Solid roller lifters on a Hydraulic cam profile.

ricardoa1

Registered User
Solid roller lifters on a Hydraulic cam profile.



What are the drawbacks and bennefits of doing this.....Can one get a way with it?
The needed backlash creates a longer duration but provides less lift...Im I correct on this?
 
The hydraulic cams use preload to reduce the amount of plunger collapse before it starts pumping up. I don't know how much the plunger travels whenever opening the valve, but I do know their distances would be refutable with the difference in lash. Basically what I'm saying is, if you run .020" lash, a hydraulic lifter's plunger could only move .020" past its preload point in order to break even on the cam specs.

Really, the advantages lie elsewhere. Solid valvetrain is consistent and gives you the actual cam spec at all times, since it doesn't vary or depend on oil pressure to operate the valves. It also allows for the use of more aggressive valve springs to run higher RPMs and control valve float even more.
 
Is it something in the camshaft profile that determines its a Hydro profile or a solid profile.


So do you recommend Casey?. I Know about the higher RPM bennefits and valve float deterrents but what else am I loosing or gaining.
 
Is it something in the camshaft profile that determines its a Hydro profile or a solid profile.


So do you recommend Casey?. I Know about the higher RPM bennefits and valve float deterrents but what else am I loosing or gaining.

Physically they're both roller cams. The hydraulic lifters limit the valve spring to the point where you wouldn't take any advantage of using a good cam profile. The solid lifters and better valve springs allow you to run a more aggressive cam profile.

Having said that, there wouldn't be any sense in converting to solid roller valvetrain unless you used a more aggressive cam to take full advantage of the conversion.
 
What if my cam is alredy pretty agressive. With the solid lifter it would be less agreesive ONLY because of the added lash? But if the hydro lifters dont really pump up isnt it really a wash? But you can still have the bennefits of what a solid lifter provides.


Obviously I am giving this thought for my car.

220 in, 228 exh dur and .589" lift

So I loose .020" lift but now I know the valve springs will not fight the plungers and in essence will make this cam closer to the profile.


Can you put down an example. you can use my cam spec for discussion.
 
Your cam isn't aggressive at all. The cam profile won't change, but what the valves see because of the lifter/valve spring designs is a different story. The solid lifters will be accurate and consistent to the profile of the cam, therefore, making the cam seem as if it's more aggressive.

All I was alluding to was that the higher duration and lift that is used, then the more variant and aggressive the ramp rate, on the lobes, become. This increases the speed of the valve opening and closing. When they close faster, they increase the probability of bouncing on the seat. You can't fix that problem with a larger valve spring whenever using hydraulic lifters.

I wouldn't mess with it unless if you want to run a cam that's in the mid 230* duration, at least, and you want to rev the motor higher.
 
What if my cam is alredy pretty agressive. With the solid lifter it would be less agreesive ONLY because of the added lash? But if the hydro lifters dont really pump up isnt it really a wash? But you can still have the bennefits of what a solid lifter provides.


Obviously I am giving this thought for my car.

220 in, 228 exh dur and .589" lift

So I loose .020" lift but now I know the valve springs will not fight the plungers and in essence will make this cam closer to the profile.


Can you put down an example. you can use my cam spec for discussion.
It kind of sounds like you are looking for an inexpensive way to increase rpm potential. There are a few other things you need to consider first.

1) You don't have anywhere near enough valve spring to run higher rpm. You'll have to change valve springs, possibly valve spring retainers, cups, etc.

2) Your cam doesn't have the proper valve timing for high rpm use. It's a mild cam that peaks power at about 6000rpm, can hold power for maybe 600-800rpm beyond that but torque will be falling off quickly by then no matter what.

3) Your rocker arms aren't up to the job of higher spring pressures, and they are not adjustable anyway. You'd need adjustable valvetrain, and you need something bigger than 8mm bolts to hold it all together.

4) Heads have to come off to install solid roller lifters.

5) You should upgrade to a double roller timing chain, which means cam might as well come out at the same time and get something better suited to higher rpm.

Count on about $1500 in parts alone to upgrade to a solid roller setup, then add machining to the cylinder heads, etc....
 
DOnt you loose HP when you start to put on really stiff springs.....



I thought Steig has some pretty agressive springs on them. I guess big and agressive of a few years ago is not so big nowadays. Where did the go fast bus go? I must have missed it.

I guess I can toss the idea out the door. :)

:(
 
The SC world is a little late to the party when it comes to real performance stuff, but we do our best.

Steig springs typically were "slightly used" NASCAR pieces with the inner spring removed. Your springs specifically might be slightly different as something tells me you might have a true dual spring on yours, but the specs will be similar - 150psi seat, 360psi open. For a solid roller you start off with a minimum 200psi seat and 500psi open. Max pressures for any hydraulic roller are around 170psi seat and 425psi open. A race application like what the NASCAR springs (with their inners) was designed for were generally 250lbs seat and 600lbs open. Drag racers will run up to 500psi seat and 1200psi open though most sit around 300psi seat and 600-800psi open depending on a variety of factors.

I've never seen any motor lose power from having too much valve spring. 99.9% of the time it's the other way around.
 
Thanks Dave Ill be taking the valve cover off to see if a picture will give details of two or one spring. I have the adjustable heads on my brothers anniversary. BUt I am not willing to tear both cars down to the block to then spend more money.

I took off the AR last night and just saw the lifters sitting there and was wondering if I can prevent valve float and more RPM so I can wind the gears up more.
If and when the new T-56 comes out and I come accross a cash cow maybe it will be worth going to 7k rmps.



BTW this is the last time Ill see this on my car. Its going away sometime this week. Goodby....thank you for the awsome times I hope you make its new owner nice and happy.

DSCN1072.jpg
 
I only see one spring per valve on this picture...Unless my eyes are playing tricks on me.:confused:

So I guess I got the standard Nascar spring on mine.

Engine2013.jpg
 
Yours almost looks beefier but still single springs.. I have to get a closer pic of them...DavidN what are you sporting now on the dalke heads? Dual?



But it sounds like I cannot go to a solid lifter regardless. I really thought the added friction from going solid can make you loose HP but you gain it back in higher RPM stability. I always wanted more cam but I need Vacuum for my brakes to work, and it is a street car after all so I need some lugging power to get it moving turning street corners. Why cant I have a cake and eat it too... My car falls apart at 6500 in terms of valvetrain and power.
 
Yours almost looks beefier but still single springs.. I have to get a closer pic of them...DavidN what are you sporting now on the dalke heads? Dual?



But it sounds like I cannot go to a solid lifter regardless. I really thought the added friction from going solid can make you loose HP but you gain it back in higher RPM stability. I always wanted more cam but I need Vacuum for my brakes to work, and it is a street car after all so I need some lugging power to get it moving turning street corners. Why cant I have a cake and eat it too... My car falls apart at 6500 in terms of valvetrain and power.

Ricardo,

Yes they do look a little thicker than what you have and yes they were single springs. Current springs are the beehive style. They don't look quite as beefy as the Steig springs did, but Dave assures me they are good to 7000 rpms with my combo.

SCU3.jpg


SCU4.jpg


SCU5.jpg


David
 
Last edited:
Yours almost looks beefier but still single springs.. I have to get a closer pic of them...DavidN what are you sporting now on the dalke heads? Dual?



But it sounds like I cannot go to a solid lifter regardless. I really thought the added friction from going solid can make you loose HP but you gain it back in higher RPM stability. I always wanted more cam but I need Vacuum for my brakes to work, and it is a street car after all so I need some lugging power to get it moving turning street corners. Why cant I have a cake and eat it too... My car falls apart at 6500 in terms of valvetrain and power.

Rico youre thinking Solid lifter, not solid roller. The only real disadvantages of a solid roller is cost and that proper setup is very important. Also it will be noisier. That being said you can go solid roller lifter and still get great performance and drivability. On the far end of the spectrum you can go much radical with a solid cam (roller or non) at a cost of idle and other drivability qualities that you may not want to affect. Do you want to spend the extra $$$$ for that bit of extra performance knowing you wont be getting a huge cam due to your drivability requirements? You are already gaining the advantages of reduced friction through a roller setup
 
Last edited:
You are right solid rollers dont really have friction issues.

On another note MY junk made some much POWA I cracked my firewall near the tunnel. :(
 
You are right solid rollers dont really have friction issues.

On another note MY junk made some much POWA I cracked my firewall near the tunnel. :(

I did that with the M90 when I was running a M90 so you dont get to wave the huge power thing around:D. I think you just need to get your existing combo working. Im not turning a gazillion RPMs and doing just fine;)

Ken
 
Don't know if this will help but I didn't have to remove the heads to install the solid roller lifters. It was a tight fit.
 
Back
Top