Might be using a solid in my 402, so I figure I might want to know this.

From an earlier post by Mike:


Method two:
With a solid I use the ex open intake close method which you can use also.
With a starter button or helper crank the engine until the exhaust valve just starts to open & adjust the intake.
You can turn it by hand if you need the excerise
Crank again until the intake valve is closing & adjust the exhaust.
This is the correct way to adjust valves with a performance cam, especially solids as it assures you you are on the base circle.

--------------------
Mike (Wolfplace)

Exhaust starts to open, adjust intake.
Intake is closing, adjust exhaust.

Never mind,,, :D
Thanks phel69

It's really not accurate enough for anything resembling a performance cam. You have to adjust the lash when the lifter is on the base circle; and you have no guarantee, with a really wide lobe, that you'll get there with that method.

It works OK with hydraulics because the precision required is so much less.

I'd suggest using a dial indicator to find a valve that's near all the way open. Let's say you walk up to the motor, and observe that the #1 intake is near full open. Stick you dial indicator on it, and find full open; at that point, adjust #6 intake (the one 180 degrees, or 4 cyls, away from #1 in the firing orde) because you know for certain that when one cyl's valve is exactly at the peak of its lobe, the same valve on that other cyl is at exactly the opposite point. Then turn the crank exactly 90 degrees and adjust the next valve in the firing order which would be #5 intake in the above example. Then 90 more and adjust another, etc. When you're finished with all 8 valves of one type, do the 8 of the other kind the same way.

Works absolutely perfect, every time, no errors, no questions, just perfect. You will have no more valve train noise than an aggressive hydraulic makes. People won't even be able to tell by listening to your car that you have a solid.

Well,,,
I will completely disagree in regards to accuracy.
If you disagree with this go pick up any small block cam you have laying around & inspect it. Taking #1 cylinder which are the first & third lobes on a SB cam turn the cam until the exhaust lobe (the 1st lobe) is starting to open & look at where the third lobe is, almost dead center base circle.
Now keep turning until the intake lobe (#3 lobe) is closing & look at the first lobe, again almost dead center base circle.
I have been adjusting valves for more than a few years on everything from stock hyd cams to Top Alcohol engines & have never I repeat never had a problem using the EOIC method.
I have double checked settings from this method & have never found myself off the base circle of the cam. It may not be in the direct center of the base circle but it is on the base circle & very close to center non the less.
You are essentially doing the same thing doing it your way but making it more complicated than it needs to be. ;)

Bottom line, if you adjust the intake valve when the exhaust valve on that cylinder is opening you will be on the base circle & if you adjust the exhaust valve when the intake valve is closing again you will be on the base circle.

I agree with Mike, many top engine builders/racers use this method, and its accurate.

Mike, i love the John Wayne quote, i use it at work all the time :D

Originally posted by Motor Martyr:
.

Mike, i love the John Wayne quote, i use it at work all the time :D =
Thanks, sometimes I think he had me in mind when he wrote it :D

I can't seem to get the EOIC method, graemlins/clonk.gif so here is how I adjusted my valve and i'm not saying anything is wrong with the EOIC Method, but I just don't have the warm and fuzzy for the EOIC Method.
The method that works for me and have been very accurate is doing one cylinder at a time. I loosen my rockers then rotate the engine w /remote starter while holding the rocker arm down on the pushrod into the lifter until I feel the lifter is on the base of the lobe and the timing mark is at 0* (cam installed dot to dot). At this time I will adjust the that cylinder taking out all the up/down motion and an additional 1/2 turn (HYD). :eek: Do this for all cylinders one at a time and i'm done. You can also use it with setting a Solid Cam just set the lash while the cam is on the base of the lobe.

Mike
Is there any setback or problems using MY method? :confused:

Yes.... it only works on hydraulics, where the need for precision isn't that great. Nowhere near accurate enough for a solid.

To put it in perspective: with 1.5 rockers, one turn on the 3/8-24 rocker nut is a little over .100" at the tip of the valve. ˝ turn is therefore a little over .050". That's the level of precision you need with a hydraulic cam.

