HYD. Roller lifters , which one?

[Dodge 330]

How high do you turn your motor?. I think i'll be all done 6200-6400 ish? maybe less with my combo. Hard to understand how it seems like every other brand can run hyd. rollers in a hot street car but no love for them in the mopar world. What are the LS guys spinning 7k,87? with hyd. rollers. I do get that bb mopar's never came with them and are probably a little heaver but you would think that you could at least get a reliable 6500 rpm out of them . Thank you for the input on the Howard's ,are they noisy at all?.

Howards wants their operation limited to 6500. My limiter is set at 6400.

They are truly a zero maintenance setup and if you didn't know better, you would swear it was a 440 with a slightly large hydraulic cam.

 

[33 IMP]

I've been reading AndyF 's "How to Build Max Performance Mopar Big Blocks" and I just happen to be in the "camshafts and lifters" section. He writes a well matched hydraulic roller cam and lifters has a reliable range up to 6-7k RPM.
EDIT: See photo of relevant paragraph. He mentions that Max Wedge ports peak around 6,500 RPMs and that a solid FT or solid roller cam would be better. Hopefully AndyF doesn't mind that one excerpt photo. I certainly wouldn't publish his book without permission.
View attachment 881853
In the previous chapter on valvetrains, it seems that lift of .650 or below is the range where "special" parts are not required to make the geometry work, although aftermarket components certainly are.

I would agree. Is that your anticipated redline? I don't know modified stroker engines or cam specs well enough to know what the power band of your engine is based on what you have posted.
Since you have decided to go with a hydraulic roller cam and lifters, the focus of the replies I guess should be on what is the best brand of hydraulic roller lifters.
I'll repeat that the CompCams hydraulic roller cam and lifters in the Pontiac 421 Tripower have been flawless in operation. The rev limiter on that engine is set at 5,900 RPM because of calculated piston speed, and other factors.
Also although they are not roller lifters, my hydraulic flat tappet CompCams lifters have been fantastic, and reliably operate up to 6,200 RPMs with these CompCams springs: 911-16 Valve Springs, Single, 1.524 in. Outside Diameter, 373 lbs./in. Rate, 1.200 in. Coil Bind Height, Set of 16
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca-911-16

@biomedtechguy , on your pontiac, do you know if the lifter diameter is the same as a chevy? If so, those lifters have had a LOT of r&d. They would also be much less in diameter than a mopar lifter. A large lifter diameter is an advantage for a flat tappet engine, but with the extra weight of a aftermarket hyd roller, maybe that is causing the lower rpm limits, and durability questions?

 

[Dan64]

I actually have a set of the old cranes. I could post pics if you find some of the gatorman to compare too.

That would be great, thank you. Gatorman has a web site with pics i could compare with.

 

[Dan64]

Dan are you having the lifter bores bushed.

No Barry, they told me i didn't need to bush them to run hyd. rollers and that the bores checked out ok but i guess i'll find out if both of those are correct.

 

[Dan64]

Howards wants their operation limited to 6500. My limiter is set at 6400.

They are truly a zero maintenance setup and if you didn't know better, you would swear it was a 440 with a slightly large hydraulic cam.

Trick Flow sells a 270 top end package with a hyd. roller cam and lifters. It made about 687? hp at around 6800-6850 according to their dyno chart ( yes, they are trying to sell us something) I'm hearing that Trick Flow lifters are really Howard's and that Howard's are Murel street rollers. Anyone know how accurate this is?. Dodge 330 what size is your motor and cam?.

 

[440rb]

Trick Flow sells a 270 top end package with a hyd. roller cam and lifters. It made about 687? hp at around 6800-6850 according to their dyno chart ( yes, they are trying to sell us something) I'm hearing that Trick Flow lifters are really Howard's and that Howard's are Murel street rollers. Anyone know how accurate this is?. Dodge 330 what size is your motor and cam?.

I'm not 1 to pick mistakes in threads, but it makes a big difference that it actually showed 687hp@5800 more in the hyd. roller safe zone?....notice the cam spec went up to .640" with 1.6 rockers.

 

[biomedtechguy]

on your pontiac, do you know if the lifter diameter is the same as a chevy? If so, those lifters have had a LOT of r&d. They would also be much less in diameter than a mopar lifter. A large lifter diameter is an advantage for a flat tappet engine, but with the extra weight of a aftermarket hyd roller, maybe that is causing the lower rpm limits, and durability questions?

