Author
|
Message
|
markoxpollo
|
Posted 6 Years Ago
|
Hitting on all eight cylinders
Group: Forum Members
Last Active: 5 Years Ago
Posts: 4,
Visits: 392
|
Does the ball look like its setting deep enough in the push rod cup? Lash is set to .020 cold.
|
|
|
Joe-JDC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Active: Last Month
Posts: 734,
Visits: 21.4K
|
Looks like you need longer pushrods, and make sure the cup is for 3/8" ball, not 5/16". Ideally, the adjuster should have one thread showing instead of all of them. Joe-JDC
JDC
|
|
|
charliemccraney
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Active: Yesterday
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 437.2K
|
I think the ball looks ok. You can check that by applying some grease or marker or layout die to the ball, rubbing the two together and observing the pattern. The pushrods do look too short.
Lawrenceville, GA
|
|
|
markoxpollo
|
|
Hitting on all eight cylinders
Group: Forum Members
Last Active: 5 Years Ago
Posts: 4,
Visits: 392
|
whats strange is, that the car is a 56 and the length it calls for is 8.125". BUT a 55 calls for 8.25".... wondering if my 56 has a 55 engine?
|
|
|
charliemccraney
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Active: Yesterday
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 437.2K
|
You have the oil trays under the stands those were phased out at some point early on. Not sure of the date. Those add extra height, which would require longer pushrods, everything else equal. Also, given that the car is now 62 years old,it can have any combination of parts now, including different heads, or an entirely different engine than it came with.
Lawrenceville, GA
|
|
|
Florida_Phil
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Active: Last Year
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 285.6K
|
I ran into this problem when I swapped 1957 "G" heads onto my 1955 engine. Remove the oil trays from under the rocker stands and you will be fine. They are not needed.
|
|
|
markoxpollo
|
|
Hitting on all eight cylinders
Group: Forum Members
Last Active: 5 Years Ago
Posts: 4,
Visits: 392
|
thx, I also just noticed the rocker arms one one side have the number 6564-A2 and on the other side they are numbered 6564-B. Slight difference in size but they seem to work. Is that a problem you think?
|
|
|
Tedster
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Active: 2 Years Ago
Posts: 513,
Visits: 153.3K
|
I thought 6564 rockers were all 1.56 ratio regardless, maybe not? Are they different lengths?
edit: corrected. Need more coffee. 5751066 are standard ratio markings.
|
|
|
2721955meteor
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Active: 6 Months Ago
Posts: 927,
Visits: 190.0K
|
my inf is ecg 6564 is1.93 56has jam nut 57 and up self locking,different thread for self locking.55and some 56 1.78 ean) have some on rocker shafts and it is obvious the lift of the6564s is better. threads closer to the shaft versus ther are several #S on the other rockers,but all 6564s have threads close to rocker shaft. ted had some listings showing ecg6564 as the higher lift,and comparing them on a rocker shaft confirms he is correct
|
|
|
Florida_Phil
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Active: Last Year
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 285.6K
|
You need to have the same ratio rockers on both sides of your engine. These are old engines and many have been thrown together from more than one engine. When I took my 292 apart, I found a mishmash of parts. Very common.
|
|
|