On the other hand, with a solid, you're looking for numbers around .016" to .022" usually; and .005" difference between one valve and another is HUGE. Won't make much difference at all on the dyno or the track, and so is insignificant on a race car; but it sure affects the idle quality strongly.

I like to get mine as precise as possible; others may be content with the "EOIC" method, but IMHO it's just not good enough for a car that I want to really run its best. I'll spend the extra 2 or 3 minutes and get out the dial indicator. Other than that, my (factory) method takes exactly the same amount of time as the "EOIC" one.

RB,
Not trying to make an issue out of this but as I said, go pick up a cam & look at the lobes.
You will find what you are doing is in fact the same as the EOIC method only in a different way.
Just look at the first & third lobe as you turn the cam in your hand & you will find the EOIC method very accurate at getting to the base circle.
We are just getting to the same place on the cam using different methods.
Again, go pick up any small or big block cam & look at the thing.
Look at the 1st (#1 ex lobe) & 3rd (#1 in lobe) as you rotate the cam & I don't care how long the duration is or if it is solid or hyd you will find you are on the base circle of the opposite lobe when the exhaust is opening & when the intake is closing.
It really is that simple ;)

Mike,
With a hyd cam no but with a solid yes there is a problem.
The longer the duration the more chance you will not be on the base circle of the cam adjusting the valves at TDC
I use this method when I assemble an engine as it is quick & easy as you just turn the engine 90 degrees & go down the firing order.
It then gets broken in & readjusted properly.
If you are already using a starter button the EOIC method is very easy. Instead of finding TDC on each cylinder you just watch the rockers move.
When the exhaust is starting to open adjust the intake on that cylinder. Then when the intake has opened all the way & has almost closed adjust the exhaust again on that cylinder.
Nothing trick or magical about it & after you do it a couple of times you will find it quite easy ;)

This is how I adjust the lifters on my solid roller:

1-8-4-3
6-5-7-2

Watch for the exhaust valve of 6 to start going down and the intake to start rising. When both #6 lifters are at the same height you will be at TDC and the #1 cylinder will be on the compression stroke. At this point both the intake and exhaust valves for #1 can be adjusted. Next rotate the engine 90 degrees and the #5 lifters will be rocking. Now set #8. Continue through the firing order until you’ve adjusted all valves. Obviously this procedure is made much easier with a damper that has 360 degree markings. The lifter is on base circle for 180* or more on any camshaft grind. Why the need for a dial indicator? 180* + is a LARGE margin of error. No need to have the lifter EXACTLY on the center of base circle, IMHO.

my $0.02

Originally posted by kjett:
This is how I adjust the lifters on my solid roller:

1-8-4-3
6-5-7-2

Watch for the exhaust valve of 6 to start going down and the intake to start rising. When both #6 lifters are at the same height you will be at TDC and the #1 cylinder will be on the compression stroke. At this point both the intake and exhaust valves for #1 can be adjusted. Next rotate the engine 90 degrees and the #5 lifters will be rocking. Now set #8. Continue through the firing order until you’ve adjusted all valves. Obviously this procedure is made much easier with a damper that has 360 degree markings. The lifter is on base circle for 180* or more on any camshaft grind. Why the need for a dial indicator? 180* + is a LARGE margin of error. No need to have the lifter EXACTLY on the center of base circle, IMHO.

my $0.02 Ken,
This is the first method I just posted about doing it in 90 degree increments & is not the best way to adjust a solid lifter cam with any appreciable amount of duration.
You can be off the base circle slightly.
It is quick & easy as you just go down the firing order but you really should recheck them with the EOIC method when you are done to be sure there is no difference with your solid.
;)

I'm not the expert here but I agree with Mike based on my experiences with solid cams. Ken, If you think a solid lifter cam has at least 180 deg of base circle, mike one across the "base circle" 90 deg from the lobe. That would be your 180 deg of base circle. Then mike across the lobe and subtract the base circle reading. Compare that to the lobe lift spec. I bet the lobe lift spec is larger. It is on my L-78 cam. It's because solid cams have long gradual lash take-up ramps. It might make only .002 or .003 difference but that will change the effective duration. Try the EOIC method once and I bet you'll find your rockers a little loose.

