TheSamba.com :: View topic

Thu Apr 30, 2020 6:08 pm

Hi,
I am building an engine with basically what I have available.
1776 counterweight, 40 x 35, 1.4 rockers, 40mm idf and Engle 110 cam. 12.5 flywheel.
What I need to know is if I can use those 1.4 with the Engle 110.
Not looking for a race motor.... only a street engine with some torque.
Thanks.

Thu Apr 30, 2020 6:12 pm

No.

Camshaft lobe profile is too aggressive. The Engle W-series cams which of course includes the tried and true W110 are made for 1.1:1 rockers. They can be used with 1.25:1 rockers, but for best longevity I’d say stick with 1.1:1 rockers. The added valve lift is generated by an aggressive lobe that’s not designed for a 1.4:1 high lift rocker.

I can remember building my first hot rod VW engine with the W110 and asking to buy a set of 1.25:1 rockers my local Auto Haus store had advertised back in 1977. The guy behind the counter advised against using them with the W110 cam, I think at the time Engle didn’t recommend using anything but 1.1:1 rockers back then with the W110.

Thu Apr 30, 2020 6:22 pm

1.4 rockers are great when used with a cam designed for them. Dan

Thu Apr 30, 2020 6:26 pm

Ok,
Understood.
Thanks.
Which cam should I use with scat 1.4 rockers ?
Street vehicle, just looking for torque.

Thu Apr 30, 2020 6:58 pm

For your engine, Webcam 86a, Engle fk7, altsup will chime in saying the web is no good but that is his opinion. Dan
GB309 is also good, it is same as Engle V-26.

Thu Apr 30, 2020 7:39 pm

Thanks

Fri May 01, 2020 2:55 am

Dan Ruddock wrote: For your engine, Webcam 86a, Engle fk7, altsup will chime in saying the web is no good but that is his opinion. Dan
GB309 is also good, it is same as Engle V-26.
He he. No, I´ll shut up this time. On a small engine it might just work alright. I have no experience with that.

Fri May 01, 2020 4:57 am

Dan Ruddock wrote: For your engine, Webcam 86a, Engle fk7, altsup will chime in saying the web is no good but that is his opinion. Dan
GB309 is also good, it is same as Engle V-26.

Also your going to need dual springs or my beehives with all three of the cams I suggested. Dan

Fri May 01, 2020 8:54 am

im not saying the consensus to not use the 1.4's is wrong but what would be the main issues? if theres no coil bind then would it just be premature valvetrain wear?

Fri May 01, 2020 9:23 am

it would not bother me at all.yes I would do it.but I would make sure I had it all set up right as usual. the cam hasent a clue what rocker it has on it. but it does need to be done right no mater what rocker is used. I run the 1.34 rockers on most of my vw stuff. the 1.4 will probably in reality be between 1.45&1.6 :shock: ( no Ive never seen 1.6 but I have seen( confirmed) about 1.58 from a "1.4") the 1.34 I use is sold as a 1.25

Fri May 01, 2020 9:25 am

The acceleration rate of the cams profile needs to match the ratio of the rocker arm or it will go into valve float at low RPM which in time will damage or even break valve train parts when they slam down onto each other.

Dan

Fri May 01, 2020 10:40 am

Dan Ruddock wrote: The acceleration rate of the cams profile needs to match the ratio of the rocker arm or it will go into valve float at low RPM which in time will damage or even break valve train parts when they slam down onto each other.

Dan
Yes. The W110 is a biatch already with stock rockers. If you intend to get roller cam valve accelleration with adding 1,4´s to that cam you will need some serius valve spring pressure, like 180 pounds at the seat :shock:
It will run, and it´ll be agressive, but seats, valves and springs will wear out fast.

A guy I know did exactly that on a W125 cam in spite of us advising him against it. He had seen someone reputable in the US do that, so "we were just a bunch of nannies" The engine downright ripped, that´s for sure, but at 5000 miles the valves, guides and seats were so damaged that the engine lost power and got problems with idleing.

Fri May 01, 2020 10:54 am

Alstrup wrote: Dan Ruddock wrote: The acceleration rate of the cams profile needs to match the ratio of the rocker arm or it will go into valve float at low RPM which in time will damage or even break valve train parts when they slam down onto each other.

