Are these rotators?
 

Been working on that blue 59ab I brought home two weeks ago. Got good spark now and went through the carb after that. New head gaskets came in on Friday so this afternoon I pulled the intake and found some good news. Remarkably clean in the valve chamber and it has adjustable lifters and drilled lifter bosses. The ford rebuild tag shows bore at .0825 and .010/.010. Pistons are stamped accordingly. Sadly the stroke is 3 3/4":rolleyes: but this was a pig in a poke situation at best. The valve clearances are quite big. I usually set them up in the middle of the range numbers in my orange ford overhaul book. I notice that the last variants of the V8 show .018 for exhaust valves. Is this because they used valve rotators? Does my engine appear to have rotators, and if so, do I need the big ,018 clearance on the exhaust valves? On a side note, you can see that on #4 the builder missed the groove in the valve guide with his horseshoe clip and set it between the spring and the guide. Maybe a good 1/8" added to the lash. Maybe this is why this otherwise good looking engine was pulled? There is plenty of cross hatch showing in the bores and cranking on 12 volts with no heads it shows 60 lb oil pressure on a mechanical gauge. I remain quite optomistic but want to set the valves tomorrow before I fire it up on the stand. I know nothing about the cam but expect stock. The adjuster bolts seem pretty deep in the bores though. Valve lash settings???? Thanks in advance GB

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Nice, clean, tidy, organised shed. Yes, they're rotators.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

In your picture of the five valve assemblies, one does not have the rotator cone. So he either mixed up some parts there or used the regular non-rotator type valve in that location. You'll want to verify that each part in that particular assy is the correct one.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

are the valve springs different for intake and exhaust? Looks a little like Isky springs on the exhaust with the rotators. I believe they are shorter and would work with the rotators.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

All of the above--plus, some of the springs are upside down.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

The person that installed the valve train, had no idea what he was doing, and why. I did things like that when I was learning. I'm still learning.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Agreed! It must have been the new guy in the shop doing this. Likely not his fault, but rather a lack of training. He was left to just muddle through.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

With all of this what are the odds that the seat pressures are correct or consistent?

Re: Are these rotators?
 

A little hard to tell but it appears some springs are upside down.

R

Re: Are these rotators?
 

So it looks like I have a bit of a project ahead of me. I have 'overhauled' about ten of these V8s in the past 25 years. Most of what I know about setting them up I learned from all the books available in the '90s. I have read them all so many times they are falling apart. Living on this island I have never had any association with other flathead V8 folks until I discovered the internet, and I really appreciate all the help I get here. I have a couple of coffee cans of valve parts and know there are rotators and associated parts in there. I will fix/replace the screwed up parts and get it all dialed in. Once this is completed should I adjust the valves as though this was a 1953 engine .018 exhaust and what on the intake? After I re-work the valve train I will install the heads. They were on with 8ba head bolts and I plan to re-use them and I must have a hundred here to choose from. I have aviation permatex for the threads, blue felpro gaskets and I'm planning to use grease on them. I don't have enough good studs, but thought about using two studs on each head just to make for easy assembly. Is it a good idea to use head bolts?

Re: Are these rotators?
 

These are the specs for 8BA's of different flavors (non-rotators and rotators)

Re: Are these rotators?
 

OK, thanks Ross. That was not too bad changing things around. The valves with no rotators were at least correct as far as correct spring length for what they were, but now they all have rotators and the horseshoes in the right place and all have the short springs correctly oriented. Looks to me as though someone 'freshened up' a ford remanufactured engine. There is evidence of lubriplate on the lifters still. I think the .0825 means this engine is bored to 3 5/16?. It will most likely go into my somewhat ragged '47 jailbar 1/2 ton, or depending on how it checks out, maybe my even more ragged '47 tonner pickup that is destined to become my 'junkyard dog' around the place. Looks like it could be real nice though. Off to adjust those valves now.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Jumping Jehosafat! Check out those crankshafts way up on that shelf. Clearly does not live in southern california as they would be hard to catch during the frequent shaker.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

There is a piece of 1/2" steel rod drilled through the 3/4" plywood shelf support that runs across the cranks about 1/3 way from the top. The other end of the rod has a piece of steel lag bolted to the studs. I call that deep storage because there's 4 more in wood cradles on the left and my new merc crank just kinda laying there with the masking tape on the journals. Those are the best five....They DO talk a lot about a possible 9.0 here in the Puget Sound Region. :eek:

Re: Are these rotators?
 

The .0825 over bore is not 3-5/16, it,s .0825, 3-5/16 is .125 over. Walt

Re: Are these rotators?
 

3 & 5/16" equals .125 over standard .0825 was a oversize piston designed to use when the tin sleeves were removed on the earlier engines.
Bill

Re: Are these rotators?
 

