MustangWorks.com : Ford Forums - View Single Post

84LX89GT · 03-13-2003, 02:33 AM

Yeah, i didn't mean it WAS the largest you could put in

, it's pretty very close to being too big of a cam with those rockers and not modifying is what i meant.
The stud mount rockers are required (from what i've read/heard) beyond .512" of lift because the geometry of the valvetrain becomes too great with the rocker arm bolted down in place without adjustability. I'm not sure if it becomes unstable, or too much pressure is put on the bolt and I really haven't looked that much into it, i've just gone with what i've heard from alot of people.

03-13-2003, 02:33 AM	#4
84LX89GT Mustangs Join Date: Jul 2000 Posts: 1,938	Yeah, i didn't mean it WAS the largest you could put in , it's pretty very close to being too big of a cam with those rockers and not modifying is what i meant. The stud mount rockers are required (from what i've read/heard) beyond .512" of lift because the geometry of the valvetrain becomes too great with the rocker arm bolted down in place without adjustability. I'm not sure if it becomes unstable, or too much pressure is put on the bolt and I really haven't looked that much into it, i've just gone with what i've heard from alot of people. __________________ 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)