[catc]

Attachment 541107 over the weekend i had a Comp cam HR lifter failure,with around 1,000 miles .. Comp says it's over 12 months ,so not much they can do...wondering ..what is the absolutely best Hydraulic Roller lifter out there. that nobody has had a problem and what is the best Solid Roller Lifter out there with no problems.,,Is that a foolish statement, asking with NO Problem nowadays??thanks for your input... oh..i use Valvoline VR-1 20w50

[tom s]

WOW,first total failure I have seen.PM sent

[RocktimusPryme]

Mine have been loud since the day I put exhaust on my engine. Stuff like this makes me want to just take them out and install solids. If it weren't for the mitigating factor of cost of quality roller lifters I would have already done it.

[Navy Horn 16]

My were loud until I started using AMSOIL Z-Rod. Weird that an oil designed for flat tappet cams would solve that problem, but it did. Howard's HYD roller lifters BTW, I've run em hard and never had a problem. I was running Comp solids on a HYD profile in my previous engine and had a very similar failure.

[RocktimusPryme]

Ive never technically had a problem either, other than the noise. It just makes me nervous. And I would swear they are louder at the top end of the drag strip. That's likely my imagination though.

I know it can still be a contentious subject, but I feel there is more and more evidence that a solid roller on a mild hydraulic cam/spring is just fine.

[Navy Horn 16]

Originally Posted by RocktimusPryme

Ive never technically had a problem either, other than the noise. It just makes me nervous. And I would swear they are louder at the top end of the drag strip. That's likely my imagination though.

Get exhaust cutouts. Once you open them, zero lifter noise. Guaranteed.

[PAUL K]

I'm thinking there are no more quality hydraulic roller lifters for our Pontiacs. We've been pushing Nitrated SFT set-ups for performance street engines.

[ignaro]

Butler strongly recommended Johnson's hydraulic roller lifters. I'm still waiting on heads (COVID-delay) but you could look into those

Sent from my SM-G988U1 using Tapatalk

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by ignaro

Butler strongly recommended Johnson's hydraulic roller lifters. I'm still waiting on heads (COVID-delay) but you could look into those

Sent from my SM-G988U1 using Tapatalk

That's the only lifter that Paul C recommends and prefers to use himself. But they are hit and miss as to availability.

[AG]

Had the same failure on my brother's car and it damaged the lobe and other lifters collapsed. Got replacement lifters from Comp under warranty and 5 collapsed. I really wonder what they said to each other at Comp when they did their post-mortum on the collapsed and broken lifters? Just put some Crane HR lifters in yesterday that I had from 10 years ago and the nightmare is over, they work great without any ticking or clacking like marbles in a dryer.

[ponjohn]

In one of the more recent HR threads Cliff stated he likes to use the Crane HR lifters if the budget allows.

Who makes the Crane HR lifters?

[Jack Gifford]

Originally Posted by ponjohn

... Who makes the Crane HR lifters?...

Do you know that Crane doesn't? It's probably been 14-15 years ago, but I believe they made their own HR lifters back then that I'm very happy with- six years of street driving so far, never a single 'click'.

Something I don't really understand, is why everybody(?) wants a lifter's oil band to align with the boss's feed hole when on the cam's base circle. I've built at least a couple dozen engines (half of them Pontiacs) with the lifters starting to move before uncovering any of the hole. Many OEMs are designed this way, and it's NEVER caused a problem for me.

[Steve C.]

Potential of not having the oil band exposed to the lifter bore feed hole 100 percent of the time. I know the base circle of the cam has a impact as does the lifter oil band location and/or width. If using them, it can have a impact on the Hi-Pressure Pin Oiler (HIPPO) system on Crower roller lifters because the small 0.024" hole that feeds oil to the needle bearings is located within the oil band. That means it is not getting 100 percent oiling thru that hole.
In some instances the lifter must raise quite a distance before oil starts flowing to the needle bearings thru the small hole. I have no specific number but it can equate to quite a few degrees of cam rotation before it does.

Related video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoU_hUgq4O0&app=desktop
.

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by Steve C.

Potential of not having the oil band exposed to the lifter bore feed hole 100 percent of the time. I know the base circle of the cam has a impact as does the lifter oil band location and/or width. If using them, it can have a impact on the Hi-Pressure Pin Oiler (HIPPO) system on Crower roller lifters because the small 0.024" hole that feeds oil to the needle bearings is located within the oil band. That means it is not getting 100 percent oiling thru that hole.
In some instances the lifter must raise quite a distance before oil starts flowing to the needle bearings thru the small hole. I have no specific number but it can equate to quite a few degrees of cam rotation before it does.

Related video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoU_hUgq4O0&app=desktop
.

Did the lifter that had an issue on your engine have the oil band in the correct location?

There is a lot of oil being tossed all over the place in a running engine. The same oil that lubricated the lifter and lobe on a flat tappet cam is still provided to the bearing and cam on roller set up regardless of where the oil band and oil hole are.... It provides quite a bit of oil.

[Steve C.]

I've had two separate solid roller lifter failures that involved one lifter each time, both with the same .4300" lobe lift w/1.65 ratio and same Crower Cutaway Severe-Duty roller lifters with HIPPO pin oiling. One had needle bearings and the other bushing-style. We did not suspect either failure had anything to do with the lack of 100 percent oil flow thru the HIPPO system. Regarding that situation some suggest no issue if the needle bearings don't get oil flow 100 percent of the time under pressure, including the opinion of Crower when I called them years ago regarding the subject. That said, Crower tends to cover their ass on many issues. Agree, lots of oil splashing that is commonly called 'splash lube' but it was Mark at Luhn Performance who commented on the subject with a car at idle in a street application.

