Hydraulic roller cam with solid lifters
 

So, I'm being told that I can use solid lifters on my hydraulic roller cam. Is anyone doing this here that can say if it's true and what their results have been. I am hearing that all you do is lash it to .008-.010 depending on if the block is iron or aluminum and it will be fine. I've been told that solid lifters are stronger and last longer than hydraulic. Is this true? It's sounds like it could be something good to consider if it was durable over time.

Can anyone explain more on this?

Thanks

You will loose about 8 degrees of duration and some lift depending on what you set the lash at and rocker ratio.Better off just buying a tight lash solid roller cam and lifters .Also you will need to increase the spring pressure as it now a solid roller cam.Comp told me 200 on the seats.Its has been done with many for many years.Tom

I frequently run solid lifters on bigger HR cams. But I zero lash the solid lifters cold and let the hot expansion be the lash. There is light friction on the pushrods, i don’t use a feeler guage when I do it. The cam does not loose much duration doing it that way over HR lifters. Engine master did a test like that a few years ago and gained 8HP thru the entire power band over a side by side test with a HR lifters. I have ran lash, but it is easier to do and overall works best with no lash set cold. We use the same valve springs as the cam would with a HR lifter. I do add some extra seat pressure though depending on the set up. The engines I have done are 6500 to 7000 RPM street and strip engines and .640 ish lift 240 to 260 @.050”. There are not many mechanical roller profiles that I know of that can do the same thing without another 100 lbs of spring. Which is my reasoning when doing it.. When it needs SR springs I run a SR profile. I have never been back into reset the lash, they run pretty quite. Some are quite enough you can tell they have roller cams.

More lash equals less duration at the vale, same as any mechanical cam.

Do you think I could do it with the cam I just bought from Butler? The springs I have right now have 140lbs on the seat I think 325 open at .550. with 1.810 installed height so there is room to shim. I wanted to do it, but I was worried about failure just because I have no experience at all doing this and it's not my motor. Is there any risks in your opinion? I just don't know if the solid lifter will hold up over time as the hydraulic lifter will. I didn't go solid cam because I was told that the size I wanted was too small for a true solid cam profile. So, he told me I needed to go hydraulic with solid lifter. But I never heard of doing this before so I felt uncomfortable trying it.

I am coming up with a 336 lb per inch spring rate with the numbers you mentioned. Is that a single flat tappet spring? Or is it a dual? A dual might work with a shim if that number was measure from a tester on the actual spring. I need more details on the springs. It sounds a little light unless I figured that wrong. I will double check my numbers.

I wouldn’t be concerned running that cam as a hybrid as long as you set the lash tight like I described. A nice lifter like a BAM with pin oiling would go as long as any HR lifter. They have bigger axles and larger .75” wheels, and are very rugged. All the HR lifters are .7” wheeled and have much smaller axles and bearings. Usually the Sat lifter are overkill unless you over spring it and run the lash loose. I have done $450 Doug Herbert (Morel) pin oiled lifters on hybrids and they have worked great for the money. Crower cutaways and Comps Endurex have been ok also. I think BAM is the top mechanical lifter though.

As far as what works as a hybrid, and what doesn’t, my general rule for mechanical lifters on hydrualic cams is to check where the tappet has 1* change in duration per .001” degree in lift on the closing side of the cam. On an Extreme energy Comp like yours that is about .006” tappet lift. If you multiply .006” tappet times the rocker ratio, that is the max ideal lash it should run when everything is expanded hot. The same pretty much holds true with a full mechanical cam. If the engine expansion creates to much lash and the lash is much beyond that hot lash it is adding to much acceleration to the valve terrain, and you really need as SR profile or a lazier HR profile. If you can set the lash tight enough cold that it can stay below that number hot after expansion, the solid lifters work well. If you don’t like it, it is a roller cam, you can swap any roller lifter back on it.

After thinking about this. I wouldn’t use that Butler profile with Solid roller lifters on a Pontiac with Aluminum heads. Even zero lashed cold the hot lash window is to tight. It is the wrong HR profile. That’s needs an HR lifter like an Evolution HR, Gaterman, or Johnson PR lifter. I could show you want the profile should look like if you’re interested in running SR lifters on a HR profile. But I could pick a full SR profile out also. That Butler cam isn’t a good choice for this.

Ok, I will take your word for it. Looks like I need to go Hydraulic then. What do you feel would be the best Hydraulic lifter for this cam? Butler talks about measuring the base circle to the oil hole in the block with the cam installed. So, I guess I'll have to do that and then find the best one that fit those needs. What do you think is the best/strongest lifter out there that you would use? After all the axle and wheel sizes you were talking about, I'm figuring you may know what the best choice will be. Is there a brand that you like best. I don't have much experience with hydraulic; I usually only use solid. But this motor is just a mild streetcar for a friend. In the past ive used comp Crower and recently Bam. But I don't think Bam makes Hydraulic lifters or I would buy them. Back in 2004 I had some bad luck with a set of Comp rollers. The caps for the axles were walking out of them. I'm lucky I caught it. That was the last time that I used Hydraulic.

Both BAM and Gaterman are ran by people that came from Crane. They are separate companies, but Gaterman to me is the hydrualic roller counterpart to BAM. If Gaterman lifters are in stock they are my first pick. They have pin oiling and a better plunger feeding features than all the other HR lifters. I wish they had floating axles like most SR lifters, but Morel is the only ones that have that feature. Morel doesn’t have enough control on the bleed rates for that cam. You are not the first person to have the staked axles slide around.

If the Gatermans aren’t available a Comp Evolutions are my second choice unless the springs are extra heavy.

Good luck, I occasionally check for the Gaterman GP-1008 on their website and can never find them in stock. The only place I’ve seen them is on the Schneider cams website and they aren’t cheap, I decided on the Comp Evolutions for about the same money.

https://www.schneidercams.com/HYDROLLERlifter5610.aspx

I have the evolutions on my 66 with the Old Faithful 1 cam, but very little run time on them. They do make a sewing machine sound at 800-850 rpm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP_s1wJKm_Y

Nice car 66!

For Gaterman’s call them directly. They can check who has them in stock or when the next batch is available.

I went on Gatermans site and there's no pricing.

What about the Isky lifters. My machinist keeps letting me to get them. What's your thoughts on the Iskys?

I went on Gatermans site and there's no pricing.

What about the Isky lifters. My machinist keeps telling me to get them. What's your thoughts on the Iskys?

I have not seen that Isky HPx are available with Pontiac link bars. I assume your machinist is talking about the HPx. It would be great if they were available for a Pontiac, all it would take is a different link bar. I think the HPx lifters are completely in a league of their own as far as advancements. They are 7500 RPM lifters that can run spring pressures and 525 lbs springs. They have a bushing option also. They are made by Johnson in Taylor Michigan.

Johnson PR’s are limited travel and would work about like the Evolutions but they are not pin oiled and don’t have the advancements in the plunger feeding like the HPx. Isky and Johnson worked together to come up with the HPx and are more advanced than a PR. The PR will handle more spring pressure than an Evolution.

I like the idea of just running a smaller solid roller and DLC BAM lifters. Then run a stud girdle to help keep lash.
Too many horror stories with Hyd roller lifters for me.
These things are EXPENSIVE and take so much time and effort to get right to mess with them IMO.
Those lifters on a small cam would last just about forever. Many OEM cars run solid lifters. The wife's Volvo even has solids.

Why hydraulic anything? Solid been king since 50s.Go SFT dont look back! Have spare 255/263 on shelf for 20 some yrs jic one from 90s gos bad.Had relplace some lifters and springs. Thats easy!

What is the safe high limit for spring pressure with the CC Evolution HRs?

I run 150 on the seats with the Evos.Tom

It depends how aggressive the profile is. The body is rated for up to 500 lbs. But they won’t make it anywhere close to 500 lbs in a Pontiac and perform well. I’d say 150lbs seat an 400 open with .650ish lift is safe with the Bulter XR cam and evo’s. The OF1 could probably run about 165 lbs and 430 open with .650 ish lift and go a few hundred more RPMs than the more aggressive XR.

The Johnson PR’s (which are also reboxed as some Crowers and Isky’s) have a bigger diameter plunger and can handle aggressive cams, but the bodies are not as heavy as the evolutions and they do not have pin oiling.. The Isky HPx are rated for 535 lbs and 185 lbs seat at 7500 RPM. Some Morel short travels are up there also, but they are more of a race lifter an do not last well on the street.

I have a all broken in Crower sft that will get over 500 HP just sitting on a shelf.
I would run it before any hyd roller.

Isky gave me this part number but its not coming up 9077hyrt.

I'm so confused on what to do it's not even funny lol

Good to hear. My KREs have PAC 1914 springs:
155lbs @ 1.835, 385 lbs @ 1.200

With the Harland Sharp 1.65 rockers, my lift is .627/.632

HAH! Well I will try a little better to not be confusing. Just go ahead and order those Isky’s.

The top 2 selling lifters are Evolutions from Compcams, and the Johnson 21160PR (which also go by Isky 9077hyrt and Crower has a part number also) Isky’s online catelog is hard very to sort thru, they never seem to have all their inventory listed. You have to call them to order something. It has always been like that. Gaterman’s the same way, you have to call them.

I have suggested Johnson lifters before, I am not afraid of them. I wish Isky would sell the HPx for a Pontiac. Quite a few guys choose Johnson over the Comps because the comps have more offshore parts in them, not everyone loves Compcams. I have Johnson mechanical rollers in one engine.

I actually have Hylift Johnson hydrualic rollers on the shelf, which is also an American made lifter.I have not mentioned them because I feel plunger valving is superior on the Johnson PR (or Isky 9077) for the cam you have.

I have Johnson's (not Hylift Johnson's) and decided to use them after speaking to them directly and being told they are 100% manufactured in the US. Have not used them yet, but I have used Comp Evolution and was happy with them.

I thought the evolutions were quiet? I have a set ill be installing in the next month or 2.......or 3.

Do you like the Evolutions over the johnson 21160pr? I see they have another one that has shorter travel. ST21160PR. .030 total travel? Whats your thoughts on that one?

heres a link

https://vincentperformance.com/parts...fters/pontiac/

Relatively speaking, they are. It’s a sewing machine noise, vs a ticking noise like other brands.

I agree, I was under the impression that the Evolutions were quiet but I was also under the impression that tappet noise can also be a function of steep lobes so with a roller is that worse?

I think my H&S rockers are the sewing machine noise?Tom

Yes,,,I actually thought of the aggressive lobe thing after I wrote it.

Short travels generally don’t last half as long as a limited travel lifter. I’d only use short travels for an engine that is mostly race on a modern platform that it isn’t practical to use a mechanical roller. I skip over short travels and go right to mechanicals on older platforms.

For this cam I think the Evolutions are a better designed lifter than the limited travel Johnson 21160PR and also have a better oil band location with pin oiling. Johnson hasn’t offered a lifter with pin oiling for a Pontiac yet. I would expect they could offer pin oiling eventually, they offer pin oiling for other platforms. The evolutions would be my choice over the Johnson PR for your application.

The Johnson’s are not a bad choice though and are a good alternative for those that do not want something from Comp. Some high points for Johnson are (like AG said) they are completely USA made and generally better quality control. Plus you can call right to the company and talk to someone that is an expert about lifters that is higher up than entery level sales. I would switch to the Johnson on an application if the valve springs requirements needed a lifter that can handle higher valve spring pressures or spring rates over 400 lbs/in.

Even though the OF1 has a more lift than a 236/242 Bulter cam, the Bulter cam will make just as much sowing machine noise as the OF1. The OF1 has softer profiles on and off the valve seats. The more aggressive intensity of the Bulter cam is why it is not a good candidate to run with mechanical lifters on Aluminum heads. The OF1 works fine with mechanical lifters on Aluminum heads.

HI Jay: I'm wondering if this is the same lifter your referring to, not lasting as long as limited travel lifters?
I put a set of the Johnson Short travel lifters ST21120RP in a 400 stroked years ago and sold it. Guy is still running them with probably close to 80K miles with never an issue. Just curious. They do need a very precise last setting though. Thank you.


https://johnsonlifters.com/Products/...ters/ST2112OPR


I always seem to get confused with the Johnson Lifters and the Hylift Johnson Lifters.

I'm not overly impressed with the evolutions. I run them in my daily now, thought I'd give them a try. Before that I was a Johnson or hylift johnson user exclusively with absolutely zero issues. Wish I put Johnson's in this engine now and it may come back apart to do the swap.

It's just a mild 383 SBC that makes 460hp. Has a small 224 @.050 hydraulic roller and springs are only 135 on the seat. Sewing machine noise is there all the time and if it sits for several hours I have one that bleeds down and ticks on start up for a second until oil pressure takes over.
Rather than screw around with cartridges and hope I get a good one I'm likely just going to shelf these and swap to Johnson's and be done with it.

I should have looked at those part numbers closer. Those are pin oiled. I”ll look into those closer.

Hi Charles, yep those are definetly short travels Johnson’s. I need to do some research and see what the difference is between the 20 and the 60. . With yours having worked good to 80k miles though, I’d say they deserve a second look. I know of a couple guys that are running Johnson ST’s and are working well. I can easily be out of the flow of information when it comes to short travel on these engines because I have not been using them. Hylift Johnson’s engineering stance has been short travel are up to 70% shorter life from their testing. The general consensus over all is short travels are not expected to last as long. Morel ST’s have been hit and miss on longevity. Maybe Johnson has the ST ‘s figured out.

80K miles is a good run. What is the rest of the cam?

I know of other evolutions noise has been mixed on some other platforms running heavier springs. One of the guys on here had the axles slide out off a pair of Johnson’s last year. There is good reason for confusion with HR lifters.

Thing is I'm not running any spring pressure to speak of. 135 on the seats is whimpy for a hydraulic roller ,, that's dam near solid flat tappet territory.

SBC doesn't need a ton of pressure anyway the valvetrain is pretty light. Not like a Pontiac or BBC where I typically run 150-160 seat pressure on a hydraulic roller

So to have sewing machine noise and also have one bleed down after sitting a bit with these little springs doesn't speak to well of the evolutions in my eyes.

I looked it up and Johnson still does not appear to have pin oiling for a Pontiac. That link that says they are pin oiled appears to be wrong. The 3rd number in the part number should be a 2 or a 3 for pin oiling. All the Pontiac offering the 3rd number is a 1.

The 21160 is .3” taller than the 21120. I recalled that was what it was but I wanted to make sure. That is usually a feature for aftermarket blocks and higher lift cams. I would have to double check what the oil band position is.

If I remember right you have a Bullet cam in that SBC too. They are easier to make quiet than these XR comps. That should have been dead quiet. (Edit)think the Bullet is in the 327 has HLJ SE’s. I am not sure which engine has Evo’s?

What part number is the hylift johnsons youre using?

So you think i should go with the johnsons if there not oiled axles?

That is correct the 327 has a bullet cam with HLJ SE's.
I just finished up a 383 (3000 miles so far) and put the evo's in it just to try them since they had rave reviews. Not working out for me.

Larry, does yours so like mine?

I am ok with not having axle oiling. But it is a nice feature. Johnson have it on other platforms. Could be they have it for a Pontiac and I am not aware of it.

There is also a Hylift Johnson lifter that would work with your combo it is HLJ-A-2375SE. They are all USA made with ultra slow precise metering and have pin oiling. But the cost is around $1100. Their down side is they have a very low oil band and on Pontiac’s the power noses over after 6000 when the cam has an aggressive intensity. The Johnson’s PR and ST will make power past 6000 with an aggressive cam.

What is the cam in the 383?

We took a G body with a 377 SBC to a few races last summer with a 242/248 XR comp. Which is the next step up from this 236/242 cam. It ran well, but was not quiet as far as sowing machine noise, it has the regular comp lifters, not the evo’s. We were shifting it a 6200, it nosed over hard after 6200.

You're saying my cam is aggressive, do I have to worry about breaking a lifter bore with this cam?

Are the Howards lifters any good? Nobody has mentioned them so I'm wondering if that just because there no good.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/hrs-91466

The cam in this one is the summit 1203 hydraulic roller. LS fire order and 224 @.050
Idles nice and smooth and made peak at 5700 and makes 14" of vacuum. Perfect driver with lots of grunt. I have the trans setup to shift at 5800. It's a happy engine just lifters are noisy

Kinda?? Hard to tell.

With the hood shut I don't hear it so much. It's not the sew machine noise that I'm super bothered about even though Johnson's have always been whisper quiet but it's more about one lifter that bleeds down after a few hours of sitting.

Rather than try swapping a cartridge and hope it's better and still have a sew machine I'd rather just swap in some Johnson's and fix both issues in one shot

The possiblity of a lifter bore breaking is not an issue from the cam itself. If something goes wrong on a lifter that is when there is a risk of breaking a lifter bore.

For your cam the average duration it takes the tappet to go form .006” tappet lift to .050” tappet lift is 51*. The smaller that number, the more acceleration and the quicker the lifter starts to move. This is fine, but the lifter has to have a sharp enough bleed rate or it will tick or make extra sowing machine noise. This cam must have the plunger of the lifter bore lockup up by .005” tappet.

This cam is pretty aggressive because the plunger on the lifter does not have much time to recover for the next cycle before it need to open the valve again... The lift isn’t aggessive at all, but the intensity is. A less aggressive cam like a Comp Extreme energy marine HR with 55* of average intensity the lifter has to lock up by .009” tappet to operate quietly, giving the lifter plunger more time to recover and lock up for then next cycle. That is a big difference.

If the lifter can’t lock up the plunger by those points, it has the same effect of running a Mechanical cam with excessive lash. It increase the acceration on the valve terrain and is hard on stuff.