I am fully and painfully aware of the issues with flat tappet cams, ZDDP, wiped lobes, etc. I am anticipating some engine work in the near future, and am considering a roller cam conversion. However, I have also read on these forums about cases of the needle bearings going bad in those roller lifters and causing problems. Is it really an issue, or just a rare manufacturing error, etc.?

 

most all new cars have rollers, so i wouldn't worry as long as they are quality lifters. stop to think how many times modern electronic injectors fire in their lifetime... probably millions and millions and their life span is almost infinite...
Bill

 

87 and newer stock rollers work great.
retro conversions, not better luck than a FT. Just wishful thinking that a roller will last longer or be trouble free. Some roller lifters last only 2000 miles. But, those make a heck of a lot of power!

 

most of those issues are due to solid roller applications, valve lash takes it's toll after a while on roller components and spring pressures play a part too
if you go hydraulic, wear is a lot minimal or non existent in most cases.....

 

First off it wasn't qualified what roller lifter style you are talking about. As the last poster said "Just wishful thinking that a roller will last longer or be trouble free". This is true for a solid roller but not at all true for a hyd roller with good components.

Solid rollers aren't meant for street type stop go, long idle periods typical of a true street use. They are designed for very steep ramp race type cam profiles. Spring rates requirements are high on these style camshafts also. You can use them on the street with a very good maintanence schedule but even then it isn't optimal.

Hyd rollers are on almost every car made today. Retro fit roller lifters and camshafts come in many types and styles. They get a bad rap for falling flat at the upper rpm ranges specifically on BBC with large heavy valves, however with a good lifter higher rpms can be achieved. If that is what you are going for. The key is proper selection of components.

I have had all the different types of lifters and camshafts on my motors. I just built a 496 for the 66 and I used a hyd roller with Morel hyd roller lifters that were specifically designed for 6600+ rpm, I used titanium spring retainers and matched the springs to the cam and lifters.

People who make blanket statements and recomendations without knowing the specific facts are clueless and are making a judgment on something without all the information. Which is what happened on a cam selection thread the other day.

First figure out what you would like the motor to perform like and then select the components to do what you want. I will say this I'll never use another flat tappet camshaft ever again. Just remember the first wiped out flat tappet camshaft you have pays for your roller lifter conversion.

 

Non race solid rollers which use an iron core instead of billet steel?

 

It isn't so much the camshaft material it is made from but the roller lifter itself. As many solid rollers get the oiling from splash oiling, some solid rollers have pin oiling feature but not all. There is very little splash oiling going on at idle. A mild solid roller camshaft with lower spring seat pressures and pressurized pin oiling might live a while but I wouldn't use a solid roller for a dedicated street car.

 

Used a bushed lifter then. Chris Straub has some nice morels, Isky Crower etc all have solid bushed lifters no needle bearings
Have a few hun on some Crower severe duty solid rollers its on the street all the time. So far so good. I idle it at 1200 partly for splash partly as thecam is pretty healthy.
Keep up on the lash. Im only running a 210-220 lb spring and a not so aggressive ramp so it shold last a long long time.

Or the trick thing to do would be to use a larger dia lifter so the load is spread out more on the lifter. Grind cam accordingly , thats gonna get done on my next one makes sense.

 

The reason I pointed out the iron core, is because the "milder" solid rollers are made out of iron instead of steel. This implies a less radical flank. That's the only reason, as I am addressing the lifter and not the cam itself.

Using rollers with EDM holes for oiling is best as the lube is injected directly into the roller bearings. I install standpipes in the drainback holes in the lifter valley when I do these installations. Splash oiling is not needed here, and this greatly reduces windage on the crank. The use of a rev kit keeps the lifters in contact with the lobes and eliminates shock loads on the needle bearings. "Milder" solid rollers don't use exceedingly non-compliant springs, and if beehives are used, that's better still. Pressures in the vicinity of 150/400 psi allow revs well past 8000 RPM.

 

Good thread.

I'm no expert but I will share my own personal experience. I ran a solid roller in my drag car and bought what I was told were the best roller lifters I could buy - Isky RedZones. I ran these for years, hundreds of passes and no problems.

I sold the car to a guy who drives it on the street (it's a 9 second car). He's been driving it without issue.

My sample size is as small as you can get, but I wouldn't hesitate to go roller. I would just make damn sure you are buying quality parts and that the heads are set up with the right spring pressure and the pushrod length is correct.

Good luck, I'm subscribing I want to see what others say.

 

And, lets not forget that sometimes s**t happens! I was running a flat solid w/ Crane Gold Roller rockers and one of them came apart with needle bearings all over. Failures just happen.

 

If you are hearing this about the GM LS motors then I believe the problem is not with the lifters or camshaft but with the lifter trays. These plastic pieces can, in some instances, cause the lifter to rotate slightly eventually wiping out the lifter and camshaft. I've heard in the later motors GM has installed a new design tray.

 

Call Howards Cams. I just did a hyd roller swap in a 427 and it cost around 750.00, which included cam and roller lifters. They make their cams with a gear that is compatible with your stock iron distributor gear, so no composite or brass gear is necessary. You will also need pushrods, full roller rockers, a cam button, and you will also most likely need to space your valve covers with thicker gaskets and longer bolts to clear the full rollers, but its definitely worth the extra coin in my opinion. I did a 327 last year as well and i am very happy with the results. Dont cheap out on the full roller rockers or pushrods.

