Roller Rockers?

[Cummins610]

Besides the price, why are roller rockers not a popular option in performance engine builds?, or are they just used by the quiet few?. Are there benifits using them with a sub 4500rpm engine?. Just curious after seeing them on Pure Diesel Powers website, search didnt come up with much. Cummins Roller Rocker Assembly 5.9L 12 Valve SMT Version 2 (http://www.puredieselpower.com/catalog/roller-rocker-assembly-for-59l-valve-cummins-diesel-smt-p-28871.html)

Thanks

[Kronic_187]

takes quite a bit of work i would imagine....

i doubt that is just bolt on and go..... otherwise more people would have them.... of course i can think of alot i;d rather spend 4 g's on

[roachie]

Price is the biggest issue. I think a cheapest set I've seen is $1300.

[badbowtie]

I read they require more maintenace because they use a brass bushing on the pedistal, that has to be replaced every so often.

[DIESEL_POWER]

A properly built Roller rockers will last longer than stock in the same conditions.

Less friction, better ratios, cooler oil temps, and more power are all bennifits of getting roller rockers.

With this set here we gained 38 hp on a stock truck, and over 70+hp on a modded truck, the gains dont stop there, it really depends on what you combo is and the ratio that can be used. most are tight lipped because they dont want you to have what they do.

This design i had built will work on all VP and all 5.9 and 6.7 CR's, They are Fully roller needle bearing design and tip, no cheap bushing, wheel pin tip.. A first of it's kind!

i have not made any 12 valve stuff, but figured you would like some info on whats out there.:Cheer:

[gunracer1]

sweet looking

[Blueboy]

I called Harland Sharp a couple years ago, price was $2.200.
They did not recommend them for driving on the street with
our diesels.

[cummin get it]

I dont understand how they are adding that much power to stock and modified trucks. I understand the less friction part would help but with these rockers according to what your saying will add as much hp as what snow performance is claming a 50/50 ration will add on modified. Do you have and dyno sheets or anything im not doubting you cause trust me i have had my shares of been proven wrong... i just can't believe they add that much.

[GRotman]

I dont understand how they are adding that much power to stock and modified trucks. I understand the less friction part would help but with these rockers according to what your saying will add as much hp as what snow performance is claming a 50/50 ration will add on modified. Do you have and dyno sheets or anything im not doubting you cause trust me i have had my shares of been proven wrong... i just can't believe they add that much.

They are a higher ratio, similar to putting in a larger cam.

[zstroken]

Sharp pieces, what kind of costs?

[Blueboy]

Google Harland Sharp, I think those are his.

[soulezoo]

I am using Haisleys. It was about $1k. I did not do before and after dynos as this was not an expected change. It occurred when pulling the head and finding the stockers galled up. Anyway, it does change the ratio slightly and the sotp was quite noticeable. Throttle was "snappier", slight improvement on spool.

Basically on what I have, you are not getting a all new rocker like the OP's link, but just replacing the bushing with roller bearings using the stock arms.

[zstroken]

I am using Haisleys. It was about $1k. I did not do before and after dynos as this was not an expected change. It occurred when pulling the head and finding the stockers galled up. Anyway, it does change the ratio and the sotp was quite noticeable. Throttle was "snappier", slight improvement on spool.


Do you have any pictures of them?

[cummin get it]

They are a higher ratio, similar to putting in a larger cam.

ahh now i understand lol duh!! So with a cam it almost doubles the power?! Sweet! But how much you talking for price cause they look like they are made with pride and non of that garbage foreign bs which is what most of us want. (at least i think)

[rawdog]

i was told 14 hp on the dyno.this system was designed not for the power bit for the rigidity of the rockers.in high rpms the standard rocker pedestal will move with only one bolt and this system will clamp the whole top end together.what i have been told

[DIESEL_POWER]

I called Harland Sharp a couple years ago, price was $2.200.
They did not recommend them for driving on the street with
our diesels.

The previous stuff HS made was for VP and 12 valve only, i have the first and only build rights on the 5.9 and 6.7 Stuff, the material and design is much better/lighter/stronger than what was previously offered. because it's a neddle bearing style tip and fulcum , they need less oil to live, and there much tougher, so street driving would be no issue, accually i have one set that has about 15k on them and they are still showing zero wear...

