Roller Lifters vs. Schubeck style lifters

-
daves66valiant

daves66valiant

68 Dart 340/727:66 Signet Vert 340/5spd: 68 D100
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
3,151
Reaction score
1,071
Location
SoCal
I've got a few questions and would like some opinions from those who may have experience with either option.

I'm at a point in my restoration where I can easily swap a cam, lifters, rockers etc. I'm running a 340 with a hydraulic Comp 292 cam with stamped rockers. 10.1 compression ported j-heads. I have a valve tick on the passenger side bank and this concerns me since the engine had been sitting fo some time while doing the paint. The CompCams website says you should be using an adjustible valvetrain, which is what I'm more familiar with anyways. So I'm wondering if this is a good time to switch to something that is going to benefit me in the long term.

By longterm I mean not wiping out cam lobes. Reading about the roller lifter/cams and these schubeck lifters got me thinking this is the time to change things up.

My cost to get the drop in hughes retro roller lifters and cam with all the other necesary pasts would cost at least $1600. Cons: More work to install

Cost for the hydraulic Schubecks and roller rockers and new pushrods would be about $1350 and I'd be keeping my current cam and springs. Pros: Less work to install. Cons: Not sure besides expense

For the money which option would yield the best performance?

I'm leaning towards the schubecks style lifters. Any opinions? Roller cams seem to be all the rage lately but these schubecks really have me thinking.
 
Are you looking at a street engine? Look at maintainance on rollers. I have no experience with either but am almost ready to get a set of Schubecks. The 273 buildup by Rob R. used the EDM lifters with .020 hole to lube the lobes. Very interesting.
 
DJVCUDA said:
I did a track test a few years ago with similar spec'd roller and solid cams.

http://editions.amospublishing.com/...1&f=1&id=83aa7076-6054-4a6d-85eb-c1cd9a4f7b11
Click to expand...

Thanks Dave. Nice write up. I wondered if he had to change to heavier springs and pushrods? Seems like the roller lifters/cams add some extra weight to the valvetrain but I guess the cam profile and aluminum rockers make up for the possible HP loss r/t weight gain?

BTW. How did the tti install work out?
 
The new company that is making the Schubeck style lifters makes them for the street as well.

My dilemma is the cam in my mystery motor is on the upper end of streetable. I don't really plan on too many 1320's.
 
The cam you have is what many Mopar guys call "a Chevy grind" meaning that it was designed to be used with .842" diameter lifters that Chevys use. A Mopar-specific grind will net you more area under the curve since it takes advantage of the larger .904" diameter lifter. That means more usable torque and power.

If you're going to tear into it, why not get the most power you can? I'd go hydraulic roller if I were you.
 
lilcuda said:
The cam you have is what many Mopar guys call "a Chevy grind" meaning that it was designed to be used with .842" diameter lifters that Chevys use. A Mopar-specific grind will net you more area under the curve since it takes advantage of the larger .904" diameter lifter. That means more usable torque and power.

If you're going to tear into it, why not get the most power you can? I'd go hydraulic roller if I were you.
Click to expand...

Good point Lee. I do believe it is an older cam profile like you say. The guy I was talking to about the Schubecks said it was a Chevy grind as well. I've not seen too many people running this cam although it sounds great.

I've been wrestling with tearing into the motor because I just want to drive the damn thing after all the time I've put into it.

Ultimatley I would be happier with a mopar specific cam profile like you say.

Glad I asked for opinions since I've been on the fence and pulling the $1600+ trigger.

Now if someone would report back on those retro roller lifters from hughes so I can get a little more info to make my decision.
 
Schubecks need a bunch more spring pressure to live.
Float them at all and the base gets hammered.
 
Thanks Rob I had heard that the ceramic puck will get shattered if there's any float. The springs that my cam calls for are only 115# at the seat and 336# open. With a roller I'm sure I'll have to run higher spring pressures too. Don't think that shimming the springs will be enough to bring the pressure up in my springs to accommodate the schubecks or roller lifters. I think I need around 175-200 for the Schubecks

Still deciding. I may call ya later Rob
 
For the cost, run a hyd roller.

Springs don't have to be stupid crazy. You'll likely need to change them out from what you currently have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top