Hey guys I've got a 1310 with a stage 3 head and a 45weber on it. Car used to have standard 12g940 head on it and wouldn't rev past 4500 (power).

From what I've read on the forum 1.3 rockets are better for road use just wondering what I would be better off with for midrange power. Will it help higher up to get a few more revs out of the motor as well. Weber is running 36mm chokes if that makes a difference. Head is good for 8k

P.s. Ausmini on my mobile phone. Greatest thing ever

_________________
1962 850,Frog

But are the springs able to cope with the extra lift? What are the cam specs?
1.3 ratio generally gives better midrange torque, which is why people say it's better for a road car. If your engine is capable of 8,000rpm then the top end would benefit from the 1.5 rockers.

_________________
Too many cars, and too little time.

If you have no guts above 4000rpm then rockers won't help much. You will need to replace your cam for something sportier.

I have 120bhp and I run 1.3's

_________________
Lillee - 1969 Morris Mini K

Springs are good for .5 lift cam unsure of exact cam but mild/fast road (previous owner)

_________________
1962 850,Frog

Read again. New head is "Stage 3" i.e. ported, oversize valves, etc.

_________________
Too many cars, and too little time.

You could run 1.5 rockers with quite an agressive road/race cam and not exceed 500 thou lift. Still, 1.3 ratio would probably suit a road car better - but I'd go for the higher power option. Personal preference.

_________________
Too many cars, and too little time.

If it wasn`t reving past 4500 in top gear, then i`d be suspecting the final drive ratio (diff gears) are too tall,,,

does it rev to 6500 or 7000 in 1st, 2nd & 4rd???

just a guess tho

either that or it`s been really really poorly tuned

or both



sure the handbrake isn`t stuck on or the muffler blocked or something???

_________________
No offence intended here but--> anyone writing a book about minis 30 years ago may not have experienced such worn or stuffed-with components as we are finding these days.

You should put your heart & soul into everything you do.

what's a muffler?

and yeah it'll rev up to 6000 (or did with standard gear and an su on it) never really took it past 5 amd changed gears @ 4500 for peak torque.

so probably a bit of both miniman

at the moment i'm thinking that a set of 1.3's will offset the peak rev nature of the weber and help out with the down low stuff.

Are there any bad effects of putting high ratio rockers on.?(neglecting increased forces on components)

as for you comment mokey my lad

"power corrupts, absolute power is even more fun"

_________________
1962 850,Frog

Higher lift does not mean more hp. Air travels faster through smaller orifaces. By increasing valve lift, the gap is increased between seat and valve. At high revs where high volume of air passes through, that's a good thing. At low revs you will lose torque because of the speed at which the smaller volume of air travels through the large gap is slower.

So in fact if your car has no more torque after 4500 and you rarely take it over 5000 then 1.5's will definately reduce power under at any given rev under say 4000rpm. I've seen it first hand on my engine.

From what I am reading, 1.3 roller tip rockers from Minisport.co.uk (the blue ones) will suit you perfectly, I just bought a set 2 weeks ago and they're great. Note that std S forged or steel pressed are not even 1.3, it will be an improvement in lift.

BUT From what you are saying, it's not your rockers currently letting you down. Head porting is where I'd look first followed by a cam. There's easily 30hp locked up in a std head...

Also you say you have a Weber but I can tell you that with the wrong carb setup and filters you can easily lose 10hp <<< first hand experience. I moved from Ramflo (worste) to Unifilter socks with 15mm ramtubes (better) to 40mm ramtubes and Pipercross double socks (best by far) and have unlocked about 10hp (i kid you not!) back to the way it was on the engine dyno at GR's. (I have a box welded into my firewall btw)

Just to give you an idea, Ramflos I ran 165 mains (and it was still very rich, so I guestimate 155's would have been right), Pipercross I am running 180 mains. There's a 5 step difference in those two filters, which equates to less air being fed to the engine (that's 14% restriction just from the filter alone)...

So my point is, if it's HP you're after then there are other places too that you need to look at that probably have a higher priority than valve lift.

_________________
Lillee - 1969 Morris Mini K

Hey lillee you forgot to mention your K&N experience..
IMO 1.3s best for a roady 1310, big motors (eg. my 1412) like 1.5s though, they need the extra breathing.

_________________
DrMini- 1970 wasaMatic 1360, Mk1S crank, 86.6HP (ATW) =~125 @ crank, 45 Dellorto (38 chokes), RE282 sprint cam, 1.5 rockers, 11.0:1 C/R.

K&N are OK, the problem is room. You need at least a 4-6inch K&N oval filter for 0 restriction, that means the end of your filter will be nearly flush with your gearknob inside the cabin!

Also removing the K&N for cleaning means carb off every time... what a hassle...

_________________
Lillee - 1969 Morris Mini K

I'm gonna assume you haven't seen my build thread then :p

_________________
1962 850,Frog

I am going to assume you haven't seen mine! Haha

Link me...

_________________
Lillee - 1969 Morris Mini K