MustangWorks.com - The Ford Mustang Power Source!

Go Back   MustangWorks.com : Ford Forums > Mustang & Ford Tech > Windsor Power
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 1.00 average. Display Modes
Old 04-14-2002, 08:36 PM   #1 (permalink)
Coupe5oh
Registered Member
 
Coupe5oh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SanAntonio, Tx
Posts: 734
Default Dont use 1.7 rockers with stock heads?

This is a quote off the MAC website:

"To enhance the total package, high quality roller rockers (direct bolt on) with a 1.6 to 1 ratio need to be installed. The use of high quality roller rockers will help equalize cam performance from cylinder to cylinder. Stock rockers are stamped and their ratios are inconsistent, be sure to use only high quality roller rockers. Caution: with stock rate springs and heads, do not use more than 1.6 to 1 rockers. Stock springs are not designed for more valve action."

Glad i didnt already buy mine, so i guess im getting 1.6's, but how hard is it to replace the stock springs with newer ones, if i decide to just do the springs? thnx
__________________
Police package 5spd 90 Lx, Stock original motor, 3.27grs, BM fan, fms 10.5 clutch, D&D quadrant, and adjuster, ADS chip, 180 stat, mac cai, mac h-pipe, mac subframe connectors, ASP crank pulley, ripper shifter, 26x10.5 M/T sport pros welds. 246 hp according to analyzer
Race weight: 3,120

E.t-13.57 with 26x10.50's e.t. streets. 1.88 60'

mph- 99.92 mph
Coupe5oh is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2002, 10:40 PM   #2 (permalink)
Dark_5.0
Registered Member
 
Dark_5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Staging lane
Posts: 4,337
Default

I know many many people using 1.7 rockers with stock heads and springs with no problems after years of use.

Later,
__________________
92' LX-Big brakes, Lots and lots of suspension, GT40X heads, Ported cobra intake, stock cam, Vortech SC trim.
00' Lightning-Stock
88'CRX-13 second ego killer
Dark_5.0 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2002, 10:50 PM   #3 (permalink)
Mach 1
Registered Member
 
Mach 1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,866
Default

Just because MAC says something on thier web site doesnt make it gospel. 1.7's work great on stock springs, as long as the springs are in serviceable condition.
__________________
2002 GT
1993 GT (SOLD)
'93 Mustang GT
RHC member #142
Mach 1 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2002, 12:03 AM   #4 (permalink)
fiveohpatrol
I'd rather be basketweaving
 
fiveohpatrol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,551
Default

My stock springs had about 100k on them when i put my 1.7's on originally. A few months later, I noticed that my valves were floating at about 5300 rpm and higher.

I put on a set of comp cams springs (about $70), which installed very easily, and the problem went right away. Also the car seemed to pull harder on higher RPM's as well.
__________________
NMRA O/C 9516
NA pumpgas stickshift 347 10.65@125.6, 6.73@100, 1.41 60ft
fiveohpatrol is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2002, 01:46 AM   #5 (permalink)
juiceman
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ny
Posts: 197
Default

thats a rediculous statement. 1.7 rockers are the same as running 1.6 rockers with a higher lift cam. so i guess theyre saying you cant get a cam either. unless of course you buy new heads and springs. you can use 1.7 rockers on stock motors and thats what they are primarily used for
juiceman is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2002, 02:39 AM   #6 (permalink)
84LX89GT
Mustangs
 
84LX89GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,938
Default

My engine in my '89 has 1.7 roller rockers on it with 120,000 miles and there's no problems so far after they were installed by the previous owner at 80,000 miles.
__________________
2005 Suzuki Hayabusa GSX1300-R

1980 Ford Thunderbird - 255 V8
ported heads, 5.0L ported stock headers, O.R. H-pipe and Flowmaster 2-chambers, dual roller timing chain
hi-po Mack Truck hood emblem

1985 Mustang GT 5.0L T5, F-303, GT40p, headers, off-road h, flowmasters, MSD stuff, etc.

Sold 02/06/04
1989 Mustang GT ET: 13.304@102.29 mph (5-24-03)

