gerg

I think I might just do these ones the same as the others and run the shims on all of them, just for future consistency. There may or may not be a cam in this engine's future.... We'll see how much I can delude myself into thinking it's a necessity Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Yep you have your micrometer eyes calibrated right Bear. It's probably only 2mm which equates to about 3mm at the pushrod. Good thing is that the round bit can be gripped in the lathe and the base is what I'll machine off. I'll defs record the difference and put it up here. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Well, today I learnt something. Even though these Scorpions are supposed to be for 351C, 400M and big block Ford, and yes they do physically bolt on, the pedestal is a couple of mm higher so you'll be too short in the pushrod on a Clevo. I found this out the hard way when I went to bolt them on. Part number: SCP1024 Here's the pedestal: Despite having different numbers, the rocker bodies look pretty much identical, save for the new ones having silver trunnions and roller shafts (not black). Slight difference in the recess for the pushrod but otherwise look ok. So the plan is to take the pedestals into work and skim a bit off them on the lathe to match the sample one that's correct. Now you might be wondering what's going on with me ordering these when I have a set already... Well I almost had a full set. My brother kindly donated his ones that he bought off Wagoon (remember him?) that were meant for his turbo crossy XP ute project that was moved on to another bloke. So I had a set of 12 for a crossy but a clevo takes 16... No biggie, I would just run them along with the 4 remaining stockers until I could order the last 4 rollers individually. I cracked them open and tried bolting them on, found that the threads were wrong. They were M8s instead of 5/16. So it turns out that they wouldn't have worked on a crossy directly as the part number refers to the Canadian 3.8 Essex V6, which is a metric engine..... No drama, I got a set of 5/16 capscrews and bolted them on. You might ask why I would do such a goofy thing, but I was chasing a tick in the valvetrain so I wanted to install the rollers and pick the best standard rockers to use for the last 4, to try and eliminate the noise. Still ticked though, I think in might have a few lazy lifters. The car otherwise ran fine with 4 stock rockers and 12 Scorpions. It's taken over a year for me to pull my finger out and order these, and the only ones available individually from Summit now are these ones, which are supposed to be a universal Ford fitment. Annoyingly, Jeg's had the 3.8 ones available individually (perfect) but they don't ship internationally. So... A heads-up for anyone getting these Scorpions for their clevo (or crossy). You will need to either skim the pedestal, get a longer pushrod or run a lash cap. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