Dan
Yes. The W110 is a biatch already with stock rockers. If you intend to get roller cam valve accelleration with adding 1,4´s to that cam you will need some serius valve spring pressure, like 180 pounds at the seat :shock:
It will run, and it´ll be agressive, but seats, valves and springs will wear out fast.

A guy I know did exactly that on a W125 cam in spite of us advising him against it. He had seen someone reputable in the US do that, so "we were just a bunch of nannies" The engine downright ripped, that´s for sure, but at 5000 miles the valves, guides and seats were so damaged that the engine lost power and got problems with idleing.
That was Clyde Berg who did that with a ton of spring pressure. In time there was a valve train failure. If his dad was still alive he would got a tongue lashing. Dan

Fri May 01, 2020 11:00 am

For you "new guys" know that Sig Erson made 1.5 and 1.65 rockers in the 70s and 80s for our engines.

Sat May 02, 2020 1:52 am

Lrodri64 wrote: Hi,
I am building an engine with basically what I have available.
1776 counterweight, 40 x 35, 1.4 rockers, 40mm idf and Engle 110 cam. 12.5 flywheel.
What I need to know is if I can use those 1.4 with the Engle 110.
Not looking for a race motor.... only a street engine with some torque.
Thanks.
NO.
But, if you want to use those 1.4's, maybe think of getting an Engle V-26. If you're using a single 40 IDF maybe a FK-7.

Sat May 02, 2020 2:40 am

My scat 1.4 rockers were actually 1.54 (measured). I had to get different rockers, so that my springs didn’t get to close to coil bind. I wish they were truthful with the difference between theory and reality.

Sat May 02, 2020 3:56 am

Lrodri64 wrote: Hi,
I am building an engine with basically what I have available.
1776 counterweight, 40 x 35, 1.4 rockers, 40mm idf and Engle 110 cam. 12.5 flywheel.
What I need to know is if I can use those 1.4 with the Engle 110.
Not looking for a race motor.... only a street engine with some torque.
Thanks. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...………...…………...…………………………………………..one can try any thing . it may work. but it may not work .its easy to change rockers back to stock rockers grass hopper... oh god staying home all the time sucks cant wait for this to end spencerfvee

Sat May 02, 2020 9:57 pm

myb356 wrote: My scat 1.4 rockers were actually 1.54 (measured). I had to get different rockers, so that my springs didn’t get to close to coil bind. I wish they were truthful with the difference between theory and reality.
This is actually very common. I haven't had a lot of experience with this, but most of the high ratio rocker arms I've used and measured, measured out greater than advertised. The only rocker arms that were really close were the old NLA Swedish forging Gene Berg 1.4:1 ratio rockers. I think they measured out to be, like, 1.42:1. There's a lot of variables that can cause this, though. A whole chapter in a book could be devoted to all of that.
Also, as Alstrup said above, the acceleration rate of the valve would quickly grenade all kinds of valve train parts, and in addition to that, be very LOUD. Been there, done that... clackityclackityclackity...

Sun May 03, 2020 2:18 am

My Pauter 1.4’s measured out to be 1.44’s. You would think when just the rockers cost 400 that they would be what they are suppose to be. I used my old shafts, blocks and shims. Quiet tho, I have a fk 89/91 designed for them and spray bars that keep a ton of oil on them which helps with noise. Almost no valve noise at all.

Sun May 03, 2020 11:53 am

ivkings4 wrote: My Pauter 1.4’s measured out to be 1.44’s. You would think when just the rockers cost 400 that they would be what they are suppose to be. I used my old shafts, blocks and shims. Quiet tho, I have a fk 89/91 designed for them and spray bars that keep a ton of oil on them which helps with noise. Almost no valve noise at all.

RE. no noise in your case - You are running a cam designed for HR rockers, so It wouldn't be overly noisy. But an Engle W110 with ratio rockers = more valve noise.
I'm using a SLR EXR 310 cam which is similar to a FK-46 (but better; more lift), and with the extra lift these cams create I thought it would be noisy w/ ratio rockers. Nope. Makes no more noise (chromoly push rods) than a SLR XR 302, V-26, FK-8, or 86b, all cams I have used in the past.