How this man doesn't have a million subscribers I will never understand! Easily the best, most honest engine tech I've come across on TH-cam. Thank you for what you do and I look forward to many more years hopefully! This knowledge is the equivalent of having a secret weapon 👍
Just like David Vizard’s channel, starting slow but taking off once people experience the tons of knowledge that is being shared in 20 minutes. Best of luck, you have a great channel and your attention to detail is admirable!
I think it's because you need a basic understanding at minimum to know whats going on and a lot of people find this too 'technical' (personally I find it fascinating and also very simple to understand)
@@1crazypj Yep, I agree. I will almost never use most of the information that Eric discovers, because I simply can't afford to build this kind of stuff, but I am a data geek when it comes to race engines, very fascinating stuff. So the "average" car guy probably isn't really concerned about this stuff, but anyone in "the business" I would bet watches his videos and data very, very closely, and would be surprised if they didn't to be honest!
Great info Eric couple of vignettes... 292 chevy six has really long pushrods The late Kay Sissel or Mike Kerby had problems with pushrod flex and came up with a bushing at the deck and upper and lower pushrods did make a difference. We noticed early on that the Ford with larger pushrods was more stable than the 440 Chrysler eventhough it has a heaver valvegear. There also appears to be a connection with pushrod flex and spring surge/ life Thanks
Seem like a lot of Spring pressure for A 2.02 valve at 6500 My 350 with A 2.08 valve, 5/16 push rod and a little over 200 pounds of Spring pressure ran smooth to 7700 on the Dyno and was still gaining power With a .446 lobe lift and a 1.6 rocker stud mounted
@@WeingartnerRacing But if the valve train could still be stable with less Spring pressure that result in more horsepower? I am just thinking about 16 Springs with possibly 50 pounds more than needed per Spring.
@@pontiac411 10-4. I have a 1965 Catalina 389 motor for parts, heads look promising as they are small combustion chamber, block is done for as it had water in a few cylinders for ? years and would need liners to be usable Have a 76 Formula 400, last year of round headlights and the best looking hood ever fitted with NACA ducts
Outstanding information. Thank you. Erson is grinding me a cam very close to the specs you suggested. Block is ready, heads are halfway, so almost there. Appreciate the help
I have always used 5/16 pushrods. Lighter and cheaper. Ballend for preference. Some swedged end gall in the rocker cup. Which is sometimes a problem in itself. I had a well known brand do that to me,,they ended up giving me pushrods that did not. This an engine flat out at 7500. SBC. I have used factory Chev pushrods with no issues on [baby] race rollers.. And on race Holden 6s Guide plates can be an issue. Some are not hard! The old Manley plastic ones were good.
Hopefully this is one of those things you guys tested during (or are currently testing) the BBC dyno mule tests. BTW, thanks for sharing all of this info with the rest of us, you're an awesome guy Eric, don't let anyone ever tell you different!!
I think part of the reason for your results is it’s just a well engineered set up to be honest like you said if you had a much heavier spring in there or heavier valves, OR more pushrod angularity from a canted or Hemi valve train I bet you would’ve seen a bigger difference, but I will say that I’m pretty damn surprised I thought the 3/8 pushrods we’re going to make more power!
I have had a few pairs of Brunt shoes. The dont last very long if you work in construction FYI> Good to know about the push rod penalty or lack there of.
Great video Eric! I have not used a cam with as much rate as that one you have in your dyno mule. So, it is safe to say, for me anyway, that standard 5/16" pushrods are more than enough. In building engines, it is wise to have margin by using parts that are stronger than necessary, especially in areas where it has no effect on RPM (such as 4-Bolt Mains versus 2-Bolt Mains). When you get into the areas of reciprocating weight however, it does matter more. You have to use the strength level that is needed at the RPM that generates the most stress for that particular component. At the same time, you just want to use the lightest weight possible because anything above that minimum required weight, will be a liability at all other RPMs. That liability will usually be in the form of wasted energy which equals less power, however great or small the difference will be. In the end, because we common folk do not have access to dyno equipment, we try to choose components that are perceived to be "overkill" so that we never run into the hidden failure zone with our engine. Thanks to guys like yourself, we have the necessary information to make more accurate component choices. Thank you for all you are doing for your fellow car enthusiasts. God Bless!
Great content. Things are looking up as far as the channel goes. Sometimes I think folks are using to much spring rate, maybe. Might make for a good test?