Mike/Von,

I prolly exaggerated the number of degrees that the lifter is on base circle, but it's on base circle long enough that unless you're huffing on a crack pipe you should be able to set the lash using the method I described smile.gif I've been using this method on the current engine with over 200 passes. My friend that runs a SSP-AA car (3 national records) uses the same method on his 468. Crosses the stripe at nearly 8k depending on the cam he's running (read BIG DURATION). I'll take a look at the EOIC method, however I stand by my original statement using the method I described based upon proven experience.

Oops. Double post.

Hey Mike...

A somewhat funny story about looking at cams. A friend of mine was over and we were talking about adj valves and he didnt get the concept ... so I said the same thing you did ... pick up a cam and look at it.... I happened to have 6 or 7 SBC cams there so he grabs a box at random , opens it up and looks at it..... He's literly scratching his head trying to figure it out... It doesnt work he said...

I was busy doing something else and not paying attention to what he was doing.... I said sure it does...it has to... He said no ...look when the intake is just closing the exhaust in at mid lift!

What !!?? Are you looking at the right lobes ? YES he said.... I stopped what I was doing and looked at what he was saying.... SURE ENOUGH ... he was right.... I bout started crying I was laughing so hard.... Out of all the cams laying there in their boxes he picks the one and only " REVERSE ROTATION " cam I had there !!... I explained it to him and he tried it rotating in the opposite direction and it worked perfectly...I said here try this standard rotation cam and of course it worked just fine and he then understood the concept....

I didnt even think of the fact that I had a reverse rotation cam in there and as luck would have it thats the one he picked !! I felt kinda stupid there for a minute before I realized that was the cam he picked graemlins/clonk.gif graemlins/clonk.gif Hehehe

oops, wrong bu graemlins/clonk.gif tton

Hi Al, graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Damn guys, this is getting out of hand ;)

Ken, you are right. With most cams doing it your way you will be on the base circle,
The intake lobe will be fine but the exhaust lobe will be getting ready to open

Granted still on the base circle on most cams but not anywhere near the center of the base circle on the exhaust lobe.

On something like a 320 or 340 degree duration cam, you are depending on lobe separation going to be about 20 or so cam degrees from the exhaust ramp opening point while adjusting at TDC compression.

For info, the wider the seperation & or the more the duration the worse this becomes.

If you use the EOIC method you are assured of being close to the center of the base circle which is where I would prefer to be.

RB,
Your method is very accurate & will put you in the center of the base circle but so will the EOIC method & not everyone here has a dial indicator.

Both systems are quite accurate & will work equally well.

In reality all three systems will work just fine once you know where you want to run the cam at & have a baseline to adjust to.
All it comes down to then is doing it the same every time ;)

Ok,,, here's your homework.
Get a cam & set it on your bench. The lobes go like this"
SB- E1E2I1I2 I3I4E3E4 E5E6I5I6 I7I8E7E8
Now, look at the lobes as you turn the cam & it will all become clear as mud :confused:
A Rat works the same way the lobes are just in a different order.

www.mcmaster.com (http://www.mcmaster.com) go to page 2083, bottom of the page.... not much reason to be without one.

Originally posted by Wolfplace:
Damn guys, this is getting out of hand for such a simple operation ;)

Ken, you are right. With most cams doing it your way you will be on the base circle,
The intake lobe will be fine on #1 & the exhaust on #6 but,,, the exhaust lobe will be getting ready to open on 1 & the intake will have just closed on 6.

Granted still on the base circle on most cams but not anywhere near the center of the base circle on one lobe of the other.
Mike,

Using my method the cylinder will be on TDC of the compression stroke. Are you saying the valves are open on the compression stroke? I don't think I'm depending on any lobe separation. The only thing that will affect this is a split duration cam, but even then only by a few degrees. The valves stay closed for over 180 degrees.

Originally posted by kjett:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Wolfplace:
Damn guys, this is getting out of hand for such a simple operation ;)

Ken, you are right. With most cams doing it your way you will be on the base circle,
The intake lobe will be fine on #1 & the exhaust on #6 but,,, the exhaust lobe will be getting ready to open on 1 & the intake will have just closed on 6.

