428 PI/CJ Hydraulic Flat Tappet Lifters w/Adjustable Rocker Arms

[The Going Thing]

Yes, and clears the baffles. The factory adjustables hit them..

[8T03S1425]

     Agreed, best procedure, remove the plugs, turn by hand. 

     No need to pump-up the lifters, as a mater choice I prefer them bled-down for better feel, but that's me. 

     Generally, the suggested sum of .020" - .040" "lifter-punger-preload" is that which one is targeting, if the adjusting ball stud in the rocker is 3/8" x 24 tread per inch, then 1/2 turn equals just over .020".   But less is often chosen by racers who will maintenance this more frequently.

Thanks for confirming this for me Scott. It does require a bit more effort, but I'm not dissuaded from a technique if additional effort will produce the desired result.

However, it seems to be the general consensus that spinning the oil pump to pump up the hydraulic lifters was a waste of effort. I have since learned that hydraulic lifters have a spring as an internal component. That spring provides enough pressure to determine zero lash. The additional 1/2 - 3/4 turn preload may compress that spring, but on startup, oil pressure pumps the hydraulic lifter back up.

Steve

[8T03S1425]

If these are stock style adjustable rockers then you typically will need to replace all the adjusters with first oversize if you are needing to adjust them again. Otherwise they will come loose in no time and then you will get to do it again.

Yes Royce, increased clearance between the adjusting bolt thread and the rocker arm thread, from repeated adjustments concerned me. The adjusting bolts I'm using have a locking nut component. I was not aware that anyone made a "first oversize" adjusting bolt, but it makes sense that that is one way to solve the problem. I like the lock nut solution, but I have snapped an adjusting bolt or two by torquing the lock nut too tight. I've learned that snug is good.

Steve

[The Going Thing]

If you are going to stick with the factory iron adjustables you can still find oversized adjusters. Ford Power Parts used to offer them years ago. I see them come up on Ebay from time to time still.

[Royce Peterson]

Only if you have stock '67 chrome valve covers. The factory adjustables fit fine under 68 - 70 valve covers. They also fit fine under Shelby LeMans valve covers of course.

If you really want to use them under '67 chrome valve covers Dennis Carrico (DSC) sells a 5/16" thick valve cover gasket to allow that to happen too.

Yes, and clears the baffles. The factory adjustables hit them..

[8T03S1425]

You don't want to run Crane Rollers. They're poorly made. The are known for bore wear and breakage. Not just my opinion, but many on the FE forum.  A good reasonable unit is from Doug at Precision Oil Pumps. You'll want to run the stud kit as well and the end stands and end supports and shafts.  The cam you're running will not work with stock springs or pressures.   The seat pressure for that cam is about 135lb on the seat and should be about 335 open. The factory rocker shafts aren't designed for those loads and you're asking for a failure.
Either way, roller or non-roller you'll need the stands, shafts, studs and end supports.
If you ran single factory springs you'll have to pull the heads and have them set up. You can't run a .600 lift cam on stock single springs, retainers and unmachined guides. You'll have coil bind and wind up bottoming the spring retaines on the guide.



http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/fe-ford-billet-end-support-stands/
http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/fe-ford-hd-chrome-moly-rocker-arm-shafts/
http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/fe-ford-roller-rocker-arms/
http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/ford-fe-390-427-low-riser-428-cj-billet-rocker-stands/
http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/ford-fe-390-428cj-427lr-rocker-stud-kit/

Jumpin, Geehosafat Keith, That's a nice, dare I say sexy, rocker arm assembly. I especially like the shaft end mounts. I wish that Ford implemented the end mounts for CJ and SCJ engines. I can see where that upgrade would be a must have for a competition engine, but my engine will, at most, be stressed with spirited street driving, rarely, if ever, seeing 6,000 -> 6,500 RPM.

All too often I've heard that the engineers at Ford, GM & Chrysler engineer and design engine components for 100,000 miles, simplicity, and minimum cost. These engines were widely used and experienced infrequent breakage (that I've read about), unless stressed regularly,  beyond "intended" use. That's probably a dangerous rationale to follow, yet many do with reasonable success, and I'll follow suit.

