Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: 1.7 rockers with swivel foot?
914World.com > The 914 Forums > 914World Garage
mtndawg
I currently have pauter rockers on my 2.0 L motor that I acquired. I'm considering going back to stock rockers or doing the 1.7 modification to the swivel foot. What is the benefit of using the 1.7?
76-914
Performance. They need to be taken down .060" and you need the spacers as they are offset differently but they can rev pretty high w/0 those spring spacers. Jake/Type 4 Store used to have the kit. beerchug.gif
RenoRoger
QUOTE(mtndawg @ Feb 5 2017, 10:28 AM) *

I currently have pauter rockers on my 2.0 L motor that I acquired. I'm considering going back to stock rockers or doing the 1.7 modification to the swivel foot. What is the benefit of using the 1.7?


I bought a VW Beetle engine with swivel foot rockers. Two of them failed within 5.000 miles. They were junk. I went back to originals.
Montreal914
QUOTE(RenoRoger @ Feb 5 2017, 01:10 PM) *

QUOTE(mtndawg @ Feb 5 2017, 10:28 AM) *

I currently have pauter rockers on my 2.0 L motor that I acquired. I'm considering going back to stock rockers or doing the 1.7 modification to the swivel foot. What is the benefit of using the 1.7?


I bought a VW Beetle engine with swivel foot rockers. Two of them failed within 5.000 miles. They were junk. I went back to originals.


That is because they were cheap chinese parts. Use original 911 swivel.
TheCabinetmaker
^ agree.gif I have real 912 adjusters. Over 60k. No problems
Mark Henry
The reason for using them is they are needed on Stainless Steel valves, because the stem face is so soft the stock adjuster will mushroom the the valve stem/face.
Even a stockish engine with a carb cam or SS valves should have them.
They are not needed on a bone stock engine with factory valves.

QUOTE(Montreal914 @ Feb 5 2017, 04:30 PM) *

QUOTE(RenoRoger @ Feb 5 2017, 01:10 PM) *

QUOTE(mtndawg @ Feb 5 2017, 10:28 AM) *

I currently have pauter rockers on my 2.0 L motor that I acquired. I'm considering going back to stock rockers or doing the 1.7 modification to the swivel foot. What is the benefit of using the 1.7?


I bought a VW Beetle engine with swivel foot rockers. Two of them failed within 5.000 miles. They were junk. I went back to originals.


That is because they were cheap chinese parts. Use original 911 swivel.


agree.gif The china swivel feet are junk, so are the ford copy swivel ball (used on T1's) adjusters.

Gene Berg used to have good swivel foot copies, but I don't know if they sell them any more.
The best are the real 911 adjusters, but new they are not cheap for a set of 8.

I don't care for the Paulter rockers, in my book they have very poorly designed oiling.
malcolm2
mine are 911 swivel feet. Came with my Cam from TIV store. pushing 30K miles.

the push rods spin during operation, I am sure the lifters do too, so the swivel foot spins too, not sure if it swivels, but I bet a nickel it spins.

Increasing life of all the components. IIRC you need 1.7 rockers so the swivel foot adjusters fit.

I also have Chromoly pushrods that need zero lash. to check the lash, I make sure the swivel foot spins and I can't get a gauge in.
ottox914
The Porsche ones are going to be hella expensive, but better than throwing a motor away with cheep knock offs. I've built a couple motors and use the 911 ones every tine. Have had zero concerns or problems.
bretth
Back in 2000 I put swivel ball adjusters on my 68 Bus. Don't remember paying much then. 60,000 miles on them without issue. Back then I probably got them from Rocky Mountain Motor Works (Ecklers now?) Wish i knew if the same ones were still made now.

Brett
Dave_Darling
The reason you use 1.7 rockers is that the 1.8 and the 2.0 ones use larger-diameter adjusters. And so the holes in the rocker arms are too big for the 911 adjusters.

(I'm not sure about the 73 cars; I think the 1.7s may use the early-type rockers and the 2.0s may use the late-type, but I'm not certain of that.)

--DD
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.