Hmmm, I would believe it if someone were to argue that the 3-piece
pushrods were designed with hydraulic lifter applications in mind, and
that the pounding they take from large-clearance mechanical applications
like the B engine can potentially lead to failure. But I don't know of
any authority for this opinion.
I am using the 3-piece pushrods in my Mopar V8, but only because I went
from solid lifters to hydraulic, and needed a custom length. The original
Chrysler pushrods were one-piece, FWIW, even in this high performance
application.
What's the big benefit with these tubular pushrods on the B, anyway? Low
reciprocating mass isn't exactly the thing's strong suit. Hardly seems
necessary on a street engine, anyway.
Barney Gaylord had this to say:
>>Barney Gaylord wrote:
>>>....
>>> Yes. Absolutely got an idea. Look here first:
>>> http://www.ntsource.com/~barneymg/grapes/bent_pr.jpg
>>>
>>> This WAS a brand new set of Crane Cams pushrods. .... notice the end
>>>piece inserts that came loose from the Crane 3-piece tubular pushrods. ....
>
>I'm still open to ideas though, just in case anyone would like to venture a
>guess as to cause and effect. And just for the record, since repairing the
>engine and installing a stock set of one piece pushrods I have done an
>additional 5000 miles of very serious driving, including EIGHT more
>autocross dates, and still no more problems.
>
>Barney Gaylord
>1958 MGA with an attitude
> http://www.ntsource.com/~barneymg
>
>
--
Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the red one with the silver bootlid.
|
