Hughes is good. Just remember, if you want to take advantage of their "lifetime warranty", read the fine print. You have to use all of their valve train stuff for that to be valid, if warranties are your kinda thing.
cold feet about potential bad lifters
- Thread starter HTMLmopars
- Start date
-
MopaR&D
Nerd Member
Man that's a huge bummer. I have some other questions if you don't mind... did you happen to check the lifter faces for being convex (slightly curved out) before you installed them? What about rotation, did all the lifters spin freely and smoothly in their bores? And I'm not sure if it's possible to determine but can you tell if it was a cam lobe that failed first or the lifter?
Also for everyone else... I'm seeing a lot of posts about using solid flat-tappet lifters to eliminate this issue. What I don't understand is if the problem is in the interaction between the cam lobes and lifter faces, what difference does it make if the lifter is solid or has a hydraulic plunger inside? How is it that solid cams/lifters aren't failing even if they're still flat-tappet?
If someone makes a solid cam that would be appropriate for truck and towing usage I'd consider it for my 440 but I'd also have to get adjustable rockers... seems like every solid-lifter cam out there is designed for street/strip usage and has way too much duration and lift for my needs.
Also for everyone else... I'm seeing a lot of posts about using solid flat-tappet lifters to eliminate this issue. What I don't understand is if the problem is in the interaction between the cam lobes and lifter faces, what difference does it make if the lifter is solid or has a hydraulic plunger inside? How is it that solid cams/lifters aren't failing even if they're still flat-tappet?
If someone makes a solid cam that would be appropriate for truck and towing usage I'd consider it for my 440 but I'd also have to get adjustable rockers... seems like every solid-lifter cam out there is designed for street/strip usage and has way too much duration and lift for my needs.
Disregard catalog listed cams. Look at any cam companies master lobe list. Countless solid lobes that can be ground on a core.
aaronk785
Well-Known Member
What's so frickin hard about making a quality lifter. Where did it all go wrong. Hell it used to be I stuck any brand lifter on any cam and never had a problem. Now it's Russian roulette.
Have to set up a "Dummy Block" just to break in new lifters to new cams.
When successful, then can put them into the final build assembly.
When successful, then can put them into the final build assembly.
MopaR&D
Nerd Member
Gotcha, I still don't understand how solid vs. hydraulic makes any difference in not going bad during break-in if they're both flat-tappet though? A little while ago the answer was always "go roller" and spend $1000+ just for insurance. If Chrysler made a factory roller-cam BB I'd go for it but they didn't and dumping the money for a roller retrofit conversion is a really hard pill to swallow for my build.
I feel like if all the lifters are confirmed to have the correct crown on the face and rotate freely in their bores, the only way for one to fail is from inferior materials in the camshaft or lifters. That's why I'm so eager to get the gritty details from @68Valiant225 , if we can figure out the exact mode of failure there might be an alternative path forward besides just "use a solid or roller cam instead".
It just went bad ^^^ because things were not 100% right. Was the oiling System Primed? etc. etc. etc.
Has a lot to do with a 200,000 mile engine, with lower than average oil pressure, and the new aftermarket heavier than stock valve springs used on initial start up.
Not enough oil pressure and volume, and too much valve spring pressure on unmated surfaces makes cam lobes go away. (200,000 mile oil pump too)
Has a lot to do with a 200,000 mile engine, with lower than average oil pressure, and the new aftermarket heavier than stock valve springs used on initial start up.
Not enough oil pressure and volume, and too much valve spring pressure on unmated surfaces makes cam lobes go away. (200,000 mile oil pump too)
I “think” one of the reasons some say go solid is for the fact you eliminate the hydraulic components and the possibility of the internals having an issue (collapsing, leak down, etc) among other reasons.
I took a set of Sealed Power hyd apart, cleaned and inspected them. Some had the thin stamped little discs installed 180° from a majority of them. I put them in the same as the others during reassembly, after thoroughly cleaning them. (Lots of black residue on rags after wiping them) Lubed up good, soaked in oil, cam lube massaged into the lifter faces. I’ve done all I can do so.....
MopaR&D
Nerd Member
For sure, still makes me worry though I could follow every procedure to a T with a fresh-rebuilt 440 and still have cam/lifter failure. But then multiple members said they are running the same lifters as the OP with no issues so... idk this ****'s dumb lol. I agree with @aaronk785 it's not that friggin hard to make a lifter, makes no sense why this is still an ongoing issue and it's been what, 15 years since people started having flat-tappet cams go bad?