Diameter is the same, but the height of a Pontiac lifter is taller, thus heavier. So as far as R&D goes, I don't know how much has gone into the Pontiac specific lifters in the 421. The cam is .508/.510 lift intake and exhaust (from what I've read in AndyF's book on Mopar big blocks, the intake is usually favored with more lift, but the valves on the 421 are tiny by comparison, so maybe that's why the builder gave a bit more lift to the exhaust?)
EDIT: 857-16 is the part number for the hydraulic roller lifters in the Pontiac 421.
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca-857-16
Looks like a Pontiac/Oldsmobile ONLY retrofit. 136g Weight│2.47” Seat Height
Chevy: same specs...

 

[Tex013]

You can go either way, you can go solid roller lifters on a hyd. roller cam, many do that after having had enough of the hassle with hyd. lifters, you only need them to pump UP once@6k+, bleed down issues are another thing. I'm not a fan of anything hyd. in a motor thats gonna see over 6k rpm.

this is a maybe sometimes . Lobe ramp plays a huge input . Quite often a hyd ramp is too fast/steep to let you run a solid .

Tex

 

[Dan64]

I'm not 1 to pick mistakes in threads, but it makes a big difference that it actually showed 687hp@5800 more in the hyd. roller safe zone?....notice the cam spec went up to .640" with 1.6 rockers.

Yes , you are right ,big difference . Help me understand this, they used 1.6 to raise the lift to get more hp but wouldn't that make it more likely for the lifter to get unstable at that fast of a ramp up and down with a hyd. roller?. That also brings us back to the oil problem with the higher lift if my thinking is correct. Seems like the duration of 243/247 is on the small size ,no?. We see they list the basic operating range of this cam, intake and head package @ 3000 to 6500 rpm but i guess their own test suggest otherwise. The good news for me is that if their build is anywhere close to the advertised 687 hp then i'm hoping i should be ok hitting my target 625 +/- in a reliable motor.

 

[Dan64]

this is a maybe sometimes . Lobe ramp plays a huge input . Quite often a hyd ramp is too fast/steep to let you run a solid .

Tex

If I can run the Morel hi-rpm at .20 from the bottom ( not sure if that ok to do yet) wouldn't that more or less make the hyd. roller act more like a solid roller but have the benefit of the roller being able to follow the cam lobe without digging in?.

 

[biomedtechguy]

i'm hoping i should be ok hitting my target 625 +/- in a reliable motor.

With my limited knowledge of the details of what it takes to build a balanced package of parts for a Mopar stroker motor, I can tell you that I was looking for 600HP and 6XX torque from a 505 with a 6bbl dual plane Edelbrock/Chrysler aluminum intake, TF240s, and I've read about half a dozen just like that. With the 270s you are in a better position to achieve more horsepower. The cam and carb I think will be the key at this point, and I just don't know enough about cam specs to be confident in a prediction other than to say it "sounds" like you won't have a problem getting there.

 

[440rb]

!.6 rockers increase lift and duration to some degree, I'm no cam guru but I would think thats a mild ramp speed roller being hyd.?, instability comes from too weak a spring, pushrod flex, incorrect geometry, pre-loading these lifters can be another issue. The duration is a bit weak yes and with 505ci it becomes even weaker to some extent, the 1.6's helping. Its a well thought out combo from the looks of the intake/carb/spacer etc. The cam is listed as 3>6.5k but thats for a stock stroke 440 I believe as thats the same cam used in the 440/240 head combo 620hp@6200, a longer stroke will change the characteristics of where max hp will be of course, I think they had all that in mind. Our 589 made its best hp @5500 and was within 1hp@5900 with a 260/[email protected] s/roller cam.

At first I thought 687 was a bit [email protected]:1 but its possible as much as any dyno no. given is. As far as oil [email protected]!....well I'm sure they didn't just bolt it all together and go. I would've thought they primed the motor to see if any oil was coming out of the lifter bosses@max lift at least before going ahead?. The best way to avoid those issues would be to either bush the bores, or use solid body lifters as we know. I couldn't find any on a quick search in hyd. apart from a howards street roller which was almost solid bodied, but almost doesn't quite cut it. A stock block isn't the best for lifter boss accuracy, some are better than others, it can be a lottery as to how good a block you got.

 

[Dan64]

With my limited knowledge of the details of what it takes to build a balanced package of parts for a Mopar stroker motor, I can tell you that I was looking for 600HP and 6XX torque from a 505 with a 6bbl dual plane Edelbrock/Chrysler aluminum intake, TF240s, and I've read about half a dozen just like that. With the 270s you are in a better position to achieve more horsepower. The cam and carb I think will be the key at this point, and I just don't know enough about cam specs to be confident in a prediction other than to say it "sounds" like you won't have a problem getting there.