Granted still on the base circle on most cams but not anywhere near the center of the base circle on one lobe of the other.
Mike,

Using my method the cylinder will be on TDC of the compression stroke. Are you saying the valves are open on the compression stroke? I don't think I'm depending on any lobe separation. The only thing that will affect this is a split duration cam, but even then only by a few degrees. The valves stay closed for over 180 degrees. </font>[/QUOTE]Ken,
First, I screwed up in my description of where the lobes will be & will go back & edit it as it was very confusing
The last sentence you quoted should have read:

=====
"Ken, you are right. With most cams doing it your way you will be on the base circle,
The intake lobe will be fine but the exhaust lobe will be getting ready to open"

Granted still on the base circle on most cams but not anywhere near the center of the base circle on the exhaust lobe".
======

Anyway,, ;)

As I said, all three methods will work as long as you do it consistently & if what you are doing works for you that's fine.

No I am not saying the valves are open on the compression stroke.

I will print this again so it is a bit easier to understand.
When you are on TDC compression
The intake LOBE will be fine on but,,, the exhaust LOBE will be getting ready to open
I am not talking about when the VALVE OPENS I am referring to the CAM LOBES & on some long duration cams you are very close to the opening ramp on the LOBES.
When you spread the lobes you advance the exhaust & retard the intake so the point in question gets closer.

Just go pick up a cam & spend some quality time with it,
You will see what I am talking about ;)

Again, all three methods will usually work & I use "your" method when I assemble an engine.
I then go back & use the EOIC method after breakin for a final adjustment.

If what you are doing works for you that's fine, I am not telling you how to do things I am just telling you how to be absolutely sure you are somewhere near the center of the base circle of both lobes which is where I prefer to be.

If you adjust enough cams you will find there is a difference in the lash on some.

If you have a baseline where you make best power or run the best all of this is academic as long as you do things the same each time.
You can then can tighten or loosen the lash with your preferred method depending on what it is you are trying to do.

Valve lash is not rocket science & using the EOIC method will work without having a degreed damper to find TDC or a dial indicator to find the center of the opposing lobe or even if the stars are not lined up in the right position. :D

It is as simple & about as dummy proof as it gets & everyone can use it with nothing more than a feeler gauge & the knowledge of which valve is the intake & which is the exhaust.

Comments in-line...

Originally posted by Wolfplace:
Ken,
First, I screwed up in my description of where the lobes will be & will go back & edit it as it was very confusingNo problem, since I overstated the amount of time spent on basecircle I'll let it slide :D

Originally posted by Wolfplace:
As I said, all three methods will work as long as you do it consistently & if what you are doing works for you that's fine.Agreed.
Originally posted by Wolfplace:
I will print this again so it is a bit easier to understand.I'll soon be 40 years old and built my first engine when I was 15 years old. While I don't claim to know everything, I do understand how valve timing works. The method I use for valve lashing was described as inaccurate. I was simply pointing out that it isn't.
Originally posted by Wolfplace:
Again, all three methods will usually work & I use "your" method when I assemble an engine.
I then go back & use the EOIC method after breakin for a final adjustment.Agreed.

Originally posted by Wolfplace:
If what you are doing works for you that's fine, I am not telling you how to do things I am just telling you how to be absolutely sure you are somewhere near the center of the base circle of both lobes which is where I prefer to be.I understand your position.

Originally posted by Wolfplace:
If you adjust enough cams you will find there is a difference in the lash on some.As I said in an earlier reply, I will be checking the lash on my valves later this week for maintenance. I will use my method and then use the EOIC. I will report the difference, if any.

Originally posted by Wolfplace:
If you have a baseline where you make best power or run the best all of this is academic as long as you do things the same each time.Again, I don't claim to know everything. I'm pretty open minded when it comes to tuning, so I'll give your method a try.
Originally posted by Wolfplace:
It is as simple & about as dummy proof as it gets & everyone can use it with nothing more than a feeler gauge & the knowledge of which valve is the intake & which is the exhaust. I would submit that the method I use is as easy and requires less time (50% fewer engine rotations) :D

Seth,

Sorry to take your post so far off topic. In hindsight I shouldn't have thrown my $0.02 worth in since you didn't ask about other methods for lashing valves. You were inquiring about EOIC.

