![]() |
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 1,262
|
SC rocker arms vs. early cars
I've heard that early cast rocker arms (69-77) are different from SC and later (78-89).
Can anyone clarify for me? |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,006
|
I believe the foot is a little longer, identified originally with a small casting “B” or a triangle.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,241
|
Some time in the 60-70s, football teams came up with the tear away jersey. I think that philosophy applied somewhat to a change in the rocker arms as prior to the pressure fed tensioners, that items failure, which happened frequently, could be catastrophic with the valves being hammered into the pistons. A more fragile rocker arm was preferrable as the weak point.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 1,262
|
|||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,006
|
They came along with the 49mm cam housings, formally 47mm. I suspect the cam lobe profile was bigger and they didn’t want the rocker to runoff the end of the foot, but I’m really not sure. You can run late rockers on early engines but not sure if u can run early rockers with 49mm cam housings.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,006
|
Early and late rockers.
![]() ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2025
Posts: 5
|
You’re absolutely spot on
|
||
![]() |
|