Engine RUINED? - Page 2 - Vintage Mustang Forums
 24Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #16 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 01:36 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 1,680
Valves just go up & down, so as long as the dimensions are right and they seal in the heads, why would the fact that they were used on a chevy motor too matter?

I had a 354 Chrysler Industrial Hemi rebuilt by a local shop (in business forever with a good reputation) and the valves use on that were the same size as some ford big block motor, so that's what he used during the rebuild. They were dimensionally the same.
Grabber70Mach and Grimbrand like this.

Dan
Chapel Hill, NC
***PM me if you're close by and can lend a hand with my 65 Fastback project***
Dan Babb is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 03:32 PM
Moderator
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 8,475
Garage
If the size of the valves you posted 1.84I/1.5E is what’s installed, you will be just fine. You actually could have gone slightly larger in the intakes. When you mentioned Chevy valves did you disclose the sizes? If not, everyone probably assumed 2.02/1.94.

You will want to make sure to do some port work on the exhaust side of the heads to take advantage of the larger valves. Make sure the intake sides are just cleaned up.

Regards,
Patrick
patrickstapler is online now  
post #18 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 04:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Imperial, MO
Posts: 884
Guys, did anybody look at the other thread? It wasn't the size of the valves LSG commented on, it was the length. Chevy valves are shorter in length than Ford valves potentially causing rocker arm geometry issues. The pushrods will potentially be too long now and the contact pattern between the rocker arms and the stems of the valves may be less than optimal.

The OP needs to verify his geometry and make adjustments as necessary to ensure a good contact pattern on the valvestem. If he does that he'll be fine. If not then wear issues may show up down the road from side loading the valves. The problem comes when guys just slap it all back together without checking and then wonder why the valves and guides prematurely wore out on the heads they paid good money to completely reccondition.

Sent from my LG-D631 using Tapatalk

Last edited by Jeff351w; 06-29-2019 at 04:07 PM.
Jeff351w is online now  
 
post #19 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 04:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Imperial, MO
Posts: 884
I just went back to look at the other thread again and saw the new info that was added this morning. LSG pretty well gave the OP all the info he needs. Now it's time to start checking geometry to see if those new pushrods are the correct length.

Alex, I also want to point out that you never responded about if you have rail type rockers. You don't want to use those with shorter valves as the rails can contact and wear on the locks and retainers.

Sent from my LG-D631 using Tapatalk
Jeff351w is online now  
post #20 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 04:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Grimbrand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Sedgwick, Kansas
Posts: 674
I think those valve sizes are pretty good for a SBF head, really. 2.02's (and anything larger, though I don't know how you'd fit it!) will have problems with shrouding because the edge is so close to the cylinder wall. I think your machinist is making good choices. Good heads really make a tremendous difference on any engine, and the SBF is no exception. Like @Dan Babb said, your engine doesn't care that they are "bow tie valves", so long as they fit I'd like to know more about the rest of the engine choices he's making!

"No matter what you are, be the best one you can." -Abraham Lincoln
Grimbrand is offline  
post #21 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 05:43 PM
Senior Member
 
kenash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Severna Park, MD
Posts: 6,187
Garage
I agree, using chevy valves is a no problem. I ran them when running the Windsor JR heads. I think they were 1.94/160s. They lasted, they sealed, they did what they are supposed to do. The Vid does a nice job of detailing P/R geo. Also, ask your builder to fill in the details for you. The worst situation is not knowing your build needs this attention and it's not performed.

KenA..
64 1/2 Poppy Red Cvt. Resto-Mod
333 Cu.in. T5z, 3:55, Dual 40 mm DCOE Webers
Performer RPM, CI cam, TFS/TWs, Tri-Ys, Discs w/Shelby Drums
Severna Park, Maryland

Last edited by kenash; 06-29-2019 at 05:46 PM.
kenash is offline  
post #22 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 09:58 PM
Senior Member
 
tom991's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Vero Beach, FL but currently live in Germany
Posts: 2,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleB View Post
Why would you take the opinion of SGOTI over your machinist who's done this before? I'd listen to someone who could tell me, "Hey, I did this same thing, and here's the problem I encountered". But the guy who just says, "Oh, no, that won't work" without anything to back it up... not so much.

It's interesting, though, that the topic came up. I was just reading -- literally yesterday afternoon -- an article on Ford smallblock heads. The author says that using larger Chevy valves was a common practice. According to the article, the only potential issue was that cutting the seat larger would get you out of the induction hardened area of the head, leaving non-hardened cast iron. Not a problem (according to him) for a street engine. Ah, here's the link: Modifying Small Block Ford Cylinder Heads

Now, is this guy more credible than someone else? I have no idea, but a quick Google search will bring up quite a number of references detailing pretty much the exact same thing.
I had 1.94" intake, 1.6" exhaust valves put in my C4OE 289 heads and haven't experienced any problems This was done in 2010. I could be wrong but the hardened valve seats absorb the impact of the valves closing.
tom991 is offline  
post #23 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 10:29 PM
Senior Member
 
Grimbrand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Sedgwick, Kansas
Posts: 674
The whole 'valve erosion' thing is a bit overblown, really. With better understanding of WHY valve seats would erode, the problem is mostly gone for well-planned engines now. In fact, the biggest reason they went to Tetraethyl Lead in gasoline was to prevent this 'valve erosion' problem. It was believed that the additive helped lubricate the valves, and kept them from sticking to the seats. The added detonation resistance was also seen as a good thing. Modern research has shown that it was the octane improvement that helped, not any 'lubrication effect'. In fact, TEL was really hard on exhaust systems, with the lead salts being very poisonous to boot.