GB SISSON, we're almost neighbors, nice hoard you got there! I'm new to V8's but have Model A stuff stuck everywhere in my regular old 2-car garage. Looks like someones lack of knowledge might have helped you score a nice engine with just a little bit of sweat-equity. My 49 pickup really needs a carb, the one on it is so worn I don't think a rebuild kit will get me very far. Did the fellow you were buying you goodies from have a carb stash?

Re: Are these rotators?
 

He said there is more flathead stuff in an old airstream trailer. With all those blocks you would think there would be a lot of carbs, distributers, exhaust manifolds, camshafts and on and on. One thing though is the chevy guy I got all that stuff from said he had taken a bunch of small stuff to the swap meet. :confused:

And yes 3 5/16 bore is 1/8" more than 3 3/16, and .125 is 1/8" . 35 years a cabinetmaker, I should know my fractions. I stand corrected.

Still no comments on head bolts for a 59ab block? I'm all ears.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Bolts are Ol Ron's (along with many others) favorite. I prefer studs

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Oh great a civil war.... :rolleyes: Let's just say there is a thread or two that isn't exactly perfect in this block. Seems a stud cranked all the way down is less apt to fail in the final torque down procedure than a bolt. Just a gut feeling on my part. In the end, engines built by J Seery and Ol Ron are both great runners, so if I use common sense I should be ok....... On another note this engine must have the good hollow johnson lifters in it. I had to do a LOT of wrenching on them and the tension on the bolts was very consistent and very snug. They gave me a lot of confidence that my settings were going to last. No loose ones in the batch.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

I like studs for the same reason ,less wear and tear on the block threads.
On studs the wear is on the steel threads of the stud and nut instead of the softer cast iron threads of the block.
Bill

Re: Are these rotators?
 

I quit using studs 50 years ago in street applications and some racing. I torque to 45/50 lbs for All applications. However I know that I must have a min of 7 threads engagement or a diameter and a half for the bolt stud. I'm also mindful of the blind holes. Just remember you must have a reason for what you do

Re: Are these rotators?
 

This is something I never thought of before. I built an 8RT engine 30 some years ago,a '53 F-100 engine. I used an ISKY cam kit,they provided the springs. The '53 8RT engine used the rotators but I don't recall that ISKY ask if you are using rotators or not with springs they supply. My question is there two different spring sizes,rotator,non rotator? I don't think all 49-53 8BA engines were all rotator,correct? All I remember is it ran fine and just heard the other day it still is.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

I have had a thought about studs VS bolts. Just one of those 'can't fall back to sleep after getting up to pee in the early morning hours' kind of thought. With bolts we are cranking down a coarse thread fastener with our torque wrench. The inclined plane (thread) is steeper than the fine thread on the nut which we'd be cranking down with studs. Does the torque end up being equal? Is it not easier for the wrench to tension the fine thread nut, as though it was 'geared down'. And Ron can you tell me why you stopped using studs so long ago? Which ever way I go I will be using good used ford fasteners.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

The torque will be different between bolts and studs/nuts to achieve the same clamping force.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

This article by the late Rumbleseat goes into detail on the subject of studs vs bolts:
http://www.flatheadv8.org/rumblest/engine.pdf

Re: Are these rotators?
 

37 Coupe
Rotator type valve assemblies came in mid 1951 production sometime which pretty much coincided with deletion of hardened inserts in the valve seats.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

During my racing days the engine had to come aoart quite often, every time was a project pulling the heads and ruining the gasket. Those 3036 gaskets cost a bunch (14 bucks a set). I figgered the 8BA's used bolts, so why not. Then there was the torque, some guys said 60/65 lbs, However, Bill Barth said 40/50 was better because it didn;t distort the block. So ever since the 60's I've been using bolts and torquing to 45 ft lbs. So Far so good. and that's the reason Plus I never have to buy new gaskets.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

GB, I agree with this, it makes sense to me as a common sense engineer, coarse thread, steeper slope, less clamping force. I put forward this notion in a post some time ago and was told I was wrong. I still believe I was right, and I believe you are right too. I believe that to achieve the same clamping force a coarser thread should be tightened to a higher torque than a fine thread. I wouldn't refute anything written above, as there seems to be a range of torques that will work well for a flathead. I agree that it is not beneficial to murder them up too tight.

Further to Ron's note above, I too have successfully reused head gaskets a few times.

Mart.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Thank you all. I continue to learn. I have always considered myself as an 'armchair engineer', but maybe Mart's term is better. Armchair engineer might imply one who only reads and thinks about stuff, but never does any of it. I'm the cheapskate who makes wooden running boards for my panel truck, teflon buttons for wrist pins with a plywood jig for my router and hones kingpins with a sandpaper wrapped dowel in a drill. Now I find out I have been wasting good money all this time on new headgaskets! I'm also thinking I should inspect the bottom end of this engine before I button up the top end. I see the pot metal fitting on the pan for the dipstick is loose and I'm thinking the same guy that used mixed up valves must have had the pan off as well, as the flywheel is drilled for am 11" clutch, and it has a 'car type' one piece pan and no clutch. So as soon as my engine stand is vacant I'll do a once over on the lower end, just because I'm old now and don't know everything....

