[vtxman]

The main reason I decided on the Gaterman lifters is because the oil supply hole in the lifter seemed lower than the other options and would align better with he oil hole in the Pontiac block. Many of the LS style lifters don't seem to align as well. I also like the oil port that lubricates the roller. I don't know how reliable the lifter actually is, or who makes it. I figured that for $199, I would give it a try and take one for the team. I can't pay upwards of $800 after seeing pictures and posts describing the failures of the high dollar, big name lifters.

[Franked]

Ok, 335 posts, and then NOTHING. For a year. What happened to this thread?
I saw 5 potential solutions here.
1. Cutting on the open ended dog bones to make them thinner, so they don't lift with the round part of the lifter.
2. a spider that goes under the bone, as well as on top.
3. the plate, which I can't find for sale
4 a thicker bone that has more room for the lifter.
5. cutting the flats farther down the lifters, so they don't lift the bone
Did ANY of these make it to production?
I am building a 468 with a Butler specced comp roller cam, Edelbrock D port heads, CnC'd by Kauffman. I bought the Ford spider and bones kit, and they ride up at max lift, maybe .030 to .040. I REALLY don't want to mill 32 spots on the dogbones, or 32 flats on the lifters. I would like to bolt something in to make this work. Is there anything resolved?
Could I weld something onto the bottom of the bones? maybe stack 2 sets together to make them thicker, and cut the retainer part out of the bottom set?
I could possibly make my own plate, or my own under-over spider, but all these solutions would take ME so much labor, It would be easier, and cheaper for me to just buy a 700$ set of johnson's or Morels or something.
did this thread go somewhere else?
Frank

[HWYSTR455]

Originally Posted by Franked

....I could possibly make my own plate, or my own under-over spider, but all these solutions would take ME so much labor, It would be easier, and cheaper for me to just buy a 700$ set of johnson's or Morels or something....
Frank

Exactly.

Many are using the Johnson's/Morels successfully, take the time to do proper prep, R&R, and your' chances are very good it will be successful.

Or just go solid roller.


.

[Formulajones]

Paul C just told me Johnson has another batch of hydraulic rollers in stock for Pontiac. He orders directly from Johnson. However they aren't $700 anymore. He told me the price has jumped to $1100 if I remember correctly. This was just a few weeks ago. Like everything else, prices are going up.

I ordered a set from him for a Chevrolet he's doing machine work on for me. I don't much care about the cost, just getting a good lifter straight from the manufacture means more to me than saving some dollars. I won't buy the cheaper stuff found on the internet that "claim" Johnson as a lot of that stuff has been found to be reboxed garbage.

[Franked]

Well, I got my heads a few weeks ago, they are KAUFFMAN D-ports, not Edelbrock D-ports, not sure why I thought that, must have been confused during the conversation, when ordering. I have them at my machine shop, so my machinist guy can bash on them, he is super picky, and builds a lot of high RPM racing stuff that wins a LOT, so I can listen to his bitching. He keeps telling me I don't want over 9.25 to 1, the stroker kit/head combo is designed for 10-1 or 10.3 to 1, Kauffman didn't have larger than 85cc chambered heads, so we may be putting thick gaskets, and or leaving the deck height as high as we can.
My Machinist guy says with CA's piss gas (max 91 octane) I really don't want over 9.25-1, or I will have to mix in race gas, and/or have no timing advance.
Any thoughts on this? the gas here does suck for high compression.
Frank

[1969GPSJ]

Franked, I could be wrong, but IMO, and strongly suggested by current production engines and typical, recent hot rod builds of aluminum head engines, your machinist is in left field, crap gas or not. An engine built with aluminum head is significantly more tolerant of poor octane fuel than an engine with iron heads, even without regard to the dynamic compression influence via camshaft timing. The much higher heat loss rate associated with the aluminum heads significantly reduces the chances for detonation. Most non-turbo V8 builds now with aluminum heads are comfortably running compression ratios at (or above) 10.5:1 on 89-91 octane fuel - as long as the fuel/air mixture is not really messed up. I would seek out the direct advice from either the folks at Butler, Kauffman or Don at DCI. motorsports. For a small example, my wife's mini-van has 11.3:1 compression and is comfortable with 89 octane fuel, and makes over 280 hp (stock) with only 3.6 liters (non mini-van versions are rated at 310 HP). Granted it was designed with variable valve timing, 4 valves per cylinder, electronically controlled fuel injection and ignition, and a modern head design. The 2 liter Turbo Direct Injected 4 cylinder in my daughters car makes 200 (stock) hp with 10.5:1 compression (but requires 91 octane fuel). The aluminum Kauffman D port heads are said to have an excellent chamber configuration, that is highly detonation resistant, and that combined with being aluminum makes running 105:1 compression roughly the iron-head equivalent of 8.5:1 (I'm sure that the folks at Kauffman can give you a better number than that).

[hgerhardt]

.......recent hot rod builds of aluminum head engines, your machinist is in left field, crap gas or not. An engine built with aluminum head is significantly more tolerant of poor octane fuel than an engine with iron heads, even without regard to the dynamic compression influence via camshaft timing. .....

Yup, I learned that in 2001 or so. I had 87cc E-heads on a 428 with a 248/254@ .050, 114 solid roller, and that setup ran best with 87 octane fuel, and slowed down with 91. From that experience, I got a set of 72cc E-heads which brought static CR to 11.4:1 which works great with 91 octane.

Another interesting thing is, this engine now runs best with 31 deg ignition timing, where with the 87cc heads, I needed 36 deg.

[Stan65]

Ha ha. Thanks guys!

Now anyone have any of the specs I need? Will be buying some parts to reverse engineer otherwise.

Thanks,
Stan

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by Franked

Well, I got my heads a few weeks ago, they are KAUFFMAN D-ports, not Edelbrock D-ports, not sure why I thought that, must have been confused during the conversation, when ordering. I have them at my machine shop, so my machinist guy can bash on them, he is super picky, and builds a lot of high RPM racing stuff that wins a LOT, so I can listen to his bitching. He keeps telling me I don't want over 9.25 to 1, the stroker kit/head combo is designed for 10-1 or 10.3 to 1, Kauffman didn't have larger than 85cc chambered heads, so we may be putting thick gaskets, and or leaving the deck height as high as we can.
My Machinist guy says with CA's piss gas (max 91 octane) I really don't want over 9.25-1, or I will have to mix in race gas, and/or have no timing advance.
Any thoughts on this? the gas here does suck for high compression.
Frank

Don,t put the thick head gaskets on. 9.25 is a great number, for iron heads.
You can run 2 full points more CR with aluminum heads.
Trust me, you want over 10-1 CR with aluminum heads or you are selling your engine power short.
You could run 87 octane with 10-1 in a lot of cases.

[Franked]

Thank you for the response Paul. I like the Idea of a factory roller lifter, especially if it's lighter. I am wondering what happened to all these guys who had something they made, did anything ever get produced, so Joe public(as in , ME) could buy them? I may try milling the flats lower on some lifters, I bought a 4 pack of the sealed power HT2148s on ebay, they haven't arrived yet, and I took my block and stroker assembly to the machine shop so my guy can tell me how I screwed up, and charge me to make it better, so I can't test right away.
I will post what I decide to try, I am also looking forward to seeing what length custom pushrods I need, I don't have the heads yet, so that is a wait item too.
All this is going into a 1964 Lemans, like my first car, but not the same car, with a T-56 Magnum Transmission, and a 9 inch housing made for these cars. Hopefully I won't be breaking parts!!
Frank