What few people realized was that engine technology of the time - cam, combustion chamber, ignition, and carburetion, combined with cheap gas, often led to conditions favorable for detonation. If it happened during cruise, (which is common due to lean mix for economy) power levels were low enough that the quiet pinging could go unnoticed. Meanwhile, the exhaust valves would get so hot they'd try to weld themselves to the head every time they closed. If the condition was allowed to persist for long enough, it resulted in serious damage to the heads.

So, they went to TEL to raise octane, which helped. And later, hardened valve seats. With modern sensors to help sort out real-time fuel/air ratios, not to mention electronic fuel injection, leaded gas wouldn't help the average modern car, even without considerations for the environment and catalytic converters. Gas quality is a lot more standardized now, despite alcohol and other additives. Thanks to modern technology, the old 'hardened valve seats' thing is usually not a big deal for cast iron heads - although I'm sure for some high performance applications, it can come in handy! It probably falls into the same category of "Well, do I need hypereutectics, or forged?" It just adds safety margin.


The camshaft's closing ramp is a lot more responsible for limiting impact of the valve on the seat than anything else.
englishman likes this.

"No matter what you are, be the best one you can." -Abraham Lincoln
Grimbrand is offline  
post #24 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-29-2019, 11:53 PM
Senior Member
 
Turnall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dothan, AL
Posts: 4,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbrand View Post
Thanks to modern technology, the old 'hardened valve seats' thing is usually not a big deal for cast iron heads.
Are you actually saying that the fact I didn't have my valve seats hardened in my 66 GT may not be a problem?

Stunned...and from a recent post I now know that I should add...'sarc off'.

Allen
Groundpounder17 likes this.

My build thread: Allen's Build Thread

My go fast build thread: Go Fast Build Thread
Turnall is online now  
post #25 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-30-2019, 12:02 AM
Senior Member
 
Grimbrand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Sedgwick, Kansas
Posts: 674
lol @Turnall. =)


Well, maybe I should've turned off "Verbose". But for a mild "stock" build I would not fret over whether I had hardened seats!
Turnall likes this.

"No matter what you are, be the best one you can." -Abraham Lincoln
Grimbrand is offline  
post #26 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-30-2019, 12:47 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
alex1965's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 649
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbmach View Post
Comp Cams has a good, short video on pushrod length and geometry. Helps if you pull the spark plugs when rotating the engine.

https://youtu.be/Cqx8Cs6O6Vo
Are you suggesting I get an adjustable pushrod and follow their procedure?

And yeah, I figured that out

289
4 speed
Rally-Pac
Bench Seat
Power Steering
All-around discs
Aftermarket A/C

And not nearly enough time

alex1965 is online now  
post #27 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-30-2019, 12:56 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
alex1965's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 649
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff351w View Post
I just went back to look at the other thread again and saw the new info that was added this morning. LSG pretty well gave the OP all the info he needs. Now it's time to start checking geometry to see if those new pushrods are the correct length.

Alex, I also want to point out that you never responded about if you have rail type rockers. You don't want to use those with shorter valves as the rails can contact and wear on the locks and retainers.

Sent from my LG-D631 using Tapatalk
Sounds like I'm getting an adjustable rocker arm and following the procedure posted in the video earlier in this thread.
I have conventional rockers. Not rail type!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbrand View Post
I think those valve sizes are pretty good for a SBF head, really. 2.02's (and anything larger, though I don't know how you'd fit it!) will have problems with shrouding because the edge is so close to the cylinder wall. I think your machinist is making good choices. Good heads really make a tremendous difference on any engine, and the SBF is no exception. Like @Dan Babb said, your engine doesn't care that they are "bow tie valves", so long as they fit I'd like to know more about the rest of the engine choices he's making!
Thanks for the reassurance. Pro Machine is the shop (Murray, UT) in case you wanna talk to him. His name is Yates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickstapler View Post
If the size of the valves you posted 1.84I/1.5E is what’s installed, you will be just fine. You actually could have gone slightly larger in the intakes. When you mentioned Chevy valves did you disclose the sizes? If not, everyone probably assumed 2.02/1.94.

You will want to make sure to do some port work on the exhaust side of the heads to take advantage of the larger valves. Make sure the intake sides are just cleaned up.
The exhaust ports were ported, that much I know!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff351w View Post
Guys, did anybody look at the other thread? It wasn't the size of the valves LSG commented on, it was the length. Chevy valves are shorter in length than Ford valves potentially causing rocker arm geometry issues. The pushrods will potentially be too long now and the contact pattern between the rocker arms and the stems of the valves may be less than optimal.

