[PONTIAC DUDE]

Yep, Damn those 'HEAVY' Hydraulic roller lifters won't rpm. Can't make power. What's wrong with those damn things. People whining about the performance of those hyd roller cams.

10.16@132 thru the traps at 6800 rpm. shifting at 6500. 3450 lbs, stock suspension, DR's with a Powerglide. LOL.

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by PONTIAC DUDE

Yep, Damn those 'HEAVY' Hydraulic roller lifters won't rpm. Can't make power. What's wrong with those damn things. People whining about the performance of those hyd roller cams.

10.16@132 thru the traps at 6800 rpm. shifting at 6500. 3450 lbs, stock suspension, DR's with a Powerglide. LOL.

What's it run with a solid roller?

[Z Code 400]

Careful Dude....

You don't want to anger the archaic gods of Pontiac with the praises of roller cams...It is written, that the only way you can make a Pontiac run is with a 744 and Rhoads Lifters....:-)

Good work on that combo, Dude. We turned similar rpm with a Bullet-ground Hydraulic Roller and only 325 lbs open pressures...Robert

[David Jones]

Originally Posted by motor-daddy

What's it run with a solid roller?

What would it run with a BBC? The question makes about as much sense.............

[Pontirag]

Hydraulic rollers work best in a large displacement lower RPM motor. Not to say they cant work elsewhere. But that is where they really shine.

[gtofreek]

Originally Posted by PONTIAC DUDE

Yep, Damn those 'HEAVY' Hydraulic roller lifters won't rpm. Can't make power. What's wrong with those damn things. People whining about the performance of those hyd roller cams.

10.16@132 thru the traps at 6800 rpm. shifting at 6500. 3450 lbs, stock suspension, DR's with a Powerglide. LOL.

You know, it's funny P-Dude, how everyone is so worried about lifter weight. When we were at PRI showing off our flat roller lifter, just about everyone made a comment about how heavy they were. Our lifter weighed something like 113 grams. A standard Johnson flat tappet weighed like 88 grams or so, empty! When you fill it with oil, it weighs about 110 grams. Our lifter has very little room for oil weight. It really cracked me up how people would say, "it sure is heavy" . Yeah, so! What difference does it really make anyway? Very little. Weight on the cam side of the program doesn't matter anywhere near as much as weight on the valve side of things. Then there's the fact that roller lifters are so much heavier than our flat roller. Noone ever bitch's about how a solid roller lifter is so heavy and my engine won't rpm with them. How many people are spinning over 10,000 rpm with those heavy ass roller lifters? Must be made of some cosmic, lightweight material, right? Bob Fox, inventer of the spintron, invented it to prove that weight on the cam side didn't really matter. He was dogged about how much his pushrods[Trend Performance] weighed so he made the spintron and took a lightweight pushrod and ran it on the spintron and got some readings. He then took a SB Chevy piston pin[145 grams] and slipped it over the pushrod and welded it in place then ran the test over again and found that the difference was not really measurable. I mean, think about it, when the engine is all assembled, there is hundreds of pounds of weight[springs pressure] on the lifter, essentially adding hundreds of pounds of weight to that lifter! What is adding a few grams of lifter weight really going to do? DIDLY SQUAT, that's what!

We did however redesign our lifter to get it down to the 79 gram range just to make the tire kickers happy!

[PONTIAC DUDE]

I not a Rocket Scientist, LOL, but yes I agree and have been fighting that same point for 4 years on here.

I would worry more about what the rocker has to open then what a roller itself has to roll over on the ramp of the cam.

motor-daddy. The reason I went to hyd rollers is so I don't have the noise or have to adjust valves or even take the cover off. Or big spring pressures.

This is not a race application nor a tricked out combo with sh*t people leave out trying to put up numbers. Pump gas.
Plus i don't have 200lbs over the seat. Just a whimpy 145lbs.

Rae Hard & Have Fun

[Motor Daddy]

Agreed, hydraulic lifters are more maintenance free, and quieter.

Now, let's get to the real question, which makes more power, a hydraulic roller or a solid roller? When you get that combo worked out for a good strong maintenance free "crate motor," how about you put a healthy solid roller in place of the hydraulic roller (not necessarily the same specs) and see which one is faster?

My money's on the solid roller.

[TTS]

Of coarse the solid roller is faster. It also creates maintenance issues- what Ken's wanting to avoid.

[Steve C.]

The overall weight of the hyd roller lifter is not as much of a concern to some as the effects of the oil inside. It's eluded to here and in other tech articles that discuss the "lash effect".....

"But hydraulic lifters are far from the best way to make max power. That's because, as engine speed increases, the hydraulic lifter's plunger depresses further into its body due to the increasing forces of trying to accelerate the valve off the seat. The cam begins to act like an aggressive solid design from the lash that's created, but now has a shorter duration as the result. The more aggressive the cam acts, the harder time the valvespring has controlling it. As it approaches max speed, the valve bounces off the seat and oil rushes into the lifter to take up the clearance that's now been created at the plunger. This effectively holds the valve off the seat, (valve float), bleeding off compression and power, and limits the high-rpm capacity of hydraulic designs."


