My 71 Duster work in progress

[Dr.Jass]

Having trouble with both the gas and temp gauge now. Grounded wires on both, both went to full scale high. The temp sender is new, need to check the ohms on that. I checked that it is grounded. The cluster is grounded with a dedicated wire. I sure didn't take the wire off the back of the cluster, and I don't see any disconnected ring connectors under the dash, so it's reasonable to say yeah it's grounded as good as it can be. I would have to take the column back down to check that anyway, so there is no rush.

You may have a flaky voltage limiter on the cluster. As you may or may not recall, the fuel and temp gauges in Agnes were both smoked as a result of a limiter failure. I've gotten to the point where I won't install a cluster anymore without installing one of the solid-state limiters from Real Time Engineering. Even though NOS A-body standard-cluster gauges aren't particularly expensive, the hassle of pulling the cluster to change them is worth $60+shipping. Even if it fails, it can't fry the gauges.

 

[b-body-bob]

You may have a flaky voltage limiter on the cluster. As you may or may not recall, the fuel and temp gauges in Agnes were both smoked as a result of a limiter failure. I've gotten to the point where I won't install a cluster anymore without installing one of the solid-state limiters from Real Time Engineering. Even though NOS A-body standard-cluster gauges aren't particularly expensive, the hassle of pulling the cluster to change them is worth $60+shipping. Even if it fails, it can't fry the gauges.

Yesterday I heated the engine up then checked ohms at the temp sender. They did not reflect what I expected. Apparently the sensor should act like the fuel sender with ohms decreasing as the level increases. It had about 1 ohm dead cold, and 170 ohms at 190*. That ain't right, or I'm not doing it right, or the internet is wrong.

I found this:
L = 73.7 Ohms (empty)
M = 23.0 Ohms (1/2)
H = 10.2 Ohms (full)

Yes I'm sure the meter said 170, not 17.0.

The sender is STANDARD MOTOR PRODUCTS LS201. I'm not sure I kept the old sender.

I measured the ohms from the sender terminal to ground at the battery. It's not a huge deal since I've got a mechanical gauge but it should be working dangit. Also, too much info is not necessarily good. The problem is likely in my cluster and I'm sick to death of taking the interior apart to work on that stuff. I've got to do something about the gas gauge though, that is kind of necessary.

Maybe I should buy one of those Dakota digital dash clusters. If I do that, please shoot me. Ugly pieces of junk (grumble grumble cuss cuss). Speaking of, I watched an episode of a Mecum auction in Dallas where they ran 15 B/E bodies in a row though, and only one sold. They all had ugly freaking big wheels, most with dog dish caps, and Dakota digital was one of their upgrades. Also, if one is to think it wasn't about the cars, it could be prices are falling but sellers refuse to believe it. But I think it's more likely caused by the ugly aftermarket crap they hung all over them, built by used car salesmen that just don't get it.

Back to my troubles ... I also realized that those shiny heat shields you buy at the parts store aren't just shiny, they are actually conductive. I was repositioning the wire around the motor mount and got sparks for my trouble. I expected to need new cables, but noticed the heat shield was all the way out on the cable toward the starter so I loosened up the clamp I put around all that at the block, moved the insulation to where it isn't near the terminal end of the wire, and there were no more sparks.

Also: I think a lot of my noise problems are still related to the headers. While screwing around under the car I noticed the driver's side was still on the torsion bar. I stuck 1/8" of shims under that mount to get it mostly off the TB, noise was reduced inside the car, but there's still a weird noise going on. I'm going to end up taking it all apart again to try and deal with that before it's all over.

AFAICT it needs to have NO shims at all and there seems to be exactly ONE spot where the engine is sitting where it should be, and that spot is near impossible to hit at least for my 3-man team of me, myself, and I. A tiny bit too far to one side or the other and one header or the other ends up on the torsion bar, and it always seemed to go where it wants to go no matter how much I tried to move it.

I should've bought the cheapest set of headers I could find. They might have fit better.

 

[Dr.Jass]

Yesterday I heated the engine up then checked ohms at the temp sender. They did not reflect what I expected. Apparently the sensor should act like the fuel sender with ohms decreasing as the level increases. It had about 1 ohm dead cold, and 170 ohms at 190*. That ain't right, or I'm not doing it right, or the internet is wrong.

It does not use fuel-sender specifications. Those numbers are completely unrelated. If someone told you the fuel specs are the same, they're wrong.

