Is there such thing as a good lifter?

-
I understand what your saying. The primary operational factor is RPM/bleed down time.
What I am saying is that the lifter will fill with oil more efficiently at 80psi than it will at 15 psi. Remember, it's bleeding down and filling up.
I would suspect it has an effect, if only a very small one.
 
Last edited:
Bakerlite said:
I understand what your saying. The primary operational factor is RPM/bleed down time.
What I am saying is that the lifter will fill with oil more efficiently at 80psi than it will at 15 psi. Remember, it's bleeding down and filling up.
I would suspect it has an effect, if only a very small one.
Click to expand...
Viscosity has an effect on the original Rhoads lifters. Rhoads say's it doesn't.
I 've ran enough of them over the years and I know for a fact there's a difference in how they work at lower rpms using 20/50w vs 10/30.
 
Back in the day, when you did lifter bleed down testing, you had to use a specific fluid to test the bleed down time.
 
Bakerlite said:
I understand what your saying. The primary operational factor is RPM/bleed down time.
What I am saying is that the lifter will fill with oil more efficiently at 80psi than it will at 15 psi. Remember, it's bleeding down and filling up.
I would suspect it has an effect, if only a very small one.
Click to expand...
If you look on their Q&A section, it also addresses that. It basically says they work the same with a standard volume or high volume/high pressure.

Course, I know all that's their marketing spill, but I've heard nothing but good things about them. I am also considering them for my new engine in Vixen, since they can also be used on solid lifter camshafts. The camshaft for that engine is even bigger than the 250@.050 I have in the current engine.
 
fishmens67 said:
Viscosity has an effect on the original Rhoads lifters. Rhoads say's it doesn't.
I 've ran enough of them over the years and I know for a fact there's a difference in how they work at lower rpms using 20/50w vs 10/30.
Click to expand...
You would certainly think viscosity would affect them some. I don't see how it could not. I believe they have a viscosity recommendation for their lifters, so that tells me right there it has some effect.
 
RustyRatRod said:
If you look on their Q&A section, it also addresses that. It basically says they work the same with a standard volume or high volume/high pressure.

Course, I know all that's their marketing spill, but I've heard nothing but good things about them. I am also considering them for my new engine in Vixen, since they can also be used on solid lifter camshafts. The camshaft for that engine is even bigger than the 250@.050 I have in the current engine.
Click to expand...

Yes the new ones are much better than the old style.
Mike Jones has used them and he's thinks they are OK.
 
There's nothing wrong with Rhoads originals, they are a quality lifter and they work.
 
fishmens67 said:
There's nothing wrong with Rhoads originals, they are a quality lifter and they work.
Click to expand...
I've always liked them for the right application. The advantage to the ZMax is they are adjustable.
 
413 said:
Observations from many lifter threads on many websites.

1) Comp Cams is involved way too often.

2) People mixing oil and additives is involved 90% of the time

Does anyone that buys the correct oils for classic car flat tapper cams have lifter failure. Brands like
Penn Grade
Joe Gibbs driven
Redline
VR-1

buy the right oil and then you don’t need any additives.
Click to expand...



Comp cams Gets a bad rap for their lifters due to the amount of sales they make with performance cams. Did a 340 and it ticked for a long time then went away. Drove the car it was fine.

The next day the tick was back. The engine had adjustable lifters so we checked the preload and found some lifters that were not pumped up. Started the engine and it went away after a while.

Called Comp and they sent another set of lifters without a problem. My son buys a lot of cams from them so they didn't even ask for the old lifters back.

The new lifters did the same thing and found two were at the same location . It was the lifter bores some wore more then others. That is a fresh engine and in a customers car. The quick fix will be a new solid lift cam. That car is coming back for new AMD quarters . The cam will get changed at that time.

So everyone stop blaming the lifters and start checking the bores. You are all sounding like ? Well I won't say it. But Oil type and viscosity? Really! I remember years back I would pour any oil in I could afford at the time . And guess what no tick. But the blocks were not 50 years old.

And as far as Rhodes lifters ? they can shove them up their ***. The biggest Gimmick ever. How can you keep a balanced air fuel charge depending on the lifters pumping up at inconsistent times due to pressure and tension differences. A smooth engine is a balanced engine in all aspects, Not only mechanical balancing.

This is only my opinion I am sure everyone sees things different. So I will read comments but you won't change my mind. Because I think every old performance mopar should have a solid lifter cam. LOL
 
Oldmanmopar said:
So everyone stop blaming the lifters and start checking the bores.
Click to expand...
So far, changing out a noisy lifter with a new one has worked for me. Maybe one day I'll come across a worn lifter bore..
 
Agree with ^ about lifter bore wear. Pretty rare. Also seem to re-call that the Street Hemi had 0.001" undersized lifters for reduced friction.
 
So all current lifters are crap and the only salvation is NOS or old NORS? Is that what I'm reading?
 
