'65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

i am assembling a customers basket case '36 ford truck that had this rebuilt 289 with it. i was getting ready to bench run the motor and wanted to make sure the valves were adjusted correctly when i noticed the rockers hanging off the tip of the valve. Now by the stick out of the valve past the keeper i would assume a rail style rocker would be needed in this application? does anyone know what part is wrong in this combo here? do the rail rocker measure different than the conventional? the heads seem to have the tight clearance holes for the pushrods so no guides should be needed..

any input would be appreciated.

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

if the heads have the small pushrod holes they are 66 as it seems are the valves you need 66 rockers.

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

i goofed on that the 65 heads had the small pushrod holes.these are 66 valves that take the rail rockers.the 66 rail rockers should fix the problem otherwise you will have to change to 65 valves.its been awile but i think you have to use 65 springs as well with 65 valves.

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

As said those are the wrong valves for that head.

That's OK as you can simply get rail rockers, mid '66 to '77 or so. Those valves have to have rail rockers as darrell said.

I will add that you have to have hardened pushrods as the small hole early heads guide the push rod.

It' really a good set up as a performance upgrade for rail rocker heads was guide plates. Early heads do not need guide plates. Just make sure you use hardened pushrods.

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

Some pictures and Tech is here: http://www.mre-books.com/interchange/interchange5.html

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

As said hardened push rods needed with slotted push rod holes in head. Take a 3 corner file to one of your push rods, if you can cut it its to soft and will wear quickly in your heads. Also agree the valves are the wrong ones. Push rods may be wrong too, as a shorter push rod will bring the rocker tip back some. Be careful running both slotted heads a rail rockers together, as double alinement puts things in a bind.

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

thank you all for the info!

i guess i will measure the pushrods first and then check them for hardness, then order a set of rail style rockers for it.

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

looking at the side by side shot of those rockers it seems the rail style has a greater distance from pivot to valve tip, which would make my problem worse. Maybe i will order one rocker just to make sure before buying a set. thanks for the link!

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

Cydways, I just saw in the for sale adds in the Ford Barn, that Ford Barn member "Ahshoe" is selling a set of used 289 rail rockers in good condition.

Sal

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

I don't know if I would by anything from some ahs-hoe.;)

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

This is from my machinist buddy in Houston. Some good suggestions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Icd...ature=youtu.be

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

Thanks Dobie for that! the first photo shows it on lift and the 2nd shows it on base circle. I have sent a check out to Ahshoe for the rail rockers and i will check the length of the pushrods tonight.

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

I feel like Rodney Dangerfield.

Sal

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

much respect to you, Scicala. For letting me know about the rockers for sale!

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

I wonder if the guy is really an ahshoe or if that's just his way of joking around? The Japanese Ah So or "I See" doesn't quite fit.

Some of the 302 engines used a cap on top of the valve stem. A person has to pay attention to all this stuff on the Ford small blocks. They went though several changes during the 289 years and a few more in the 302 era. If you don't get the right combination, it can do some damage. Many of the parts counter guys now days don't know and really don't care so a person has to do their own research.

Re: '65 289 rocker arm geometry help
 

Sorry Cydways. I was just joking around.

Sal