2.9 Camshaft Prototype

[capriroadracer]

That's pretty cool! No idea they made roller rockers for the 2.6 & 2.8L engines.

There are only a couple of shops that make them and they fly under the radar because the demand is so . . . non-existent. A racing pal tells me that they are no lighter than the original cast iron or steel arms, but I have not verified that. So other than the "cool factor," which is useful only with clear valve covers, the only significant advantage is the ability to get better ratios than the roughly 1.45:1 of the original Ford arms. The better ratios - 1.6:1 or 1.7:1 - allow for more valve lift, which is helpful as long as the poor-breathing heads can be inspired to breathe better. All this begs the question why some of us continue to beat on these engines to get more power. Insanity explains it, as does the satisfaction of taking the road less traveled.

 

[capriroadracer]

There freaking awesome! I'd love to see them when your done.

I'll post updates with appropriate photos as I make progress. Getting the first engine done will be enough of a challenge - heads ported, larger valves installed, proper length pushrods (probably from the 2.8L engine with the same roller rockers), shimming the arms to line up over the valve tips, and making sure that the pushrods do not interfere with the inside edges of the heads as they follow some of the arms to their new location relative to the pedestals and valves. The next trick is to get a few hundred miles on the engine and see if the milled stock pedestals hold up.

 

[capriroadracer]

Are you using the intake from Burton? Just for fun I ordered a catalog from them (took like 2 months to get over here to Alberta) and they have got some dang nice parts for the colognes!

I'm using the intake from Ric Wood, also in the UK. I've seen Burton's intake on their website, and the one that they make - or someone makes for them - for the 2.8L (the non-US market 2.8L). Yes, Burton offers some nice parts for the Cologne engines. I used one of their cams for my first 2.8L race engine. It was very good to 7200 rpm, but the heads could not breathe beyond that. I used their 1.75" intake valves and 1.50" exhaust valves on that engine and might use them on the eventual 2.9L race engine.

Attached should be a photo of the mocked-up 2.9L engine, just a test-fit of the intake and carbs. And, no, at that point I had not properly sized the ARP head studs, but that's easily done from existing 4-cyl Ford OHC stud kits.

 

[Psychopete]

I like!!!!

 

[jd4242]

I've been experimenting with roller rockers made for the 2.6L and 2.8L Ford "Cologne" V6s on a new World Products 2.9L head, though it could be done with any 2.9L head.

I've milled the sides of the stock cast aluminum rocker shaft pedestals to allow the rocker arms to line up better over the valve tips. (I've gone this route because the guy who makes the roller rockers pretty much refuses to make arms for the 2.9L engine because of the increased offset and poor arm-to-valve orientation on the 2.9L. Seeing how bad the alignment is, I can't blame the guy.)

I've replaced the hex head bolts with allen head cap screws to allow the pedestals to be milled enough for the arms to line up over the valves. I'll either have a portion of the allen head cap screws' shanks milled to allow for proper oil routing, or I will further mod the pedestals with an oil distribution groove or two. A small o.d. AN-grade flat washer will be fitted to reduce galling of the pedestal top.

The real test of whether this works will be to see if milling the stock cast pedestals weakens them to the point of failure. I'll build the first engine as a street-going guinea pig. If the milled stock pedestal idea is worthy of just the trash can, I'll have pedestals milled from billet aluminum. My few fellow conspirators in this madness are suggesting that steel pedestals would remove all doubt about integrity, but we'll see if we have to go there.

The accompanying photo might better explain what I am doing. The front assembly has not-ready-for-prime-time pedestals made from billet aluminum. The rear assembly has stock cast Ford pedestals with lots of milling done to the sides. Once I have the pedestals milled so the arms are where I want them I'll have aluminum spacers made to keep the arms in place.

Ive been trying to find higher ratio rockers for my 4.0 for years as they aren't made any more.ive tried getting custom shops to make them also and they wont do it.im assuming the 4.0 has the same problems as the 2.9 so i would LOVE to see if these work out and sure would be willing to pay you to make a set for the 4.0

 

[capriroadracer]

Ive been trying to find higher ratio rockers for my 4.0 for years as they aren't made any more.ive tried getting custom shops to make them also and they wont do it.im assuming the 4.0 has the same problems as the 2.9 so i would LOVE to see if these work out and sure would be willing to pay you to make a set for the 4.0

Sorry for the turbo-lag delay . . . I have a complete 4.0L OHV engine sitting around for compare-and-contrast purposes. Once I finish the 2.9L engine that will be fitted with the roller rocker arms and modified pedestals, and put some time on it, I'll have a look at one of the 4.0L heads. I cannot promise that I will get to this quickly. Lots of things have jumped the line in front of the 2.9L engine work. But, I'd be happy to help if I can put a kit together, once I am sure that this plan is sound.

 

[gi728]

Well I still have my motor apart. I would love to try both cam, and roller rockers. if there is a big boom then O well. 5.0 is already on order.

 

[Golden Ranger]

I am going through an '88 Ranger 2.9L that has sat for many years. It is in good shape for its age. http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1225859&postcount=11

Currently the fuel, suspension, and brake systems are in progress.

How many air volume mods can the stock Speed Density Fuel Injection reliably compensate?

I had the larger 58mm TB on previously with NO problems. Headers and plans to port match the plenum and intake are in the works.

If additional mods (cam, high ratio rockers, ported heads) were added to the mix, would it all be in vien?

Thanks
Golden

 

[Golden Ranger]

I asked what products they still offered for the 2.9L Ford engine. Here is the response from Camcraft dated 4/30/12:

We can still supply the cam & lifters and some 1.55 ratio rocker arms (stock is 1.47) but that is about it. The rockers are modified stock items. The additional power comes from the faster valve opening NOT the roller tip. The cam & lifters cost $269.00 and the modified rockers are about $375.00 exchange with $100.00 core charge. Call (800) 426-2261 to order. We accept major credit cards and money orders. We appreciate you interest in Camcraft.

 

[twentyover]

I think Camcraft used Rocker Arm Specialties in Andersonville CA to change rocker arm ratio. I spoke to Camcraft about re-ratioed rockers when I was investigating their "ported" World Products heads. During that conversation, they suggested re-ratioing the rockers, and I told them I'd had RAS re-ratio a set of rockers for an MG I'd been hot rodding. When I mentioned RAS, it seemed to suck the wind out of their sails, the basis for my belief.

RAS re-ratio's by drilling the adjustment screw at an angle to move it closer to the rockershaft.

Loooks like RAS lists a high ratio rocker for the 2.9
http://www.rockerarms.com/ford.htm
Scroll on down to Ford 2.9. No need for a mild cam change, just change rocker arms. More lift w/ no duration change (OK, duration @ 0.050 valve lift will increase.

 

[twentyover]

Double post. I'm a moron

 

[Golden Ranger]

Thanks twentyover