I hope it gets me there, lol. Seeing how this is a stock block build that will see street duty i didn't want to go to crazy ,i'm just looking for 625 to maybe 650 hp with a nice torque curve .240's could have gotten me there but I knew that i was going to have a hood clearance problem and would probably have to go with a dual plane ( can't find a 337) so i was told maybe try 270's with a Indy dual plane and as much spacer as i can fit . I was thinking a 950 Brawler but have been told that due to air velocity issues i may be actually better off with a 850 or maybe have one built for the car. The hyd. roller spec'ed out by my builder is as large as he would go with a hyd. roller. Maybe i'm completely wrong about needing to see 6300-6400 maybe i'll be all done at 5800-6000? and be able to hit my numbers ,that may be a good thing. With a 29" tall tire ,410 rear ,if i can hit my numbers it should only trap about 6000 i think.

 

[biomedtechguy]

The hyd. roller spec'ed out by my builder is is as large as he would go with a hyd. roller. Maybe i'm completely wrong about needing to see 6300-6400 maybe i'll be all done at 5800-6000?

The larger engine displacement will make the cam "seem smaller". The 270s vs 240s moves your torque peak UP the RPM range though. I just can't bring myself to run 240s on a 541 cu in motor, so that's why I moved up to the
270 MaxWedgesized ports...
MAXWEDGE
(and I get a kick, like a little kid, obviously, out of saying "Max Wedge")

 

[Dan64]

!.6 rockers increase lift and duration to some degree, I'm no cam guru but I would think thats a mild ramp speed roller being hyd.?, instability comes from too weak a spring, pushrod flex, incorrect geometry, pre-loading these lifters can be another issue. The duration is a bit weak yes and with 505ci it becomes even weaker to some extent, the 1.6's helping. Its a well thought out combo from the looks of the intake/carb/spacer etc. The cam is listed as 3>6.5k but thats for a stock stroke 440 I believe as thats the same cam used in the 440/240 head combo 620hp@6200, a longer stroke will change the characteristics of where max hp will be of course, I think they had all that in mind. Our 589 made its best hp @5500 and was within 1hp@5900 with a 260/[email protected] s/roller cam.

At first I thought 687 was a bit [email protected]:1 but its possible as much as any dyno no. given is. As far as oil [email protected]!....well I'm sure they didn't just bolt it all together and go. I would've thought they primed the motor to see if any oil was coming out of the lifter bosses@max lift at least before going ahead?. The best way to avoid those issues would be to either bush the bores, or use solid body lifters as we know. I couldn't find any on a quick search in hyd. apart from a howards street roller which was almost solid bodied, but almost doesn't quite cut it. A stock block isn't the best for lifter boss accuracy, some are better than others, it can be a lottery as to how good a block you got.

For some reason i was thinking only about the increase in lift ,not duration ,thank you for pointing that out,makes perfect sense. Didn't realized that it would move that far down the rpm range with a stroker but that's a good thing also. Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Budnicks]

I've had the Crane Retrofits Hyd. Roller lifters in 2 of my strokers
street/strip engines
I had 12,000 miles on the 1st one, when I sold the car
back in 2007
(it's been freshened up but still has the same Crane camshaft, rockers & lifters)
I have the same lifters & milder Crane Hyd. Roller in my current RR too
going on 12 years now...

I'm truly not even sure if they (Crane) make the same lifters or not
or if someone else bought out the tooling etc.
when Crane was bought by S&S (motorcycle related engines)

I've still never had any problems "yet" after 2 sets & 10's of thousands of miles
& many laps down a racetrack or beat runs driving in the mountains

I made sure the pushrods where the correct length
it's critical, so is the amount of adjuster sticking out of the rockers

I also use the Crane Super Gold 1.6 rockers, hardened shafts & lash-caps too
needed to order special length pushrods
the ones Crane said; 'were the proper ones' were too long,
(IIRC like 0.090 long)

(I have semi fully ported Eddy RPM closed chamber heads)

I have a small base circle Crane 'Retrofit Hydraulic Roller Cam' too
I've checked them a few times, so far so good on the 2nd build too
not sure how many miles on this combo, probably 5,000 (???)
still all good, no weird wear shown, no excessive noise or troubles either


IMO a solid roller & higher lift cams will eat valve-springs fast-er,
especially just cruising, putzing around
not really street friendly, although they tend to & will make more power
but not for a 'real long' period of time
they are made for higher RPM & regular servicing
if you don't mind pulling the VC's & checking valve lash regularly
you can keep on-top of it "hopefully"

the roller trunnions (shafts) on the lifters fail more often than anything
on a solid or Hyd. roller

I like the solid roller on the street too
just more upkeep & maintenance, regular valve adjustments
to keep "really" on-top of stuff, or you're asking for trouble
when something starts showing up as 'lose or too tight'
something is wrong, usually the springs go 1st
or the lifters fail (it's not just a Hyd. Roller lifter problem)
or the push rods tips or adjusters go bad
(lack of proper oiling or adjustments out too much)

many newer "performance cars'
have service life of 100,000 miles on hydraulic rollers

if you're going after every last hp, go with a solid lifter

some results will & some opinions will vary as much as them too
that's mine

take it or leave it

 