And a fwiw, after the first failure we modified the lifter bore with the groove like Paul Carter does so my lifters involving the second failure did see 100 percent oil flow to the bushed bearing thru the HIPPO system.


.

[FrankieT/A]

I had hydraulic roller lifters and hated them. Just noisy. Mine are the later Comps with a Road Paver. My feeling is this is a retrofit. Roller lifters in a block designed for hydraulic flat tappet. I mentioned this to Dave Bishop and he about lost his mind, maybe he has stock in CC IDK. I have read all the posts including Paul K.'s about notching the lifter bores(which makes the most sense to me by the way, although have not tried it). The pros, the cons, the bad, the good, the success stories, the failures. I have no confidence in any brand, any age, any series. To me, they're not worth the initial cost or the potential cost of catastrophic failure. Strict race engine with unlimited budget maybe.

In the meantime, I have a relatively new RP cam, CC roller lifters, Smith Bros. pushrods and Crower SS roller rockers sting on a shelf. Do the math.... Sorry for the rant. lol

[Sirrotica]

Funny how LS engines can run hydraulic roller lifters for 200,000 and more miles trouble free.............

204/213 duration at .050 @ 520 lift stock GM cam in my 05 GTO.

My LS2 has 141,000 miles on it since new, never ticked once. It will run 6 grand with a stock GM valvetrain.

It seems no one gives a damn about making quality parts for our tiny market, and we just get overpriced crap. And we're supposed to be grateful they make crap for us to buy?

If someone designed a rev kit for the hydraulic roller lifters you could remove some of the spring from the heads, helping relieve some stress on pushrods and the hydraulic portion of the lifter. I know it's a small market, but we've been able to get parts a lot more technical than a rev kit made for Stratostreak engines in the past.

I have a Crower solid roller for a Pontiac from back in the 60s, fairly radical for the time, with a rev kit, never had an ounce of trouble with it, and ran it in 3 different engines. It would run 6500 RPM, but with stock cast rods I didn't take it there too many times.........

Just thinking out loud is all.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by Sirrotica

Funny how LS engines can run hydraulic roller lifters for 200,000 and more miles trouble free.............

204/213 duration at .050 @ 520 lift stock GM cam in my 05 GTO.

My LS2 has 141,000 miles on it since new, never ticked once. It will run 6 grand with a stock GM valvetrain.

It seems no one gives a damn about making quality parts for our tiny market, and we just get overpriced crap. And we're supposed to be grateful they make crap for us to buy?

If someone designed a rev kit for the hydraulic roller lifters you could remove some of the spring from the heads, helping relieve some stress on pushrods and the hydraulic portion of the lifter. I know it's a small market, but we've been able to get parts a lot more technical than a rev kit made for Stratostreak engines in the past.

I have a Crower solid roller for a Pontiac from back in the 60s, fairly radical for the time, with a rev kit, never had an ounce of trouble with it, and ran it in 3 different engines. It would run 6500 RPM, but with stock cast rods I didn't take it there too many times.........

Just thinking out loud is all.

A lot of things contribute to that, I hear what you're saying. The LS engines are fantastic little pieces. The rollers live for a lot of reasons.

The LS1's I messed with for several years were lucky to have 100 lbs. seat pressure on those beehive springs. They weren't much. I think the lazy stock cam profiles helped and didn't require much spring to start with. The valvetrain is pretty light on these engines too, with some of them, like the LS6 having sodium filled valves.

Even with that said, I've done cam swaps on 100k mile engines, with a custom cam, more aggressive lobes, and upgraded the valve springs and push rods to go with it, and left the original lifters in place, then proceed to log another 80k miles on the engine with a 6700 rpm rev limit set, without a hiccup, go figure.

My sons 5.0 has it's original long block (and roller lifters) now with 253,000 miles on it. Whisper quiet. Probably has 80 lbs. springs in it lol.

The rev kit is an interesting thought. I've always liked to keep the valve train light on my engines with titanium retainers and lighter valves to help with valve train stability without spending a bunch of money.

[FrankieT/A]

Originally Posted by Formulajones

A lot of things contribute to that, I hear what you're saying. The LS engines are fantastic little pieces. The rollers live for a lot of reasons.

The LS1's I messed with for several years were lucky to have 100 lbs. seat pressure on those beehive springs. They weren't much. I think the lazy stock cam profiles helped and didn't require much spring to start with. The valvetrain is pretty light on these engines too, with some of them, like the LS6 having sodium filled valves.

Even with that said, I've done cam swaps on 100k mile engines, with a custom cam, more aggressive lobes, and upgraded the valve springs and push rods to go with it, and left the original lifters in place, then proceed to log another 80k miles on the engine with a 6700 rpm rev limit set, without a hiccup, go figure.

My sons 5.0 has it's original long block (and roller lifters) now with 253,000 miles on it. Whisper quiet. Probably has 80 lbs. springs in it lol.

The rev kit is an interesting thought. I've always liked to keep the valve train light on my engines with titanium retainers and lighter valves to help with valve train stability without spending a bunch of money.

I have a 4.8 in one of my work trucks 335,000 miles never had the valve covers off. Quiet as quiet can be. It even has the factory Freon in it, but that's another story.

[gtobob67]

I have the Shaver Comps in my motor. Noisy when hot at idle, 20 psi. Really noisy around 1500-1900 RPM, 45-50 psi. I've done the lifter bore mod recommended by Paul Carter. No change. I had the earlier comps and they were noisy also. Ready to throw the towel in and just live with it. Saw a post by Cliff saying he bottoms out the lifter and backs it off 1/2 turn rather than 1/2 turn down from zero preload. Tried it and it is quiet at all RPMs. As Cliff stated, not recommending this, just saying....