LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Old Jan 9, 2005 | 05:40 AM
  #1  
Inutero's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 318
From: jax FL
1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Ok, this is a stock internal motor. Was wondering which would be best. Do I need hardened pushrods for 1.6's? would there be much more of a gain with 1.7's?

Last edited by Inutero; Jan 9, 2005 at 03:21 PM.
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 05:51 AM
  #2  
rskrause's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 10,745
From: Buffalo, New York
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

If you use a self aligning rocker you do not need hardened pusrods. If you switch to a non-self aligning rocker you need guideplates and hardened pushrods. If you have stock heads you will not gain anything significant from 1.7:1 v. 1.6:1 rockers.

Rich
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 05:54 AM
  #3  
redfirehawk101's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 54
From: Nebraska
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

I agree, 1.6 roller rockers would be the max on stock heads and even for an lt1. ls1's like the 1.7 roller rockers better from what I have heard.
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 06:32 AM
  #4  
Dave88LX's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,168
From: AACO, MD
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Just wanted to be an *** and throw in there that it's not 1.6" and 1.7" (inches), it's a ratio as in 1.6:1 and 1.7:1.

Hardened pushrods have nothing to do with the pushrod ratio, but as stated, whether you use guideplates or not.
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 09:31 AM
  #5  
SnakeSkinner28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 376
From: VA
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

[QUOTE=Dave88LX]Just wanted to be an *** and throw in there that it's not 1.6" and 1.7" (inches), it's a ratio as in 1.6:1 and 1.7:1.





Do you feel smarter now?
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 09:50 AM
  #6  
unvc92camarors's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,769
From: cinci
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

since you have a 95, you already have hardened pushrods from the factory
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 11:14 AM
  #7  
92LT1RS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 426
From: Slidell, LA
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Originally Posted by SnakeSkinner28
Do you feel smarter now?

Great technical post


Anyway, for stock internals, your best bet is to go with 1.6's as your stock springs probably wouldn't be able to handle the extra lift. Later on, if you switch cams, just get a little higher lift cam instead of the 1.7's.
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 11:23 AM
  #8  
SnakeSkinner28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 376
From: VA
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Originally Posted by 92LT1RS
Great technical post


Anyway, for stock internals, your best bet is to go with 1.6's as your stock springs probably wouldn't be able to handle the extra lift. Later on, if you switch cams, just get a little higher lift cam instead of the 1.7's.
Well i figured it was about as good as his was, and i guess it didnt sink in as you are not following his advice. They are 1:6, not 1.6'. Remember now, its a ratio.
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 11:33 AM
  #9  
turbo_Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,515
From: Kansas
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Originally Posted by unvc92camarors
since you have a 95, you already have hardened pushrods from the factory

So people say but I wouldnt trust that word of mouth. REAL hardeneed pushrods are only $20.
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 11:55 AM
  #10  
96SilverRam's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 780
From: Tejas
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

I picked up a little bit on stock heads going with 1.6 RR's, but I also have all the bolt-ons. I would say do 1.6's if you intend to do all the bolt-on's as a minimum. I think 1.7's might even make a little more HP (just a little). The use of 1.7's on stock heads become prohibitive in most cases.
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 12:55 PM
  #11  
Heatmaker's Avatar
Advanced Member
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,874
From: Under The Hood
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Simple...

How big of a cam do you plan on running?

If you don't plan on going over the LT-4 Specs try the 1.7's

If you plan on going bigger... Get the 1.6's

There's allot of comments and reviews on the Scorpions... on this site...

But to be honest with you I'd go with the 1.6's NSA just so I can sleep safe at night...

Old Jan 9, 2005 | 12:57 PM
  #12  
hsyr's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,025
From: Saskatchewan, Canada
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Originally Posted by rskrause
If you have stock heads you will not gain anything significant from 1.7:1 v. 1.6:1 rockers.

Rich
Have you or anyone else proved this yet? I'm not bashing you but alot of people say this but I have yet to see and proof of it.
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 04:10 PM
  #13  
unvc92camarors's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,769
From: cinci
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Originally Posted by turbo_Z
So people say but I wouldnt trust that word of mouth. REAL hardeneed pushrods are only $20.
i guess
it's your money in the end, not mine
i'd rather just use my pushrods that i already have, just my personal preference
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 04:18 PM
  #14  
stereomandan's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,620
From: Saginaw, Michigan
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

Originally Posted by SnakeSkinner28
Well i figured it was about as good as his was, and i guess it didnt sink in as you are not following his advice. They are 1:6, not 1.6'. Remember now, its a ratio.
It's not 1:6. It's a 1.6 ratio, as in 1:1.6. If the cam lobe moves the pushrod a given amount, the valve moves 1.6 times that.

Dan
Old Jan 9, 2005 | 07:01 PM
  #15  
95z28txn's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 266
From: Dallas, TX
Re: 1.7"s vs 1.6"s

hey sorry to intrude but i have a comp cam with 510 540 lift and 918 springs could i go with 1.7's and not mess anything up. Also what kind of a lift improvement would i see with 1.7's I was tol with 1.6 my lift would be like 560 570 area.
thanks

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:55 AM.