Cool video man, i think the 5/16 is deflecting giving that mid range, but maybe it’s just out of head over 5700, I bet it changes slightly with the next heads like you said, I also learned way more than I want to type from running it to 7k, but that will really help show the gains you’re gonna get on the top end with heads! Great video as always, and thanks for answering my question!
I'll still go by the old adage, put the biggest pushrod you can physically fit in the engine....if you can't get more size, go for wall thickness.....You hurt NOTHING by having a big, thick pushrod, but you CAN have issues with too small of one....
I think you need heavier springs when you have heavier push-rods, so, it will need more power to drive them. I remember reading around 1970, use lightest spring rate that gives a safety margin if you miss a shift, of course, that would depend on crank weight and how fast motor spins up.
That's not how it works. Pushrod weight is of little to no significance. Weight on that side of the rocker has little effect on valve control, unless the parts are too weak to begin with. My statement is correct, and is proven by professional builders everywhere. Too weak of a push rod will deflect and cost power.
@@markgoulette5056 Obviously a 'weak' push-rod will deflect and may cost a complete engine rather than just lose power (if it flexes enough to come out of seating and follower comes out of bore at high rpm) but using a heavy push-rod just because you can is also losing power as it will need heavier valve springs than would otherwise be needed. It's been proven that a heavy valve train costs power by puttig engine on a Spintron. Just because it was done in the 70's and 80's (and earlier) doesn't mean it's done today.
@@1crazypj Yes, a weak pushrod will deflect and can cost power, but additionally it can cause unwanted, uncontrolled valve motion. A heavier pushrod WILL NOT loose horsepower, it will generally GAIN due to less deflection. You do not determine valve spring requirements from pushrod size/weight. As stated, weight on the pushrod side of the valve train has little to no effect on the valve side of the valve train. Yes, heavy valve train parts can cost power, ON THE VALVE SIDE....NOT THE PUSHROD SIDE.....you are incorrect in your assumptions. Lighter weight springs (weight, not RATE), lighter valves, retainers, and locks are very beneficial to the valve train. However, strength and stiffness on the pushrod side are most desirable, and the rule of thumb of using the largest pushrods you can physically fit in an engine is a proven method of stabilizing the valve train. The pushrod acts like a spring, and when it rebounds, it can transfer unwanted motion to the valve. Not good. When there is minimal deflection by the pushrod, there is less the spring has to deal with to maintain control. Then, by adding lighter weight valve components like Ti valves, retainers, locks, and lighter weight springs, allows us to have substantially less valve train harmonics and better control over valve motion. There is no negative to running the largest, strongest pushrods on the lifter side of the valve train. NONE. The spintron data shows this as well. While there may be little gain, there won't be any loss. As stated, weight on the lifter side of the valve makes little to no difference to valve motion unless the pushrod itself is not adequate for the application. Too large of a pushrod has no negatives.
The test is the test, I expected the 3/8" to has a bit more up top. I'd still take the 3/8 but this makes me question how much better a 3/8 or 11/16 is on a LS with a hydraulic roller. Granteed, I'd still go with the larger pushrod.
One other comment. There used to be a company that claimed swapping over to titanium valves is worth a tenth in ET. Cannot remember the company but always wondered if there is power to be had there.
Ti is expensive and has a short service life. Will help the engine rev a little more free. Us budget racers will use good stainless as the gains are not worth the extra cost
The weight difference makes sense to me. Down low less weight, easier to throw around HP climbs quick. Up high, speed of inertia comes along and they both prevail
It would be interesting to run cam and valve train package on a sprintron to show valve action difference between 5/16 and 3/8. But I suspect the 5/16 is flexing and making the engine think it has a slightly smaller cam.
I picked up Chromoly 5/16" diam 7.4" .080" walled pushrods by BTR, they practically the same as TSP, price was determining factor. Stock replacement or mild/moderate builds. The 3/8" rods was thinking rockers and lifters require 3/8" cups
I expected the 3/8 would make slightly 5-10hp more at 6000 plus and the same down low as the 5/16. Cool test even if it can't be directly applied to every combo.