( I'm not necessarly agreeing whole hardely with this material, again it's just fodder for conversation. And this is at least 4 year old info, much has changed and higher rpm operation is becoming more commonplace. Especialy with new valve spring tecnology )

[Jeff Walker]

Originally Posted by motor-daddy

Now, let's get to the real question, which makes more power, a hydraulic roller or a solid roller?

Funny, but I don't see this question anywhere in Kens first post.

Maybe because that isn't the reason he started this thread in the first place.............

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by Jeff Walker

Funny, but I don't see this question anywhere in Kens first post.

Maybe because that isn't the reason he started this thread in the first place.............

Did someone doubt a hydraulic lifter is more maintenance free or more quiet? Did someone doubt a hydraulic roller would run OK?

So it appears the only doubt is which is faster, as everyone agrees hydraulics are more maintenance free and quieter. Sure they'll run, but how fast is the question? The rest is agreed on.

[Larry Navarro]

did someone say lifter noise?
My old UD solid flat tappet had virtually no noise compared to the COMP hydraulic flat tappet in a previous engine. I set the solids one time after break-in and never had to re-adjust them.
I tried 3 or 4 times to set the valves on the hydraulic to get rid of the noise until I read the PY threads about COMP and "fast acting" ramps causing lifter noise on their flat hydraulics.
Of course hyd. roller lobe design is different than hyd. flat lobe design so the noise may not be an issue.

[gtofreek]

Originally Posted by Larry Navarro

did someone say lifter noise?
My old UD solid flat tappet had virtually no noise compared to the COMP hydraulic flat tappet in a previous engine. I set the solids one time after break-in and never had to re-adjust them.
I tried 3 or 4 times to set the valves on the hydraulic to get rid of the noise until I read the PY threads about COMP and "fast acting" ramps causing lifter noise on their flat hydraulics.
Of course hyd. roller lobe design is different than hyd. flat lobe design so the noise may not be an issue.

Yeah, Harold's lobes slow the lifter down at the end so it set's the valve down gently. Unlike the Comps. I've had some Comps that were just real noisy and nothing we did would quiet them up. Hyd. cams that is. Even with duration as mild as 210° @ .050. New lifters, 1 even 1 1/2 turns of preload, still noisy. We recently ran two Pontiacs with UD cams, both solid rollers on the dyno, one with .022" lash and the other with .026" and you can't hear either one of them. They're quiter than Comp Hyd. cams. I also like the broad, flat torque curves of the UD's.

[PONTIAC DUDE]

Originally Posted by motor-daddy

Did someone doubt a hydraulic lifter is more maintenance free or more quiet? Did someone doubt a hydraulic roller would run OK?

So it appears the only doubt is which is faster, as everyone agrees hydraulics are more maintenance free and quieter. Sure they'll run, but how fast is the question? The rest is agreed on.

I NEVER said a solid was faster.

This is the Street section right?

What I am saying is that a hyd roller will take more then most on here can dish out to it and live. No need to put a soild on a hyd profile. & without all the excessive spring presures, wear, noise, be able to run knock sensors, checking adjustments. blah, blah, blah. LOL.

So if i can run 9's on real pump gas with a hyd roller and not have to worry about the wear on the roller, etc in a 3450lb stock suspension car, Why would i need to go to a solid?

If hyd roller were that great. Line & Anderson would have them. LOL. But then again........... this is the Street section

[gtofreek]

Dude's got a point there MD!

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by PONTIAC DUDE

I NEVER said a solid was faster.

This is the Street section right?

What I am saying is that a hyd roller will take more then most on here can dish out to it and live. No need to put a soild on a hyd profile. & without all the excessive spring presures, wear, noise, be able to run knock sensors, checking adjustments. blah, blah, blah. LOL.

So if i can run 9's on real pump gas with a hyd roller and not have to worry about the wear on the roller, etc in a 3450lb stock suspension car, Why would i need to go to a solid?

If hyd roller were that great. Line & Anderson would have them. LOL. But then again........... this is the Street section

Running 9's is not your everyday average Grandma mobile. I'm pretty sure the car was built for speed, otherwise it would have a 4 banger in it to get good mileage, correct?

I agree a hydraulic roller is a pretty much install, adjust, and forget type of deal you need as a builder, trying to keep the customers happy, and I applaud that. But there is a difference in bulding an engine for dependability and building an engine for all out performance. As usual in this field it's a compromise. Where you draw the line is an individual choice. Making the most power is a fact.

[David Holmberg]

But you have to look at the ability of the average driver/customer. They want to drive it and not worry about it. They can change the oil and the spark plugs but don't want to mess with the motor.

[Motor Daddy]

Originally Posted by David Holmberg

But you have to look at the ability of the average driver/customer. They want to drive it and not worry about it. They can change the oil and the spark plugs but don't want to mess with the motor.

And I agree. I like Dude's offerings as far as a 9 second maintenance free "crate motor." Maybe he could offer a solid roller version as the more powerful crate motor than the hydraulic roller model?

[Z Code 400]

I just don't have any desire to adjust tappets anymore. I chose a UD lobe profile for my latest hydraulic flat tappet for dynamic stability and ease of maintenance...Robert