![SEARCH](http://www.mustangworks.com/images/search.png)
![The Mustang Works](http://www.mustangworks.com/images/mw_footer_logo.gif)
© Copyright 1995 thru 2008 - The Mustang Works™. All Rights Reserved.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
![]() |
#1 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: jersey
Posts: 147
|
![]() I ordered my headers from Mac today, thanks guys for the help> but I just realized I need new rockers, I don’t think I should use the stock rockers, is one brand better then another? Not sure if I should go with 1.6 or 1.7.. I know the 1.7 will change the lift which is ok, I’m installing a Ecam with the heads but I wonder if I should have went with the B cam instead, the heads are SVO GT 40 aluminum, the guy I bought these from said there pedestal mount, should I stay with pedestal or change to stud mount, ? I was also thinking about used rockers to save a few dollars, ( any thoughts on used) if i buy used, are all rocker compatible as long as there stud or pedestal? or must they be for the right application? ford is ford chevy is chevy.This car is a daily driver, so it has to be some what trouble free
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Domestic Rice really sucks!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: KY
Posts: 973
|
![]() I would get 1.6 pedestal mount rockers and not look back.
__________________
The sig says it all. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Huh? Whatcha said?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 1,073
|
![]() Too many variables to answer that one. It all depends on what you want. The 1.7's and 1.6's are fine. Eitherway you should be fine. It's all a matter of opinion. Never bought anything that important used, not that it's a bad idea, just haven't done that. Ford =Ford, Chevy=Chevy stick with that and you are golden.
The heads can be converted to the stud mount rockers, but why pay more for the same thing with the pedestal mount?
__________________
2003 GT White---STOLEN May you burn in hell whoever took it. Dumbazz didn't even get the good engine that was in the garage. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: jersey
Posts: 147
|
![]() I’ve been giving this a lot of thought, the car will average 12,000 miles a year as a daily driver, are rollers the way to go, ? or would I be better off keeping with a stock rocker arm for reliability, compared to what ever possible gains that I probably won’t even see if i go with rollers
Last edited by surfsup; 01-14-2006 at 09:38 PM.. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Rat Killer
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cold ass Ohio
Posts: 1,143
|
![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
d-Con Racing "Nothing fancy, just 347 inches of RAT POISON!" MICE need not apply..... ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dont use 1.7 rockers with stock heads? | Coupe5oh | Windsor Power | 10 | 11-28-2015 12:36 PM |
2005 Ford Mustang JBA Silver Ceramic Coated Headers. GB | OnlineAutorama | Modular Madness | 0 | 07-14-2005 10:27 PM |
F Cam With Stock Rockers Or E Cam With 1.72 Roller Rockers ? | 83GTMUSTANG | Windsor Power | 0 | 05-12-2005 12:12 PM |
Rail Rockers on 289 Small Block Heads | sleeperstang | Classic Mustangs | 16 | 05-11-2003 11:34 PM |
Anyone have problems with MAC headers?? | HiFlow5 0 | Windsor Power | 15 | 05-30-2002 08:30 AM |