener1727]

graphs are provided so you can visually see the gains (not just at the peak)

[@martyjohnsonozarkoutdoors8198]

Im curious if a guy could use a msd cam sync distributor. And a crank sensor 5.7 vortec front cover. And wire those to a stock 6.0 engine controller. And use an intake with ports for injectors. And a cable controlled throttle body. And put the individual coil packs on it. Would those things be able to all work together. 🤔

[@MasterWitchDoctor]

awesome video Richard, I love watching what you do. Its pretty straight forward and I appreciate that. Cancel Comment 🏁

[@bens8696]

Hey Richard sorry I’ve been missing the chats… Great video! Nice little motor there. Think cam is biggest limitation at this point? 1.6s might give another 10hp or so? Or just go bigger?

[@bigandlittlecountry]

on a setup like this, what do you think a 1.6 roller would have done or gained?

[@rotaxtwin]

Ah, sometimes a good old SB Chev story hits the spot. Goes to show that a 650 cfm carb pretty much covers it for a lot of street engines. You could have put a 750 on there and it probably would have bumped the power up a tad but not worth the expense for most folk.

[@richardholdener1727]

I doubt a 750 will add power on a 340-hp motor

[@1gbayfisher]

No, it would add zero power.... The carberator's purpose is to add fuel, if there is enough fuel, its good, adding more fuel if the gine doesnt need it is a waste, amd adds nothing.

[@rotaxtwin]

@@1gbayfisher Wicked !

[@rotaxtwin]

Ah but it might! You never know til you test on the dyno!​@richardholdener1727

[@christiandore7518]

Where would you have seen the changes if you had gone from 1.5 to 1.6 either on intake or exhaust or both?

[@richardholdener1727]

maybe through the whole curve, but sometimes on top

[@albr6770]

I didn't think a four hole spacer would make much difference on a dual plane. I want to use one on a Edelbrock Torker.

[@danielamosjr.2138]

I would love to see what the difference is in that spacer VS a 2in 4 hole HVH super sucker spacer, I have one on my drag car and it increased my throttle response tremendously just curious about dyno numbers

[@tuffsnuffy]

I remember reading in an old magazine article that roller rockers were worth about a 30* drop in oil temperature. If that’s true it would be worth it to me just for that.

[@IllegalC4]

Great vid rich. Always appreciate the info. Im almost done building my 383 sbc. How do you think it will do on power? 383ci, afr 195 heads, xm276r cam, 18cc dishes pistons around 9.5:1 CR.

[@richardholdener1727]

what intake

[@captainrawn]

Some really good info here thanks Richard!

[@smiley19912]

Todays E10 gas has a stoichiometry around 14.2 , 12 to 1 is still on the rich side for an NA engine. Lambda .89 would be around 12.6 to 1, I'm sure it would have picked up some more power , might try going as lean as 12.8 or lambda .9

[@richardholdener1727]

you might not be understanding how the meter works-the AF numbers were given on a gas scale-and the change in AF showed minimal power gains-so you being sure is not the same as the actual results

[@smiley19912]

@@richardholdener1727 So this was via flow turbine and not wide band.

[@CarlT-cc9bn]

That zoom in medley at the 3:05 mark gave me vertigo. What the hell was all that about?

[@ni_wink84]

I think friction reduction isn’t as easily measured in HP as it may be In oil temps etc, I’m personally going to reduce friction anywhere I can, even if HP gain is minimal

[@malibu1969]

Excellent video! Question sir. 1969 SBC 350 with stock rotating assembly (53k original miles).... Mild cam (.501ish I/E lift) with new AFR Enforcer 195 heads. I've installed new Scorpion 1.6 Self-Aligning rockers and would like to know if it's a NO NO to run guide plates too. I see in this video you've used both the guide plates AND sa rockers, and you don't mention any issues. Is there a reason some engine builders frown upon using both? If so, can you explain why? Pushrod deflection? Thank you sir, keep up the amazing vids. Edited: I scrolled far enough and saw a couple comments related to this and saw your "not ideal" response. Can you elaborate sir? Thank you!

[@richardholdener1727]

do not use both

[@malibu1969]

@@richardholdener1727 Ok.... I take it you used both only because it was for a dyno pull, and not a street motor driven every day?

[@drewweber8155]

Hey, just watched your supercharged 4.6l Ford. I was wondering how much it would cost to have that built right around 550hp. I'm doing a midtravel 01 F150 and have no places nearby who could build. I'm gonna have to pay shipping regardless.