One HUGE advantage the EOIC method has, especially for the street crowd who probably doens't adjust rockers very much, is that it is VERY easy to remember. For the general enthusiast it is much more difficult to remember to find a cylinder 180 deg from this and turn 90 degrees that, so on number 7 cyinder i should go to #3 or something or other... get me a beer my brain hurts.
For someone who builds a lot of engines, adjusts their valves every week, every day, ect.. they can remember the other methods quite easily, but EOIC is very easy to remember, and it works on your Farmall M too!!!

Originally posted by fourfiddyfour:
One HUGE advantage the EOIC method has, especially for the street crowd who probably doens't adjust rockers very much, is that it is VERY easy to remember. For the general enthusiast it is much more difficult to remember to find a cylinder 180 deg from this and turn 90 degrees that, so on number 7 cyinder i should go to #3 or something or other... get me a beer my brain hurts.
For someone who builds a lot of engines, adjusts their valves every week, every day, ect.. they can remember the other methods quite easily, but EOIC is very easy to remember, and it works on your Farmall M too!!! If you don't know the firing order on your Chevy then maybe it's time to find another hobby :D
1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2

Overlay them like I suggested in a previous reply:

1 8 4 3
6 5 7 2

When the rockers are in line on #6, #1 will be on TDC of the compression stroke. Rotate the engine 90* and move on to the next one. How hard is that???

Aw com'on, no better method than EO-IC, adn the cam companies even say so. Now let's debate something really importnat like...

Hey Ken you really running that fast with those rect port heads. ?? You KNOw you'll go faster with ovals, don't you? graemlins/clonk.gif

Originally posted by 427L88:
Aw com'on, no better method than EO-IC, adn the cam companies even say so.And we all know if the cam company's say it's true it must be so...

Next time you're in the pits at a race ask ask some people which method they use, or just observe for yourself. Guaranteed you will see the method I describe and use myself.

Oddly enough I did a generic google search on "lashing valves" and what do you know, the very first match described the exact procedure I and countless others have been using for years!

Search result:
http://www.totalengineairflow.com/tech/valvelash.php

How's the air in that vacuum? smile.gif

BTW, EOIC is one thing you and MR. Bigley agree on graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Originally posted by kjett:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 427L88:
Aw com'on, no better method than EO-IC, adn the cam companies even say so.And we all know if the cam company's say it's true it must be so...

Next time you're in the pits at a race ask ask some people which method they use, or just observe for yourself. Guaranteed you will see the method I describe and use myself.

Oddly enough I did a generic google search on "lashing valves" and what do you know, the very first match described the exact procedure I and countless others have been using for years!

Search result:
http://www.totalengineairflow.com/tech/valvelash.php

How's the air in that vacuum? smile.gif

BTW, EOIC is one thing you and MR. Bigley agree on graemlins/thumbsup.gif </font>[/QUOTE]=
Ken,
Read the bottom sentence of your very own search.
This if you look at it & take the time to inspect a cam comes out almost exactly the same as the EOIC method ;)

Originally posted by Wolfplace:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by kjett:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 427L88:
Aw com'on, no better method than EO-IC, adn the cam companies even say so.And we all know if the cam company's say it's true it must be so...

Next time you're in the pits at a race ask ask some people which method they use, or just observe for yourself. Guaranteed you will see the method I describe and use myself.

Oddly enough I did a generic google search on "lashing valves" and what do you know, the very first match described the exact procedure I and countless others have been using for years!

Search result:
http://www.totalengineairflow.com/tech/valvelash.php

How's the air in that vacuum? smile.gif

BTW, EOIC is one thing you and MR. Bigley agree on graemlins/thumbsup.gif </font>[/QUOTE]=
Ken,
Read the bottom sentence of your very own search.
This if you look at it & take the time to inspect a cam comes out almost exactly the same as the EOIC method ;) </font>[/QUOTE]I did read, just like I've read every response on this thread including my own. It says...


For you serious race car guys with gross duration figures in the 320 plus region you can use the firing order sequence but instead of adjusting the #1 valves at TDC #1 adjust the previous intake rocker and the next exhaust rocker. This ensures that the lifter is on the absolute base circle of the camshaft.Who posting/reading on this forum runs a camshaft in their street/strip (or even race car for that matter) that has 320 degrees or more advertised duration? Or did I mistakenly post my method in a pro stock forum?