We do have alpine regions and decent mountain ranges, but nothing like the Rockies or Switzerland. Our skiing experience involves a lot of gum trees [emoji23] The Great Dividing Range runs up the east coast and probably averages around 500m (1600ft) in height, with peaks in the Blue Mountains up around 1400m (5000ft) and 1600 in Barrington tops. Dean I thought Mt Hotham was higher (around 1800m or 6000ft), or is that just a resort (not a town)? Australia is old and worn down. There are no active fault lines or volcanoes within our continent so no new mountains have been made since forever. I would love to see the Rockies and the Oregon Coast one day. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Welcome, and interesting combo t have in the States... long live the crossy! Dean is right about the 34ADM being reliable, once dialled in. They just need to be understood if you want to overhaul them for whatever reason (as a precaution, etc). Up to you if that's something you'd like to take on. Once done right, they should be another set-and-forget carby. Jetting for altitude shouldn't be too difficult, I'm sure your Aussie friends could help with parts if you're in a pinch. Jet drills might need to be used in any case (we don't normally need to play around with jets as we're not a mountainous country by world standards). Personally I think the 2100 is a great old-school carby that should give years of faultless service. The CFM rating will depend on what model you have, determined by the throttle bore diameter. I understand that these Autolites were OEM on 70s Jeeps, am I right? This would tell you that they are well-suited to off-road work. Many folks consider these a set-and-forget carby. I don't think they are in the same category as a 500 Holley, I think they are more like a 350 for flow. If comparing to 4-barrel flow (different test criteria), the 500 is more like 390 and the 350 is around 280. One issue I see is that turning the carb around with the throttles 90 degrees to where the ADM was will have the flow restricted by the tight turn it has to make into the manifold. Not really ideal for performance. There are various manifolds available here that you can mount a 2- or 4-barrel Holley straight onto, which you would adapt the Autolite to. They aren't cheap though. I think it will be tight up against the manifold going by the mount position you described. Most folks here either adapt it with the bowl facing forward or just mount it on a performance manifold. If you really have to mount it sideways, could you have the bowl facing outwards? Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Sadly I think you will run into carrier compatibility issues. The 2.77 ratio centre has a housing machined to suit that pinion depth, and is in the 75 (7.5" crown) series of BW diffs. The later gear sets (with deeper ratios) are 78 series and without machining, I don't think can be fitted to the 75 housing. The issue is that the step that the inner pinion bearing sits on is machined closer to the carrier, bringing the pinion further in to meet the smaller diameter crown. If you tried putting 78 gears in that housing, the pinion may be well too deep to get the crown in. You can go the other way (75 gears in a 78 housing) with a specific pinion bearing cup with a built-in spacing to suit, or there are shims to go under the bearing to space it in to meet the crownwheel. There are lots of traps to fall into with these diffs if you haven't researched which parts fit what series, and even then you can come across hybrids that have a mish-mash of parts that don't seem to make sense. I had one kindly donated to me that was an old 75 series 2.92 with disc brakes, big bearing axles, LSD centre but was only 2-pinion and 25 spline. It had a thick spacer under the pinion to get it to mesh properly, so the housing could possibly have been a 78 with 75 internals. I've seen a housing with "LSD" cast into the outside but was a 2-pin open centre. Best bet is to transfer an entire working diff over to your chassis. I did this using an XG disc brake diff but changed to an LSD centre and (eventually) 3.08 gears from a Commodore. It's only 25 spline but I don't drop skids or pop the clutch so should live a long life. I would have bought those 2.77s off you if I hadn't already built mine up. My 1st gear is a bit on the short side for my liking (EA T5 box). Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Would be nice if you could source a crank for it to make it a proper engine... Maybe a Windsor stroker would work? Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Once you get that pin in the right place, is there a way you can cross-pin it or stake it, seeing as it's now sitting shallower in the hole than before, with less interference fit holding it into the casing? Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

One last clutch at a straw... Is that detent fork installed properly? As in, is there another way it could go onto the shift rail that puts it further up into engagement with that peg so it doesn't fall off the end? Something doesn't seem right here. Is there a spacer or shim missing, circlup in the wrong spot... I dunno, I always go back to basics when I'm finding myself scratching my head Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Is there a way you can drill into the back of the pin to push it out of the housing? This would allow you to drill/tap for a screw-in one and have an external locknut to keep it tight. This is only if you can get access to the back of it. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

A-ha... that will do it Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Maybe he got the longer input E-series windsor box/bellhousing? ie: EB XR8, etc Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

That wasn't my experience Thom, my combo consists of an EA T5, very old mechanical toploader bell drilled and studded to suit, and standard 351 clutch. Input shaft on my T5 was the same length as the single rail that came out, 6 and 8 cyl types, only mod was to skim 1.5mm off the diameter of the input bearing retainer (snout) to fit into the smaller hole in the bellhousing. This same T5 box lived in my EF and my EA before it, both of them 6s. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

That's full farmer spec there Thom, surprised you didn't stick-weld some star pickets or tie it off with fence wire or involve a tree stump somehow Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Cheers mate, 17.8 is not much better than what mine is doing at the moment. I dunno why, but clevos just seem to like a drink. Looks like Summit is the go for that kind of gear, but their price is deceptive as the spider kit and bronze dizzy gear are extra which should really be all bundled together. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