5.9 kits come with 4340 Cro moly spacers 4340 Cro-moly bridges, 12.9 bolts, Rockers, fulcrum shafts, and a valve cover.

6.7 are made as a direct bolt on, but same rockers as 5.9

5.9 vp are also direct bolt on.

Hope this helps.

[RonA]

The previous stuff HS made was for VP and 12 valve only, i have the first and only build rights on the 5.9 and 6.7 Stuff, the material and design is much better/lighter/stronger than what was previously offered. because it's a neddle bearing style tip and fulcum , they need less oil to live, and there much tougher, so street driving would be no issue, accually i have one set that has about 15k on them and they are still showing zero wear...

5.9 kits come with 4340 Cro moly spacers 4340 Cro-moly bridges, 12.9 bolts, Rockers, fulcrum shafts, and a valve cover.

6.7 are made as a direct bolt on, but same rockers as 5.9

5.9 vp are also direct bolt on.

Hope this helps.

Wade.
Send me a recommend for my 6.7.

RonA

[DIESEL_POWER]

I am using Haisleys. It was about $1k. I did not do before and after dynos as this was not an expected change. It occurred when pulling the head and finding the stockers galled up. Anyway, it does change the ratio slightly and the sotp was quite noticeable. Throttle was "snappier", slight improvement on spool.

Basically on what I have, you are not getting a all new rocker like the OP's link, but just replacing the bushing with roller bearings using the stock arms.

your talking about the offset fulcrum stock rockers..........yea i remember talking to van about that a few years ago. they give about 25 thou more lift and some duration. good for about 20 hp or so.

only problem is that there not rebuildable and you can only go but a tiny bit bigger on lift and durationover stock. otherwise nice if you dont have money

[roachie]

It pains me to say this but, I believe Houge had a pic of a very nice comp setup for a 24V, same as what PDP has. It caught me with the bridges being rigid as to force both valves to be equally depressed.

[StainlessRRA]

It pains me to say this but, I believe Houge had a pic of a very nice comp setup for a 24V, same as what PDP has. It caught me with the bridges being rigid as to force both valves to be equally depressed.

Its true, Houge has a very nice set up. I wanted to run them, but didn't have the extra $. But from those pictures they're far different than what PDP has.

[DIESEL_POWER]

It pains me to say this but, I believe Houge had a pic of a very nice comp setup for a 24V, same as what PDP has. It caught me with the bridges being rigid as to force both valves to be equally depressed.

That set up adds unessisary weight and friction compared to a stock design, more pieces = more points of failure!

Also another bad point is that with heat and the flexing of the valve stem that design WILL bind, take a close look. But i dont want to pick it apart, it just dosent seem to me that it was well thought out!

I've been told that KISS method is best...........KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID !!!

[roachie]

Its true, Houge has a very nice set up. I wanted to run them, but didn't have the extra $. But from those pictures they're far different than what PDP has.

Same company makes them is what I was saying.

That set up adds unessisary weight and friction compared to a stock design, more pieces = more points of failure!

Also another bad point is that with heat and the flexing of the valve stem that design WILL bind, take a close look. But i dont want to pick it apart, it just dosent seem to me that it was well thought out!

I've been told that KISS method is best...........KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID !!!

I seemed like a nice approach. Although I have not heard of anything bad about OEM bridge system.

[DIESEL_POWER]

Same company makes them is what I was saying.



I seemed like a nice approach. Although I have not heard of anything bad about OEM bridge system.

The bridges i have are weighted on the ends instead of the middle,(like stock) that promotes less weight "rocking", and the valve stems fit in the bridges "snug" not tight but snug and this stops most of the bridge rocking, and stem horizontal motion. They also have oiling holes in the stem ends for enhanced protection and friction/wear losses

Also the top are flat not round, the roller tip is also flat, the fit together allows for equal motion down and back up. The "A" frame design makes for un beatable strength, lightened 4340 Cromoly makes for very light weight.


The bridges pictured are for the 5.9 only the vp and 6.7 can use the stock style bridges, unless the engine is a roller cam and lifter style i have built other bridges for that application.

