I was thinking about going with roller rockers on my new engine buildup(350). Im going to be runnning the edelbrock performer rpm heads. is the summit roller rockers ok to run. They are a good price. Also. I have an ac car. Will i have to run tall valve covers and wilol that get in the way of my ac bracket?

Personally I hate to see roller rockers on a street engine when stock style rockers perform so flawlessly. Roller rockers are noisy. IMHO Any time you introduce additional complexity to simple components you increase the likeliness of potential failure. I would guess taller VC needed and expect AC interference. I assume its a streeter based on the AC brackets?

Milan

Its just a street car. I thought i would splurge a little on the valvetrain but i guess i will just stay with stockers.

Originally posted by blaster:
Its just a street car. I thought i would splurge a little on the valvetrain but i guess i will just stay with stockers. Good idea, I beleive those Summit ones are Cast AL versus the better extruded. would probably be Ok with your application but I would stick to the stockers and keep it simple especially when no performance gain will be achieved.

If you want to step up a little...use the crane true 1.5 ratio stamped steel rockers. or 1.52 or 1.6. the main problem with "stock rockers" is the ratios are all off

What will i do about raising my ac bracket?

you can run stock valve covers with the stamped steel rockers...they are just like stock..except more accurate

Uh, I think full roller rockers are a big step up from the factory stamped steel ones . . . personally, I'd look at the Crane Energizers -- for a couple bucks more than the Summit ones you get a much better rocker arm. My 1.6 Energizers now have >10,000 hard miles on them and are still running strong. The Summit rockers are heavy and the fulcrum bearings tend to get loose quick (at least the last set I owned did).

Factory stamped rockers suck IMO. The ratio is rarely the same between two rockers and is almost always less than the 1.5:1 they are supposed to be. Last factory rocker arm I tested had a 1.39:1 ratio graemlins/sad.gif and had 10* LESS duration at the valve than my full roller 1.6 rockers.

If you are concerned about price then the Comp or Crane roller tip rockers have a much more accurate ratio than the stockers, are much stronger, and are still only about $100 a set. If you are really tight look at the Crane stamped rockers -- again, MUCH better than stockers.

I agree with Eric. There is nothing flawless about an old stock rocker. They wear the valve guides out faster, ratios can be in the high 1.3:1 range, they flex quite a bit, break, etc. I say get AT LEAST roller tipped rockers to solve the guide wear and the low ratio pepper.

GM made those to save every last penny. Is that how you build an engine?

Are there aftermarket ac brackets if i decide to run some crane energizers and have to run tall covers?

I don't think you would necessarily need tall valve covers to run the Cranes. You could always just use an extra thick cork gasket with your stock covers to buy an extra 1/8" or so clearance, but I'm not so sure you need it. Watch the baffle inside the valve covers - could possibly need tweeking to clear the fulcrum bearings.

I saw Summit has lightweight aluminum roller rocker thats about $10 cheaper than the cranes. has anyome had any experience with these? they look nice.

I have the RPM heads also and will very soon be running roller rockers. I was reading an article in car craft that was comparing steel vs. aluminum roller rockers. The steel came out ahead on everything....I could explain the reasoning for you if you want me to, but i'm trying to keep this post short. I'd just say make sure you go with steel roller rockers if you buy some....comp makes what looks to be a decent set. The guys at summer will be able to tell you whatever you need to know.....as far as if they will work with your heads. Good luck