My engine builder, has a rather large following and predominately builds race engines. He's definitely not driven by date code correct parts, but rather squeezing as much power out of a build as the client's budget will allow. As I look at my valve springs, I see an inner flat spring and an outer round spring. I'm not sure what the spring pressures are, but suffice to say, I trust that Doug Meyers built the engine to a quality level that protects his reputation.

My next engine will be built as a 428 PI but with small upgrades to enhance performance. To me, gone are the days when every red light brought a challenge from "those kids with their cars always running downhill."

Steve

[gt350hr]

   The adjusters have to be pretty loose (turning effort wise) because it is pushrod rotation ( caused by lifter rotation) on half of the lobes that causes them to back off. Why half of the lobes? Ford flat lifter cams have "dual taper" so that the fore and aft thrust on the cam is equalized this way. Half of the lifters turn one way and the other half the other way. ( Engines without thrust plate cam retention have single taper to keep the cam "loaded toward the rear".) It is up to the specific cam grinder as to which half goes which direction so it's difficult to say cylinders 1 , 3 6, and 8 or 2,4 , 5 and 7 will back off. I have boxes of oversize NOS Ford adjusters just in case AND Pioneer Products still sells the oversize versions as well.
   Randy

[Royce Peterson]

Most of my engine builds get this setup for great reliability and low cost. Factory style rockers - brand new ones - on Doug Garifo's (pumbuilder.com) HD shafts using his HD end stands and spacers. This setup is dead nuts reliable for a mild street engine.

I have used Doug's rockers and they are nice but they are also very expensive and require unique ball / ball pushrods. Since I own many extra sets of ball / cup pushrods in various lengths I have tended to use either stock adjustable rockers or Harland Sharp rockers if cost is no object and the valve spring pressure starts getting high. Everything that I build uses stock drip trays under the rockers for best oil return to the pan.

[Vcode]

I'm running the POP shafts, stands and spacers with Harland Sharp rockers.

[The Going Thing]

You don't want to run Crane Rollers. They're poorly made. The are known for bore wear and breakage. Not just my opinion, but many on the FE forum.  A good reasonable unit is from Doug at Precision Oil Pumps. You'll want to run the stud kit as well and the end stands and end supports and shafts.  The cam you're running will not work with stock springs or pressures.   The seat pressure for that cam is about 135lb on the seat and should be about 335 open. The factory rocker shafts aren't designed for those loads and you're asking for a failure.
Either way, roller or non-roller you'll need the stands, shafts, studs and end supports.
If you ran single factory springs you'll have to pull the heads and have them set up. You can't run a .600 lift cam on stock single springs, retainers and unmachined guides. You'll have coil bind and wind up bottoming the spring retaines on the guide.



http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/fe-ford-billet-end-support-stands/
http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/fe-ford-hd-chrome-moly-rocker-arm-shafts/
http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/fe-ford-roller-rocker-arms/
http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/ford-fe-390-427-low-riser-428-cj-billet-rocker-stands/
http://stores.precisionoilpumps.com/ford-fe-390-428cj-427lr-rocker-stud-kit/

Jumpin, Geehosafat Keith, That's a nice, dare I say sexy, rocker arm assembly. I especially like the shaft end mounts. I wish that Ford implemented the end mounts for CJ and SCJ engines. I can see where that upgrade would be a must have for a competition engine, but my engine will, at most, be stressed with spirited street driving, rarely, if ever, seeing 6,000 -> 6,500 RPM.

All too often I've heard that the engineers at Ford, GM & Chrysler engineer and design engine components for 100,000 miles, simplicity, and minimum cost. These engines were widely used and experienced infrequent breakage (that I've read about), unless stressed regularly,  beyond "intended" use. That's probably a dangerous rationale to follow, yet many do with reasonable success, and I'll follow suit.

