[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by Jimbobeast

Sell it cheap right now. All the parts are there. Assembly needed - Ages 6 - adult.

Hmmmm ...... I'm in that age group

[68WarDog]

Originally Posted by steve25

Think twice!

If a HFT fails then 99% of the time the cam and lifters are toast, if a lifter fails on a hydro roller you stand a chance of loosing the lifter bore.

Also lifter bores have a greater ware rate with a roller lifter since they don’t spin.

Steve, I've heard that about solid rollers, but not about hydraulic rollers. So are you now bracing hydraulic rollers?

[Formulajones]

I believe Steve is just talking about overall quality of lifters and not lifter bore braces.

Only issue Ive ever seen with hydraulic rollers breaking are with some of the cheaper brands, either the link bar comes off, which isn't typically catostrophic, or a wheel breaks with the flimsy style body design. That can cause some damage.

Never seen or heard of a wheel breaking on the full body design from hylift, much stronger as it encases the entire wheel. The link bar stuff, well that can happen with any lifter. Frankly with a good lifter and proper valve train setup, correct springs etc... I don't even worry about it. Millions on the roads today with 6 digit mileage and I've had some of my own high performance engines done for 25-30 years without a problem and still build them today. Only problem now is the hylift roller lifters are ridiculously priced. I paid $1400 for the last set just several months ago.

Most opt for the cheaper $400 morels or what ever else is on sale that week, or are forced to buy them because hylift availability is hit and miss, and then you hear of issues like noise from inconsistent bleed rates, broken wheels etc .. then the whole roller industry gets a bad wrap. Take it for what it's worth but my experiences with them over the last 40 years is nothing like what most here report.

Solid rollers a different story. Not so much breakage but because of the spring pressures required on a proper solid roller cam I find in a street application where I'm driving them 7000+ miles a year I've had a couple wheels lock up on some very expensive pin oil crowers. I think over time even with lash checks on a tight lash cam they still take a beating.
I'd much rather run a hydraulic roller, and a good lifter with proper setup they'll spin as high as you need anyway. Not that anyone here would test that limit in their street car.

[Formulajones]

In the op's case, if we are talking about a real RAIV, I'd be more inclined to keep the RAIV flat tappet cam in it just for purist sake. But I'd take extra precautions.

I'd be nitriding the camshaft and I'd be using a lube option style lifter from rhoads which are modified hylifts. Then proper break in while it's all fresh and not sitting a decade.
I don't have issues with flat tappets doing this, but I end up spending a grand or more taking the extra precautions. I'm usually approaching half the cost of a roller setup.

I would not be against a RAIV roller from someone like butler though, but again I'd only run hylift rollers on it and the setup starts getting spendy.

[Skip Fix]

Maybe even cryoing the lifters and cam too!

[Formulajones]

Good idea. The last engine I just finished I paid Paul to cryo everything including the block and crank etc....

[steve25]

My comment stems from what I have seen in a few of my motors with roller cams and the ware that takes place with lifters that don’t spin.
specifically the steel on cast iron deal.

[P@blo]

Thanks for posting the lifter bore wear issue associated with the retrofit roller lifter Steve. Not a magic bullet by any stretch.

Too bad someone could not make a deodorant-ball style lifter with a groove in the cam lobe to increase roller-to-cam contact surface area. You know the old Avon type lol. Then the link bar/rotation issue would be resolved. Might not be practical, though.

[P@blo]

Sorry OP I did not mean to post off topic on your thread.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by steve25

My comment stems from what I have seen in a few of my motors with roller cams and the ware that takes place with lifters that don’t spin.
specifically the steel on cast iron deal.

Can you elaborate more on that Steve? I'm trying to wrap my head around it because I haven't seen this issue and doesn't seem to be an issue with OEM rollers either.

[68WarDog]

Originally Posted by Formulajones

Can you elaborate more on that Steve? I'm trying to wrap my head around it because I haven't seen this issue and doesn't seem to be an issue with OEM rollers either.

FJ. I've heard of hydraulic roller lifters needle bearings issues in the 5.7 Mopar hemi. IMHO the needle bearings are starving for oil, locking up the roller and taking out the cam and engine. Would this affect the lifter bore?Johnson has addressed this issue, HLJ roller lifters with the pin oiling option. Part # 2375 SE

[steve25]

It’s not that likely to happen with hydro roller lifters as with solid rollers.

My concern is that if your starting out with lifter bores with more then .004” clearance then since the lifter is not going to spin then accelerated bore ware can take place.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by 68WarDog

FJ. I've heard of hydraulic roller lifters needle bearings issues in the 5.7 Mopar hemi. IMHO the needle bearings are starving for oil, locking up the roller and taking out the cam and engine. Would this affect the lifter bore?Johnson has addressed this issue, HLJ roller lifters with the pin oiling option. Part # 2375 SE

I believe the hemi does have some inherent problems now that theyve been in service several years they start to show. Lifters being an issue in just one brand of engine tells me it's an engine issue or something related to it. Or you would see it in all the oem's.

As far as needle bearings go there is different thought on that from engine builders to manufacturers and we've discussed it here before.
Needle bearing rollers are believed to be better than a bushing for a street car. The Argument is that needles will tend to hold oil while sitting with more crevices to trap oil making for a better lubricated cold start. A bushing however doesn't really have all those places to hold oil. Now we have pin oiling so does it really matter?

There are other arguments that's just one example.

Rollers have been around oem's since the mid 80's with millions on the roads. My son's fox body is one example with 268,000 miles, never a valve cover off and runs perfectly. Needle bearings and no pin oiling. I'm even thinking of a cam swap and will put those lifters right back in. Did that with high mile LS engines all the time.

You can beat yourself up worrying about this or that but in the end really it's such a small percentage of problems. I would however recommend buying good stuff and not what's on sale that week. If it means spending more money then I'll do it. I prefer quality over price. We all just have a different way of looking at it I guess.

[Jimbobeast]

I got a new cam from Butler, their proprietary Comp Cams RAIV "041" grind. The cam card is shown below. The pushrods are the RAIV 11/32 diameter 9.2" units. Before I put everything back into my engine, I need to know why I had multiple pushrod failures and ultimately lifter/cam destruction with what seems to be stock pieces. Too much spring pressure? I'm thinking not, since the heads were assembled many moons ago by very competent Pontiac loving machinists. Somehow my valve train geometry is off.
In H-O Racing's "Heavy Duty Parts and Specs" book I noticed that the 1969-70 RAIV lifters had a ball height of 1.659 and a travel of 0.050 as opposed to 1956-79 all V8 which used lifters with a ball height of 1.759 and a travel of 0.125. First of all, what is "ball height" and can the 0.1" taller standard lifters cause my problems? I have a set of standard lifters ready to go in.
Photo #2 shows the spring paramaters for the springs that Butler recommended.
We should be well under coil bind. Is "seat load" the installed seast pressure?
Valve spring specs for the 1970 RAIV show 39# tension @ height of 1.78 and spring rate 110 (Intake), 76# @ 1.81 with spring rate of 281 (Exhaust).
Will the new springs work? What do the numbers mean in layman's terms?

[Formulas]

new pushrods ball or swaged ends ?

[Formulajones]

As I mentioned before those pushrods will chew themselves up when you combine them with those comp rockers arms you used.

It is required to have a good quality hardened pushrod when using those rockers or they will chew up the pushrods. There used to be a warning about it in the paperwork when you buy those rockers.

Without going back and looking at your pics I'll take a wild guess that the pushrods you had chewed up were all on the rocker arm side and the lifter side was fine. Ask me how I know, I've been down this road before with those rockers arms. They do not mix with cheap pushrods.

[steve25]

The spring pressure rates used on the RA IV motors were the highest ever used in the industry for a hydro lifter motor.

124 lb on the seat and 320 to 340 open.
The factory it seems had no problem breaking in the cams in these RA4 motors.

Only BBC solid lifter motors exceed these numbers in a production vehicle.

[Jimbobeast]

Originally Posted by Formulas

new pushrods ball or swaged ends ?

Yes, standard RAIV pushrods, but maybe I'll spring for some better quality units. Any specific recommendations? (11/32, 9.2").
I will check the current spring pressure and the installed height today. And yes, all failures were on the rocker ends.

[steve25]

Since you have busted push rods and are replacing them I would mod two of them into an adjustable checking push rod and confirm that geometry wise you do not need a length other than 9.200”.

It takes all of 45 minutes to make a adjustable one.

[Skip Fix]

Be easier the swap in D port 5/16 guideplates and find correct length 5/16 pushrods readily available in lots of lengths. Get some better rockers too. Maybe some Crower SS! sure do not want to hurt RAIV heads!