Sold - 1998 Mustang Cobra coupe, 1/4 mile - street tires: 13.843@103.41 (bone stock)
84LX89GT is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2002, 11:12 AM   #7 (permalink)
byrnech
Registered Member
 
byrnech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Anderson, TX.
Posts: 166
Default

I had the same results as fiveohpatrol, I installed them with about 65k on the odometer and they were great for about a month or two then the valve float set in. It would just fall on its face after 5000. When my crank snapped and I get my new motor I gave them to a friend, Same thing with him. He gave them to another friend and the same thing. Stock springs are notoriously weak.
__________________
331 10:1, AFR 185's, TFS-R intake
byrnech is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2002, 12:40 PM   #8 (permalink)
Mach 1
Registered Member
 
Mach 1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,866
Default

I put the 1.7's on a 1990 Lincoln Mark VII (5.0 HO, identical engine) at around 75K, and they were fine. I took them off again at around 100K before I sold the car, and had no problems the whole time. Car ran good and made plenty of power throughout the RPM range.

Maybe the Lincolns get superior valve springs?
__________________
2002 GT
1993 GT (SOLD)
'93 Mustang GT
RHC member #142
Mach 1 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2002, 09:20 AM   #9 (permalink)
Piston
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 77
Default

I had 1.7RR installed on my 94gt on stock heads. They gave me a nicer sounding idle and added some power. If you have low miles on your car go for it. If you are extremely cautious go with the 1.6RR.
__________________
Stock Bottom End 302. With TFS stage II ported and milled heads. Anderson B2 cam with 1.6RR. Hooker Full Tube Headers flowing into offroad H-Pipe out Hooker mufflers. Ported Edelbrock Preformer Upper/Lower.
Lots of other Goodies...
Just bought a nice forged 331 stroker kit for a new block that should be ready to take 650hp of abuse.
Piston is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2002, 09:25 AM   #10 (permalink)
RoadWarrior
Registered Member
 
RoadWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Edmonton,Alberta,Canada
Posts: 317
Default

I cant see the rockers needing better springs. From what i understand the only time (besides if one goes) that you need to change springs is if you go with a more extreme cam. Because if you have an big bad cam you can start to get floating valves because the spring cant hold the lifter on the cam. But roller rockers alone should not need new springs.
__________________
Fast Company
RoadWarrior is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2015, 11:36 AM   #11 (permalink)
88quickGTVert
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1
Default Re: Dont use 1.7 rockers with stock heads?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coupe5oh View Post
This is a quote off the MAC website:

"To enhance the total package, high quality roller rockers (direct bolt on) with a 1.6 to 1 ratio need to be installed. The use of high quality roller rockers will help equalize cam performance from cylinder to cylinder. Stock rockers are stamped and their ratios are inconsistent, be sure to use only high quality roller rockers. Caution: with stock rate springs and heads, do not use more than 1.6 to 1 rockers. Stock springs are not designed for more valve action."

Glad i didnt already buy mine, so i guess im getting 1.6's, but how hard is it to replace the stock springs with newer ones, if i decide to just do the springs? thnx
Speaking from experience, I had 1.7's on my 89 LX, after 2 1/2 years of driving/street racing, I needed the stock heads (springs worn and valve job) done over. Some of the rockers we're also loosened up even after being torqued to 20 ft lbs. At that time engine had about 60 thousand miles. Get the upgraded springs when using 1.7.
The heads are the weak point of the 5.0 engine.
88quickGTVert is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
val springs in stock 97 heads , quesion ? southernstang97 Modular Madness 0 07-16-2002 11:52 AM
SystemaxII intake and Box stock RPM heads NewAge 5.0 Windsor Power 4 01-17-2002 11:52 PM
Anybody use the GT-40P headers on stock heads? Scappoose Windsor Power 3 01-15-2002 05:38 PM
1.7 Roller Rockers, Hand Porting Exhaust Side Of Stock Heads... Good Idea??? BowTie Eater 5 Liter Windsor Power 12 09-15-2001 02:00 PM
Best Heads For Stock Short Block StreetStang37 Windsor Power 2 02-26-2001 10:10 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:03 AM.


SEARCH