If you measure absolute zero lift on the cam, you could easily have over 320 deg of duration with a street/strip cam.

Taken right from the 1966 GM Service Manual:

http://kjett.home.mindspring.com/Images/gm_lash.jpg

I guess the General is wrong too.

No body seems to want to debate the facts. If the cylinder is on TDC of the compression stroke both valves are closed. If both valves are closed how is it that adjustments made are inaccurate?

It seems like my way or the highway for the EO-IC camp. Like I said, I'll try both methods and report any difference when I adjust my valves later in the week. However, no one posting on this thread has been able to offer and facts to indicate that the method I'm using is not accurate. I'm all ears.

Well, we both love bbc Chevelles, and own red ones. Hey, that includes you too!

Dare I admit, I like to watch that 68 run. Hard to get a launch pic of too. Quick off the line.

Hey, BTW, the official Chevy Service manual uses the 90 rotation method for the LS6/L78 cam. 4 valves @ each 90. I used that method when I first got the 427 in. Being that the Crane cam was very simiolar to the GM solid. I did notice a difference when I went with EO-IC, but I attribute that 100% to user 'error'.

With EO-IC, it's easy to remember, and spot on for ANY grind.

Either work well. As long as 'user error' is held to minimal.

Originally posted by kjett:
No body seems to want to debate the facts.....However, no one posting on this thread has been able to offer and facts to indicate that the method I'm using is not accurate. I'm all ears. What makes you think that the EOIC method is inaccurate? If you do like mike says and actually pick up a cam and look at it, you will see that the eoic method puts you adjusting the valves at VERY close to the dead center of the base cirlce. Since this is not a pro stock forum, noone should be running a cam so huge that the EOIC method would be inaccurate. So maybe it is the 180 degrees off and rotate 90 degrees crowd who is "my way or the highway"? After all, the facts are that the post was started asking what the EOIC method is and got turned sideways by the other crowd saying that you should do it this other way. I haven't seen any one show any proof that the EOIC is inaccurate either.
There is no doubt that both methods are accurate and work just fine. I have used both. EOIC is by far easier to remember and works on more than just chevys and more than just v8 gas engines. The other method leaves more room for user error, especially for the novice.

FFF...You need to learn how to read. Try to contribute something worth reading instead of just trying to stir up a bunch of $hit.

Originally posted by kjett:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by fourfiddyfour:
One HUGE advantage the EOIC method has, especially for the street crowd who probably doens't adjust rockers very much, is that it is VERY easy to remember. For the general enthusiast it is much more difficult to remember to find a cylinder 180 deg from this and turn 90 degrees that, so on number 7 cyinder i should go to #3 or something or other... get me a beer my brain hurts.
For someone who builds a lot of engines, adjusts their valves every week, every day, ect.. they can remember the other methods quite easily, but EOIC is very easy to remember, and it works on your Farmall M too!!! If you don't know the firing order on your Chevy then maybe it's time to find another hobby :D
1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2</font>[/QUOTE]Who's trying to stir up a bunch of $hit? It certain looks like you are. I contributed a perfectly VALID reason for using the EOIC method and was returned by you giving a smart a$$ response to find another hobby. What does that contribute? Don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house.

Who's trying to stir up a bunch of $hit? It certain looks like you are. I contributed a perfectly VALID reason for using the EOIC method...What you did was discount the method I and countless others (including the manufacturer) have been successfully using to lash valves for years:

For the general enthusiast it is much more difficult to remember to find a cylinder 180 deg from this and turn 90 degrees that, so on number 7 cyinder i should go to #3 or something or other... get me a beer my brain hurts.But now all of a sudden you not only approve of this method but have used it before yourself:

There is no doubt that both methods are accurate and work just fine. I have used both.:rolleyes:


and was returned by you giving a smart a$$ response to find another hobby. What does that contribute? Don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house.Why don't you practice what you preach Internet tough guy?