The results may be the same because there wait differences may not be enough to register, our Australian engines push rod's are fairly straight up and down, thanks for sharing, all the best to you and your loved ones
Ive not work much with pishrod engines other than bmc mini's.. same engineering applies for competition just different scale of hp.. engine harmonics plays a huge roll & the pitch harmonics of these rods vs any critical resonance rpm harmonics from the engine are going to be bigger factors than static load stiffness of the respective rods.. thinner & thicker wall sections would be a better option to look into to change the harmonic frequencies of valve trains vs all up recipro weights or critical individual component weights.. "strongest" can still have a critically short life vs lightest.. as can firing order or ignition event timing (cylinder bank angles create different combustion harmonics that feed back through all the machine in different ways).. a flat plane v8 will have many of the harmonic problems in valve gear that flat plane 4s have.. cylinder bank angles & stroke interfere with those harmonics a lot! valve gear included.. Excellent artical.. food for thought thanks.. loving the channel.
If you make the pushrod stuff enough you take one spring to control out of the equation. I've never seen a pushrod too stiff, and weight is not a big concern.
@@WeingartnerRacing So I've always used air die grinders but after I watched one of your videos (can't remember which) I got a Foredom SR. That thing is awesome.
Awesome!!!! I'm building a moderate Jeep 258 (with Edelbrock 4.0 head and cam) and many have said to get thicker rods. I really didn't want to, lol. They're non adjustable rockers, and rare, so it would be an expensive part. Glad to see it really isn't worth it in the end.
@@WeingartnerRacing Yeah, but they would probably have to be made custom- non adjustable rockers. I don't race it or anything strenuous. Just don't think the squeeze is worth the juice in such a build. Wait till I get bored, then I'll end up buying them, lol. It's never ending....
I've been watching you alot lately, enjoying it. Do you ever run beehive springs? Also, I would like to have you flow one of my heads. How can I get this done?
I'm at 9:22 that tells me if the 3/8 is much cheaper then use it, I know there is an older guy on yt that would make out that gain is the difference between a fool and a pro. But we won't go there....
IDK The 516th might weigh less so will that make it revmore? But then 3/8 does it deflect less meaning does it Basically not bend as much creating more a lift I guess I'm about to find out
Steve morris" ever hurd of him? He states that one thing you can't over do. Are push rods, and fuel pump. When someone like Steve, or Nelson, tells me something. I don't need to over think it.
Video looks clear to me. Possibly it's your internet connection or computer that is causing youtube to downgrade the resolution. I watch it at 1080 HD.
![ตีสิบเดย์ [FULL] | อาจารย์โอเล่ ญาณสัมผัส ผ่าดวงคนดัง ประเทศไทยจะเป็นยังไงหลังจากนี้!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gszT2O76fL4/mqdefault.jpg)
How this man doesn't have a million subscribers I will never understand! Easily the best, most honest engine tech I've come across on TH-cam. Thank you for what you do and I look forward to many more years hopefully! This knowledge is the equivalent of having a secret weapon 👍
I wish I knew why too.
@@WeingartnerRacing It will happen. Just like bussiness...it takes time and word of mouth people will see who you are and stay followers.
Just like David Vizard’s channel, starting slow but taking off once people experience the tons of knowledge that is being shared in 20 minutes. Best of luck, you have a great channel and your attention to detail is admirable!
I think it's because you need a basic understanding at minimum to know whats going on and a lot of people find this too 'technical' (personally I find it fascinating and also very simple to understand)
@@1crazypj Yep, I agree. I will almost never use most of the information that Eric discovers, because I simply can't afford to build this kind of stuff, but I am a data geek when it comes to race engines, very fascinating stuff. So the "average" car guy probably isn't really concerned about this stuff, but anyone in "the business" I would bet watches his videos and data very, very closely, and would be surprised if they didn't to be honest!
Great info Eric couple of vignettes... 292 chevy six has really long pushrods The late Kay Sissel or Mike Kerby had problems with pushrod flex and came up with a bushing at the deck and upper and lower pushrods did make a difference. We noticed early on that the Ford with larger pushrods was more stable than the 440 Chrysler eventhough it has a heaver valvegear.
There also appears to be a connection with pushrod flex and spring surge/ life Thanks
I would say you haven't reached the limit of the 5/16 pushrod. Got to be close. Love the channel.
When the new heads, go on, we may find the limit. They have a much heavier valve train.