 

So, do you want to be the fastest kid on the block and spend hundreds and hundreds of $$$$$$$ on all this hot rod stuff that may break anyway or is the stock performance, lumpy idle and OEM long term durability right for you for $150 or so for stock replacement?

 

ZZ4 crate motor - factory hydraulic roller lifters - beat on it for 65,000 miles with zero issues - shifted around 6,000rpm constantly, with valve float coming in around 6,100 - you could feel it.

With the better cam profiles available for rollers (more lift for a given duration) I will never build a flat tappet motor again.

Had a quality crane solid roller lifter come apart on my 540 BBC in my boat - engine came as a solid with the boat - had maybe 3 seasons on it, and never saw more than around 5,200rpm. I changed it over to hydraulic rollers, and that was 7 years ago. I'll probably never use a solid roller again, unless I built an all out, short lifespan, drag strip only engine.....

A good example of the difference between flat and roller hydraulic lifters can be found when you look at the peak power rpm, and the overall power curve of the ZZ4 crate motor, at 355hp/408lbs vs the old LT1 of 70 at 370hp/380lbs. The modern roller motor made basically the same power, but with peak hp at 800 rpm lower, 5,200 vs 6,000. The cam duration is so low on the ZZ4 it idles smooth, while the Lt-1 was rather large at an advertised 317/346, and had a rough idle. One of the magazines did a comparison on these motors a few years back, and the LT-1, built to 1970 specs, came within 5hp of it's orig rating if I remember correctly. The ZZ4 is 10:1 compression, vs 11:1 for the LT1. Both motors would probably run the same times in the same car, but one would be shifting at 5,600-5,700 rpm, and the other would probably be shifting at 6,500 rpm... One would be fine with 3:55 gears, while the other would be begging for 4:11's....

 

Yup, they use melonized steel distributor gears, but that's only when using the more radical solid rollers which MUST use a steel blank for durability.
If the geometry is set right (pushrods) and you use high quality parts, you have a much stronger motor which is more durable than a flat tappet engine. It's also wise to reinforce your sheet metal timing cover by brazing sheet steel to the inside, where the button contacts it.

 

Not to be argumentative here but...................

There is nothing new or modern about this. All this has been common knowledge for years, ever since roller cams became available to SB/BB Chevies and other engines over 50 years ago.

There is no question the roller cam will make more power tahn a flat tappet in any performance engine. There is also no question that any attempt to even get close to a roller profile with a flat tappet cam will probably result in super stiff valve springs, bent pushrods and rounded off cams and less power. The biggest problem with retro fitting a roller cam is the COST!

In the meantime, there are plenty of old guys like myself that don't have to burn rubber for two blocks and just like the sound of the original stuff and the performance characteristics (what's wrong with a 4.11?) that will last forever as long as the valve train is all matched to OEM levels.

It costs a lot of money to retro an older engine and go with a bullet proof roller cam, roller rocker setup and related components. And then there's the "while I'm at it" mode you get into when you realized your stock heads are NOW the big choke point in the power of your engine so you get to spend another $1K to take care of that little problem.

Is it really worth it? Your choice!

 

I use a solid roller in my '66 BB. As was stated earlier, the lifters are the key to trouble free ops. I used Isky Red Zone lifters in my rebuild, set the valve lash, and have run the car on the street for almost 2 years. So far no problems. My engine gets a good hammering about 2 or 3 times a month well past 6000 rpm just to keep it limbered up. When you're my age (65), that's one of the few things that sends a chill up your spine!!! Good luck. TJS

 

The expense is an issue, but so is pulling a motor back out and changing a cam. I wiped a lobe on a lunati hydraulic flat tappet cam in a 427 last year and i followed break in procedures to a T and used Joe Gibbs break in oil. The cam failed after only 100 miles. I ended up screwing up the paint while changing the cam, which added an extra 1,000 to the expense to repair. So actually a roller cam can save you a lot of money and headaches in the long run. Plenty of lump in the 327 and the 427 I have...just depends on the profile. Ill post a video soon of the 427 running. It sounds incredible and the car shakes even with the new fully restored chassis and new suspension.
It wasn't tuned in perfectly in this video, but it shows that it still has plenty of lump.

 

The problem with solid rollers is that the rollers are not turning at the time the roller surface comes into contact with the cam lobe, i.e., at the end of the lash period. This gives the opportunity to pound the needle bearings slightly flat, causing their eventual failure. A couple of CF members using solid rollers consider them a "maintenance item" as in they get thrown away and replaced at regular intervals to avoid a catastrophic failure.

None of this applies to hydraulic rollers. They are always in loaded contact with the cam lobe so there is no pounding the needle bearings flat because the bearings are always turning. If you go hydraulic roller, consider a "rev kit" which is a set of additional springs placed in the valley that force the lifter bodies into contact with the cam lobes, but do not affect the part of the lifter that moves the pushrod. That way you can run sane valve spring pressures while avoiding valve float. Too much spring pressure at the head will cause even the best hydraulic lifters to partially collapse, resulting in valve float below the rated RPM of the cam.