Lifter Technology Selection

-
Oh, as said earlier, a good solid cam and edm lifters.
Hard to beat.
Having a solid roller cam doesn’t Guarantee Jack!
 
This mentality is why aftermarket companies don’t waste time on the Mopar crowd. You old guys just keep rocking those purple shaft cams and heaven forbid, don’t use anything from Comp Cams lol.
 
512Stroker said:
YR your inbox is full
I am going to trash my Comp Hyd rollers and switch to solid rollers.
Would you please provide a supplier for a good solid retro fit roller.
340 LA, X ported heads, Comp roller top end with a Comp 20-811-9 cam, stock oiling system 25psi to 60psi hot. Street A body auto trans application.
Engine made 452hp corrected on a dyno.
If at all possible I would like to be able to remove lifters without removing the heads.
Thanks in advance
Sorry for the hijack
Click to expand...


If you don't have pushrod oiling use a good solid body lifter with a wheel diameter of .810 or bigger. They are usually .810-.815 diameter. Nothing with a .750 as that is just cheap *** Chevy junk. The core on the Chrysler cams is bigger than Chevy, so the overall length of the lobe is bigger on a Chrysler for the same lift compared to a Chevy.

That means the small wheel has too much speed. So, solid body, big wheel, lash at .002 cold and if you are very VERY careful you can lash them at zero cold but you must warm up carefully. I've done it, but you've got to get some temp in the engine before you best on it.

The Crower and Crane Pro Series (not the junk *** regular crane lifters with the .750 wheel...long story) are probably the best cost verses quality I've seen for lifters.
 
Wyrmrider said:
Didn't realize that rollers allow more aggressive cam profiles than FT.
They don't
so a roller would get the valve open to a useable lift quicker,
not usually
Click to expand...


They don't. You can smack the **** of of a solid lifter getting the valve off the seat, the roller not quite so much, unless you are running lifters with diameters of 1 inch with big wheels in them.

Once the valve is off the seat the roller can whip the valve open much faster than a solid lifter.
 
Hemirunner said:
This mentality is why aftermarket companies don’t waste time on the Mopar crowd. You old guys just keep rocking those purple shaft cams and heaven forbid, don’t use anything from Comp Cams lol.
Click to expand...


Really? Like I've said, I was big on the hydraulic roller deal, until I had to make power with them. Yes, you can do it, but it's just as easy to do it with a solid roller.


What is stupid is guys wanting performance and then using hydraulic anything in the valve train.

I would walk around a pile of free Comp junk to PAY for a quality part.
 
Listen to YR and read his posts over again
Comp Has NO solid lifter profiles for the .904 Chrysler/AMC lifter in their master catalog (except so outdated top fuel profiles) and only 3 HL hyd profiles which do fit some applications but your intake and exhaust and head flow andxxx has to match to optimise
they will do custom versions but there are other grinders out there with other profiles to choose from- so why bother
YR is correct on the roller size- and note that ALL HR retrofit kits are made by Johnson (AFIK) with the small chevy wheel
"until I had to make power with them" now for long life on the street-OK I have 300k miles on one
which is why (untill you go to a longer duration which may not be appropriate for a HR in the first place) a .904 HYD will out "intensity" them
so watch your trade offs.
Mike Jones inverse profile HR and Solid roller designs can get with the program as well as most FT
(always exceptions like NASCAR .875 FT and very high maintenance race only .842 chevy profiles- nothing we are considering here)
 
I get it but you guys are throwing around some big blanket statements based on personal bias. The people with experience know what you mean but those that don’t are taking it at face value.
 
Hemirunner said:
I get it but you guys are throwing around some big blanket statements based on personal bias. The people with experience know what you mean but those that don’t are taking it at face value.
Click to expand...


I'm not making blanket statements. I'm relating facts from doing this **** for a long time and learning the hard way. It's not a bias at all. Like I said, I was on the HR bandwagon like jack the bear. Then, as always happens the lobes get more aggressive so you need more spring load. More spring load is now needed. The hydraulics HATE that. So now, you need stiffer pushrods because instead of running a 30 grade oil you need a 50 grade oil. Now, you have to adjust the clearances to compensate for that heavy oil. Then, the lifter manufacturer will swear on a stack of Bibles that you are the ONLY GUY IN THE COUNTRY who thinks you need that heavy oil. The ONLY one. In fact, their super trick lifters are designed to use much lower grade oils because they use new CNC manufacturing methods to keep internal clearances pussy good.

The only problem is you can't give up that much hydraulic load (only way I can think of right now to explain it) to keep the valve train stable at RPM.


That's when you say piss on this and drop in some solid rollers and be done with it. You can now run 240 on the seat and 600ish over the nose and everything is as happy as a pig in ****.
 
I'm not that smart, but I totally understand what YR just said.
I have not had the years of experience, that he has had, and at my power level, have not come to those types of roadblocks; but I understand it none-the-less.
 
AJ/FormS said:
I'm not that smart, but I totally understand what YR just said.
I have not had the years of experience, that he has had, and at my power level, have not come to those types of roadblocks; but I understand it none-the-less.
Click to expand...



Hey AJ I sent you a PM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top