It's an NTC sensor, so the higher the temperature the lower the resistance. I had a spec sheet downloaded at home with the specs for literally hundreds of senders/sensors, but Lord knows we're well past the day of the internet being truly useful. I can't find that .pdf anywhere to save my life. I'll have to see if I can find it once I get home.
Regardless, we're talking an enormous difference in resistance across its temperature range--far more than 60Ω. I had to find all this crap while building my EFI PCM, but that doesn't use a Chrysler gauge sender. Without hazarding an actual guess, I'd expect to see tens of ohms at temperature and hundreds if not thousands at low temperatures. As I recall--but don't take it as gospel--the resistance is a curve rather than a straight line. If you remember geometry, picture the X-Y graph of a quadratic equation. Now invert that curve.

You must measure resistance only across the sender itself. You can't use the battery, block, etc. Test from the sender's brass body to its terminal only. If you have known temperatures and can get three readings, it's possible to extrapolate the curve.

The sender is STANDARD MOTOR PRODUCTS LS201. I'm not sure I kept the old sender.

This may be a part of your problem. That part number is for a backup-lamp switch. You should have a TS17 if your sender is of Standard origin.


The cluster limiter affects only two gauges: Fuel and temperature. I suggested that because those are the two gauges with which you have issue. However, if grounding both wires is sending the gauges full sweep, then it does seem likely to be wiring or sender issues. The aftermarket fuel senders can definitely be spotty, but this would be the first I've heard of a bad aftermarket temp sender for a Mopar application. I have the TS17 in Agnes and it reads about mid-gauge at 180°F. In my Charger, the same part number read about 1/3 gauge. I'm more apt to believe that's a production-gauge variance issue than a sender variance.
____________________________

After writing all that, it occurred to me: Both senders are push-on stud connectors. Try squeezing the connectors gently with a pliers to ensure they're making good contact. Those things have a tendency to spread over time.

 

[b-body-bob]

This may be a part of your problem. That part number is for a backup-lamp switch. You should have a TS17 if your sender is of Standard origin.

That's what I get for just finding my most recent rockauto receipt and copy/pasting the part number LOL.

I found the receipt and it came from Advance and seems to be the right part number (WTC1097).

You must measure resistance only across the sender itself. You can't use the battery, block, etc. Test from the sender's brass body to its terminal only

OK, then the problem is the way I'm measuring it. I started out trying to use the sensor body as the ground and had the scale set wrong if you expect hundreds if not thousands when cold. I'll have it started again today for another try at doing it right.

Both senders are push-on stud connectors

It fits pretty tight right now (can feel the threads when plugging it in) but I will give it a squeeze anyway.

I'm more apt to believe that's a production-gauge variance issue than a sender variance.

I agree with your intuition. Even when the old gauges work, they're wrong.

 

[b-body-bob]

We went out yesterday, did some figure 8s and the rear end noise is gone. The car is a symphony of weird noises though. We had to head back home when I noticed a clicking that correlated with wheel speed and stopped when I hit the brakes. There seems to be something in the passenger front doing it.

Update: yeah it was the outer brake pad.

Also the idle speed jumped up about 500 RPM again at some point. I forgot to bring any tools so I stopped at a Dollar General for a screwdriver and slowed that down. It seems like an inverse fast idle - I might need to adjust/set that up so it is in effect while the choke is on and then set the idle so when it jumps up it's in the correct range (IOW where it is right now). I don't understand why the idle increases though - makes no sense to me. But I promise you the choke was wide open long before the idle stepped up. I haven't started it cold since then but expect it to barely idle without help since I took a quarter turn out of the adjuster screw.

I noticed I raised the fuel level too much on both bowls too. I heard a bunch of detonation at one point, so I went ahead and filled it up with high test this time. Timing is at 15*, max 34, but it could still be coming in too quick.

Taking a chance on that transmission being good wasn't the best choice because it seems like I've got a bad synchro for the 2nd gear shift. I'll adjust the shifter but I don't think it's related because it goes in gear, it just makes a racket about every 3 shifts. I couldn't see anything wrong with them while it was out of the car but it's not like I'm Dan Brewer and know what I'm looking at either.

I revisited the the temp sending unit and it seems to be working (117 @ 210*, 155@ 190*) so I guess it's something to do with the dash. Remember I tested the fuel sender too, so the wiring and the senders both seem to be working as they should. Weird. I could really use a working fuel gauge.

