• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

Rockers 1.6 V.s 1.7

  • Thread starter Thread starter Grabbin' Asphalt
  • Start date Start date Dec 4, 2013

Grabbin' Asphalt

10 Year Member
Jun 10, 2013
2,029
310
124
Atlanta, Ga
Dec 4, 2013
#1
  • Dec 4, 2013
  • #1
So here and there I've seen a few guys with split rockers on there valve train. Mostly around a low lift Ecam or something to change it into a split lift by using a 1.7 on one valve. Does anyone like this method and does it work better on the intake side cause the exhaust is forced out??
 
Last edited: Dec 5, 2013

Don"HO"Daddy

New Member
Jul 26, 2013
10
0
2
Dec 5, 2013
#2
  • Dec 5, 2013
  • #2
I wouldn't think there would be much benefit except to get a little extra lift from a smaller cam if the engine was naturally aspirated....although I have seen this used in turbo, and or other forced induction set-ups to get more lift on the exhaust side. I guess if you have 2 complete sets of different ratio rockers lying around its better than a tear down to switch cams.....just an easier way to get a little more valve lift when a cam swap isn't in the cards.
 

MY 85 GT

10 Year Member
Mar 7, 2008
1,852
208
104
New Jersey
Dec 5, 2013
#3
  • Dec 5, 2013
  • #3
Very interesting...I have a stock Speed density cam in my turbo fox..And i run trickflow 1.6 roller rockers wonder if i would benefit anything going to 1.7s on the exhaust side...hmmmmmm...
 
Reactions: Grabbin' Asphalt

84Ttop

They make new pistons every day, so why worry?
5 Year Member
Jul 2, 2009
5,222
3,254
204
South Jersey
Dec 5, 2013
#4
  • Dec 5, 2013
  • #4
In a stock type application this would be silly in my opinion. On some of the higher dollar stuff where valve train geometry and cam lobe profiles come into play the rocker ratios are adjusted to make things work the way that they need to. For example my new shaft rockers are 1.65 straight across. If I decide to go to a bigger or different cam lobe then I may need a higher ratio rocker. Currently with the way my cam is designed if it where physically any bigger it would not fit in the cam bore which means custom rocker geometry and going to a 1.8 or 2.0 ratio or running a 55mm cam core.

If anyone does decide to play with different ratio rockers please check PTV clearance, as you are effectively increasing the life of the valve.
 

srtthis

the guy doing it does every local racers rear end
15 Year Member
Jul 3, 2009
5,129
1,666
204
Maryland
Dec 5, 2013
#5
  • Dec 5, 2013
  • #5
i have 1.72's in my car now... and i wish i didnt. im looking at ditching the B cam (ALL HAIL THE B CAM!) for a more nitrous friendly cam. the ones im looking at the rockers are bending me over due to the stock short block. something about 623 lift and stock pistons aint going to work lol
 

84Ttop

They make new pistons every day, so why worry?
5 Year Member
Jul 2, 2009
5,222
3,254
204
South Jersey
Dec 5, 2013
#6
  • Dec 5, 2013
  • #6
srtthis said:
i have 1.72's in my car now... and i wish i didnt. im looking at ditching the B cam (ALL HAIL THE B CAM!) for a more nitrous friendly cam. the ones im looking at the rockers are bending me over due to the stock short block. something about 623 lift and stock pistons aint going to work lol
Click to expand...
Want to borrow my die grinder?
 
Reactions: Gearbanger 101 and A5literMan

srtthis

the guy doing it does every local racers rear end
15 Year Member
Jul 3, 2009
5,129
1,666
204
Maryland
Dec 5, 2013
#7
  • Dec 5, 2013
  • #7
haha i have a die grinder.... im worried about how much piston i will have left to get to .623 lift.
 

Grabbin' Asphalt

10 Year Member
Jun 10, 2013
2,029
310
124
Atlanta, Ga
Dec 5, 2013
#8
  • Dec 5, 2013
  • #8
Don"HO"Daddy said:
I wouldn't think there would be much benefit except to get a little extra lift from a smaller cam if the engine was naturally aspirated....although I have seen this used in turbo, and or other forced induction set-ups to get more lift on the exhaust side. I guess if you have 2 complete sets of different ratio rockers lying around its better than a tear down to switch cams.....just an easier way to get a little more valve lift when a cam swap isn't in the cards.
Click to expand...

Yeah the few guys I've seen do it just wanted to raise the lift on a particular valve side without doing an entire cam swap. They either traded a part for used rockers etc, ....I would think a turbo could benefit from that on the exhaust side and maybe a N/A and supercharger on the intake. But checking clearances would be Top priority with that much money tied up into those power adders as well as any other built engine. Just an interesting concept if one could fine tune a smaller less radical cam though
 

A5literMan

At least it is lumpy...
5 Year Member
Jul 30, 2011
4,674
2,343
194
Illinois
Dec 6, 2013
#9
  • Dec 6, 2013
  • #9
I kinda remember an article about switching to 1.7s on the exhaust side in a nitrous application. Just don't remember the outcome.
 

clement

Founding Member
Feb 27, 2001
1,106
52
59
Oak Cliff
Dec 6, 2013
#10
  • Dec 6, 2013
  • #10
sometimes, when you are doing a custom grind based on the lobe catalog you will find a lobe that has everything you want in terms of .006, .050 and .200 duration and ramp rate except the lift is a little off compared the other lobe you are looking at. also sometimes you have one lobe that has such a fast ramp it cant get away with a higher rocker ratio and the other is a slow ramp that can. those are pretty common reasons to split rocker ratios. putting higher ratio on a OTS cam really wont do much most of the time.
 
Last edited: Dec 6, 2013

rbohm

Founding Member
Apr 12, 2002
6,698
550
204
tucson,az
Dec 6, 2013
#11
  • Dec 6, 2013
  • #11
using 1.7 rockers on one side and 1.6 on the other is a good tuning effort. sometimes it helps, sometimes it doesnt. like anything else you have to try it and give it a good testing to know for sure. it will depend on how bad your exhaust efficiency is compared to your intake efficiency. for stock heads, it can work, for aftermarket heads not so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Discussion on mild budget build/ top end
  • Acesario
  • Feb 21, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
732
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 23, 2026
General karthief
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
887
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
D
Rockers, lash adjusters and timing: help with parts (4.6 2v)
  • dvigAtel
  • Nov 1, 2025
  • Other Auto Tech
Replies
0
Views
250
Other Auto Tech Nov 1, 2025
dvigAtel
D
M
Help! 2003 GT misfire when hot
  • Modular03
  • Feb 10, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
4
Views
393
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Feb 13, 2026
Mustang5L5
Engine Valve and or rocker noise .....new to this but dont mind getting my hands dirty.
  • mustang matt 1993
  • Jun 29, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
16
Views
2K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 1, 2024
rednotch
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?