Or need I remind you of your wise-a$$ reply exploiting a typo I made while providing real life experience to try and help someone solve a problem:


Originally posted by fourfiddyfour:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by young gun '71:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by kjett:
If you're still seeing significant amounts of oil after the first couple of oil changes then something is wrong.

my $0.02 yeah keep that oil out at all cost! tongue.gif graemlins/beers.gif </font>[/QUOTE]If you change the oil again and there was still a lot of oil in there, try running without your valvecovers on. Not only does it solve that problem, but also gives you a really trick look and keeps your chassis lubed. :D

but seriously. 71chevy0192, how is the engine running now. Had any noises? Have your driven it some more and checked the oil for metal again? [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]From the following thread:

http://www.chevelles.com/forum/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=020167;p=2#0000 16

I'm done bickering with you. If you got a problem with me look me up the next time you're in the Atlanta area.

oh, so thats it. you got a bruised ego over something that was said in good jest with no bad intentions and was not discounting your post, as it was clear what you intended to type. Hey, we ALL make typos sometimes. I AM sorry if you took it as making fun of you. It was intended to have fun with the situation.

I never said that I disapprove of the method. I was just giving a perspective on how Jonny Novice might feel. And that comes from real life experience of having novices ask me how to adjust them struggle with the manufacturer's way of adjust. then giving them the EOIC way and they have no trouble. You tried to discount that fact with, they need to find another hobby.

Internet tough guy huh? I see your making physical threats knowing that I won't likely be traveling to atlanta anytime soon. way to hide behind your computer with empty threats.

It's "Johnny" novice tongue.gif

Well,

Just for $hits and grins I tried the EO-IC method tonight. I first checked every valve using the method I've been using. I had 2 valves out by .001 and and 4 out by .002. The remaining 10 were dead on at .016. I then checked all the valves again using the EO-IC method. They all read exactly the same. I decided to use the EO-IC method to adjust the valves that needed adjusting. I will say it's pretty easy once you get a feel for watching the position of the valves as opposed to relying on the balancer position. Regretably I broke one of the bolts off in my passenger side stud girdle trying to loosen it (must have overtightended it the last time I adjusted the valves). Now I will have to remove the stud girdle completely to easy out the part of the bolt that stayed in the girdle graemlins/angry.gif

So there you have it. BTW, my cam is a Comp XR-286 ground on a 107 LSA.

I have used both methods mentioned of setting the valve lash, and the EOIC seems to be the easiest way to do it for the experienced and novice alike!

But to get to the original question about using this method with a solid cam the answer is YES. If anyone cares to read it, there is an artical in the March 2003 issue of Chevy High Performance called 16 Lashes. How to set valves the easy way. By Jeff Smith. It say it can be used on any four stroke of any make or model from a Briggs and Stratton to a Pratt & Whitney radial aircraft engine.

It tells how to do hydraulic and solid lifters. from what I understand, this method is preferd because it works with any cam no matter how radical or mild.


Rocky

Originally posted by kjett:
Well,

Just for $hits and grins I tried the EO-IC method tonight.....
So there you have it... Wow, gotta appreciate a guy who tries the scientific approach and compares both methods. I was watching this post and while I have always used the EO/IC method, felt I had nothing more to contribute to it, so I kept out of it. But in the back of my mind I kept saying: "I wonder if I can just go out to the garage and try both methods". Kind of difficult to get any real measured data with my 288/296 hydraulic can though. Glad you went through the excersize Ken, now I know how they compare. graemlins/thumbsup.gif
BTW,..EO/IC is a bit easier if you have a remote starter button, otherwise it is a major PITA !!

Originally posted by Epistuff:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by kjett:
Well,

Just for $hits and grins I tried the EO-IC method tonight.....
So there you have it... Wow, gotta appreciate a guy who tries the scientific approach and compares both methods. I was watching this post and while I have always used the EO/IC method, felt I had nothing more to contribute to it, so I kept out of it. But in the back of my mind I kept saying: "I wonder if I can just go out to the garage and try both methods". Kind of difficult to get any real measured data with my 288/296 hydraulic can though. Glad you went through the excersize Ken, now I know how they compare. graemlins/thumbsup.gif
BTW,..EO/IC is a bit easier if you have a remote starter button, otherwise it is a major PITA !! </font>[/QUOTE]Well Jim,

The results prove what I already knew. There is NO difference. While I was adjusting my valves tonight I even got as far as 15* on either side of TDC for the cylinder I was adjusting the valves on and it made NO difference in the lash reading. So there is some margin for error using the TDC method too.