Finally, I'm still not convinced the rockers aren't making a racket. It sounds more like a high speed clicking than a valve tapping.

 

[RUSTY Cuda]

Turn up the radio!

 

[Dr.Jass]

We went out yesterday, did some figure 8s and the rear end noise is gone. The car is a symphony of weird noises though. We had to head back home when I noticed a clicking that correlated with wheel speed and stopped when I hit the brakes. There seems to be something in the passenger front doing it.

Update: yeah it was the outer brake pad.

I assume the pad was rattling. Is the car A-body or A-/E-body brakes (big bolt pattern)?

Also the idle speed jumped up about 500 RPM again at some point. I forgot to bring any tools so I stopped at a Dollar General for a screwdriver and slowed that down. It seems like an inverse fast idle - I might need to adjust/set that up so it is in effect while the choke is on and then set the idle so when it jumps up it's in the correct range (IOW where it is right now). I don't understand why the idle increases though - makes no sense to me. But I promise you the choke was wide open long before the idle stepped up. I haven't started it cold since then but expect it to barely idle without help since I took a quarter turn out of the adjuster screw.

You have to set the choke and fast idle with the carb ice cold, and the fast idle with the carb warm. Now, if that car only has the one idle screw, then the best thing I can tell you is to clean the cam and its surrounding area as good as possible, and maybe hit it with some silicone spray or something. If it's simply a cam on a single screw, that cam needs to move freely. It's been awhile since I messed with a Holley that had a choke, and the last time I did, I was removing the choke.

I noticed I raised the fuel level too much on both bowls too. I heard a bunch of detonation at one point, so I went ahead and filled it up with high test this time. Timing is at 15*, max 34, but it could still be coming in too quick.

Although I have a hard time believing it, 34° might be more than it wants. You could try dropping a degree or two and re-test. However, I'd suggest playing with the vacuum canister first to see what effect it has.

It's also possible that the newer carb has the high IFR, which causes the air-fuel ratio to fluctuate wildly while cruising. I've heard of guys swinging between 12.5:1-16:1 with the high IFR. Of course, fixing that requires taking the bowls and blocks off and drilling, but it's well worth it. I'm assuming you've adjusted the idle mixture screws to the max vacuum reading at hot idle. If you haven't, get after it.

Taking a chance on that transmission being good wasn't the best choice because it seems like I've got a bad synchro for the 2nd gear shift. I'll adjust the shifter but I don't think it's related because it goes in gear, it just makes a racket about every 3 shifts. I couldn't see anything wrong with them while it was out of the car but it's not like I'm Dan Brewer and know what I'm looking at either.

When checking synchronizer rings (the synchro itself is rarely the issue), there are two things you need to do, one of which absolutely requires the transmission to be apart. The first thing is to feel the angle on the top of the teeth. If they're sharp, replace them. New ones are rounded on that peak. Really, if any edge other than one along the flat side feels sharp, I toss it and install new. That test you can half-ass do with the side cover off. The other test is to loop your index fingers inside the synchro ring, and pull hard. Now rotate it and try again. If there's a crack, you'll find it. Obviously, the rings must be out of the transmission for this. Cracked synchro rings are more common on the older, square-notch rings than it is on the '70-up style tapered slots.

I know I mentioned it previously, but GL4 oil only. Parts-store GL5 is not backward compatible and will chemically destroy the synchronizer rings, period. The only two remaining oils of which I'm aware are the Penngrade GL4 and Redline MT90. The latter is synthetic and aboot thrice the price of the Penngrade stuff. One can also use Dex/Merc automatic transmission fluid, since that's what A833ODs specified. For heavy-duty running, though, I prefer the 80W-90. The A833OD for my '68 will get the ATF, because I expect to drive that car year-round. Experience has taught me that trying to shift an 833 with 80W-90 at -10°F is like trying to move a paint stick through chilled molasses.

I revisited the the temp sending unit and it seems to be working (117 @ 210*, 155@ 190*) so I guess it's something to do with the dash. Remember I tested the fuel sender too, so the wiring and the senders both seem to be working as they should. Weird. I could really use a working fuel gauge.

I found my NAPA/Echlin .pdf with sender specs (thank God; I forgot about it until now). Per their sheet, it should be 24.7Ω @ 220°F and 152.2Ω @ 100°F. Since their sheet is jut a stolen copy of Standard Motor Products despite not selling that brand, it should be the same specs for the TS17.

