Pull the intake, and watch while you do it.

 

That type of lifter should operate from 130lbs to estimating here around 165. Also those type will allow for .090" to .110" normal squish and a total of .200" before bind.

 

There is no break in procedure for roller lifters. Put them in and go.....no springs to remove or anything else.
Your lifters are simply full of fluid and need to be drained.
Oil pressure will not lift the valves as stated previously but what is not mentioned is if you prime before lash then the lifters will be full of oil and will not plunge.
There is no mystery to this.....the lifter has a one way check valve “tiddly wink” in it and if it is full of oil....it will not lash....
1/2 turn is about .030 plunge.....this is where you want to be.....1/4 turn is not enough for a street motor.....too much plunge (1 turn or more opens the door for lifter pump up).
This is not my opinion.....this is fact and is how thousands of top shelf builders lash hydraulic stuff....

Jebby

 

Thanks Jebby (and everyone else). Will be doing option 1 (above) over the next couple of days. Will rebuild/drain, reinstall, adjust, then prime to see how much oil I get out of the top of push rods and see if the lifters get so stiff again they won't close the valves. If all works out, hopefully fire the motor on the stand Fri or Sat. Will report the outcome back on this thread.

BTW.. if anyone is monitoring this because they are interested in how hydraulic lifters work, there has clearly been lots of good info on this thread. I also found a thread on the Chevelle forum which was helpful. Know it's hard to seriously consider information from a bunch of guys that drive large family cars with giant bench seats , but this may help "connect the dots" for a few folks. This was an answer to a OP that had the same problem I did...

**********
"Pressure oil is fed down the lifter galleys on each side of the block. The lifter consists of an outer body and inner plunger this is a close fit between them not intended to leak oil but some does. Pressure oil from the galley feeds into the lifter body from a hole and into the reservoir by way of another hole it that body. The plunger is hollow with a cup for the push rod sealing the top and a motion sensitive valve under the bottom. The valve admits oil under the plunger into a space between it and the bottom of the outer body; this is where the lash is maintained which comes from the reservoir within the upper portion of the plunger. This holds the plunger against the valve spring pressure. This sets what you can think of as the lash by adjusting the rocker so it pushes the plunger down a distance that allows space for the plunger to move upward to absorb any lash that develops and leaks down at some rate to absorb excess tightness in the linkage. This also sets the stage for pump up and leak down.

At the top of the plunger the cup that engages the push rod has a small hole that bleeds oil into the push rod which then flows out the top of the push rod into the rocker's push rod cup as the push rod moves its hole should see the hole of both cups at some point to insure oil goes into the push rod rather than venting into the valley at the lifter or just dripping off the push rod end of the rocker that should squirt oil over and onto the fulcrum of the rocker and the valve spring. Flow control is under the lifter's push rod cup; depending upon manufacturer is one of about three methods of controlling the bleed of oil from the plunger reservoir into the push rod. The exit flow will be controlled by a disk under the cup with a little play to allow oil past; or the bottom of the cup may have raised portion with vent gap in it where the disk otherwise is tight to the cup but has a small leak past it, or the disk may have several small bleed holes that meter oil. Since the reservoir within the plunger is nothing more than a place to store oil modifying the bleed restriction to the push rod for more flow will not affect the function of the lifter.

Obviously once oil gets out of the lifter's cup it has to flow into, through and out of the push rod so the holes in each end need to be clear as does the body of the push rod. A similar thing for the rocker as it should have a bleed hole at the apex of its push rod cup that is clear and that aligns with the bleed hole of the push rod at some point of its engagement with the push rod.

I would also consider that since the holes of the push rod need to align with the feed hole of the lifter cup and the rocker’s receiver cup that a consistent misalignment could be the result of incorrect push rod length something else to check."

 

The lifter will eventually plunge if left with valve spring pressure on it.

 

TRIPLE springs ? for THAT smallish HYD roller ? ( XR276HR ~ 224*/230* .503"/.510" )
If those are a TRUE triple (Three round wire springs and Not Two round wire springs Plus a flat damper)
Just a WAG; dunno your triple springs' specs, but perhaps high spring pressures are overwhelming hyd lifters

FWIW, Comp sells that cam in a kit that includes their recommended spring #986
Dual (Two round wire springs w/ flat damper) 132# closed 1.750" , 293# open 1.250", coil bind 1.150"
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca-986-1

https://www.compcams.com/dual-valve-...i-d-inner.html

 

I recently had my 496 big block assembled at a local speed shop which has been in business for over 50 years.
During the assembly they inspected the new Edelbrock aluminum heads I purchased completely assembled by Edelbrock.
They were checking the spring pressure of the valve springs and found that the springs installed by Edelbrock exceeded the recommended spring pressure by Crane cams for the hydraulic roller camshaft I was installing.
They told me the springs would be fine for a racing application where I might often see rpm's at or over 6500-7000.
But, for a street application they could cause premature lifter issues and wear on the roller rockers causing them to be replaced in less than 30,000 miles.
They ended up installing a slightly lighter spring that was within the specs from Crane and said they would give me less issues in the valve train down the road.
Just sharing my recent experience.