Not that stock is bad, but it could be better, so i made it better. There's your difference.:Cheer:

[COMP461]

The bridges rocker system is horrible,

I’m more than likely the only person around that has been on a spintron with a 4 valve Cummins. The bridges wobble all over the place. The lift can vary up to .015 , from side to side . This even truer with the 4.6 Ford single springs, that the other guy sells for so cheap. I will not sell a single spring for this reason

The dual springs I designed and sell, helps a lot, in that the variance is less than .003. The dual springs are more progressive, and mantain equal pressure thru the lift range.


The misunderstood part of rockers on a diesel is that they are for friction reduction, there is a small percentage gains in power in friction reduction at the rpms we are running.


The only gain is to use high ratio rockers. The 4 valve Cummins needs lift in the .600 + range on fully ported head, and the Dmax is very similar. The 2 valve Cummins head is happy at .850+ lift.
to know this, you must have , and use one of these below

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa147/GREG560/Project%20X%20Diesel/duramax_flowbench20101.gif




To get those lift numbers you will need big ratios. I have 2.25 to 1 rockers for 12 valves in final testing, and going in to production. The 4 valve rockers are 1.95 to 1 .

The other aspect is that the diesel power cycle, wants very short timing events, so to stay within the parameters you must reduce lift / base circle. To do this you either make a bigger cam core, as in my 60 mm Cummins core up from the stock 54.5 mm stock cores, or increase rocker ratio. Or do both.


Here is so preproduction pictures of the rockers for a Cummins CR / 24 valve, the productions parts will have cast bases. These are over $3700, but well worth it if you going to build a ultra competitive program.
Here is also so of the early development of the 12 valve rockers, they have come a long way since this old pictures



http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa147/GREG560/Project%20X%20Diesel/61123_1415696308254_1107968363_31013467_346974_n.j pg

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa147/GREG560/OLD%20COMP%20PHOTOS/rockersproto.jpg




here is a 60mm billet core next to a stock 54.5 core

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa147/GREG560/60MMCAM.jpg

[RyanB]

Greg- Looks good! Can you explain the cut away head with the spark plug???? Getting into something new? If so...I am quite intrested!!!

[Kronic_187]

alky tractor.....

[The Cummin Goat]

These netted us about .05" extra valve lift.


http://i389.photobucket.com/albums/oo331/CumminGoat/IMG_3580-1.jpg

http://i389.photobucket.com/albums/oo331/CumminGoat/IMG_3592.jpg

[The Cummin Goat]

These 24v also netted us about .05" extra lift. Sorry they're a little oily, just came off the hone.


http://i389.photobucket.com/albums/oo331/CumminGoat/05-04-10_1727-1.jpg

[zstroken]

These 24v also netted us about .05" extra lift. Sorry they're a little oily, just came off the hone.


http://i389.photobucket.com/albums/oo331/CumminGoat/05-04-10_1727-1.jpg



.05???

[The Cummin Goat]

.05???

Yeah, .05" . Went from .442" to .495" max lift in one engine.

[Laramie4x4]

These 24v also netted us about .05" extra lift. Sorry they're a little oily, just came off the hone.


http://i389.photobucket.com/albums/oo331/CumminGoat/05-04-10_1727-1.jpg

I want some!!!!!...

[COMP461]

if your going to go to the trouble of rockers , then go to a 2.00 to 1 or bigger .

[DIESEL_POWER]

sometimes too big of a rocker will loose power,all depends on the whole engine combo, including the camshaft. most of the time with the diesels less is better,unless higher rpm is needed. almost 40 hp on a .050 better ratio speakes volumes.:rockwoot:

[getblown5.9]

So are these all systems that must go together, or are there components that can be bought separate?

What all is needed to switch to roller rockers on a 24v VP engine? I noticed i have some nasty scuffing on my rocker arms etc, and rather than put new stockers in, i'll upgrade while I'm at it.

Wade send me a PM with some info on your 24v VP rockers and bridges.

[RonA]

Nice looking parts all around. Too bad the 6.7 pistons are so thin between the the crown and the top ring. .100 less meat in that area than a 5.9 makes me nervous thinking about putting reliefs in.