Finally, I'm still not convinced the rockers aren't making a racket. It sounds more like a high speed clicking than a valve tapping.

Try and narrow it down. Pull the belts and start the engine to remove the accessories and fan blade from the equation. Pull the dipstick out; it could be contacting the crank. Turn the lights off and run it whilst eyeballing the engine. Mist it with water from a spray bottle. You'd be surprised how loud leaking spark can be. Make sure nothing mounted to the engine/trans/bellhousing is touching something mounted to the body. I realize it's unlikely, but don't rule anything out.

I watched an interesting video regarding lifter face finish. That channel has done a lot of research into flat-tappet cam failures and really hasn't found the answer, however just looking at the lifter faces at the beginning, I don't know that I'd trust 'em. They just look like they're sloppily machined. Dude does have a Rockwell tester and says he's not yet found hardness issues in failed cams and lifters, and in one video he even checks a ~40-year-old factory cam as a reference. It's no harder than a current aftermarket piece. I haven't watched all his videos, but he's clearly not solved it yet.
One thing I wonder about is valvesprings. I don't think yours are anything ridiculous, but I wonder how many cam failures are related to attempting a cam break-in on too much spring. On doubles, you're supposed to break in the cam using only the outer spring. Are some of today's stiffer springs exerting too much pressure during break in? I don't know the answer but I'm definitely curious.

 

[b-body-bob]

That channel has done a lot of research into flat-tappet cam failures and really hasn't found the answer

I am a believer in the burnish ball. Recall I had lifters that weren't rotating (no valve train on top), I bought and used the burnish ball on the block, then they all turned. FWIW my valve springs are nothing special, stock hydraulic e-head stuff.

Make sure nothing mounted to the engine/trans/bellhousing is touching something mounted to the body

Yeah. Don't forget the on-going conflict between my headers and torsion bars. I will take your advice on disconnecting things, etc.

I also noticed that not only does it rattle like a Subaru at start up, it takes a second or two for the gauge to register oil pressure. Once the pressure is up, the obvious lifter noise goes away.

it should be the same specs for the TS17

I give up on this. It's got to be something in the dash cluster or the harness connection. I just don't have the energy or desire to take that out right now.

Although I have a hard time believing it, 34° might be more than it wants. You could try dropping a degree or two and re-test. However, I'd suggest playing with the vacuum canister first to see what effect it has.

I did give the vac can a 1 turn adjustment IIRC.

Another factor could be reluctance to downshift because of the apparently bad synchros.

You have to set the choke and fast idle with the carb ice cold, and the fast idle with the carb warm. Now, if that car only has the one idle screw, then the best thing I can tell you is to clean the cam and its surrounding area as good as possible, and maybe hit it with some silicone spray or something. If it's simply a cam on a single screw, that cam needs to move freely. It's been awhile since I messed with a Holley that had a choke, and the last time I did, I was removing the choke.

It's a brand new carb so everything moves freely and the choke is set. There is a one-screw adjuster hidden on the passenger side for the fast idle. I have not touched that yet. The paper work that came in the box describes how to adjust it.

GL4 oil only.

I used the right oil, it's possible the person before me did not. If I take the trans out I will rebuild it completely, or trade it in on one from Brewer's. I tried adjusting the shifter and TBH I need to just raise the car up more and disconnect all the rods to start over.

FWIW I found that focal length comes into play in this case because there's not enough room between me on the floor and the car on jackstands to focus in on anything under there.

I assume the pad was rattling. Is the car A-body or A-/E-body brakes (big bolt pattern)?

I don't know if that was the noise on the road, but the one I heard in the garage is gone now. The brakes were part of a Dr. Diff kit using these Mopar '73-'89 Slider Calipers

 

[b-body-bob]

Turn up the radio!

You can't hear it in the car. You can barely hear anything in the car. As I said before, it's like being inside a drum.

That is the kind of thing that turns good stock-ish muscle cars into over done resto-mods when someone buys one, realizes the car is nearly as crude as the one Fred Flintstone drove, and points their checkbook at it.

 

[Dr.Jass]

That is the kind of thing that turns good stock-ish muscle cars into over done resto-mods when someone buys one, realizes the car is nearly as crude as the one Fred Flintstone drove, and points their checkbook at it.

