|
By slick56 - 12 Years Ago
|
I have pressed tin plates under my rocker pedestals to channel the oil away from the valve springs. To quote from 'Ford Y-Block' by Eickman,
"Valve spring oil baffles were installed under the rocker arm shaft supports until May of 1956. A service letter at that time advised that they were no longer needed due to changes in the rocker arm lubrication system".
What changes were made, do i need them, and do i need to be concerned at how much will it change rocker arm geometry if i remove them?
Tia, Al.
|
|
By oldcarmark - 12 Years Ago
|
|
I would leave them on.I put mine back on when I rebuilt the motor.Nothing lost or gained by removing them.Keeps the geometry as it was originally.Not sure what "changes" were made but they do keep oil from building up around the valve springs and away from the valve stem seals.Remember this-every savings Ford made by NOT putting parts on one car was multilplied by the number of cars sold!More profits maybe?
|
|
By NoShortcuts - 12 Years Ago
|
My thinking parallels oldcarmarks. Similar to the rockerarm oil deflector trays, I think the bean counters decided that the camshaft fuel pump eccentric counterweight and the timing chain oil drip trough used on the early years of block production weren't necessary.
Conversely, note that FoMoCo did move:
- from un-posted 'G' heads in pre-May '57 production to posted 'G' heads.
- from the knitting needle type pushrods used from '54 'through ~ '59 to the tubular configuration
- to longer main cap bolts sometime in '59 production 'til the end of U.S. production in '64.
These production changes cost serious money and were done based upon information that was being reported in the field, I'm sure.
|
|
By MoonShadow - 12 Years Ago
|
|
Something that crossed my mind about those deflectors. I wonder if the slightly shorter push rods are used with these to make up for the geometry change. It would seem to make sense on the surface but? I would think the longer push rods with the deflectors would change the rocker arm geometry quite a bit. Chuck
|
|
By oldcarmark - 12 Years Ago
|
|
MoonShadow (10/19/2013)
Something that crossed my mind about those deflectors. I wonder if the slightly shorter push rods are used with these to make up for the geometry change. It would seem to make sense on the surface but? I would think the longer push rods with the deflectors would change the rocker arm geometry quite a bit. Chuck
You may be right Chuck. 54/55 pushrods(used with oil deflectors from factory) are 8.296 long.56 and later(no deflectors) are 8.188 long.
|
|
By NoShortcuts - 12 Years Ago
|
|
MoonShadow (10/19/2013)
Something that crossed my mind about those deflectors. I wonder if the slightly shorter push rods are used with these to make up for the geometry change. It would seem to make sense on the surface but? I would think the longer push rods with the deflectors would change the rocker arm geometry quite a bit. Chuck
Hmmmm... I hadn't thought about it, but I'm wondering IF the billet rocker stands that John Mummert shows on his web site are reversible because of the baffles or to compensate for the different pushrod lengths...
I think I'll save reflecting on the math of all this tomorrow... 
Y-BLOCK BILLET ALUMINUM ROCKER STANDS STANDARD HEIGHT, or INSTALL INVERTED FOR +.050" PART # RS-6531-B set of 8
|
|
By pegleg - 12 Years Ago
|
|
You guys may want to remember that the springs need oil as a coolant. Drenching the valve guides may be a problem, But No oil will be an issue eventually as well.
|
|
By NoShortcuts - 12 Years Ago
|
|
pegleg (10/22/2013)
You guys may want to remember that the springs need oil as a coolant. Drenching the valve guides may be a problem, But No oil will be an issue eventually as well.
I've never thought about the cooling of the valve springs, Frank.  DUH!
The baffles are intended to channel an amount of oil away from the valve springs on the early y-blocks during operation. I've always dismissed the elimination of the baffles in '57 as an engineering determination that they weren't required and the production cost saving as assuring their elimination.
When adjusting rockers, I've never paid particular attention to the oil flow path in the valve train area. Too, I've always reduced engine idle speed to make rockerarm adjustment easier. The reduced rpm serves to reduce oil flow and reduce the oil flying around quite so much.
Viewing oil flow in the valve spring area at different engine operating rpms with baffles on one cylinder bank and not on the other could be revealing. A set of steel valve covers with a narrow rectangular 'window' opening cut in the top surface might make this less oily...