Seem like a lot of Spring pressure for A 2.02 valve at 6500 My 350 with A 2.08 valve, 5/16 push rod and a little over 200 pounds of Spring pressure ran smooth to 7700 on the Dyno and was still gaining power With a .446 lobe lift and a 1.6 rocker stud mounted
Not really. In this case it seemed happy judging by the numbers with both pushrods.
@@WeingartnerRacing But if the valve train could still be stable with less Spring pressure that result in more horsepower? I am just thinking about 16 Springs with possibly 50 pounds more than needed per Spring.
pontiac411, is that an overbored 400 or a much modified 389?
@@1crazypj400 bored .060
@@pontiac411 10-4.
I have a 1965 Catalina 389 motor for parts, heads look promising as they are small combustion chamber, block is done for as it had water in a few cylinders for ? years and would need liners to be usable
Have a 76 Formula 400, last year of round headlights and the best looking hood ever fitted with NACA ducts
For me the evidence is in the last half of the graph. They overlay which tells me both pushrods were more than adequate for the application.
Brunt boots are amazing. Bought a pair in December and absolutely enjoy them more than my red wings.Great video as always. ✌😁
Ive got a pair of brunt boots and they are awesome mine are waterproof comfy and toe protected and light
Would be interesting to see how a non shaft rocker played in this testing as well. Thanks for the video.
Outstanding information. Thank you. Erson is grinding me a cam very close to the specs you suggested. Block is ready, heads are halfway, so almost there. Appreciate the help
Very interesting test. Thank you Eric for this video!!
I have always used 5/16 pushrods. Lighter and cheaper. Ballend for preference. Some swedged end gall in the rocker cup. Which is sometimes a problem in itself. I had a well known brand do that to me,,they ended up giving me pushrods that did not. This an engine flat out at 7500. SBC. I have used factory Chev pushrods with no issues on [baby] race rollers.. And on race Holden 6s
Guide plates can be an issue. Some are not hard! The old Manley plastic ones were good.
Hopefully this is one of those things you guys tested during (or are currently testing) the BBC dyno mule tests.
BTW, thanks for sharing all of this info with the rest of us, you're an awesome guy Eric, don't let anyone ever tell you different!!
I think part of the reason for your results is it’s just a well engineered set up
to be honest like you said if you had a much heavier spring in there or heavier valves, OR more pushrod angularity from a canted or Hemi valve train I bet you would’ve seen a bigger difference, but I will say that I’m pretty damn surprised I thought the 3/8 pushrods we’re going to make more power!
I have had a few pairs of Brunt shoes. The dont last very long if you work in construction FYI> Good to know about the push rod penalty or lack there of.
Great video Eric! I have not used a cam with as much rate as that one you have in your dyno mule. So, it is safe to say, for me anyway, that standard 5/16" pushrods are more than enough. In building engines, it is wise to have margin by using parts that are stronger than necessary, especially in areas where it has no effect on RPM (such as 4-Bolt Mains versus 2-Bolt Mains). When you get into the areas of reciprocating weight however, it does matter more. You have to use the strength level that is needed at the RPM that generates the most stress for that particular component. At the same time, you just want to use the lightest weight possible because anything above that minimum required weight, will be a liability at all other RPMs. That liability will usually be in the form of wasted energy which equals less power, however great or small the difference will be. In the end, because we common folk do not have access to dyno equipment, we try to choose components that are perceived to be "overkill" so that we never run into the hidden failure zone with our engine. Thanks to guys like yourself, we have the necessary information to make more accurate component choices. Thank you for all you are doing for your fellow car enthusiasts. God Bless!
I use 3/8 in my SBM....the PR angle kills lift with a smaller PR
Great content. Things are looking up as far as the channel goes. Sometimes I think folks are using to much spring rate, maybe. Might make for a good test?
Maybe I will try it. By the way your intake ended being the best one.
Orcourse as stated. Every engine is unique in its valvetrain behaviour. But still I did not see this result coming. Very interesting.
Cool video man, i think the 5/16 is deflecting giving that mid range, but maybe it’s just out of head over 5700, I bet it changes slightly with the next heads like you said, I also learned way more than I want to type from running it to 7k, but that will really help show the gains you’re gonna get on the top end with heads! Great video as always, and thanks for answering my question!
Good job Eric!
Interesting and thought provoking. Thank you.
I'll still go by the old adage, put the biggest pushrod you can physically fit in the engine....if you can't get more size, go for wall thickness.....You hurt NOTHING by having a big, thick pushrod, but you CAN have issues with too small of one....