Well, if one has an interior installed it's not nearly as bad. If my electric pump wasn't mounted on a frame rail below the rear seat, the Valiant would actually be surprisingly quiet for the idiotic engine powering it. I did spray the floor pans with some Cascade Audio Engineering sound dampener and I think I put a small piece of not-Dynamat on the shifter tunnel. That was it. Of course, I still have the factory firewall pad, the fiberglass behind the kick panels, the rear-seat divider and I re-undercoated the front fenderwells after our frame and stiffener butchery. It's no modern Honda, for sure, but that's not the nature of the car so I didn't pursue it.

One of the funniest things to see are floors completely covered in Dynamat or other products of its ilk. Of course, this started in car-audio magazines, then moved to enthusiast mags and "car TV". Dynamat was always a sponsor or advertiser. Hawkers of such products prefer folks wallpaper everything because it sells more product, but doing so shows a lack of understanding how such products work and how metal panels are dampened. Fully covering the panel--especially the floor--is a huge waste of money.
Find the largest, flattest part of any panel, put an appropriate-sized piece of sound deadener on it, and the panel is damped. Adding more will not further dampen the panel, it simply adds significant weight. Putting 2' x 4" pieces of it between the structural bows of your roof will quite effectively dampen the whole panel. The diagonal lines in the floor pan are not only for stiffening, they also dampen the panel. Fold a cymbal straight across its diameter to about 45° and hit it again. Weird, huh?
I believe McMaster-Carr has a very basic tutorial on how much deadening is required on sheetmetal. Their foil-backed "Dynamat" asphalt was aboot 1/3rd the cost of the brand-name stuff the last time I checked, which was several years ago. They also have several other products similar to Dynamat's other offerings at significant savings.

 

[b-body-bob]

Some progress, I adjusted the shifter - 1-2 was out of adjustment so hopefully this will help with that grinding, but the shifter as a whole is pretty sloppy and needs gone through. Again, I had a range of turns on the reverse linkage so I just found the point where it wouldn't go on because the rod was too long, then turned it the other way until it wouldn't fit again. Range of 5, center of 3. Boom.

I removed the carb and bolted the lifting plate on, lifted the engine up and got it in a place where the headers aren't touching anything. Until it goes right back to where it wants to be of course. One thing I realized is that the solid mount is about 1/8" thicker than the rubber one but I had the shim under the solid mount. Doh.

Jass, I took your tip and unbolted the pivot from the bellhousing and shoved it inside the z-bar to keep from messing up the clutch linkage when I lifted the engine. Those aren't the easiest two bolts to get to but I was able to keep everything else in place so it was a win.

I also realized that I have this standing in the corner. It seems to be the right width, is shaped a little different but so what, but the far end of the muffler to the collector is about 6" longer than the Duster. Same configuration on the mufflers and everything. If I had the energy I could cut that old crap off and cut this down to fit but by the time I have enough strength back to do that I will have a road runner to work on instead.

 

[b-body-bob]

Now that the headers aren't against the torsion bars and steering box the unexplainable noises seem to be gone.

 

[b-body-bob]

It officially does something the 400 engine never did

(Coming toward you)

I let off there; it would've smoked them all the way up the street. It sounded NASTY once the tires broke completely loose.

Note the neighbor's quad test patch there too. I had to claim the road back. It's mine unless the son who visits his mom in a hellcat decides to give it a go.

 

[b-body-bob]

I almost forgot - the shifter adjustment moved the grinding from 2nd to 1st. It happened if I tried to downshift to first while rolling. Every time. Bad habit, I know.

Unsure if grinding means the rod is adjusted too long or too short. Obviously I'm not having any luck using the expected adjustment method, thinking if I figure out which way to go with it might get me there quicker/easier.

I probably need to just break down and rebuild the shifter.

 

[Dr.Jass]

I almost forgot - the shifter adjustment moved the grinding from 2nd to 1st. It happened if I tried to downshift to first while rolling. Every time. Bad habit, I know.

Unsure if grinding means the rod is adjusted too long or too short. Obviously I'm not having any luck using the expected adjustment method, thinking if I figure out which way to go with it might get me there quicker/easier.

I probably need to just break down and rebuild the shifter.