[@richardholdener1727]

check with shops in your area-I don't build motors

[@AmericanThunder]

All the seizure prone viewers are surely enjoying the timing light strobing the camera. lol

[@ericdemo5910]

Here's a SBC test that I haven't seen anyone else do, including the EM crowd when they take over Westech: 4-pattern cams - Real gains or marketing hype?

[@richardholdener1727]

Westech already tested those

[@DonMoore-g6u]

Question, on a sbc l69 305 would there be any benefits to running a 1.6 on the exhaust & keeping the 1.5 on the intake side. What would the gains be if any?

[@charleshaggard4341]

A question I've never asked. On most of the videos, these engines are tested on the dyno at wide open throttle with a lot of timing, but they will go in vehicles that will be cruising at slow or highway speeds 90% of the time. How will this affect the drivability?

[@richardholdener1727]

how will what effect drivability?

[@mark_osborne]

Great stuff Richard !

[@sharkinstx]

Heck yes they work!

[@bobocaterpillar3697]

cool video! this is the interesting stuff! REAL world stuff !

[@brianb9410]

What an interesting video! Thank you.

[@rafaellastracom6411]

I´m curious, why would you think roller rockers would free up some power?

[@scotthatch4548]

One of the funny things I have found is that that type of spacer is happier upside down on a dual plane intake manifold

[@richardholdener1727]

sometimes

[@Scott_Buchanan]

Good info as always 🙌

[@msumcj]

very interesting testing, thanks.

[@krusher74]

Should you not get fuel air ratios correct and then test differant timings? and whys is the spark advance locked?

[@richardholdener1727]

we ran a locked distributor-it is what we had. As long as AF is safe to run timing test

[@Geoduck.]

Quality roller rockers are not in my budget so in this case it's gratifying to seen no change.

[@danieldelpha1315]

Thanks for getting a sbc back on the dyno

[@hardhead7056]

POWER? You just said ,"it would definitely change when increasing rocker ratio".. BUT. The other day you told me that ratio changes alone don't work that way. Basically saying my suggestion was worthless.. Soo. Which is it?. Make up your mind.

[@MrGsxr10001]

I"d like to see you dump the oil and fill it with full syn race oil. Now that would be interesting?

[@richardholdener1727]

I have oil test vids up

[@____MC____]

Race oil go fast🏎🏎🏎

[@jonnyszewczuk6452]

You sure thats not a ZZ4/603 with a different intake making those numbers?

[@justinwhitaker3537]

Thanks!

[@Haffschlappe]

Make proper Dyno test according to DIN or BHP not gross HP without any alternator, waterpump etc

[@richardholdener1727]

You might be new to dyno testing, but feel free to look at the accessory video to find out how much they are worth. It doesn't matter how you test, as long as it is consistent and you make only 1 change. Keep watching and learning.

[@VGHCX]

Using a torque wrench see how much torque it takes to turn the engine over with the roller rocker arm vs the non roller rockers on the same engine.

[@richardholdener1727]

you won't be able to measure that with a torque wrench and there is no oil flow

[@VGHCX]

@@richardholdener1727 I'm speaking about using the torque wrench on the crankshaft to see how much it takes to turn the engine over with the rollers. Then test it again with the non rollers.

[@MrGsxr10001]

The rokers for sure would not make power, the real gain for them I think would be throttle responce and less wear and tear. Maybe a faster reving motor and would not show up on the dyno but might be in the feel of the car on the street. Or butt dyno if you will... LOL!

[@richardholdener1727]

faster revving? Throttle response?

[@lukesimeon5756]

Good test thanks

[@richardholdener1727]

Thanks for watching!

[@DonMoore-g6u]

Nice video!

[@utahcountypicazospage5412]

at higher rpm roller aluminum is better if not much cam then no point to change

[@Guns_N_Gears]

More more more!!! 1.5 to 1.6

[@joe-hp4nk]

No, they made roller rockers because they look pretty.

[@driverjamescopeland]

I'm not surprised in the slightest... especially with modern oil, in an engine that's not deep into 7k RPM territory.

[@pauljanssen7594]

You know if you're pushing an engine over 45,000 RPM all the time up to the 7000 range and over then you need roller rockers, but if you're barely hitting 4,000 5,000 don't waste your money.

[@lollipop84858]

I wonder how these engines were able to turn over 7500r back in the day without roller rockers if they're needed to do that like you say..

[@thomasbradley7844]

Well they are far better then stamped rockers

[@Patrick-xd8jv]

Unless the factory rockers have a true ratio lower than 1.5 I have no problem believing you’re outcome. In theory the guides should last longer.

[@matthewcarsen309]

Why aren’t the headers glowing red? I have stainless steel headers and they glow red at idle

[@richardholdener1727]

headers don't glow at idle