My engine builder, has a rather large following and predominately builds race engines. He's definitely not driven by date code correct parts, but rather squeezing as much power out of a build as the client's budget will allow. As I look at my valve springs, I see an inner flat spring and an outer round spring. I'm not sure what the spring pressures are, but suffice to say, I trust that Doug Meyers built the engine to a quality level that protects his reputation.

My next engine will be built as a 428 PI but with small upgrades to enhance performance. To me, gone are the days when every red light brought a challenge from "those kids with their cars always running downhill."

Steve

Steve:
Because I suffered this fate I know it all too well.  There are lots of good builders out there. The problem is most do not know the FE engine intimately. There are many intricacies with the FE that don't apply to most engines because of the head/intake design alone. If they don't seal, aren't cut to match the head after surfacing they leak. You wind up with port mismatch, vacuum leaks, coolant leaks, often into the oil or because of the drain back it pulls the oil into the combustion process through the intake port gasket leak.
Many forget to restrict the oil to the rocker shafts/top end and sometimes it creates a starvation issue in stock capacity oil pans. Jay Brown makes transparent valve covers. Some of the unrestricted systems can leave as much as a quart of oil sitting up top on each head. That leaves about 2.5 quarts left in the pan and on hard acceleration, it's in the back of the pan sump. Likely why the Ford TSB added a quart of oil and a different dipstick.
Your cam card should give you a recommened spring, or open and closed pressures. A single spring with a wound damper isn't enough for that cam. The NOS 427 MR springs I have about 96lbs on the seat and 265@ 570 lift. They are also very close to coil bind.
I wouldn't assume anything. I would ask him what the seat pressure was, the installed height and what pressure was over the nose based on your cam's lift.  If he can't tell you, I don't trust his work. You don't want to do this twice. Your cam needs a minimum of about 10.5:1 compression.
I just don't like to see people learn the hard way.

Also a point to note: Many people don't consider that used parts have thousands of cycles and often are well over 50 years old. Metallurgy has also changed drastically in the last 50 years. I did away with the polished beam 13/32 CJ rods and went with a JE piston. I can safely spin the engine at 6500 rpm. The cam stops really making any power at about 6000 but the shift point drops me right back into the power band in the next gear.
I just like the fact that I don't really have to worry about a weak bottom end. Four times in and out is enough to convince me of this fact.
Low dollar short-cut builds leave our cars often a disappointment and unreliable.  Just a little food for thought.
I lost a block because the builder wasn't familiar with #1 was. He was supposed to have bored the block and compensate for the core shift noted in the sonic He wound up boring to the thin side. I lost #6. It cracked and I wound up with coolant in the oil.  He was supposed to have sonic checked the block to make sure it was at a minimum of .110 on the thrust side and no less than .100 at any point. I got the block back, dumped another 500.00 on bearings, seals, rings and 300 on machine work and lost #4 to the same failure.
Small mistakes get expensive quick in the world of the FE.

[The Going Thing]

P.S. I am still looking for that adjustment sheet on performance cams. It's about the best one I've seen on the procedure. I adjusted them on the stand and they were dead-on the first time. Tight hydraulic tappets also cause all kinds of other issues. You don't want to screw the pooch.

[8T03S1425]

Damn guys, showing me the beefed up rocker assemblies has me thinking that they're now a must have.

I like the idea of the shaft end mounts, and the rocker arm spacers, at a minimum. The roller tip rockers with inline, left, or right offset adjusters looks like it solves any valve stem to rocker head miss-alignment issues. Do all 428s have a bad valve stem to rocker head alignment issues with the stock setup?

Steve

[The Going Thing]

They are FINE with as designed components. When you start making changes they require corresponding changes. In the day, Ford factory cams all had less than .500 lift. Even the 427. It was .500 lift and 244@ 50. VERY mild by today's standard.