You are correct
I think you need heavier springs when you have heavier push-rods, so, it will need more power to drive them.
I remember reading around 1970, use lightest spring rate that gives a safety margin if you miss a shift, of course, that would depend on crank weight and how fast motor spins up.
That's not how it works. Pushrod weight is of little to no significance. Weight on that side of the rocker has little effect on valve control, unless the parts are too weak to begin with. My statement is correct, and is proven by professional builders everywhere. Too weak of a push rod will deflect and cost power.
@@markgoulette5056 Obviously a 'weak' push-rod will deflect and may cost a complete engine rather than just lose power (if it flexes enough to come out of seating and follower comes out of bore at high rpm) but using a heavy push-rod just because you can is also losing power as it will need heavier valve springs than would otherwise be needed. It's been proven that a heavy valve train costs power by puttig engine on a Spintron. Just because it was done in the 70's and 80's (and earlier) doesn't mean it's done today.
@@1crazypj Yes, a weak pushrod will deflect and can cost power, but additionally it can cause unwanted, uncontrolled valve motion. A heavier pushrod WILL NOT loose horsepower, it will generally GAIN due to less deflection. You do not determine valve spring requirements from pushrod size/weight. As stated, weight on the pushrod side of the valve train has little to no effect on the valve side of the valve train. Yes, heavy valve train parts can cost power, ON THE VALVE SIDE....NOT THE PUSHROD SIDE.....you are incorrect in your assumptions. Lighter weight springs (weight, not RATE), lighter valves, retainers, and locks are very beneficial to the valve train. However, strength and stiffness on the pushrod side are most desirable, and the rule of thumb of using the largest pushrods you can physically fit in an engine is a proven method of stabilizing the valve train. The pushrod acts like a spring, and when it rebounds, it can transfer unwanted motion to the valve. Not good. When there is minimal deflection by the pushrod, there is less the spring has to deal with to maintain control. Then, by adding lighter weight valve components like Ti valves, retainers, locks, and lighter weight springs, allows us to have substantially less valve train harmonics and better control over valve motion. There is no negative to running the largest, strongest pushrods on the lifter side of the valve train. NONE. The spintron data shows this as well. While there may be little gain, there won't be any loss. As stated, weight on the lifter side of the valve makes little to no difference to valve motion unless the pushrod itself is not adequate for the application. Too large of a pushrod has no negatives.
Wow peddling shoes. 😂😂😂😂,thanks for the info it is great. I am glad you are so detailed on things it makes it easy. Keep them comming.
Will do
Great video sir i really appreciate all the info you post.
The test is the test, I expected the 3/8" to has a bit more up top. I'd still take the 3/8 but this makes me question how much better a 3/8 or 11/16 is on a LS with a hydraulic roller. Granteed, I'd still go with the larger pushrod.
I use 11/16 in my LS engines they do fit and I can't prove any gains but it is ease of mind for me
One other comment. There used to be a company that claimed swapping over to titanium valves is worth a tenth in ET. Cannot remember the company but always wondered if there is power to be had there.
Ti is expensive and has a short service life. Will help the engine rev a little more free. Us budget racers will use good stainless as the gains are not worth the extra cost
The weight difference makes sense to me. Down low less weight, easier to throw around HP climbs quick. Up high, speed of inertia comes along and they both prevail
It would be interesting to run cam and valve train package on a sprintron to show valve action difference between 5/16 and 3/8. But I suspect the 5/16 is flexing and making the engine think it has a slightly smaller cam.
I would like to see that data as well.
@@WeingartnerRacing good to get people thinking
Makes me curious about running 5/16 chromoly intake pushrods for less weight, and 3/8” exhaust for less deflection against cyl pressure 🤔
I picked up Chromoly 5/16" diam 7.4" .080" walled pushrods by BTR, they practically the same as TSP, price was determining factor. Stock replacement or mild/moderate builds. The 3/8" rods was thinking rockers and lifters require 3/8" cups
Remember the exhaust valve has to open up under pressure!
Thank you for the update and information
I expected the 3/8 would make slightly 5-10hp more at 6000 plus and the same down low as the 5/16. Cool test even if it can't be directly applied to every combo.