Hopefully 3D printing technology will continue to improve and at some point soon we can just print custom engine parts instead of relying on garbage offshore stuff made in commie China... lol (for real though)
The FT lifter failures has NOTHING to do with the lifter being hyd...or sol....or the oil.
The problem was/is/always has been poor metallurgy of the lifter &/or incorrect or no radius on the lifter base.
This will probably be the umpteenth time I have said this on this forum: if you do not want FT lifter failure, find some stock or aftermarket lifters that are 25 years or older. Then have them re-faced, good to go.
The problem was/is/always has been poor metallurgy of the lifter &/or incorrect or no radius on the lifter base.
This will probably be the umpteenth time I have said this on this forum: if you do not want FT lifter failure, find some stock or aftermarket lifters that are 25 years or older. Then have them re-faced, good to go.
We are letting China make everything and they are our adversary. You think they're gonna make it "good"?
That Melling looks like a better lifer all the way around.
It might appear that way, you could be right, IDK but that black residue that looks like scratched paint was what I was talking about when cleaning them. The SP’s I have are mostly all made in Mexico (a couple in USA with no difference I could see) and the one Melling is also made in Mexico. I’ve had these SP’s on a shelf for about 14 years. Other than the black stuff, the machining, as cast surfaces and all else appears identical on all. I wonder if one plant in Mexico is making these parts or there are others down there like in China.....
HTMLmopars
Well-Known Member
I didn't check them for being convex but I did run every lifter into it's respective bore and they all moved nicely in my opinion. My opinion might be wrong but I'm fairly confident that the lifter bores were in good shape.
In terms of problems with the break in, motor wasn't primed, and I was using the new aftermarket valve springs.
Is there anything that I should look for when pulling the engine apart in terms of finding the failure mode?
Lifters were most likely fine.....but motor “wasn’t primed”??
Surely you meant “was primed”??
HTMLmopars
Well-Known Member
Lifters were most likely fine, but not primed??
I had soaked them in oil before install. I pushed them in with the pushrods a couple times. I had heard various things about pumping up the lifters beforehand versus not pumping them up so I split the difference.
HTMLmopars
Well-Known Member
HTMLmopars
Well-Known Member
So cyl 2 intake lifter wasn't rotating. Cyl 5 intake is also scarred. Both had to come out of the bore thru the bottom after pulling the cam. I'm assuming this is a bore issue with the block, or is crowning on the lifter potentially at fault?
PRH
Well-Known Member
My take on the “benefit” of the solid lifter being less likely to fail as opposed to the hyd is what’s going on while the lifter is on the base circle of the cam.
With the solid there is clearance.
With the hyd the lifter has some preload and is wiping the oil off the cam.
Plus, there is the option with the solid of having an EDM’d hole in the bottom, direct feeding oil onto the cam instead of relying on splash.
However, imo the most common culprits for cam failures are poor lifter rotation(or none), and/or too much spring load for break in.
I’m also a big believer in using proper break in oil.
The other thing that no one talks about much is...... and this is particularly important when using a cam that’s designed to maximize the lifter diameter....... the actual usable footprint diameter of the lifter.
An aggressive chamfer on the bottom of the lifter cam easily reduce the usable footprint of a .904 lifter down into the .870-.880 range.
Even if it’s .890...... that reduction of diameter coupled with factory tolerances for lifter bore location and geometry, and frankly I’m surprised there aren’t more failures when using fast rate cams designed to use the full lifter diameter.
With the solid there is clearance.
With the hyd the lifter has some preload and is wiping the oil off the cam.
Plus, there is the option with the solid of having an EDM’d hole in the bottom, direct feeding oil onto the cam instead of relying on splash.
However, imo the most common culprits for cam failures are poor lifter rotation(or none), and/or too much spring load for break in.
I’m also a big believer in using proper break in oil.
The other thing that no one talks about much is...... and this is particularly important when using a cam that’s designed to maximize the lifter diameter....... the actual usable footprint diameter of the lifter.
An aggressive chamfer on the bottom of the lifter cam easily reduce the usable footprint of a .904 lifter down into the .870-.880 range.
Even if it’s .890...... that reduction of diameter coupled with factory tolerances for lifter bore location and geometry, and frankly I’m surprised there aren’t more failures when using fast rate cams designed to use the full lifter diameter.
Last edited:
PRH
Well-Known Member
Since you said there was good lifter rotation prior to start up, it’s unlikely a lifter bore issue.
MopaR&D
Nerd Member
I got you. It's pretty simple to link videos, just copy the URL of the video you want to share then click on the icon that looks like a film strip and paste the URL then click "Embed".
Ken actually has 3 videos on it, here's the first...
-