The OP needs to verify his geometry and make adjustments as necessary to ensure a good contact pattern on the valvestem. If he does that he'll be fine. If not then wear issues may show up down the road from side loading the valves. The problem comes when guys just slap it all back together without checking and then wonder why the valves and guides prematurely wore out on the heads they paid good money to completely reccondition.

Sent from my LG-D631 using Tapatalk
This is valuable information. I think it's pretty certain now that I'll be doing a geometry check now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Babb View Post
Valves just go up & down, so as long as the dimensions are right and they seal in the heads, why would the fact that they were used on a chevy motor too matter?

I had a 354 Chrysler Industrial Hemi rebuilt by a local shop (in business forever with a good reputation) and the valves use on that were the same size as some ford big block motor, so that's what he used during the rebuild. They were dimensionally the same.
Good info, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbrand View Post
The whole 'valve erosion' thing is a bit overblown, really. With better understanding of WHY valve seats would erode, the problem is mostly gone for well-planned engines now. In fact, the biggest reason they went to Tetraethyl Lead in gasoline was to prevent this 'valve erosion' problem. It was believed that the additive helped lubricate the valves, and kept them from sticking to the seats. The added detonation resistance was also seen as a good thing. Modern research has shown that it was the octane improvement that helped, not any 'lubrication effect'. In fact, TEL was really hard on exhaust systems, with the lead salts being very poisonous to boot.

What few people realized was that engine technology of the time - cam, combustion chamber, ignition, and carburetion, combined with cheap gas, often led to conditions favorable for detonation. If it happened during cruise, (which is common due to lean mix for economy) power levels were low enough that the quiet pinging could go unnoticed. Meanwhile, the exhaust valves would get so hot they'd try to weld themselves to the head every time they closed. If the condition was allowed to persist for long enough, it resulted in serious damage to the heads.

So, they went to TEL to raise octane, which helped. And later, hardened valve seats. With modern sensors to help sort out real-time fuel/air ratios, not to mention electronic fuel injection, leaded gas wouldn't help the average modern car, even without considerations for the environment and catalytic converters. Gas quality is a lot more standardized now, despite alcohol and other additives. Thanks to modern technology, the old 'hardened valve seats' thing is usually not a big deal for cast iron heads - although I'm sure for some high performance applications, it can come in handy! It probably falls into the same category of "Well, do I need hypereutectics, or forged?" It just adds safety margin.


The camshaft's closing ramp is a lot more responsible for limiting impact of the valve on the seat than anything else.
Lots of information here that I think is above me. Definitely something to research in my free time. Thanks for the detailed info.

289
4 speed
Rally-Pac
Bench Seat
Power Steering
All-around discs
Aftermarket A/C

And not nearly enough time

alex1965 is online now  
post #28 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-30-2019, 01:12 AM
Senior Member
 
bbmach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Atl
Posts: 273
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex1965 View Post
Are you suggesting I get an adjustable pushrod and follow their procedure?

And yeah, I figured that out
Check it with what you have first. It may be good. If not, then get the tool. You can probably borrow one from the machine shop....

1969 Mach-1 Mustang
460 / C6 / 9"
Back in Dixie DSO 22 (Charlotte)
bbmach is offline  
post #29 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-30-2019, 01:19 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 22
An experienced machinist can do exactly what was done. Installed height, open and closed spring pressure can be checked in house and manipulated. You can change installed height through seat work, keepers, or retainers. You can also increase and decrease spring pressure through the same methods (within reason). Spring seat work/ shims can also be another method to attain optimal results. This happens all the time. For that matter most (practically all) SBF aftermarket heads work off a standard performance installed height of 1.800" which is also shared with SBC 350 aftermarket heads (generally speaking).

I'm betting this is the valve ( or equivalent) you are running(intake) S.B. International e-Catalog

If you compare the installed heights of the two in stock form you will find they are very similar. Look at the associated springs to see pressures and what installed heights they are designed for and you will find they are very close. To ease your worries, I have been running 2.02 1.600's on a EFI 351 Windsor that uses Chevy valves in an aftermarket aluminum head. They are set up at 1.800" and have about 50k miles on them.

You did well by supporting a local trusted machinist that backs his work. Looking at your build sheet I see he used an Engine Pro double roller timing set with an upgraded Rolon chain. That's a quality set and chain and coincidentally is what I am using on the same 351 Windsor.

FYI, by the way, early Chevy 350's with a 4.00" bore share the same exact piston ring as 289/302/351's and are sold as such, as well, in the aftermarket.
Grimbrand likes this.
EmbergloConvertible66 is offline  
post #30 of 47 (permalink) Old 06-30-2019, 02:18 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Imperial, MO
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex1965 View Post
I have conventional rockers. Not rail type!
This is meant with absolutely no intent to slight or disrespect you in any way whatsoever, but do you know what rail type rockers are? Rail type rockers ARE conventional rockers. They have ears to help keep the rocker arm centered on the valve when guideplates are not used.

Sent from my LG-D631 using Tapatalk
Jeff351w is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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 On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome