chinese 1.6 steel roller rockers & RHoads lifters

-
greymouser7

greymouser7

Vagrant Vagabond “Veni Vidi Vici”
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
3,729
Reaction score
1,493
Location
78002 down the road from Atascosa, Texas
I have both of these. This particular build is a Street build, <4800 RPM 99.99% of the time.

Do you think the rattle of the rhoads lifters bouncing off the cam would destroy the rockers (vice stock rockers or 273 rockers) ?

After reading all of you guys input on the SBM board I know that just getting the correct or custom camshaft for the application is the best answer-but i got these parts now.

I understand that you can set the Rhoads lifters with tight valve lash like regular lifters as well.
 
No, Rhoads lifters should be set to zero lash to about .002" lash, regular lifters are set to as much as .060" preload. Big difference. What camshaft are you talking about using Rhoads lifters on?
 
Save the Rhoads for another project, or sell 'em .
Just get some cheap lifters for that 4800rpm cam......
Unless that cam is a 6000rpm cam you just want to limit to 4800........
I wouldn't call that a great idea, lol.
A 4800 cam kit is cheap too.
 
Something like a Crane cams 693511 or 693901 or XE-256 or Lunati 60401 (256) or Howards Cams HRS-711381-10
Daily driver Aspen on San Antonio freeways and haven't decided which ghey gears- 2.76 , 2.71 , or 2.45
No stop light racing nothing, just traveling
 
All of those are way too small to use Rhoads lifters on. They would actually have an adverse effect, IMO.
 
greymouser7 said:
Something like a Crane cams 693511 or 693901 or XE-256 or Lunati 60401 (256) or Howards Cams HRS-711381-10
Daily driver Aspen on San Antonio freeways and haven't decided which ghey gears- 2.76 , 2.71 , or 2.45
No stop light racing nothing, just traveling
Click to expand...

And this is going to be used with an A833 OD transmission, correct? If so, go ahead. You'll find out the hard way what I've been trying to tell you for years.
 
greymouser7 said:
yes sir
Click to expand...

You're going to be lugging the engine so badly at highway speed, it's going to ruin the efficiency altogether. I cannot get you to understand that. Even if you go with the 2.76, your final ratio in high gear (OD) is going to be 2.01. If you get a strong head wind, you'll have to down shift. The mileage will suffer terribly. You're not going to like it.
 
RustyRatRod said:
You're going to be lugging the engine so badly at highway speed, it's going to ruin the efficiency altogether. I cannot get you to understand that. Even if you go with the 2.76, your final ratio in high gear (OD) is going to be 2.01. If you get a strong head wind, you'll have to down shift. The mileage will suffer terribly. You're not going to like it.
Click to expand...
I have the transmissions, and am under the impression that it will be in third gear most often.
The write-ups say even slant six 225's would wear/brake the secondary shafts of overdrive over time.
I promise a write up of "RUSTYRATROD WAS RIGHT" when I find out. The goal is to duplicate the C-body's with 360's and 2.76's

I was thinking that up hill or acceleration should not be accomplished in OverDrive gear
 
greymouser7 said:
I have the transmissions, and am under the impression that it will be in third gear most often.
The write-ups say even slant six 225's would wear/brake the secondary shafts of overdrive over time.
I promise a write up of "RUSTYRATROD WAS RIGHT" when I find out. The goal is to duplicate the C-body's with 360's and 2.76's

I was thinking that up hill or acceleration should not be accomplished in OverDrive gear
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the strength. It will be plenty strong enough for what you are doing. And it's not about being right. I'm just trying to help you avoid a car that's just going to be dreadful to drive. Just dreadful. I wouldn't put anything higher than a 3.55 gear in something with an OD. Even with a 3.55, the OD ratio is 2.59, John. TWO FIFTY NINE. You're just not grasping what I am trying to tell you. It's all about the engine NOT being in it's preferred operating range. That's what I am trying to get across. You think it's cute to have the engine turning 1500 RPM at 75 MPH, but you simply don't understand why that's not good. You will.
 
RustyRatRod said:
You're going to be lugging the engine so badly at highway speed, it's going to ruin the efficiency altogether. I cannot get you to understand that. Even if you go with the 2.76, your final ratio in high gear (OD) is going to be 2.01. If you get a strong head wind, you'll have to down shift. The mileage will suffer terribly. You're not going to like it.
Click to expand...
If I get it to work good, YOU are driving it and will have to post a write up "Greymouser7 was Right!!" ha ha ha!
Those jive turkey Diplomat's -some had 2.25 gears and V8's.
I had a 267 sbc (3.5" bore) 1980 Impala (Caprice Classic) with 2.55's -it drove like it had 60 horsepower, but would make it up to 130mph.
 
greymouser7 said:
If I get it to work good, YOU are driving it and will have to post a write up "Greymouser7 was Right!!" ha ha ha!
Those jive turkey Diplomat's -some had 2.25 gears and V8's.
I had a 267 sbc (3.5" bore) 1980 Impala (Caprice Classic) with 2.55's -it drove like it had 60 horsepower, but would make it up to 130mph.
Click to expand...

...and you know I will. But see, in order for it to "work" you'll need on the order of 400 plus LB FT of torque @ at or below 2K RPM and you're not building "that much" motor. You'd be better off with a 6BT Cummins.
 
RustyRatRod said:
...and you know I will. But see, in order for it to "work" you'll need on the order of 400 plus LB FT of torque @ at or below 2K RPM and you're not building "that much" motor. You'd be better off with a 6BT Cummins.
Click to expand...
bet that would squat the front end of the car!
On a serius note though, my 1.5 civic does alright with a 4 speed with 1/4 the engine- i thought that the 360 would not need 400 foot pounds to do it.
 
greymouser7 said:
bet that would squat the front end of the car!
On a serius note though, my 1.5 civic does alright with a 4 speed with 1/4 the engine- i thought that the 360 would not need 400 foot pounds to do it.
Click to expand...

Totally different animal. The Civic has a MUCH better gearset and it's WAY lighter. You're trying to compare to different kinds of engineering.
 
Depends on what you want.... I had a '76 Dart Lite with 2.76 rear gear and the 4 speed OD trannie with .73 OD......that 2.01 final drive ratio with the 225 /6 was FINE cruising on the interstates, even on the interstates in western VA which are quite hilly... like driving through the Texas Hill Country NW of your location. An occasional downshift to 3rd was not any issue for me going up some of the mountain grades. And out in the flat midwest, like your area SW of San Antonio, it never needed downshifting to 3rd when cruising along, unless you wanted some zoom to pass someone on a 2 lane highway; again, not any issue. With those 2 lane speeds limits of 70 MPH in Texas.....sounds doable to me.

If you have it.. no harm in trying it out. You'll know soon enough if you need a different rear gear. 75 mph is going to be around 1900 RPM. I'd stick with the smallest cam and agree fully with NOT going with the Rhodes lifters. Keep the duration small to make the low end of the torque curve down low in RPM. I like the Howard's cam there (or smaller!) but don't recall your compression parameters. You perhpas might want to simplify and stick with 1.5 rockers unless you have the 1.6's already.

400 ft-lbs to 'work'? No sure what 'work' means exactly.... if at the flywheel, that is very roughly 2-3 times the torque needed to keep an A-body rolling at 75 mph on level ground with this gearing. (50-70 HP consumed.)
 
RustyRatRod said:
You're going to be lugging the engine so badly at highway speed, it's going to ruin the efficiency altogether. I cannot get you to understand that. Even if you go with the 2.76, your final ratio in high gear (OD) is going to be 2.01. If you get a strong head wind, you'll have to down shift. The mileage will suffer terribly. You're not going to like it.
Click to expand...
I did this a different way, ending with a 1.97 final drive. To properly use double overdrive 1.97 ratio Rusty's right, even tho my combo was engineered to work with that ratio. You will need a lot of cylinder pressure,a stand-alone timing device,and a well worked out timing curve; to make 65=1600 work. It's the 1600 that is the problem when attached to a high-overlap cam; it messes up the intake AFR and you may get worse fuel economy than at 1600/.73=2200. Getting good fuel economy at 2200 or perhaps 2000 is way easier.
I ended up at 2240 with a different trans, and a different rear, and a stand-alone overdrive; final drive is now 2.77. I wouldn't go much lower for 65 mph
 
Last edited:
Be careful on evaluating this overlap.... Overlap on that Howard's cam as listed is 38 degrees.... it's not a high overlap cam. These are pretty high ramp rate lobes, optimized for the .904 lifter, so the overlap stays low. The next step IMHO is to take that Howards spec with a 110 LSA and order it with a 114 LSA. (Standard for mileage/torque cams...) Now overlap is 30 degrees for those particular lobes, down in stock 2 BBL 360 cam-land now for that parameter; how much less overlap is good/needed? I don't think your cam is in this overlap range, AJ, but I am going from memory; would you mind listing it for us? (And you can even drop the overlap by another 6-7 degrees if you really want to go wild; there is one smaller lobe size in the .904 optimized Howard's lobes for HFT's.)

You can order this Howard's cam variation through any outfit like Summit or Jegs by giving the lobe grind numbers for intake and exhaust from their master lobe list, and then the LSA and ICL.
 
I would be more worried about the chink roller rockers in my engine. The Rhodes
lifters are great in almost any application above stock. Folks don't like Rhodes because of "noise" and they take away from the cruise night lumpy cam sound.
IMO they are a quality product that delivers as advertised.
 
nm9stheham said:
Depends on what you want.... I had a '76 Dart Lite with 2.76 rear gear and the 4 speed OD trannie with .73 OD......that 2.01 final drive ratio with the 225 /6 was FINE cruising on the interstates, even on the interstates in western VA which are quite hilly... like driving through the Texas Hill Country NW of your location. An occasional downshift to 3rd was not any issue for me going up some of the mountain grades. And out in the flat midwest, like your area SW of San Antonio, it never needed downshifting to 3rd when cruising along, unless you wanted some zoom to pass someone on a 2 lane highway; again, not any issue. With those 2 lane speeds limits of 70 MPH in Texas.....sounds doable to me.

If you have it.. no harm in trying it out. You'll know soon enough if you need a different rear gear. 75 mph is going to be around 1900 RPM. I'd stick with the smallest cam and agree fully with NOT going with the Rhodes lifters. Keep the duration small to make the low end of the torque curve down low in RPM. I like the Howard's cam there (or smaller!) but don't recall your compression parameters. You perhpas might want to simplify and stick with 1.5 rockers unless you have the 1.6's already.

400 ft-lbs to 'work'? No sure what 'work' means exactly.... if at the flywheel, that is very roughly 2-3 times the torque needed to keep an A-body rolling at 75 mph on level ground with this gearing. (50-70 HP consumed.)
Click to expand...

It may work better than I thought then. Thanks for weighing in. John is a personal friend of mine and I appreciate it!
 
nm9stheham said:
AJ, but I am going from memory; would you mind listing it for us?
Click to expand...
The cam I used for that combo was a Hughes HE2430AL, listed at 223/230/110@.050 and later revealed to be 270/276/110.. I used 1.6 arms so the lift was predicted to be .538/.549 ..The math shows 53*overlap. I ran this cam with Hughes HD snap-ring lifters at 1/2 turn preload or .020 IIRC, and with OOTB Eddies and at ~185psi. And of course with TTIs and dual 3" full-length pipes.
For the Econo-run, I ran an old Holley 600 Vsec with a modded low-speed circuit. Cooling system running at 207*F, and IIRC, at that time I did not yet have fresh cold air to the carb. Tires were still 245/60-14s
I used 3.55s and the A833od box (.71od) with the GVOD operating as a splitter. Shifting at 2800 the rpm drop was about 600rpm between gears, and 65mph was about 1700rpm. A lot of the time traffic was flowing at 85 mph=2200. That same combo with nothing more than a carb-swap to a 750 DP, went 106@12.9 on it's one and only run.
With 53* of overlap, I was not expecting the phenomenal fuel-mileage it made. IIRC that combo vacuum peaked at just above 1800rpm. And plateaued for a long ways.
I bought that cam from the Hughes fast-rate hype (year 2000). In the end when they finally published the advertised to be 270@.008, that cam was actually a turd in terms of fastrate, the intake ramp being 270 less 223=47 degrees at .008 lift. Fast-rate myazz. Rated at .006 like a comp, that could actually be 276* or more, making the ramps 276-223=53*, making it a really slowazz turd, in my opinion. So when the lifters started clacking I just let them.
Despite this minor disappointment, that was a great cam, pulling hard into the 6s exactly like Hughes said it would; and I usually revved it to 7000, including on the 106mph run.
If I needed a cam today, hands down it would be a fast-rate solid lifter cam.And it would have a lotta overlap for it's size;
Cuz 95% of the time, my hotrod is doing less than 65mph and when it gets to 60 it is wound up tight in first-over@6400, having gone thru the power-peak twice, with a 1400rpm or less,drop at the 1 to 1od shift. If you have never heard a 367 screaming at 7000, thru dual 3" cannons from nearly a dead stop to 65 mph, well IMO, you really need to; it's only about 5 or so seconds, so try not to miss it,lol.I never hear the 295s howling. Is it loud? In the cab it is, but no one who has reported on it has said anything about loudness,lol. Not even the coppers who have pulled me over for misbehaving.
 
Last edited:
AJ/FormS said:
The cam I used for that combo was a Hughes HE2430AL, listed at 223/230/110@.050 and later revealed to be 270/276/110.. I used 1.6 arms so the lift was predicted to be .538/.549 ..The math shows 53*overlap. I ran this cam with Hughes HD snap-ring lifters at 1/2 turn preload or .020 IIRC, and with OOTB Eddies and at ~185psi. And of course with TTIs and dual 3" full-length pipes.
For the Econo-run, I ran an old Holley 600 Vsec with a modded low-speed circuit. Cooling system running at 207*F, and IIRC, at that time I did not yet have fresh cold air to the carb. Tires were still 245/60-14s
I used 3.55s and the A833od box (.71od) with the GVOD operating as a splitter. Shifting at 2800 the rpm drop was about 600rpm between gears, and 65mph was about 1700rpm. A lot of the time traffic was flowing at 85 mph=2200. That same combo with nothing more than a carb-swap to a 750 DP, went 106@12.9 on it's one and only run.
With 53* of overlap, I was not expecting the phenomenal fuel-mileage it made. IIRC that combo vacuum peaked at just above 1800rpm. And plateaued for a long ways.
I bought that cam from the Hughes fast-rate hype (year 2000). In the end when they finally published the advertised to be 270@.008, that cam was actually a turd in terms of fastrate, the intake ramp being 270 less 223=47 degrees at .008 lift. Fast-rate myazz. Rated at .006 like a comp, that could actually be 276* or more, making the ramps 276-223=53*, making it a really slowazz turd, in my opinion. So when the lifters started clacking I just let them.
Despite this minor disappointment, that was a great cam, pulling hard into the 6s exactly like Hughes said it would; and I usually revved it to 7000, including on the 106mph run.
If I needed a cam today, hands down it would be a fast-rate solid lifter cam.And it would have a lotta overlap for it's size;
Cuz 95% of the time, my hotrod is doing less than 65mph and when it gets to 60 it is wound up tight in first-over@6400, having gone thru the power-peak twice, with a 1400rpm or less,drop at the 1 to 1od shift. If you have never heard a 367 screaming at 7000, thru dual 3" cannons from nearly a dead stop to 65 mph, well IMO, you really need to; it's only about 5 or so seconds, so try not to miss it,lol.I never hear the 295s howling. Is it loud? In the cab it is, but no one who has reported on it has said anything about loudness,lol. Not even the coppers who have pulled me over for misbehaving.
Click to expand...
So you are saying that mathematically your Hughes cam was crap but in the real world it was a great cam. Funny how theory and reality don't always match up.
 
Mike Jones .904 grind is really short seat to seat eventhough it's listed at around 256@.006 It's 60+ @.275 which is 50% larger than the Mopar Perf 260
I'd like to compare with the Howard's

He can grind it any lsa you want- gives a really flat torque curve I posted a 364 AMC dyno sheet recently

BTW AMC Rambler came with 3'31 with OD with 3.54> 4.11 and even 4.28 optional
we used 3.08 and high 2's in the Mobilgas economy run with the Nash Statesman flathead
If you go over a hill below the OD low limit you can take your foot off the gas and it will not shift into OD so you can coast shut the motor off...
 