[Dan64]

I've had the Crane Retrofits Hyd. Roller lifters in 2 of my strokers
street engines had 12,000 miles on the 1st one when I sold the car
back in 2007, I have the same lifters in my current RR too
going on 12 years now...

not sure if they make the same lifters or not
or if someone else bought out the tooling etc.
when Crane was bought by S&S (motorcycle related engines)
never had any problems "yet" after 2 sets & 10's of thousands of miles
& many laps down a racetrack
made sure the pushrods where the correct length
Use the Crane Super Gold 1.6 rockers & lash-caps too
needed to order special length pushrods
the ones Crane said were the proper ones were too long
(I have semi fully ported RPM closed chamber heads)
small base circle Crane 'Retrofit Hydraulic Roller Cam' too
checked them a few times, so far so good on the 2nd build too
not sure how many miles on this combo, probably 5,000 (???)

solid roller & higher lift cams will eat valve-springs fast,
especially just cruising, putzing around
they are made for higher RPM & regular servicing

I like the solid roller on the street too
just more upkeep & maintenance, regular valve adjustments
to keep "really" on-top of stuff, or you're asking for trouble
when something starts showing up as 'lose or too tight'
something is wrong, usually the springs go 1st
or the lifters fail (it's not just a Hyd. Roller lifter problem)
or the push rods tips or adjusters go bad
(lack of proper oiling or adjustments out too much)

many newer "performance cars'
have service life of 100,000 miles on hydraulic rollers

if you're going after every last hp, go with a solid lifter

some results will & some opinions will vary as much as them too
that's mine

take it or leave it

My engine builder really liked the older Crane's but thought the tooling was sold off during a buy out. We were wondering if Gatorman was the company that got the tooling?. Both in Florida i believe.

 

[Budnicks]

My engine builder really liked the older Crane's but thought the tooling was sold off during a buy out. We were wondering if Gatorman was the company that got the tooling?. Both in Florida i believe.

I can't answer that question...
I don't know...

I'm not not sure if S&S bought all the tooling or not
when I bought my 2 sets,
but they were owned by S&S at that time, doing business as Crane
(a few of the same people I dealt had with at Crane originally, for years
they were a big sponsor of mine back in the day, I liked their stuff, they treated me well
before the buy out, some of the org. people still were doing engineering/design there,
I have no idea if they still are)
but that was over 12 years ago now

 

[biomedtechguy]

Budnicks,
My goal is to not have to "do maintenance" or to keep it to a minimum.
Not knowing what cam specs are going to be recommended, I can only speak in general terms, but I don't think I will need a "lot of cam" to reach my power goals, being as I've gone up in cubic inches, to a 541 (4.25 crank/4.50 bore). The other side of that is the Max Wedge ports of the TF 270s can handle more cam, and the larger displacement will make the cam seem smaller. Pump gas 93 octane too.
So I'm sure a solid lifter flat tappet will get the job done, and one reason why I'm trying to stay away from hydraulic lifters is IQ52's warning against using them, and although I've had zero problems and great performance from both my CompCams hydraulic flat tappet lifters and the hydraulic roller cam and lifters in the Pontiac, I can't ignore Jim's concerns.
So I'll get power from displacement, I don't need to try to find "the most" power from my cam lifters. In that case, what do you say?

 

[Budnicks]

Budnicks,
My goal is to not have to "do maintenance" or to keep it to a minimum.
Not knowing what cam specs are going to be recommended, I can only speak in general terms, but I don't think I will need a "lot of cam" to reach my power goals, being as I've gone up in cubic inches, to a 541 (4.25 crank/4.50 bore). The other side of that is the Max Wedge ports of the TF 270s can handle more cam, and the larger displacement will make the cam seem smaller. Pump gas 93 octane too.
So I'm sure a solid lifter flat tappet will get the job done, and one reason why I'm trying to stay away from hydraulic lifters is IQ52's warning against using them, and although I've had zero problems and great performance from both my CompCams hydraulic flat tappet lifters and the hydraulic roller cam and lifters in the Pontiac, I can't ignore Jim's concerns.
So I'll get power from displacement, I don't need to try to find "the most" power from my cam lifters. In that case, what do you say?

Jim IQ52 knows his ****...

I just wanted to share, my personal experiences...

I don't use Comp Cams, I haven't for a long time
(I had a bunch of valve-train attrition or breakage back in the 90's
using their stuff on top-sportsman Big cid Chevy's, Blown Max Wedge & Milodon Hemi's)
can't speak to their use or quality, anymore
hyd. roller or solid roller, for that matter