Craig,
I found it curious that none of the procedures I've seen make the adjustment
directly on the heel of the lobe; i.e., "opposite the lifters" as you say.
My procedure gives more margin for error on setting the crank angle. In my
case, with a not-to-radical cam, I get the same readings at +/- 90 degrees
of crank angle, but that might not be the case for a more radical cam. I
should also mention that, in spite of what I said before about temperature
not mattering (I'm surprised I didn't get some flack on this one), I do set
the exhaust just a tad looser than the intake since the exhaust valve stem
can run quite a bit hotter than the intake, especially under heavy load. I
only make the exhaust clearance about 0.001" or less. The tolerance range
for setting solid lifter clearance may be at least 0.003" or even more. It
does make a difference how it runs and you can set it tighter for better
high rpm performance or looser for better idle and tooling around town.
Have fun with your new toy.
Brgds,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-tigers@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-tigers@autox.team.net]On
Behalf Of Craig Wright
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 9:36 AM
To: Bob Palmer
Cc: James Barrett; tigers@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Long-Backfire damage
Hello Bob,
Your valve process looks good. I'll start using it. Is this the sequence
that
places the lobes opposite the lifters during adjustment? I noticed when I
first
did the 427 that the lash did not come out right when using the factory
system,
and I suspected it was due to the large cam overlap. I then started using
the 90
degree method but adjusted each cylinders intake and exhaust when that
piston
was in the TDC and firing position. Your system looks better. The info is
timely. I purchased a '66 GT350 vintage race car a couple of weeks ago and
replaced the valve springs (with the heads on) last night. I'll adjust them
tonight.
Thanks,
Craig
|