[DIESEL_POWER]

So are these all systems that must go together, or are there components that can be bought separate?

What all is needed to switch to roller rockers on a 24v VP engine? I noticed i have some nasty scuffing on my rocker arms etc, and rather than put new stockers in, i'll upgrade while I'm at it.

Wade send me a PM with some info on your 24v VP rockers and bridges.

All the 24 valve needs is rockers. you can use the stock bridges if you wanted to.

[DIESEL_POWER]

Nice looking parts all around. Too bad the 6.7 pistons are so thin between the the crown and the top ring. .100 less meat in that area than a 5.9 makes me nervous thinking about putting reliefs in.

thicker gasket?

[RonA]

thicker gasket?

Just thinking out loud Wade. It's interesting stuff to be sure, but my 5.9 is making plenty of power. The 6.7 should have a bit stronger bottom end and midrange so I'll just be happy with that. It's already a one run special at the track and I don't like lying to the tech guy. I'll leave warp speed to you racer guys.

[joefarmer]

All the 24 valve needs is rockers. you can use the stock bridges if you wanted to.
Do you sell/source CR rockers? PM price if you could. Thanks!

[Laramie4x4]

....X2....................

[DIESEL_POWER]

Do you sell/source CR rockers? PM price if you could. Thanks!

Sorry, i missed your post

[JERONIMO]

Greg- Looks good! Can you explain the cut away head with the spark plug???? Getting into something new? If so...I am quite intrested!!!

Nat gas/ LP cylinder head.

[DIESEL_POWER]

Any one see our roller rocker bump in the new DP mag? i've gotten a huge response!!

[BigBadDodge]

Any one see our roller rocker bump in the new DP mag? i've gotten a huge response!!

Sure did, nice :)

[CIDraughn]

id like a price on the roller rockers for the 06...something with a conservative ratio. not looking for huge rpm

[RonA]

I just got the flow sheet on my 6.7 head. It looks like on the intake side the gains above .300 lift are minimal and on the exhaust side above .400 are minimal. With a 1.35 (approx) rocker .400 total lift is about .300 lift at the cam.

[zstroken]

I just got the flow sheet on my 6.7 head. It looks like on the intake side the gains above .300 lift are minimal and on the exhaust side above .400 are minimal. With a 1.35 (approx) rocker .400 total lift is about .300 lift at the cam.


Who did the head? How radical did they go?

[DIESEL_POWER]

I just got the flow sheet on my 6.7 head. It looks like on the intake side the gains above .300 lift are minimal and on the exhaust side above .400 are minimal. With a 1.35 (approx) rocker .400 total lift is about .300 lift at the cam.

When the ports are not big enough you become port limited, flow will drastically slow down.

Flow @ .250-.350 are typically where the biggest CFM gains will be, BUT the flow should not stop there.

What size valves do you have?

Higher rocker ratio's WILL increase CFM and flow into and out the cylinder head.

IF you post a flow sheet i can tell you appox what you will gain with a ratio or two higher rocker.

[DIESEL_POWER]

One other question, How were the heads flowed?

Vaccum, or pressure?

[WUnderwood]

Let me get this straight, you don't have any data to post up for YOUR roller rockers.

dyno sheet?
flow numbers?
data logger?
boost?
drive pressure?

Just a simple 'I have roller rockers for sale, they work!, but I don't have any data to back up what I say.'

Typical Wade:nail:

[SCHOOL BUS]

I did tests on banks rockers and they are better. But no you can't have any useful information. But they are the best. Believe me.

[DIESEL_POWER]

Let me get this straight, you don't have any data to post up for YOUR roller rockers.

dyno sheet?
flow numbers?
data logger?
boost?
drive pressure?

Just a simple 'I have roller rockers for sale, they work!, but I don't have any data to back up what I say.'

Typical Wade:nail:


William, when you have Innovative engine components that no one else has, most all of that information becomes proprietary information. Just as Schied, Haisley, and Enterprise does, so will I. They wont post this information, nore will I.

Besides, These rockers are for high end builds, not 15 second 1/4 mile Smoke Belchers.... :hehe:



Now since that had nothing to do with the question asked by Ron, lets get the thread back on track!

