1.6 v 1.7 Roller Rockers

Performance mods and Advanced Stroker discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
PolloLoco
Donator
Donator
Posts: 212
Joined: March 8th, 2009, 6:39 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 1997
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: TJ
Location: DeRidder, LA

1.6 v 1.7 Roller Rockers

Post by PolloLoco »

Yella Terra FAQ wrote:Should I run a higher than standard rocker ratio?
Many cam grinders today specify rocker ratios higher than standard for specific camshaft grinds but in most cases, unless specified, the standard ratio gives you the best results.
My cam choice is the COMP 68-231-4. I have decided to go with Yella Terra roller rockers but now I don't know if I want 1.7 or 1.6 ratio. I thought that since I'm spending the same amount for either then I should go for the one that will flow more air (assuming 1.7 is the answer here). Best deal I've seen them for is $450 shipped from falconglobal on eBay. Does anybody else have a preference of ratio? Any recommendations?
4.7L Stroker, 4.88 Ford 8.8 w/Auburn ECTED, HP30 w/ARB, AX-15, NP231 w/RR SYE, 33x10.50 BFG A/T, 4" Skyjacker, 1" body lift, 1" MORE motor mounts, Kilby fuel tank skid, UCF ultra-high clearance 1/4" skid, HMMWV-style snorkel, 63mm TB
User avatar
RAPTORFAN85
Donator
Donator
Posts: 248
Joined: June 12th, 2008, 12:45 pm
Stroker Displacement: 4.6L
Vehicle Year: 2001
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: TJ
Location: Mass

Re: 1.6 v 1.7 Roller Rockers

Post by RAPTORFAN85 »

I run the 1.7 rockers with a lower lift cam for max torque low in the RPM's. Max lift ends up at .475. The higher ratio rockers act like a fast ramp cam, without the added wear on the cam. Don't think that by adding the 1.7 rockers you will gain a bunch of ponies. You may gain 2-3 but thats about it. Also, when I ordered mine I had to wait like 8-10 weeks to get them from yella terra in Australia, they aren't big movers...

Also, with the 231-4 cam and the 1.7 rockers your exhaust lift will actually be .515, make sure that your valve springs are going to be strong enough to prevent valve float.
"Strrrrroke me, stoke me...."

Billy Squire
User avatar
Plechtan
Donator
Donator
Posts: 667
Joined: August 28th, 2008, 9:00 am
Stroker Displacement: 5.0L 4x4
Vehicle Year: 1988
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: Comanche
Location: Woodstock, IL
Contact:

Re: 1.6 v 1.7 Roller Rockers

Post by Plechtan »

You have to have the correct springs to use a 1.7 ratio rocker. you may get into coil bind if you are using a stock springs, or even perfoormance springs depending on the cam lift.

Have you looked at the Harland Sharp adjustable pedistal rockers? similar money, but you can adjust them. This is better if you have machined your head.
Peter Lechtanski
The worlds Fastest Comanche Prroject
User avatar
PolloLoco
Donator
Donator
Posts: 212
Joined: March 8th, 2009, 6:39 am
Stroker Displacement: 4.7L
Vehicle Year: 1997
Vehicle Make: Jeep
Vehicle Model: TJ
Location: DeRidder, LA

Re: 1.6 v 1.7 Roller Rockers

Post by PolloLoco »

I was planning on Mopar P5249464 springs. I'm not trying to find shortcuts to power, but if two options cost the same and one yields better power then the choice is easy. I'm just concerned about valve-to-piston clearance. The KB945 pistons have a shallow dish and .515" might be cutting it close, but I don't know. As far as I was tracking the only roller rockers that require no valve cover spacer or machine work were the Yella Terra. I still have 13 weeks before I even go home so I should order the roller rockers in about a month. I had the same mentality for the KB945 pistons so I ordered them a while ago thinking it would take months (many board users' stories) but they took less than a month to arrive.
4.7L Stroker, 4.88 Ford 8.8 w/Auburn ECTED, HP30 w/ARB, AX-15, NP231 w/RR SYE, 33x10.50 BFG A/T, 4" Skyjacker, 1" body lift, 1" MORE motor mounts, Kilby fuel tank skid, UCF ultra-high clearance 1/4" skid, HMMWV-style snorkel, 63mm TB
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot] and 24 guests