 

As a general rule, you want the weakest spring you can possibly use to garner maximum valvetrain life.

In My application (daily drivers up to around 1000rwhp), a single, 'weak' valve spring is recommended (i.e. PAC1218).
this will ensure longevity of the valvetrain (lifters, valve guides, etc...) and long service life (100,000+ Miles of service)

If you are making over 1000hp i could see using doubles, or maybe if using a more aggressive solid roller camshaft with reduced service life (20,000 miles per set of valve springs is typical)

 

Hi,

Found the springs recommended by ProMaxx, and what I purchased, are dual springs with the dampener (flat spring in the inside), and are rated at 145 lbs closed, and 325 lbs open. Good to .600 lift. While it is greater than the spring pressure recommended by Comp for the cam (132# closed, 293# open), thinking it should be OK. The Comp Cam HR- 276 will end up with 224/230 @.050 and .536/.544 lift with the 1.6 ratio rockers. Being somewhat mild, and with 110 degrees overlap, hoping to retain decent vacuum to support the needs of the car.

Thinking the extra spring pressure would encourage bleed down, and not pump up, so believe that is not the issue here.

Thanks again everyone.

Cheers,
Brian

 

For a little extra info in spring tech look into the Spintron videos on line.

 

FWIW, afaik, all the zillions of OE roller sbc that came with that type 2148 replacement lifter also came with single valve springs with between 80 lb & 101 lb on seat closed; vast majority were/are 80 lbs. just sayin

 

Also, the factory OE type 2148 lifters are Much lighter than retrofit lifters which have added ears & links.
More likely than not that Many "general" spring recommendations for rollers are implied to have link-bar (heavier) lifters

 

Hi,

Called Comp tech support yesterday and asked about spring pressures on their XR 276HR cam. They said the 145 lbs closed would be a bit heavy, but not a problem. Said 165 would be the point where they advise to change them out. Get what everyone is saying about wear over time, so that is going on the list of things to consider once I get these other challenges sorted out.

Cheers,
Brian

 

I like the method of adjusting valve lash that is shown in this video. It is simple, and works on all makes of engines that have hydraulic valve lifters. It makes sense, and I can see why it works. One key part of it is that the lifters have no oil in them during installation and adjustment. This ultimately allows you to end up with about .030" of interference (or however much interference is called for on your lifters), which allows the hydraulics of the lifter to work, thus it doesn't hold the valve open or result in any play in the valve train.

 

I actually have done it that way years ago and it works well. Solid lifters however are a little different.

 

That's a very good explanation video, he stresses empty lifters and he should; so if after studying his video and ya still cannot adjust a hydraulic, ya must be plain stupid.

 

Thanks everyone for the advice on this, and definitely have valve adjustment down.

But the problem I continue to have is not getting oil out of the push rods. Getting 50+ lbs of oil pressure on my gauge with a priming tool, and see some flow of oil into the lifter bore when I prime without a lifter, but when I install lifters, nothing out of the top. As mentioned above, was using the Sealed Power Ht-2148s, and was initially cranking them down too much on adjustment, but now with correct adjustment, still not getting oil to the top end.

Have a new set of lifters coming from Summit tomorrow and will try those. They are a different style lifter, which are similar to the OEM GM lifter (#12499225), but are Summit brand. They use a disk to meter flow vs. a hole in the side of the lifter cap that the SealedPower users, and also have the oil port on the side, which can sit right in the flow of the oil galley, and not 90 degrees from the flow as the SealedPowers are, so hoping this is going to solve my problem.

If not, appears the next steps are more invasive checks such as pulling the timing cover to check if my builder left out a galley plug, or pulling the oil pan to see if the pickup too close to the pan, both of which have been suggested as possible causes of this kind of problem.

Will report back on the outcome...

Cheers,
Brian

 

The pictured lifters look identical to the comp roIler lifters I had. I rebuilt my 68 l79 327 and converted to a comp cam with comp roller lifters. I had 2 pair of lifters fail with in 50 miles. This was over the last 6 weeks. Comp would not help at all. I replace all the lifters with Morel retrofit style. It's a totally different motor. Steady idle, snappy response and much quieter. The reason I state this is because as I understand it, there are only a few manufacturers that make lifters and rename them. The ones you pictured look exactly like the comp unit. Therefore you could have dead units. Do a Google search for failure of hydraulic roller lifters.

 

I would purchase some Howard's lifters if it were my engine......

Jebby

 

Yeah, I am almost there. If these new GM-style lifters won't flow, and then can eliminate any other oiling issues in the new block, I will reconsider the lifters. This project is a nut and bolt resto-mod, that has significantly exceeded budget due to all the new parts I ended up needing, so the thought of dropping $500 to $800 for a set of roller lifters for my relatively mild street car has been a bit of a challenge. And also a new set of push rods as the lifters won't be the same height. But, will go there if I have to... Thanks for the comments.