In the end everyone should use what ever method suites them best. Both methods work, even on a solid roller performance camshaft.

I always adjusted them both with the piston ATDC, but then again the cams were street grinds and maybe a radical race cam with a longer opening and closing ramp wouldn't adjust right with this method.

Just to add a little more fact to this discussion, on my cam the seat timing is:

intake open 36.5* close 69.5*
exhaust open 75.5* close 36.5*

So the intake closes 69.5* after BDC, which is ~110* BTDC. The exhaust opens 75.5* BBDC which is 105* ATDC. Compression occurs between the intake closing and the exhaust opening. As you can see I can be off by as much as 100 degrees in either direction and still be on base circle using the TDC method!

With this information I submit the following:

EO-IC should really be called EBO-IBC where B=barely.

Otherwise the EO-IC method will result in an improper lash based upon the mathematical data above. I don't need to have a cam in my hand to figure that out. School is out!

:D

The way I do it is when the exhaust has just barely started to open, adjust the intake. Then when the intake has opened completely and is almost back closed again, adjust the exhaust. Next time I do it, I will look to see where the balancer is when the EO/IC method says it is time to adjust the valve. smile.gif

Originally posted by von:
I'm not the expert here but I agree with Mike based on my experiences with solid cams. Ken, If you think a solid lifter cam has at least 180 deg of base circle, mike one across the "base circle" 90 deg from the lobe. That would be your 180 deg of base circle. Then mike across the lobe and subtract the base circle reading. Compare that to the lobe lift spec. I bet the lobe lift spec is larger. It is on my L-78 cam. It's because solid cams have long gradual lash take-up ramps. It might make only .002 or .003 difference but that will change the effective duration. Try the EOIC method once and I bet you'll find your rockers a little loose. Von,

What I was saying is that there is 180 degrees or more with no valve movement in most cams. Don't forget the crank rotates twice for every camshaft revolution. In my example above (my cam) there is 215* of crankshaft rotation with NO valve movement (the valves are on base circle). The intake valve closes at 69.5* ABDC of the compression stroke and the exhaust valve opens 75.5* BBDC of the power stroke (180-69.5=110.5)+(180-75.5=104.5)=215. I just needed some time to sit down and do the math, and now I have done so.

Ken, & anyone else following this way overblown post :D

I must digress,,, ;)

Ken is correct, both methods are very accurate.

As I posted in one of my last posts, all three methods will work just fine & I was not trying to tell you that your method was inaccurate just to check with the EOIC method which I see you did.
With your cam I believe you will find you are about 65 degrees from the exhaust lobe starting point at TDC assuming your 75 degree opening number & a constant velocity opening ramp of about .0005/ degree.
And you are right again & I believe I posted this when you say the EOIC method should be when the exhaust starts to open adjust the intake & when the intake is almost closed adjust the exhaust.
This will put you just about centered on the base circle to the opposite lobe which again is where I prefer to be.
But again, all this is really just academic with the cams we are referring to as 65 degrees away form the lobe starting point should give anyone enough margin for error. :D

I guess my most relevant point is that the EOIC deal involves nothing but a feeler gauge, a starter button (assuming you are lazy like me LOL) & the knowledge of which valve is which & my statement of the TDC method not being the most accurate has more to do with my feeling it is not the easiest which is at best subjective as I use it when I assemble an engine & readjusting with EOIC could be done just as accuratly with the TDC method if I didn't like the other better.
They are both quite accurate properly done with almost any cam we are likley to run into here.

So,,, folks, use which ever method "blows your skirt up" :D
Done right it will work just fine ;)

Ken, My point was just that on most solid lifter cams, especially factory cams like the L-78, there are long gradual opening and closing lash take-up ramps. They don't actually move the valve until the lash is taken up. For me, the EOIC method insures that I don't get on one of those ramps and get the lash off by a couple thou. You proved your point that your method works. I still feel more comfortable with the EOIC method for me.