Last edited:
forphorty said:
So you are saying that mathematically your Hughes cam was crap but in the real world it was a great cam. Funny how theory and reality don't always match up.
Click to expand...
Not quite that harsh.
What I'm saying is the cam, IMO, was not as fast a rate as I was led to believe. At that time Hughes did not publish an advertised and were not forthcoming on that, except to say their cams were faster than anybody else's. And since no other cam company disputed it, I jumped all over it. And the not-as-fast-as-I-had-hoped, was my disappointment. I purchased that cam specifically for Performance with Economy. The emphasis was on economy with reasonable power. I was not disappointed in the cams power or torque in my 360 at 185psi. And, I was still able to squeeze a good amount of fuel-economy out of it; just not at as low an rpm as I had planned. With my transmission's double overdrive, and 3.09 first gear, I had wanted to run a much lower than 3.55 gear. ( I had every lower gear down to 2.76s), But that cam got worse economy with lower than 3.55s. The starter gear was fine down to 2.94s (2.94x3.09=9.08), but cruising at 65=1330, got worse fuel economy than 65=1600. And I blame the late-closing intake on that. That was my disappointment.
Otherwise, that was a great cam. And I highly recommend a cam like that, for a city-car. But as you can see, I did a lotta gear-fudging to make it work for me. I used the GVOD as a gear splitter behind the A833od, to get 7 useable gears, so I could get the engine up on the cam, and keep her on the cam.
Had it been in a more typical engine at 140psi,I know it would have been a disaster,especially with say 3.23s and an automatic, at least until the cam woke up. I know because when I didn't split-shift, and the engine was forced into sub-3000 rpm, it kindof laid down. And with an automatic, the only time the engine does not get into sub-3000 on a 1-2 shift is if you rev it to over 5100 which with 3.23s is; wait for it........ 48mph with 26.5 tires.
It was also a great cam, cuz it kept on making power long after it's normal peak hit. Normally a 223* cam might peak at about 5200. Well; this Hughes cam with the Eddies and free-flowing exhaust,after just switching from a 292/108,(where you know exactly where the peak is), didn't have much of a peak, so I can't really say exactly where it was; but it kept on pulling well into the 6s, and if the tires were still spinning, I shifted it at 7000. That was a bonus....... I'm also blaming this on the late closing valves,lol.
Great cam!,just not what I was lead to believe. I had wanted a fast-rate, so I could idle it down the hiway at 185psi and clobber the gas-bowsers with high-20s mpgs with sub-1500 rpms. I eventually did get some great mpgs,but it was a lot of work.
I was very sad when that cam started dropping lobes.
I have nothing against Hughes
 
Wyrmrider said:
Mike Jones .904 grind is really short seat to seat eventhough it's listed at around 256@.006 It's 60+ @.275 which is 50% larger than the Mopar Perf 260
Click to expand...
I get sorta what you are saying, but what is .275? and if you compare another cam at .275 what might their .006s be? And IIRC that Mopar 260 is speced at .008 is it not? so is there some unfair comparison going on there; I mean 60* is HUGE.
See, you got me really interested in this strategy; I could be in the market for a fast as lightning cam with a sub 270 advertised. I think it would be awesome to have say a 223 to 230 @.050 cam with .550 or better lift, and valves slammed shut so early it idles like a stocker, yet on a 104LSA spits out power like a 235@.050. I don't care what it idles like. I don't care how fast it is in the quarter. I care only that it works with my transmissions ratios splits; namely; 3.09-2.41-1.92-1.50........ .78od and 65=2040rpm
My combo is currently at ~180 psi with an Ica of 64, and is good to about, down to 54*@.008 before the pressure gets excessive.
So here's how I see this going down; I would like to see something like this;
264/272/104and 60* overlap, advertised at .006 with incredibly short ramps. I would like the cam to make absolute power like a 235@.050, and don't care about anything else except lotsa lift to give my Eddies a bit of a work out. I have the Hughes 1110 springs which are good to well over 7200 on my Hughes HE3037cam which is 276/286/110@ .008 advertised. I don't care if I have to buy other springs or reduce my shift-rpm. I run Hughes HD circlip lifters at max .020 preload and some are clacking, maybe most, and I don't care about the noise.I'd be happy to run a new set, as they have been very good to me.
So to recap; the.008 spec can be as low as 54* to as high as 64*, the seat to seat I would like to be way shorter than my HE3037AL,(which I have never measured),and the LSA closed up to less than 108 with 104 my target to get the 60* of overlap; more is better. And it should make more absolute power than the current 230*@.050. I don't care about powerband because my trans will take care of that with its current 7 useable gears and splits of 78%.
This will get my pressure into the 190s, and the cruise vacuum I can adjust with rear gear. The specific vacuum I don't care about, as long as it plateaus fairly early, I will gear it to run on the low-end of the plateau. And I will give that cam a mountain of cruise timing, and lean the carb out as I go, And I am targeting over 30 mpgUS.I don't care if I can't rev it to 7200 anymore. I don't care how much power it doesn't make.
So there you have the worlds greatest street cam specs. Power, torque, and fuel-economy; perhaps sacrificing rpm and longivity, I don't care. If that cam hits the marks and I have to replace it every 20,000 miles; I don't care about that either.
If it can be re-engineered to work with solid lifters at tight-lash, to make same results; even better!
I'm pretty sure you and I are on the same page, but feel free to blast me anyhow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top