The results may be the same because there wait differences may not be enough to register, our Australian engines push rod's are fairly straight up and down, thanks for sharing, all the best to you and your loved ones
Thank you for watching
Ive not work much with pishrod engines other than bmc mini's.. same engineering applies for competition just different scale of hp.. engine harmonics plays a huge roll & the pitch harmonics of these rods vs any critical resonance rpm harmonics from the engine are going to be bigger factors than static load stiffness of the respective rods.. thinner & thicker wall sections would be a better option to look into to change the harmonic frequencies of valve trains vs all up recipro weights or critical individual component weights.. "strongest" can still have a critically short life vs lightest.. as can firing order or ignition event timing (cylinder bank angles create different combustion harmonics that feed back through all the machine in different ways).. a flat plane v8 will have many of the harmonic problems in valve gear that flat plane 4s have.. cylinder bank angles & stroke interfere with those harmonics a lot! valve gear included..
Excellent artical.. food for thought thanks.. loving the channel.
Interesting. Seems worth it to go bigger because it's stronger / less deflection....?
Just off the top of my head, seems the 3/8 with the thinnest wall would be best.
That was my thought.
I run 3/8 in every LS engine i do regardless, always best to run the widest pushrod you can.
If you make the pushrod stuff enough you take one spring to control out of the equation. I've never seen a pushrod too stiff, and weight is not a big concern.
Good info, and I need a new pair of boots too.
Thank you
@@WeingartnerRacing So I've always used air die grinders but after I watched one of your videos (can't remember which) I got a Foredom SR. That thing is awesome.
When the pushrod is offset you loose lift because it is going in 2 directions at once instead of a straight line.😊
ALWAYS Use the strongest push rod you can fit. There's your answer. Steve Morris will second that comment.
Nice work
Great information.
Thank you
Good stuff!
Be nice to see it at 8000 with a supporting camshaft.
an aggressive ramp on the lobe would be better to show if push rod flex is a factor.
Awesome!!!! I'm building a moderate Jeep 258 (with Edelbrock 4.0 head and cam) and many have said to get thicker rods. I really didn't want to, lol. They're non adjustable rockers, and rare, so it would be an expensive part. Glad to see it really isn't worth it in the end.
They are worth it. It is never a negative for thicker pushrods.
@@WeingartnerRacing Yeah, but they would probably have to be made custom- non adjustable rockers. I don't race it or anything strenuous. Just don't think the squeeze is worth the juice in such a build.
Wait till I get bored, then I'll end up buying them, lol. It's never ending....
@@rustygehl
I can’t imagine you’re turning much rpm of the street six even with a really good cylinder head
The more spring rate I'd say a stronger pushrod required, 5/16 for moderate builds at most depending on the alloy and wall thickness.
@@WeingartnerRacing when you have 3/8" pushrods, do you require 3/8" cups on rockers and lifters?
I've been watching you alot lately, enjoying it.
Do you ever run beehive springs?
Also, I would like to have you flow one of my heads. How can I get this done?
Could the 5/16 add a little power by lofting the valve?
I'm at 9:22 that tells me if the 3/8 is much cheaper then use it, I know there is an older guy on yt that would make out that gain is the difference between a fool and a pro. But we won't go there....
IDK The 516th might weigh less so will that make it revmore? But then 3/8 does it deflect less meaning does it Basically not bend as much creating more a lift I guess I'm about to find out
thanks for your hard work. i used 5/16ths on an LA 370 , when i changed my rocker ratio. Wouldn't weight on a fulcrum point be less significant?
Weight on the pushrod side is not near as bad as it is on the valve springs side.
Steve morris" ever hurd of him? He states that one thing you can't over do. Are push rods, and fuel pump. When someone like Steve, or Nelson, tells me something. I don't need to over think it.
I’m just showing test results. Do whatever you want. I’m not advocating small pushrods.
@@WeingartnerRacing My comment is for the comment section. Thought provoking. Your doing a fine job 👍
Subed
3/8 for me 😆
you know this but ill say it. Its not all about power when it comes to a happy valvetrain.
No difference beyond average deviation between tests.
Good info but tough to watch. Everything is out of focus.
Video looks clear to me. Possibly it's your internet connection or computer that is causing youtube to downgrade the resolution. I watch it at 1080 HD.
Looks clear to me and I'm into the lower deck on a 30 pack...
Basically all this test does is show the instability of the valve train. Without a Spintron test, you wont learn much.
Exactly