Valvebounce said:
I'm no machinist, but I would have thought soluable oil would have been more appropriate than wd40 as a cutting lubricant? Walk into a machine shop, and the place stinks of it. (I quite like the smell, it reminds me of freshly machined engine parts)

Edit, @ that LA-Phant video
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that tool needed to be resharpened when they were done with it. Way to fast with what they were using. WD40 is not a cutting fluid for steel, might as well been pouring water on it. Dark cutting oil for black pipe in the plumbing isle at the HW store would have been a lot better choice and it really should be a flood, not dabbed on every five seconds. Bottom line, if a reamer is smoking, you are doing it wrong.
 
He said this:
"Everytime we tested the standard Rhoads lifters, we lost top-end power, and picked up a little torque, but the power curve fell off much earlier then with standard hydraulic lifters.
Now, with the new Rhoads V-max lifters, we're seen great results.
They increase vacuum down low for racing classes with vacuum rules, and they'll hold the power much longer then a standard hydraulic lifter(we didn't see any change in low-end power)."

Also I noticed that he said "standard hydraulic lifter". So I guess you could draw your own conclusions from that.
 
Last edited:
Oldmanmopar said:
Comp cams Gets a bad rap for their lifters due to the amount of sales they make with performance cams. Did a 340 and it ticked for a long time then went away. Drove the car it was fine.

The next day the tick was back. The engine had adjustable lifters so we checked the preload and found some lifters that were not pumped up. Started the engine and it went away after a while.

Called Comp and they sent another set of lifters without a problem. My son buys a lot of cams from them so they didn't even ask for the old lifters back.

The new lifters did the same thing and found two were at the same location . It was the lifter bores some wore more then others. That is a fresh engine and in a customers car. The quick fix will be a new solid lift cam. That car is coming back for new AMD quarters . The cam will get changed at that time.

So everyone stop blaming the lifters and start checking the bores. You are all sounding like ? Well I won't say it. But Oil type and viscosity? Really! I remember years back I would pour any oil in I could afford at the time . And guess what no tick. But the blocks were not 50 years old.

And as far as Rhodes lifters ? they can shove them up their ***. The biggest Gimmick ever. How can you keep a balanced air fuel charge depending on the lifters pumping up at inconsistent times due to pressure and tension differences. A smooth engine is a balanced engine in all aspects, Not only mechanical balancing.

This is only my opinion I am sure everyone sees things different. So I will read comments but you won't change my mind. Because I think every old performance mopar should have a solid lifter cam. LOL
Click to expand...
If the lifter bores are worn that bad why do they make lifters with a groove from top to bottom on the side of the lifter. When I primed the one engine that I put them in it gushed lots of oil past the lifters. I know they oil the cam lobes better but what about the oil coming up top? Kim
 
I groove my own lifters, been doing it for 20+ yrs. Never go right to the top, no need to, bleeds off pressure unnecessarily. Groove only needs to go from the oil band to the within 1/8-3/16" of the base.
 
oldkimmer said:
If the lifter bores are worn that bad why do they make lifters with a groove from top to bottom on the side of the lifter. When I primed the one engine that I put them in it gushed lots of oil past the lifters. I know they oil the cam lobes better but what about the oil coming up top? Kim
Click to expand...
This was done years back on mostly BB chevies because of cam lobe wear problem. The lifters on them would not spin due to the lifter bores out of position with the cam. The groove was to put oil directly on the lobe. This was passed on over the years and people would buy them. So they were made to sell everyone who would buy them.

Mostly used on solid flat tap engines where they also would groove the bore instead of the lifter.

If your lifters don't spin it is usually because they are in the wrong location on the lobe. The grooves are a cheap fix and not recommended by most good engine shops. Just true the bores with a fixture. This promotes rotation and also helps performance
 
Last edited:
There seems to be a number of lifter threads lately questioning the hydraulic lifters consistinancy. Am I wrong in thinking one should just go with a hydraulic roller cam/lifter set if doing a cam swap?
 
1971 CY Dodge Dart said:
There seems to be a number of lifter threads lately questioning the hydraulic lifters consistinancy. Am I wrong in thinking one should just go with a hydraulic roller cam/lifter set if doing a cam swap?
Click to expand...
Well no
That's still hydraulic,
The poor quality of hydraulic lifters applies to both hydraulic flat and hydraulic roller lifters.
A lot of people are running hydraulic roller cams with solid roller lifters.
The main benefits of doing this is
You benefit from the lifters being lighter and
Because of the hydraulic roller cam profile being gentler less aggressive then a solid roller cam profile you can run the same spring pressure as a hydraulic roller which makes it live happier on the street
And the best part is no more hydraulic lifter issues!
Plus you will pick up a little Hp
Win Win...
 
I don't subscribe to the worn lifter bore stopping a lifter from pumping up theory for one simple reason.
You don't need very much oil pressure to prime a lifter. In fact you can pump them up by simply submersing them in oil and working the plunger up and down.
I don't think anyone is dumping all their oil pressure out of a lifter bore unless the lifter is missing.
 
Bewy said:
I groove my own lifters, been doing it for 20+ yrs. Never go right to the top, no need to, bleeds off pressure unnecessarily. Groove only needs to go from the oil band to the within 1/8-3/16" of the base.
Click to expand...
I'm going to have a stab in the dark here, but do you have a Relo called Brett?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top