When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Real hot rods have solids rest can sit at the little kids table.
NOw I have some customers with some fast hydraulic rollers....Troy LaCrones 1969 Camaro that was in February Super Chevy was respectable running low 9's with a squish cam.
I know the car does have a bunch of passes and that lends to the reliability of the lifters for sure.... but that has no correlation to a car that idles in bumper to bumper traffic, during the summer with 230* oil temps and actually travels any kind of distance.
I do feel that the Morel hyd rollers are the most reliable hyd lifters...I'm sure the quality of the solids is just as good.
I know the car does have a bunch of passes and that lends to the reliability of the lifters for sure.... but that has no correlation to a car that idles in bumper to bumper traffic, during the summer with 230* oil temps and actually travels any kind of distance.
I do feel that the Morel hyd rollers are the most reliable hyd lifters...I'm sure the quality of the solids is just as good.
On a side note because of your dad's build the shop that dyno'd it called an ordered a camshaft a couple of weeks ago for a project. He was very impressed with your build.
From: I tend to be leery of any guy who doesn't own a chainsaw or a handgun.
Originally Posted by gkull
They are still running I use VR 1 motor oil , priority main blocks, high volume oil pumps, about 30 psi hot idle
The motors have both been refreshed with the same lifters going back in. The springs, rings, and valve guides go
69427 with no other changes other than a roller cam you could gain significant amounts of power across all rpm. Then quit worrying about using your lighter weight brake rotors and minor additional gains flat bottoming your car to a higher level. Actually your car would be so much faster that you would finally understand that stock brakes are incapable of running more than just a few laps before failure
Well George, I'm not a one dimensional guy. Speed is neat (and a lighter car will accelerate faster than a heavier car with the same motor), but I also like a car that brakes well (and a light car decelerates quicker than a heavier car), and I also enjoy going around a corner rather briskly (and a lighter car corners faster than a heavier car).
Thanks George, but I'll pass on your advice.
ps: Link to where I was worrying about the lighter brakes on my car?
From: I tend to be leery of any guy who doesn't own a chainsaw or a handgun.
Originally Posted by StraubTech
This is a 1966 Chevelle, pump gas 496 at 10.5 to 1 at 3500# that runs 9.60's. So it makes some steam.
I'm not arguing about any steam making capability. I just prefer an engine that can reliably make steam for substantially longer than 300 miles a year. Three hundred miles is only one or two weekends of road course fun. The professional racing guys can justify pulling their engine apart for refreshing after every track weekend, but I'm the sole guy who does all the building, modifying, driving, and paying for the track activity bills. I grudgingly accept that I have to pay for consumables like fuel, tires, rotors and pads, but I'm not prepared to add cams and lifters to that list.
On a side note because of your dad's build the shop that dyno'd it called an ordered a camshaft a couple of weeks ago for a project. He was very impressed with your build.
Awesome to hear.
B&G Engines in Alvin Tx built the engine, however we dynoed it at Owens Racing engines in Pearland.
B&G has done the machine work on several engines that Rafel has built and he has ordered at least 3-4 cams from you in the last couple of years.
The 65' we did the roller 396 for has been in paint for a year, we just got it finished and hitting the show circuit, I expect to put some decent miles on it this summer, it runs like a top though. Valve train is quiet as well.
B&G Engines in Alvin Tx built the engine, however we dynoed it at Owens Racing engines in Pearland.
B&G has done the machine work on several engines that Rafel has built and he has ordered at least 3-4 cams from you in the last couple of years.
The 65' we did the roller 396 for has been in paint for a year, we just got it finished and hitting the show circuit, I expect to put some decent miles on it this summer, it runs like a top though. Valve train is quiet as well.
It was B&G that opened up an account and ordered a camshaft. Your build on your fathers is what he commented about with the very flat broad power curve.
It was B&G that opened up an account and ordered a camshaft. Your build on your fathers is what he commented about with the very flat broad power curve.
You should have seen the look on Bobby's (B of B&G) face when I told Joe at Owens to pull it to 6600..... Bobby looked...."concerned"... I told him..."it'll be fine"... LOL and it was.
You should have seen the look on Bobby's (B of B&G) face when I told Joe at Owens to pull it to 6600..... Bobby looked...."concerned"... I told him..."it'll be fine"... LOL and it was.
Well George, I'm not a one dimensional guy. Speed is neat (and a lighter car will accelerate faster than a heavier car with the same motor), but I also like a car that brakes well (and a light car decelerates quicker than a heavier car), and I also enjoy going around a corner rather briskly (and a lighter car corners faster than a heavier car).
