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

Rockers: stud/pedistal mounting and more ?'s

  • Thread starter Thread starter plastic_cow
  • Start date Start date Oct 24, 2005

plastic_cow

New Member
Sep 10, 2003
146
0
0
Oshkosh, WI
Oct 24, 2005
#1
  • Oct 24, 2005
  • #1
So I got a decent pair of heads from a friend, machined, new seals & stems .015 over, valve springs are new, blah blah blah, got 'em cheap too... like $200 for both from a friend after he had the machine work done on them... problem is - they're stud mounted rockers, (late 70's/early 80's heads) and I have pedistal mounted (1988)
Is there a way I can convert? (Without it being more expensive than buying new rockers)
I've heard bad things about alum. rockers folding up on people, is it crap or is it a geniune consern in a 'stang?
I don't have much money left to drop into this project... but I really need to have the job done relitively quickly... within a week or two... so 'saving up' isn't much of an option, if I need replacement rockers I'd like to spend under 200 (incl. shipping) Any idea on where to find them? Links would be appreciated. (3/8" if I'm correct)
What's the difference between rockers that are 1.6 and 1.7... and if I have a GT-40 intake, and the heads above, what would you recommend?

Thanks, sorry about the mess of questions, I'm just really confused and flustered... I want to drive my stang before it snows in Wisconsin...
Thanks for the help!
 

Michael Yount

Mustang Master
Apr 10, 2002
9,039
6
79
Charlotte, NC
Oct 24, 2005
#2
  • Oct 24, 2005
  • #2
The difference in 1.6's and 1.7's is the ratio of the rocker. "1.6" refers to the fact that for every 1 unit of lift the pushrod gives you on the short end of the rocker, the long end of the rocker pushes down with 1.6 units of lift on the valve stem. Obviously, a 1.7 ratio rocker gives you 1.7 units of lift - so for the same cam, you get a bit more peak lift, and a bit more valve-open duration. If nothing else changes, you probably also side-load the valve stem a bit more with the higher ratio.

On an engine like yours, you needn't worry about the aluminum rockers out there 'folding up'. That might happen to a cast rocker used with springs that are too strong for it. But MANY racers reliably use quality forged aluminum rockers with springs MUCH stronger than yours.

The challenge you face is that the hole drilled for the rocker stud is larger than the bolts provided for most pedestal mount rockers. I think you have 3/8" holes, and most pedestal mounts take 5/16" I believe. Easiest would be to simply pick up a set of used stud mount rockers. Check the forum classifieds - they are for sale all the time.
 
F

FordGuy88

New Member
Nov 15, 2004
241
0
0
Park Ridge, IL
Oct 24, 2005
#3
  • Oct 24, 2005
  • #3
I would go stud mount. They are cheaper then pedistal. You can find them used for like $180 for a good set. I know the Trickflow rockers are $230 new. If you go with Harland Sharp they are $198 in jegs right now. I would go with a 1.6 rocker because you want the cam to do the lift, not the rockers. Also you will gain horse power from aluminum rockers.
 

vikingpower

New Member
Dec 6, 2004
656
0
0
CWU Ellensburg, WA
Oct 24, 2005
#4
  • Oct 24, 2005
  • #4
I use Comp Pro Magnum's with my TFS heads, fit under stock valve covers too, made from steel intead of aluminum so they're more durable.
 

85_SS_302_Coupe

it sucks (I know) to be on the receiving end
15 Year Member
Nov 11, 2003
6,945
1,598
223
Northern KY
Oct 24, 2005
#5
  • Oct 24, 2005
  • #5
Heck man, worst case scenerio, hit up a junk yard for some stock rockers for the stud mount setup, then save up for some aftermarket pieces.
 

plastic_cow

New Member
Sep 10, 2003
146
0
0
Oshkosh, WI
Oct 25, 2005
#6
  • Oct 25, 2005
  • #6
thanks for the help guys!
 
T

tjm73

Founding Member
Aug 3, 2000
2,418
2
48
Rush, NY
Oct 25, 2005
#7
  • Oct 25, 2005
  • #7
What is your budget?

Steeda makes bolt down Pedestal rockers that are mini shaft mount rockers. Very strong. $350 new, complete set.

http://www.steeda.com/store/-catalog/shaftrocker.htm

 
8

87'GTstang

New Member
Feb 16, 2004
1,025
0
0
Oct 25, 2005
#8
  • Oct 25, 2005
  • #8
Stud mount have considerable advantages over pedestal, the best being the use of needle bearings. Consider it an upgrade/performance mod at the same time - it's the best excuse for getting to replace something
 

Paul Perreca

New Member
Mar 30, 2005
1,085
0
0
Oct 25, 2005
#9
  • Oct 25, 2005
  • #9
stud is easier to adjust too i beleive, because there really isn't any adjustment to be done -
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Requesting Guidance for 306 motor swap - Fuel? - SD? MAF?
  • So_Flo
  • Jul 26, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 4, 2026
Mcmahst
Fox 89’ GT 331 stroker, Trickflow upper/lower, TF#3 Cam, stuffed with forged goodies.
  • 08GT500
  • Nov 6, 2024
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
816
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 6, 2025
08GT500
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
1
Engine Motor swap from a 2003 Explorer
  • 1996mustang new
  • Oct 9, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
597
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Oct 16, 2025
squeak93
Place to Avoid: Jamison Auto Group in Gulfport, MS
  • D Durden
  • Oct 20, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jul 16, 2026
Noobz347
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?