Are you sure you've got the right lever on the transmission, and that it's positioned correctly? If it's a factory setup, the lever should be stamped "L", installed so you can read it. If it's an aftermarket Comp Plus or Street Super Shifter (SS1), the lever should be stamped "105 4829" or just "4829" and installed the same way. Both levers are flat (no offset). The factory shifter is different from the aftermarket; as I recall you've got the OE shifter (the reverse arm curves back). I don't know if the 1-2 travel is the same between factory and aftermarket.

As I recall, neither 1-2 rod has any bends in it, other than for offset. Make sure yours is straight in both planes. If it's bent, it's a shorter rod, which might explain why you're OK in one gear and not the other. I don't believe the OE rod was stamped with a number, but the aftermarket one is stamped "1588" somewhere along its length.

If I've learned anything about Hurst shifters after my debacle with Agnes, it's that they're finicky bastards. They don't play well with mismatched parts. I eventually want to replace what's in that car with the Super Shifter stuff, possibly because I hate myself. Stretch's setup in his Dart is a total bastardization. I don't know exactly what he used in the end but it wasn't quite factory nor was it exactly aftermarket. I know he used a '65 shifter and handle. He borrowed a bunch of my linkage parts, but didn't use any in the end.

 

[b-body-bob]

I'll check that out soon enough. I'm pretty sure it's all factory parts.

Other than confirming the stamping on the levers it's all just like the setup in this photo


I printed that out and compared it under the car.

I'm tearing that 400 down to decide what is scrap and what isn't. The pistons are about .125 in the hole and the head gaskets are steel shims. The heads are big-valve 915s that look to be slap worn out based on the oil traces on the intake valve stems.

The cam is an Erson Hiflow 2H dated 10-96, the timing set is dated 12-96 and it was installed dot-to-dot. The cam bearings need replaced. The 2H number doesn't take me to one grind, at least not yet. There should be a part number on it but I didn't see one.



I'm assuming those are date codes. They're too close to be a coincidence. The inside of the engine is filthy, I figure the block and bottom end are untouched since the factory.

I always thought that was a good cam based on the lope, just installed in the wrong engine. Too bad it's showing a lot of wear.

 

[Dr.Jass]

I misdirected you on the lever. The Hurst lever is flat, but the factory lever has an offset like what you pictured. If it counts for anything, I did get the stamping information correct.

If the Erson catalog's numbering corresponds, the HIFLO 2H is probably the HI-FLOW IIH (easier to stamp the former), which is 306° advertised duration, 235° @ .050", with .472" gross lift on a 108°CL. That would explain the lope, and might make sense if someone wanted the biggest cam they could stick in without machining the valve guides. RPM range says "3000-6000" but the description says "Runs strong 3500-7000 RPM. Stick or automatic, with gears. Needs good intake and headers with 9.5:1 or more compression. Lopey idle."
You can check the lift fairly easily with a caliper. Just measure the smallest part of the cam, rocking the cam in the caliper a bit to achieve the lowest number. Then do the same on the largest part of the lobe. Subtract your first measurement from your second, multiply by 1.5", and you're your uncle. .472" at the cam is ~.315" at the lobe. Duration, of course, means setting up the degree wheel. If the lift corresponds, though, I'd probably accept the lift results. However, the Hi-Flow cams I-III all have that same lift.
Enlarging the photo, that stamping looks like 10-95 to me, but I doubt it makes a difference.

 

[b-body-bob]

Yes I think you're right on the date. Either way well-used to say the least.

All I've got that is usable out of it is the block. Needs pistons, might as well go stroker. The heads would be OK if reworked but it'll cost as much as a set of aluminum heads for that.

The pushrods have a weird spiral pattern on them that I can catch a finger nail in running from top to bottom.

 

[Dr.Jass]

Yes I think you're right on the date. Either way well-used to say the least.

Yes, but that doesn't make it unusable. It's a weird grind, though, for sure. That's a bunch of duration for such low lift.

Needs pistons, might as well go stroker.

Wow. You justify ridiculous expenses like I do. "Well, I don't have a carburetor. Might as well go Six Pack!"

The pushrods have a weird spiral pattern on them that I can catch a finger nail in running from top to bottom.

I've seen that before, but never in an engine I've disassembled. I don't know if it's some sort of maker's mark, if damascus pushrods were a thing, or something else entirely.

 

[b-body-bob]

I don't know if it's some sort of maker's mark, if damascus pushrods were a thing, or something else entirely.

The odd part is those are most likely factory pushrods since the engine has factory rockers.