Harland Sharp Roller Rockers and Oil Restriction?

[67Satty]

I've got a line on a set of Harland Sharp roller rockers for a really good price. I was looking at the Harland Sharp website and it says that you need to restrict oil to the top end when using these rockers or else you might have a drop in oil pressure.

Anyone have experience with this? Thanks!

 

[383man]

I have not used theirs but I did not have to do anything with my Hughes roller tip rockers I use. Ron

 

[451Mopar]

Both me and my friend are running the Harlan Sharp Big Block 1.6:1 rocker arms, and no oil restrictors. Just bolt on like normal, and used custom length pushrods so only one thread of the adjuster shows below the rocker. Harlan Sharp recommends from Zero to Two threads. The shafts have oil holes on both sides so there is no up/down issue to worry about when installing them. They recommend soaking the rockers in oil for 30 minutes before installing them. We have a 4" diameter PVC tube that us capped on the bottom, and has a screw-on cleanout cap on top, that is filled with oil, and we just dipped the rockers in it to let them soak.

 

[lewtot184]

i've never used any restriction with the ones i've played with. if you study the rocker oiling with a big block you'll see that oil is restricted with the factory design. the only time i would consider restriction is with full time oiling, like the #4 cam journal grooved or external oiling like what the indy heads have.

 

[IQ52]

Just went through all this with the 505 and Harland Sharp roller rockers on the dyno. Ordered a custom hydraulic roller from Comp and they sent us one with the groove on the #4 cam journal. We had so much oil running off the rockers we had to put .030" restrictors in the Edelbrock RPM heads. I didn't like the idea of a .030" restrictor, that's a pretty small hole. Ordered another cam with just the clocking holes in the #4 journal and pulled the restrictors. Problem solved.

 

[Cranky]

Always heard that with a high rpm engine, oil should be restricted to top end. Had a 440 that was running over 7k in the 80's and was restricted and never had a problem with the Isky non roller rockers. Probably better to use a spray bar system for spring cooling and lubrication especially with higher lift cams. Drag racers usually don't have to worry about high spring temps unless they are hot lapped then things can get pretty warm in there. Mine only a .660 lift but rarely hot lapped it. Another engine had a .750 lift cam but it seemed to do ok too with only stock type upper oiling.

 

[67Satty]

Just went through all this with the 505 and Harland Sharp roller rockers on the dyno. Ordered a custom hydraulic roller from Comp and they sent us one with the groove on the #4 cam journal. We had so much oil running off the rockers we had to put .030" restrictors in the Edelbrock RPM heads. I didn't like the idea of a .030" restrictor, that's a pretty small hole. Ordered another cam with just the clocking holes in the #4 journal and pulled the restrictors. Problem solved.

So it sounds like if I have a garden-variety aftermarket cam that doesn't have the groove on the #4 cam journal I would be OK and not need to have restrictors? Is that right?

It also sounds like I might need to run different pushrods?

Right now I have the 440Source roller rockers. I've been running them for a few years with no problems but I have a small hydraulic that doesn't require much spring pressure, I think it's 125/325 or something like that.

A guy has a set of ported iron 452s with new stainless 2.14 intakes, 1.81 exhausts, new valve job, surfaced, new seals, etc..etc...supposedly ready to bolt on and including the Harland Sharp rockers - all for less than the cost of the Harland Rockers new.

The seller upgraded to Victor heads not realizing he would need offset rockers, so he says he had to spend over $1000 for new Harland Sharp 1.6 offset rockers (are they really that much?) and he's trying to recoup some money.

 

[67 B-body]

I used 3/4 groove bearings, and inserted screw in restrictors into the block. I have Victor heads with the offset roller rockers...

 

[lewtot184]

before considering restriction to the rocker assembly with a stock configuration #4 cam journal look closely at the factory oiling set-up. with the drilled oil passages in the camshaft the rocker assembly only gets a spurt of oil every 720 degrees of crankshaft rotation. with a grooved journal oiling is full time. i've always found it bewildering that folks would restrict the oil passage in the block or head to reduce oil supply and then turn around and add spray bars to cool the springs.

 

[Budnicks]

I haven't ran them in years on any BB's, {Crane sponsored me, didn't really need them, except for a personal project, I did}
IIRC, I don't remember ever having to restrict the oil to the top end, even with 0.750" rollers, I do remember not having the adjusters out the bottom more than a thread or it had starvation problems @ the cup & adjuster oiling problems...
I unfortunately learned that one the hard way...
After that little screw up, I never used out of the box length push rods, ever again...
I always measure them now, custom order from Smith Brothers Push Rods, ever since that debacle... live & learn or spend & spend more
I do have 1.7:1 H-S full roller rockers on my Dakota 5.2ltr, but they oil thru the push rod, not a shaft style, so far so good since 2001..

- - - Updated - - -

Just went through all this with the 505 and Harland Sharp roller rockers on the dyno. Ordered a custom hydraulic roller from Comp and they sent us one with the groove on the #4 cam journal. We had so much oil running off the rockers we had to put .030" restrictors in the Edelbrock RPM heads. I didn't like the idea of a .030" restrictor, that's a pretty small hole. Ordered another cam with just the clocking holes in the #4 journal and pulled the restrictors. Problem solved.

Interesting thanks for sharing that IQ52

 

[383man]

This reminds me when my buddy went to Indy SR heads and he was told to restrict to oil to the rockers as he has the oil lines at the back of the heads. Did not take long and he burnt the rocker end of 2 pushrods from not enough oil as he ended up taking the restrictors out. I agree with the stock cam bearings it should be ok as each head only gets oil once per cam revolution without the groved #4 cam bearing. Its worked fine for me and I had to get cutom lenth pushrods also. I set mine up with about 1 to 2 threads showing and got pushrods from Manton. Ron

 

[67 B-body]

before considering restriction to the rocker assembly with a stock configuration #4 cam journal look closely at the factory oiling set-up. with the drilled oil passages in the camshaft the rocker assembly only gets a spurt of oil every 720 degrees of crankshaft rotation. with a grooved journal oiling is full time. i've always found it bewildering that folks would restrict the oil passage in the block or head to reduce oil supply and then turn around and add spray bars to cool the springs.

It's to keep oil on the main journal from getting robbed for rocker shaft oil... The groove turns a heavy "squirt" of oil into a stream of oil, and the restrictor prevents starvation to the #4 main journal... This also prevents starvation to the connecting rods fed by #4...

 

[Lenny Arsenault]

Yes! I have a 69 440 with Harland Sharp 1.5 roller rockers, Edelbrock rpm heads, ultradyne custom grind cam. I have I believe lower oil pressure than I thought I should have had about 43 PSI, noisy valve train, and lifters bleed down very quickly. MY car is at the machine shop they pulled the motor back out looked at rod bearings and main bearings. Machine Shop got hold of harland sharp they said to install 0.090" oil restrictores. I have lost confidence that they can get all the bugs worked out here. QUOTE=67Satty;910090524]I've got a line on a set of Harland Sharp roller rockers for a really good price. I was looking at the Harland Sharp website and it says that you need to restrict oil to the top end when using these rockers or else you might have a drop in oil pressure.

Anyone have experience with this? Thanks![/QUOTE]