OK Guys,

I'm still not trying to say that using the overflow tube is a bad thing, but I don't think that pressurizing is bad either. After all the FE and the MEL are that way so the Ford engineers thought it Was a good idea. So give this a look.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTdmD0sQbx4&feature=channel_page

   God Bless.   Tim                           http://yblockguy.com/

350ci Y-Block FED "Elwood", 301ci Y-Block Unibody LSR "Jake", 312ci Y-Block '58 F-100, 338ci Y-Block powered Model A Tudor

tim@yblockguy.com  Visalia, California    Just west of the Sequoias

and to also note, FE rocker shafts did get a diagonal groove across the oiling hole. so Ford engineers were also wise to that.

(that may have already been mentioned in the thread) -

This ain't no L-Kamino!

Guys,

I don't want to cause any problems for anyone interested in rebuilding their rocker assemblies the way I have demonstrated in my Video. I see a few discussions pop up from time to time so I know it has been on the minds of some.

I would like to start by saying that I have used this set up with no problems so far in my engines, this is with a grooved center cam journal, new valves & guides, and very clean heads. After reading some of the concerns I freely admit there could be a problem in certain cases. If you have grooved the block behind the center cam bearing and have no restriction to the rockers this could fill the head faster than the oil can drain back. If you don't have the overflow tubes and the return passages are clogged partially with sludge the oil will not drain back fast enough, and if your valve guides have noticeable wear this could cause smoking in any case.

I'm not trying to convert the "Y" world to my way of thinking, if you have good clean parts and passages go ahead and use the overflow tubes.  I'm sure your engine will work fine, they have for decades.   I do however think it is a good idea to cut a small groove across the oil hole on the shafts for better oil distribution no mater which way you go.

   God Bless.   Tim                           http://yblockguy.com/

350ci Y-Block FED "Elwood", 301ci Y-Block Unibody LSR "Jake", 312ci Y-Block '58 F-100, 338ci Y-Block powered Model A Tudor

tim@yblockguy.com  Visalia, California    Just west of the Sequoias

Are there pictures of all of this stuff somewhere? Back in the day, mid 60's I built up a 312 and I didn't do any of this stuff and it held together and ran like a bat out of hell for the day ..

Doing Fords for 45 years. '56 Customline Victoria

E.J. in Havana FL

Duck:

You asked for opinions, here's mine.  I use the overflow tubes.  That insures a good flow of oil through the shafts to help keep them cool.  The excess oil flowing through the overflow tubes and down the pushrod hole does not overload the stock drain holes in the head, so it doesn't flood the head.  Ford designed the rockers to be "drip" oiled from the oil filled shafts, and I have found that to be fine, even with my 95/250 pound valve springs.  I know Tim, Ted, and others have different opinions, and I will not discount their methods if it works for them. 

John - "The Hoosier Hurricane"

Fellas- I've read and re-read the pressurized rocker shaft threads several times now and this is my question; If I don't do the camshaft groove mod, I won't have the increased oil volume to contend with.Correct? I'll only have the amount of oil in the rocker boxes that the factory intended- That's GOOD because I'm using OE "umbrella" seals. If I pressurize the rocker shafts ALA Tim's mod,(no overflow tubes) and add the "cross grooves" and reinstall the OE triangular oil "drip trays", I shouldn't have a situation where I have excess oil to the point of oil infiltrating the valve stem guides (and the excess oil consumption that would go along with that)- Correct? Or would I need to retain the overflow tubes to insure I don't flood the rocker boxes with oil? Any info/ opinions are appreciated- thanks /Duck




BOO- YA!!!

Ted,



The specs. provided on that eBay listing link are 1.6"-2.1" (?), (not 1.8"-2.2"). Seller says custom tool cost too prohibitive. Gave him my boss measurements so he can double check fit. Will see what happens.



Re: bronze/stainless guide clearance specs.; wouldn't a fresh motor likely run hot until it's broken in? Maybe J.M.'s customer wanted longevity as top priority, and he felt secure enough that with good geometry, cam-lifter quality, and his level of break-in experience/attention, it was worth taking the risk?

In my case, I've decided my current .0015" exhaust clearance probably insufficient, and will likely hone them another .001" at least.

6 VOLTS/POS. GRD. NW INDIANA

You’ll have to get with the seller to determine if a custom height mic can be made.  Looking at the height mic that I received for the 1.400”-1.800” dimensions, you can potentially modify the inside threads so that it can slip over the stock guide.  In received form, this particular mic lacks about 0.175” from being fully seated when placed over the stock Y guide.  Looking at the mic, it will take ~0.200” removal of the threads on the outer portion while leaving the outside length dimension as is and then modify the inner portion threads just enough to get your desired minimum valve spring height reading.  Doing it this way will not require any number bias on the outside of the mic.  This will probably make more sense if you’re actually looking at the bottom side of the mic.

 

The 1.800”-2.200” mic in stock form just fits over the stock Y guide and seats okay.  Any modifications to this particular mic to make it read a lower value will require including a bias with the outside numbers or values when using it which means making modifications to the mic in 0.100” increments to keep the numbers quick and easy to calculate.

 

As far as bronze guide clearance goes, those are performance minded specs but if the engine ever overheats with the tighter specs being used, then the opportunity for a sticking valve will exist (especially on the exhaust).

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

Thanks Ted,



Do you know if these tools are made to order? If so, the height mic. could be cut a bit shorter, and the cut # added back to dial #s. I think 1.8" minimum might be too tall to be useful for many Y-block springs, unless the spring seats have been machined deeper?



Re: the min. guide clearance specs you once provided for bronze/stainless (.002"IN/.003"EX): I found a YBM article where J. Mummert set up a mild performance motor (?) with .0018" on both. Would YOU still stay with your clearance rec. if for a grocery-getter motor, or were you thinking full-blown race specs?

6 VOLTS/POS. GRD. NW INDIANA

I did come across a valve spring height mic that will work on the Y heads with unmodified guide bosses.  It’s steel in construction and the range is 1.800” to 2.200”.  This same company does offer a height mic for a shorter set of ranges but that particular mic does not fit over the valve guide boss on unmodified Y guides.  Here’s a pair of links.

Valve spring height micrometer

Sellers other items including height mic

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)