You can't slap a valve job and the old umbrella stems seals on in this case. The bottom of the spring retainers will make contact with the stock valve guides and bend pushrods, damage guides and possibly even damage valves. Stock replacement spings also coil bind. ( The spring is compressed so that all coils make contact with each other)
I hear how great builders are all the time.  This is not a brand X GM product, this engine requires knowledge that so many "builders" don't have because they don't do enough of them to know the quirks, if you will.
My intentions are not to scare you, just to make sure you don't have to start the assemble, disassemble game. Even worse, destruction of a date correct or original to car block.  My car looks better than many people's trailer queens, but I drive my car. Not like grandma either. I have enough confidence in this build that I have no issue with spinning 6500.
If you want questions answered, I have no issue with you PMing me to keep it off the page here as someone will wind up with their underwear in a wad because they are still thinking stock or what worked in the '60s.  Ford FE engines being built by Robotnic, Blair Patrick, Brent Lykins.
We have been KILLING all other engine combinations in the engine master competitions.  750 horsepower on a streetable FE was unheard of just 10 years ago.  Do not blindly trust any builder. ASK questions. Get specification sheets. Don't skimp on parts.
I went that route the first time. It never ends well.

[pbf777]

Damn guys, showing me the beefed up rocker assemblies has me thinking that they're now a must have.

I like the idea of the shaft end mounts, and the rocker arm spacers, at a minimum. The roller tip rockers with inline, left, or right offset adjusters looks like it solves any valve stem to rocker head miss-alignment issues. Do all 428s have a bad valve stem to rocker head alignment issues with the stock setup?

Steve

      Just stick with the Crane ductile iron units, as they have proven to be simple and reliable, and more than adequate for your camshaft application.  But I do recommend replacement of the O.E. shafts with a pair of the hardened steel units, again with your camshaft this sum should prove more than sufficient without the additional end-stand supports.  But O.K., some of the other stuff does look cooler, but remember, they're hard to see with the valve covers on.         

      As far as the "miss-alignment", sometimes swapping around the rockers for different positions aids; also realize that you can bump the rocker stands, both individually or as a hole, fore and aft some which may help.  Be sure than concerns are truly existent versus perhaps just an awkward appearing presentation, and don't forget you'll be simultaneously changing the pushrod position as it passes thru the intake, so weigh that observation also.             

       And, concerning the single spring with damper as you described being present, although such do exist, I also would question whether yours' truly are capable; as although the rocker arm is supported on the shaft providing a minor advantage, I find that the FE still exhibits what one would consider a somewhat heavy valve train package as compared to many others.  So perhaps a little inquiry of concern would not be misconstrued; as a matter of fact, on all cylinder heads we set-up we always supply the specifications on ones' invoice received, of the spring pressures as measured (not printed claims) at the established and also listed installed height, at .500" lift, with a statement of the observed spring rates (all 16 being measured), coil-bind position, guide/seal to retainer clearance, etc., so this inquiry shouldn't prove to be of any professional impropriety.         

     Scott.

     

[The Going Thing]

I agree with Scott. A single spring with a wound damper is not going to give you what you need pressure-wise. The Edelbrock heads I purchased when checked were rated at .600 max lift. The were a single spring with a wound flat damper. At their installed height the seat pressures ranged between 79 and 88 lbs.
Far too light . The open pressure at .576 was 254-270 lbs. Well under recommended.  To get the needed 135 on the seat and 330 open It required a dual spring.
The viton positive seals are required for a build of your nature as well.

I highly recommend Alex Parts. ( Link Below). They are reasonable and high-quality parts. He sells matched sets. You can literally provide your specification and he will come up with a set. I provided the specifications. Installed height, open and closed. He provided seals, seats, retainers, and springs. He tests each set.  I also picked up the 2.25 X 1.75 stainless swirl polished valves.
The valves in an FE because of the stem thickness  ( 3/8") are VERY HEAVY.  You don't need them bouncing off the seats and floating when you're running the car hard.
Anyway, if you have single springs, it's not going to work for the cam profile, regardless of what the builder tells you.

https://www.alexsparts.com/categories/FORD%2C-FE-352%2C-360%2C-390%2C-410%2C-427%2C-428/