[SCHOOL BUS]

He's not asking for your suppliers phone number to get the designs from him. Just info to prove they are beneficial.

[DIESEL_POWER]

He's not asking for your suppliers phone number to get the designs from him. Just info to prove they are beneficial.

That would be completly acceptable, but because he comes across like a wanna be street thug i wont as much as give him a issue of the latest diesel power mag that featured them in the new products section....


Come on read the freaking thread, ive posted a lot of bennificial info...Besides that it's Common since.:bang


Everyone on this forum Knows i go out of my way to help and explain things engine realted, if you cant understand it after i explain/discuss it, well....:redx:



So baggin on me makes no since, i post more info on here than i would say anyone, in the CR world!

[RonA]

The reason I asked is that looking at the numbers for the intake at .300 lift I see "A". At .400 lift I see "A x 1.011", at .500 lift I see "A x 1.035".
On the exhaust, at .300 lift i see "B". At .400 lift I se "B x 1.115", at .500 lift i see "B x 1.13".
That a gain on the intake of only 1.1% going from .3 to .4 lift, and only 3.5% going from .300 to .500 lift.
On the exhauset There is an 11% gain from .3 to .4 and a 13% gain going from .3 to .5.
Seems like .4 lift (stock rockers) would be hard to improve on.
I am not trying to argue with anyone, just trying to understand where best to concentrate my dollars.

[WUnderwood]

Just as Schied, Haisley, and Enterprise does, so will I. They wont post this information, nore will I.

So NGM diesel is on the same playing field as the big 3? LOL surely you jest!

That would be completly acceptable, but because he comes across like a wanna be street thug i wont as much as give him a issue of the latest diesel power mag that featured them in the new products section....

All I am asking for is some solid data. It's so simple. Wait, nevermind, you are on the same field as Shied, Haisley, and Enterprise.


On the exhaust, at .300 lift i see "B". At .400 lift I se "B x 1.115", at .500 lift i see "B x 1.13".
That a gain on the intake of only 1.1% going from .3 to .4 lift, and only 3.5% going from .300 to .500 lift.
On the exhauset There is an 11% gain from .3 to .4 and a 13% gain going from .3 to .5.

So a 1.1% increase on the intake, and 11% increase on the exhaust? *bdh*

[RonA]

So NGM diesel is on the same playing field as the big 3? LOL surely you jest!



All I am asking for is some solid data. It's so simple. Wait, nevermind, you are on the same field as Shied, Haisley, and Enterprise.



So a 1.1% increase on the intake, and 11% increase on the exhaust? *bdh*

If I had .300 lift at the cam with 1.35 ratio(basicly a mild cam and stock rockers) I'd have .4 at the valve and a 1.1% increase in flow over .3 lift on the intake. On the exhaust I'd have .4 lift and an increase in flow of 11.5% over .3 lift.
With a 1.66 rocker I'd have .5 intake lift with an increase of 3.5% over what i had with .3 lift or an increase of 2.5% over a 1.35 ratio rocker.
On the exhaust I would see an increase in flow of 13% over the .3 lift numbers or 1.5% increase over the .400 lift numbers. The extra rocker ratio would add 2.5% on intake and 1.5% on exhaust over stock.
At least that's how i see the math using the flow data i received.

If flow and hp were directly proportional, my motor at 1000hp with stock rockers would be 1025 with 1.66 rockers using the intake data, and 1015 using the exhaust data.
Again, I'm just doing the math.

[GOT-Torque]

Ron, your math is based upon the peak numbers only, you are not accounting for the fact that a higher ratio rocker would get your valve lift to the 0.300" lift mark sooner than the stock rocker (given the same cam). So even though the peak flow doesn't appear to increase much with the increased lift (based upon your flow sheet data), there would be the added benefit of more area under the curve. How much? I don't know...

[JoshH]

...Besides that it's Common since.:bang
Since what?

[DIESEL_POWER]

Ron, With a higher ratio, you will gain in Ramp acceleration opening slightly, and the duration it stays open mostly, also the overal peak lift will be extended as well. So it changes the whole opening and closeing ramp's from the begining to the end. and everything in between, to be exact.

the changes in the very begining and the end of the stroke are so slight that a stock truck can normally run one -two ratio's over stock with out any iterfearence issu's.