What cam are you running on your 302? I like the low-mid torque on mine but every now and then I wish I had something more. I only want to upgrade if the trade-off for driveability and fuel economy is minimal or none. My current one is a Crow 21602 l, has 208/208 @50, 484 lift on a 110 LSA. Looking at the catalog of Comp rollers, they seem to have at the lower end, specs of around the low 220s and mid-500s lift. Sort of around what the old E303 motorsport cams were for 302Ws back when there wasn't much else, but perhaps with a tighter LSA than what they had. If I was ever going to swap the cam again (I've wiped 2 already) I'd want to stretch my budget to a roller setup. Have you noticed a serious drop in low end torque and fuel economy when going up in cam by that much? Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Yeah that jogs my memory after reading about Argentine Fords. Quite the parallel to Ford Oz in that they did their own thing and achieved a lot in a very small market. I'll bet the Argentine Y-blocks are the holy grail for hotrodders Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

That's interesting. When they went with the thicker castings, could they have been thinking of making a diesel variant of the Kent, just as the Essex V6 was originally designed to have? These were a very stout design for a petrol engine and rumour has it that they were slated to have a dual application for petrol and diesel. That's how they got the nickname "Essex Lump"... Their weight is comparable to a small iron V8. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

I built a cradle (not a run stand) that could be easily turned into a runner, out of bits of unistrut and brackets. Very minimal welding, mostly nuts and bolts. Maybe you could go to a scrap yard and find some of that stuff? Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Yeah Ford was a pioneer of "thinwall casting" in the early 60s, the 221/260/289 being among the first of their designs to use that method. Not sure when the "Kent" motor came about but perhaps the British casting process didn't lend itself to that approach? Or maybe the smaller engines didn't benefit as the weight saving as a whole wasn't worth it? The Kent is an amazing engine, among the longest-running designs ever produced if you count the later Spanish versions and was the basis for many motorsport engine designs as well. The most successful F1 engine in history was the Cosworth DFV, which was based on the Kent architecture, just made into a V8. Wow didn't know Y-blocks could be punched out that far... Pity they didn't make them for very long. They weren't a bad engine, just got outdated pretty quickly as the small block Chev was making its presence known. Also, goofy port arrangement that still boggles to this day. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

I would say "yes", you do need them. The oil doesn't just lubricate the pivot, it cools it as well. I've had my rocker covers off while running and noticed that on the oil deflectors that were broken, the oil shot out of the hole by a good foot or so, which means each one was shooting the oil up under the rocker cover and missing the rocker pivot completely. What did you mean by "adding to the argument" about black motor heads? Do you mean there definitely is a difference, or that you can't see much in it? Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

Funny how such a tiny block can be bored so far, yet many big behemoth V8s can't go much beyond 0.030" before the walls get thin. Pistons came up like brand spankers! Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

That was a British engineering thing at the time, the flat-faced head and the chamber in the piston design resembled diesel engines, and I think they were going for a similar approach to combustion efficiency. The "Heron" design was (I think) as much about production cost as an increase in efficiency. The head could be cast and machined in many less steps of operation, and different compression ratios/chamber volumes could be arrived at simply by changing the piston relief (chamber). There were others that took that approach too, mainly Jaguar with the V12 HE revision, the adoption of which took the fuel consumption from "frightful" to merely "a bit excessive". There were pros and cons. The pros were good combustion efficiency by having the quench area around the entire chamber so the mixture gets pushed into the centre (to the plug) from all directions. Also as stated, simplified manufacture. Cons were that the pistons were relatively heavy, requiring a lot of material in the crown. Also, valve area is limited when the valves cannot be tilted to gain extra space for a bigger diameter and also for optimal flow into the chamber (the reason why Clevos can have such big valves in a 4" bore Vs Windsors). Once multivalve engines started coming on in the 80s, this design became redundant for petrol engines. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

That's a good kit if you have the bare block in front of you. It requires drilling/tapping in the valley to screw the spider down, which of course creates shavings you need to clean up. I think the spider type lifter is a better long-term upgrade than the tie-bar type. Seen stories of catastrophic failures on the latter. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

If the roller cam is a proper retrofit, the base circle of the cam is made smaller to accommodate the longer lifters, so should be right for std pushrods. This also prevents the lifter from otherwise poking out too far at max lift, causing oil pressure to dump out the top of the lifter bore via the lifter oil feed hole. Check first though, although I researched this a while back, I have never actually fitted a retrofit roller to a clevo. Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk