FAQ |
Members List |
Social Groups |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting video on current lifter quality
Interesting video from a YouTuber who looked at current lifter offerings, while not terribly scientific they come to their own conclusions that echo what a lot of folks say regarding the Hylift Johnson’s
https://youtu.be/m3A8uMQ2d1U?si=X0u4QtTuTF-gnmmc |
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to 67Lemons For This Useful Post: | ||
#2
|
||||
|
||||
I don’t know how old the video was. But my recollection is Hughes engines (Mopar only)has always used HLJ for their lifters. There cams are currently ground by Howard’s, before that they were ground by Engle cams. Hughes also offer HLJ’s “S” lifter, which is an extremely expensive slow bleed flat tappet lifter, and exclusive only from HLJ. I don’t think Lunati has used HLJ lifter for several years. I have a set of micro-trio’s from 2018, I do not recall them being the same as HLJ’s, I had HLJ’s at the same time. FWIW…We had some 80’s Standyne lifters and some late seventies Johnson’s we source for a couple other engines. The late 70s Johnson’s have a very nice finish compared to any of the other lifters, the foot is polished like jewelry.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Jay S For This Useful Post: | ||
#3
|
||||
|
||||
I would have preferred if they tested a Hy-Lift Johnson lifter rather then relying on speculation that the other brand lifters were in fact using the Hy-Lift Johnson body. Suppliers over the years frequently change suppliers depending on price and availability. Why didn't they test Comp lifters? It would have been nice to know when these lifter were manufactured but nothing in the study to indicate if it was 1995 or 2020? They all had hardness within spec but many speculate failures are due to soft lifters. I saw another video recently and tests indicated the lifters had hardness within spec but crown was an issue. Another factor, the surface anomalies in the photos, would they be considered within limits by the manufacturer? Would they actually contribute to Lifter/cam lobe failure? I would not use them based on the photos but I don't know if that condition would contribute to a failure if the hardness and crown was correct. Nevertheless interesting information.
__________________
Tim Corcoran |
The Following User Says Thank You to Tim Corcoran For This Useful Post: | ||
#4
|
||||
|
||||
'Justin Lotspeich' Poly 318 Website - (https://poly318.com/) looks like a legit Mopar guy to me, the video is 4 months old so I'm guessing the info is current.
"I produce content to help educate others about automotive topics ranging from vintage Dodge, Chrysler, Plymouth, DeSoto, Mopar to modern vehicles." https://www.youtube.com/@Poly318/videos Best way to expect or stand behind a warranty is through quality. I utilize the kit option from Lunati so there's no confusion. Frank
__________________
Poncho Huggen, Gear Snatchen, Posi Piro. |
The Following User Says Thank You to 4zpeed For This Useful Post: | ||
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
The Following User Says Thank You to 67Lemons For This Useful Post: | ||
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Is there a way to tell JHL visually from other brands , other than face? After years of tinkering a person may have 3 or 4 sets of used lifters matched to cams and 3 or 4 sets of new lifters all from various souces and decades..
plunger build ?
__________________
If your not at the table you're on the menu A man who falls for everything stands for nothing. |
The Following User Says Thank You to Formulas For This Useful Post: | ||
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Here is a photo, starting left to right, HLJ - Melling- NOS GM.
I also had a set of current AC-Delco lifters which appear to be Melling. Note the large chamfer on the face of the NOS GM.
__________________
I'm World's Best Hyperbolist !! |
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to dataway For This Useful Post: | ||
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Morning Dataway. The last melling lifters I ordered came without the hard faced cap on the foot of the lifter. Stellite? might be the name and have never had a failure using the old style.
Bummer... |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
The plant making the Delphi GM hardened foot lifters quit mfg them a couple years ago. I think it was in Mexico.. Easy too spot them by the groove above the foot.
I haven’t bought a Lunati HFT lifter for several years. They are always out of stock, Summit does not even list Lunati lifters at all. It could be Lunati went back to HLJ since the last time I used them, I have noticed their prices went up a lot on Jeg’s site, seems like right now you can tell which companies source HLJ by just comparing prices. If they appear cheap, likely not HLJ. From what I recall the Mopar Lunati lifters I had in 2018 the lifter body was different. Last edited by Jay S; 02-06-2024 at 11:43 AM. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The capped Mellings are what is installed in my engine right now, and doing fine. I kept a set of GM NOS just in case. After careful examination and measuring the GM NOS were by far the most accurate, consistent and well machined, the Mellings came in second, the HLJ third. Rock Auto still lists two varieties of Melling lifter, both capped, one standard, one "high performance" ... no data on where they are made.
__________________
I'm World's Best Hyperbolist !! Last edited by dataway; 02-06-2024 at 12:18 PM. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
I don’t know what this means for the guys lifter video, right from Hughes site. I guess HLJ isn’t immune from QC issues either.
Last edited by Jay S; 02-06-2024 at 02:56 PM. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Sadly, everything thing today has the potential for being subpar.
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Interesting Data. Here is a picture of what they are selling as the melling JB951. Let me know what you guys think. last two orders were the new style as well and had to find a local old supply. Truman Fields had some interesting posts about the hard faced lifters. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
I think that maybe be an Eaton lifter made in Mexico. Eaton does not have the hardened foot.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Jay S For This Useful Post: | ||
#15
|
||||
|
||||
That large chamfer would worry me.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to PAUL K For This Useful Post: | ||
#16
|
||||
|
||||
That chamfer is direct from GM .. both sets of original GM lifters I have, have that chamfer. Not sure how it would play with modern cam profiles but evidently it was SOP back in the day.
Looking closely you can see the OEM GM has the most chamfer, the Melling has less, and the HLJ the least. I guess it would depend on lobe profile as to whether the chamfer would even come into the equation?
__________________
I'm World's Best Hyperbolist !! |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Bigger the chamfer the better chance you have of destroying a lobe. A lazy lobe with a large chamfer is the worse case scenario. About fifteen years ago I noticed Pontiac had a new part number for RAIV lifters. I ordered a set and they were re-boxed Hy-lift 951R's. Not sure why your lifter has such a large chamfer but I doubt it's within the original GM spec. |
The Following User Says Thank You to PAUL K For This Useful Post: | ||
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Frank
__________________
Poncho Huggen, Gear Snatchen, Posi Piro. |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Can someone help me understand how the size of the chamfer plays into this?
Is it about what happens if the cam lobe starts wearing? Or does the chamfer somehow affect stability or lubrication? How far from the center of the lifter (peak of the crown) is the "ideal" or "as-designed" contact point on the lifter? What is the offset from the center of the lifter face if all the parts are new and "in spec"? I have zero experience looking at the wear patterns and thankfully, even less experience with lifter failure but this is my perception of the contact geometry, which makes me think the chamfer SHOULD BE far away from the contact zone: Mike |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Yep Melling is currently showing an uncapped lifter as their JB-951 lifter.
Can look it up here: https://www.melling.com/parts-lookup/
__________________
I'm World's Best Hyperbolist !! |
Reply |
|
|