When you talk area under the curve, that's been gained, it shows much more flow ability, than just calculating lift, Duration is the biggest power consern for any engine, especially a boosted engine, thats where the power is, lift helps some, but not like one would think. But with higher ratio rockers you will get both.


The Flow#'s you posted dont really make much sence, and sound really low. like maybe it was a basic port job, and in that case you got what you asked for. The valve Will only flow what the port will allow it to, thats what the valve is for to essencially meter the air flow correctly, The valve should be the restriction, not the head. These heads can flow as high as the low 300's
CFM if done properly. Stock they flow between 100-150CFM.

If that is infact the case, Adding a higher ratio will only help some, because of port air stall, or port restriction. Duration will help, but not like your expecting.

[RonA]

Ron, your math is based upon the peak numbers only, you are not accounting for the fact that a higher ratio rocker would get your valve lift to the 0.300" lift mark sooner than the stock rocker (given the same cam). So even though the peak flow doesn't appear to increase much with the increased lift (based upon your flow sheet data), there would be the added benefit of more area under the curve. How much? I don't know...

That makes sense. It would be an interesting test on a dyno to see the actual difference. At one point I tried a .020 over gasket on my truck. I lost bottom end power from the compression change just like cutting the pistons. The rocker change might be a way to compensate for the power loss caused by cutting the pistons with the advantage being you'd make the same power with a lower compression ratio.

[zstroken]

That makes sense. It would be an interesting test on a dyno to see the actual difference. At one point I tried a .020 over gasket on my truck. I lost bottom end power from the compression change just like cutting the pistons. The rocker change might be a way to compensate for the power loss caused by cutting the pistons with the advantage being you'd make the same power with a lower compression ratio.


The rocker would really only have the advantage if your at the limit of your cam ramp rates and/or lift rates. One other advantage would be if your running crazy spring pressures, but that would put a little more force on the tappet.

[RonA]

I appreciate all the info on this one.

[RonA]

Ron, With a higher ratio, you will gain in Ramp acceleration opening slightly, and the duration it stays open mostly, also the overal peak lift will be extended as well. So it changes the whole opening and closeing ramp's from the begining to the end. and everything in between, to be exact.

the changes in the very begining and the end of the stroke are so slight that a stock truck can normally run one -two ratio's over stock with out any iterfearence issu's.

When you talk area under the curve, that's been gained, it shows much more flow ability, than just calculating lift, Duration is the biggest power consern for any engine, especially a boosted engine, thats where the power is, lift helps some, but not like one would think. But with higher ratio rockers you will get both.


The Flow#'s you posted dont really make much sence, and sound really low. like maybe it was a basic port job, and in that case you got what you asked for. The valve Will only flow what the port will allow it to, thats what the valve is for to essencially meter the air flow correctly, The valve should be the restriction, not the head. These heads can flow as high as the low 300's
CFM if done properly. Stock they flow between 100-150CFM.

If that is infact the case, Adding a higher ratio will only help some, because of port air stall, or port restriction. Duration will help, but not like your expecting.


Intake flows 193 at .2, 256 at .3, 260 at .4. Exhaust flows 205 at .2, 251 at .3, and 280 at .4. I don't know the details of the test procedure.(ZZ Fab).

[DIESEL_POWER]

Intake flows 193 at .2, 256 at .3, 260 at .4. Exhaust flows 205 at .2, 251 at .3, and 280 at .4. I don't know the details of the test procedure.(ZZ Fab).

Those #'s makes since. yes these rockers and a matched cam could improve that a good bit!

[RonA]

Those #'s makes since. yes these rockers and a matched cam could improve that a good bit!

Oh well. I guess I can quit thinking about these. My cam is already on it's way and I wouldn't have a clue how to order one to match a set of rockers.

[DIESEL_POWER]

Oh well. I guess I can quit thinking about these. My cam is already on it's way and I wouldn't have a clue how to order one to match a set of rockers.

Just need lift and duration #'s and piston to valve clearance #'s

[DIESEL_POWER]

I'm not a sponsor but I like to pretend sometimes in my doll house.