Billet cams and lifter supply

[GTX JOHN]

I still run the old Isky cams that I got from them in the
80s and 90s and actual Hydraulic Schubecks from 20 =
years ago. Some same old valve springs 165 seat and some
beehives on a couple cars. Never a problem I still can run 1+
under (Some of our cars even well more) when I want it too.
Engines in a couple cars are 8 plus years of regular racing. Plus
with just only one valve job.

I am sure I am a tenth or two behind the curve
of the top dogs. However, I am not spending a lot of money to race
and I still win more heads up than I lose. NO valve train issues.

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by nolongerracing

Nitride cast cam. 200/400 spring pressures. The most common issue. Tool steel or Shubeck lifters. Didn't matter. Oil, didn't matter. I was told by a cam salesman that if you got a year out of a cam like this you were "doing good". Thats why we switched to steel cams. The problem continues.
Going back to "pure stock" rules will not help. Just lost a few lobes in a stock rebuild 350 Chevy. We did everything we could for break in. Oil, additive, 1.2 rockers, 1/2 hour run time, etc, etc,. Cores are junk, lifters are junk, oil is junk, heat treat is junk.
Hate to say it.. Seems to start with the EPA!! We can't build what we need!!

If the EPA is the problem than making the parts outside the USA would fix it.


How many vehicles today run OHC on bucket setups? Which is nothing more then the cam against a flat tappet



Stan

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Rollers DON'T add reliability, they just allow bigger, more aggressive lobes that allow higher engine speeds that will make bigger and more "manipulated" cylinder heads more of a necessity which will just drive costs higher and make engine failures more frequent. Now that right there sounds like a good way to get rid of Racers.

Billy,

The issue is that there is only one solid/hydraulic lifter manufacturer left in the USA. The only other manufacturer left in the USA, makes only hydraulic roller lifters. New engines are either hydraulic rollers or OHC. The business model for earlier engines that run a hydraulic or solid tappet style is no longer a market the bean counters want to support with USA made products.

Moreover, there is both an issue with cam core quality and lifter quality, especially when they are made overseas. Then add the EPA imposed restrictions on lubricating engine oils, it creates more issues.

As regards to camshaft design, running a roller lifter/camshaft does not always allow a performance increase since the roller wheel diameter places a limit on how aggressive the lobe can be. One example would be the Olds 307 engine, which was available with both a hydraulic tappet and roller lifter. In Stock Eliminator trim, the hydraulic tappet engine, even with solid tappet lifters, is faster than the roller engine.

Since you been around as long as I have, you may remember in the early days, there were "Mushroom" style solid lifters available to run aggressive lobe profiles because it provides a larger contact area.

If there were to be a rule change to allow the use of hydraulic or solid roller lifters, then they should limit the roller wheel size to OEM which is 0.700". This is the roller wheel size for all OEM applications.

Allowing a larger roller wheel diameter has the same effect as using a larger size tappet style lifter. With roller lifters, the diameter does not make any difference, however, the roller wheel diameter does.

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by SSDiv6

One example would be the Olds 307 engine, which was available with both a hydraulic tappet and roller lifter. In Stock Eliminator trim, the hydraulic tappet engine, even with solid tappet lifters, is faster than the roller engine.

Poor example as the 307 roller motor uses a totally different cylinder head design. I can however see the issue of using a "stock" roller lifter. Very heavy.

I'll stand by what I've said, REAL RACERS will FIND the parts that they need.
And if they can't find the parts then maybe it's time for them to start building newer combos.

[Mike Taylor 3601]

Originally Posted by John Duzac

Looking at the photograph of damage to the cam lobe makes me ask one question. What brand/type of oil was used in this engine?

The reason why I ask is my new 350 engine had about 30 runs on it and began to run slower and slower. I checked the leak down and one hole had 40%. I sent the engine back to my engine builder. It was discovered that all 8 pistons were ruined, along with the tool steel lifters. I always used Joe Gibbs oil and never had any problems. Gibbs oil was sold and manufactured under the name of DRIVEN oil. Samples of the used oil were sent in for testing. The results have not been received yet. Has anyone had issues using DRIVEN oil?

I started to use Gibbs break- in oil once... warehouse gave me a case to try..I was assembling my own engine,grabbed a quart....oiled up mains and installed crank(had already checked bearing clearance) crank wouldn't turn... pulled it back out... the oil did'nt have any slickness at all... cleaned off bearings and crank... lubed it up with Brad-penn or lucas break-in oil... set crank back in and torqued down... spun just like it should... I dumped that quart I opened and the other eleven in the used oil barrel...
looking back,I should have sent back to be checked...

[Frank Castros]

I'd like to hear more from Glenn Briglio on this subject.

[Rory McNeil]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

If the EPA is the problem than making the parts outside the USA would fix it.


How many vehicles today run OHC on bucket setups? Which is nothing more then the cam against a flat tappet



Stan

Totally different situation. The OHC engines with buckets have no rocker arms, lifters or pushrods, so the valve springs are generally much less tension, since the weight of the valve train is so much lighter. Even more so with a 4 valve head, since the valves are considerably smaller, as are the spring diameters and retainers. Also, the buckets do not need to rotate like a flat tappet cam, and the cam lobes are not ground on a taper, to promote rotation.

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by Rory McNeil

Totally different situation. The OHC engines with buckets have no rocker arms, lifters or pushrods, so the valve springs are generally much less tension, since the weight of the valve train is so much lighter. Even more so with a 4 valve head, since the valves are considerably smaller, as are the spring diameters and retainers. Also, the buckets do not need to rotate like a flat tappet cam, and the cam lobes are not ground on a taper, to promote rotation.

Let leave 4v DOHC out of this and just look at 2v Single OHC. While there is no rocker arm or pushrod the bucket replaces the lifter and is traveling at valve velocity / acceleration while the lifter would be traveling slower.


Stan

[pmrphil]

But the oil can "puddle" on the top flat area of the "lifter", how long do you think it could last upside down?

[Mike Gray]

Finally, just received my new coated PPPC lifters.