Thanks George, but I'll pass on your advice.
ps: Link to where I was worrying about the lighter brakes on my car?
Sorry for kinda sounding like I got down on you.. but a roller cam of equal duration might gain you 50 hp and equal TQ. You are already very lite weight and good aerodynamics Roller cams make for a much broader power rpm range and up the rpm red line cap.
You are right about unsprung weight and rotational mass!
I'm so sorry about our local RR track closing and now I have to go hundreds of miles away for any time
From: I tend to be leery of any guy who doesn't own a chainsaw or a handgun.
Originally Posted by gkull
Sorry for kinda sounding like I got down on you.. but a roller cam of equal duration might gain you 50 hp and equal TQ. You are already very lite weight and good aerodynamics Roller cams make for a much broader power rpm range and up the rpm red line cap.
You are right about unsprung weight and rotational mass!
I'm so sorry about our local RR track closing and now I have to go hundreds of miles away for any time
I have no technical disagreements regarding the advantages of a roller cam (in regards to "area under the curve"). My only concern, and the reason why I stayed with a flat tappet setup when I built my current engine a half dozen years ago, was the durability of aftermarket roller lifters. I've read too many stories (primarily on another site that has a lot of big block fans, but that is more quarter mile oriented) about (aftermarket) roller lifter failures, whereas I've had excellent reliability/durability with hydraulic flat tappets in the three engines I've had in my '69.
If there's a roller setup available for a big block, that I can install and forget about periodic maintenance or replacement (like anybody who's running a C5, 6, or 7) I'll give it serious thought. It's a tough enough challenge trying to keep a near 50 year old car "competitive" during track days, and I'm not looking for extra work or worry.
Early on I built my vette with a low cost solid roller setup. Rev kit and cheap al RRs I don't know what broke first
I thought about doing it right no matter what the cost
Later my crank shaft broke. Cheap eagle light weight totally forged long rod setup
Good parts and some thought seems to be the answer. I always tell people that a roller setup will cost you more than $2000 to do it mostly right starting with the $900 for just the lifters
I hear you Chris but sure you took my comment tongue in cheek others not so much
Think where most failures occur is the people installing/adjusting them and others buying the cheapest parts they can then complaining because they went bad.
I would run a rev kit to make sure the roller stays in contact with the cam lobe all the time so there is no slamming of the roller into the cam lobe. hydraulic roller lifters last a long time because they are under pressure against the cam lobe all the time.
I would run a rev kit to make sure the roller stays in contact with the cam lobe all the time so there is no slamming of the roller into the cam lobe. hydraulic roller lifters last a long time because they are under pressure against the cam lobe all the time.
Rev kits are kinda older school like 20 plus years ago they add to the total spring weight. Modern springs and less valve lash is the key to success
Rev kits were more intended for upper valve train failure back in the day of poor push rods and valve control
From: I tend to be leery of any guy who doesn't own a chainsaw or a handgun.
Originally Posted by gkull
Early on I built my vette with a low cost solid roller setup. Rev kit and cheap al RRs I don't know what broke first
I thought about doing it right no matter what the cost
Later my crank shaft broke. Cheap eagle light weight totally forged long rod setup
Good parts and some thought seems to be the answer. I always tell people that a roller setup will cost you more than $2000 to do it mostly right starting with the $900 for just the lifters
Given that cost, and only an estimated 50 hp increase, I'm feeling a whole lot better about running my flat tappet setup. The cost difference helps me buy stickier tires or additional lighter-weight parts for the car.
This is an interesting post. My 69, which is my daily driver has between 7 to 8k miles on it running a solid roller setup and now you got me wondering about longevity. In this engine it got Crower offset lifters. The cam is a custom grind small base circle with a tight lash setting of .004. Just checked a couple of valves for lash, still right on. The cam grinder [Cam motion] said I should get the same mileage from roller rockers as flat tapped. All new engines are running roller setups. These lifters came out of my 6t8 that had 4 years of track duty and still looked like new. The 6t8 got a solid roller setup from Straub tech with Morels. Since my first days with 283s I ran solid lifters and beat that engine to death over 40k miles with no lifter problem, so I've stuck with solids just upgraded to roller. I guess time will tell if I made the right choice. T
See both sides but will never understand the big fear of running a solid cam; sure Im not the only guy that used them for one and only DD way back when, never once had anything fail