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Lots of guys use the later bolts - but I use studs on almost all my engines (as they tend to be on the very high-end of performance). My main reasons are this:

a) You're torquing on the fine-threaded end of a high-quality stud . . . which enables me to use a lot of stud moly lube (ARP) and I like the way the torque operation "feels" as I tighten the nuts. Almost anybody who builds modern race engines (of all types) will use studs - on the heads, mains, etc -- due to having more accurate and consistent torque readings than you have with bolts going into coarse cast iron threads.

If you think about it - when you buy a high quality stud, washer, nut package - you'll be having a consistent thread and fastener setup on every location . . . versus trying to achieve the same torque on cast iron block threads with varying amounts of wear, rust, prior usage, etc..

b) I hate leaky bolts/studs: So I initially put the studs in with ARP teflon stud sealer - and let them sit up for a bit. This has prevented water seepage on my stock as well as race engines.

c) I do use ARP Studs (yes, they cost a lot) - and they are worth it to me. Also, they are very high quality and have a nice allen hex socket cut into the tops of them. This has been VERY useful in that I can easily remove one or more studs (with the head on) - in case I ever have a leakage issue - OR to make it easier to pull the heads.

Also, I've noticed that they definitely do not stretch as much as the original or aftermarket "replacement studs" - so I usually see very little torque difference after I run the engine and once I re-torque it, the torque stays. With stock studs - I usually have to retorque multiple times.

d) I use aluminum heads on most of my builds - and I think they are more sensitive to accurate torque clamping loads (less warpage) . . . so the above method is the best I can do. I would say this to be even more important on a block that has NOT been decked.

e) Bolts: I do use them on 49-53 engines that are stock to maybe a 3/4 type build. I use the same ARP teflon sealer on the coarse threads and the moly lube on the washers and bolt-head side. Also, I make sure that I torque them down as soon as I have the heads on. Using bolts does help if the person needs to save a few dollars and overall cost is an issue. If the engine is a higher performance build, I insist on studs.

That is my story and I'm sticking to it! LOL

B&S

Re: Are these rotators?
 

I don't think you can make a silk purse, from a sows ear, no mater how much money you spend. But if it make you feel better, why not. However, I do believe the fine thread does exert more force on the head, I just don't think it's necessary and only brings the cost up on an expensive build for no reason. All out Bivelle maybe, max boost maybe , 100% nitro deffinately. Daily driver, not so much.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Because I am a middle child of three kids, I have always been a peacemaker so I'm gonna use some of each. ;)

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Last note - if you are in the market for studs (not ARP ones), go to Roy Nacewicz for ones that are correctly formed and of high quality. BUT - they are not cheap either . . . $135 for a 24 stud engine (and I believe you still need the nuts and hardened washers).

http://www.fordscript.com/

Re: Are these rotators?
 

I had a day today where it seemed the best project was to finally flip this engine over, pull the pan and see what we have in there. Nice and clean like the valve area, and lubriplate squeezed out of the bearings, still fresh looking. I noticed no safety wire or hole for it in the oil pump mounting bolt. Next thing I noticed is that it had obviously been balanced and the rods and caps had been re-stamped on the freshly ground off surfaces. Then I noticed that it had 8ba rods. Ok, now I had to find out if they used the proper 8ba crank with the double holes on each throw. Yes indeed and all the nuts and bolts met proper torque as well. I do have a question regarding the flywheel. The one that's on it is very rusty on the mating surface and I notice the ring gear is welded in a few spots, which sort of bugs me. I have a few good looking extra flywheels in my stash and wonder what I should be looking for. 8ba flywheel or 59ab style? I know there can be starter matchup issues. What ever is on it now seems to work well with the starter on it. I think one type is drilled all the way through. This is drilled for an 11" clutch, so I'll have more choices if I should decide to switch it out. Thanks in advance.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Use a 59A flywheel, NOT 8BA

Re: Are these rotators?
 

When it comes to torque/clamping force the easy way of looking at it would be to compare fine/coarse with a small/large angle wedge which should make us think finethread would give a lot more clamping force at the same torque.
But torque is more dictated by friction then one could think and with a finethread there is more threads in contact then with a coarse.
On top of that 50% of the torque is eaten by the friction between bolthead and the head.
In general 90% of the aplied torque is going into friction and only 10% is turned into tension...

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Now that we have all that settled. I'd like to add a few more suggestion. Re-torque the head bolts after 3 heat cycles. Also, I like to keep the installed valve spring pressure on a street engine, in the 50/60 lb range, I also like the use of rotators in a street engine on cams up to 350 grosse lift. All most stock springs need is a .060" spacer. I also use RTV on the intake guides to seal them. Probably should write another book.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Hey Ron I'll buy your next book, I have your first one, lots of great info in this thread.

Re: Are these rotators?
 

Ron, please do write another book. You probably have enough info in your head to write several books.