Maybe I need to stop foraging for valve spring baffles when assembling y-blocks!
|
|
By Ted - 12 Years Ago
|
|
The oil baffles do help in reducing excess oil at the guides especially when umbrella oil seals are used. Regardless of the type of oil seal that’s used, my own preference is to use the baffles when available on iron head Y rebuilds. As has been mentioned, they were eliminated along with some other engineering features during the 1956 model year. As with most of the other items that were eliminated, it would appear they were done as cost cutting measures as all those changes were not detrimental in regards to the warranty and actually puts a measure of 'planned obselescence' back into the equation. . As Frank mentions, the springs being liberally sprayed with oil does help to keep them cooler and prolong their life. Even with the baffles in place, there does appear to be enough ‘misting’ to keep the springs cool and this is with the end bypass oil tubes in place. In the event the oil to the top end does diminish or even quit as a result of cam bearing issues, then the baffle issue becomes a moot point anyhow.
|
|
By Hoosier Hurricane - 12 Years Ago
|
|
Note that stock rocker arms have two weep oil holes in them, one oils the adjuster ball and pushrod, the other is on the valve spring end of the rocker to oil the valve stem tip. I figure this weeped oil is what cools the valve springs, along with any mist that is present.
|
|
By yblock - 12 Years Ago
|
|
what about the thicker head gaskets,when did ford stop useing the steal shim type gasket.I throw the tin trays away thinking with composition head gaskets it will help with rocker geo,alsother is afair diference inshim to comp thickness when torqed down
|
|
By charliemccraney - 12 Years Ago
|
The head gasket will not affect the rocker geometry. Since they are shaft mounted, the height of the stands are the easiest way to control the rocker geometry. The length of the valves and their depth in the heads will also affect geometry, so if you're dealing with a rebuild, those are other variables.
If you don't know how the geometry is and you remove those trays away, you have changed the geometry and you don't know if it is a good or bad change.
What the thicker head gasket will affect is the geometry of the pushrod between the lifter and rocker, but I think that's just something you have to live with. It will also change the position of the adjuster screw in the rocker arm and you will loose a bit of the rocker ratio.
So if all that is changed is head gaskets, you will loose some valve lift and duration because of the lower rocker ratio. You also lower compression. If you throw away the baffles, the rocker geometry will change and is questionable if you did not check so you can gain or loose something there.
Not all shim or composite gaskets are the same but a good general number for the difference in thickness when torqued is probably about .020"
Bottom line, if you are actually trying to gain something, composition gaskets alone are not the way to go but they are fine and probably best for an engine that is in service and needs only a head gasket. With rebuilds, the block and heads are usually milled and that usually makes up the difference in the thickness of the gaskets. They will not change the rocker geometry.
|
|
By Hoosier Hurricane - 12 Years Ago
|
|
In answer to your first question, Ford used the shim gaskets until the end of Y production in the US.
|
|
By yblock - 11 Years Ago
|
|
Hoosier Hurricane (12/29/2013)
In answer to your first question, Ford used the shim gaskets until the end of Y production in the US.
has any one measured a shim style gasket after compresed. i measured comp typ they ar .040(felpro claims thers are.039 compresed.
cant find a compresed thickness for a best head gasket,any one know. thanks
|
|
By 55blacktie - 4 Years Ago
|
|
Can/should the valve-spring oil baffles/drip troughs from my 55 heads be used on 57 G heads?
|
|
By MoonShadow - 4 Years Ago
|
|
I've wondered for a while if the two different push rod lengths have anything to do with the oil drip trays. Are the shorter push rods made for use with the trays to maintain the geometry?
|
|
By Ted - 4 Years Ago
|
The valve spring baffles would appear to be more advantageous to valve stem oil control when using the umbrella valve seals. If going the positive valve seals, then that advantage tends to go away but doing away with them does provide some extra misting of the valve springs which allows those to run cooler. I personally like to run them with the stock rockers. The change in rocker arm geometry is minimal and in some cases may actually help the geometry depending upon the valve job and/or the length of the valves being used. When going the aluminum roller rocker arms the baffles are in the way and end up being eliminated altogether.
|
|
By 2721955meteor - 4 Years Ago
|
|
best head gaskets after installation are ...........040 thou thicker than the steel head gaskets ford used, so removeing the tin bafel puts you right back to where ford started. re 2 much oil my 292 has no spill tubes, no bleed tubes after I rebuilt this engine I can idel with valve covers off with no splash. I find that the spinning push rods and outer drains give plenty of oil to front and rear.to valley.recentle removed front cover as drip and found chain not worn and no sign of poor oiling .my opinion is full oil pressure via grooved cam(deepened re advice hear works fine)and will be kind to cam life as wells rocker shaft and valve train
|