Making solid/roller lifters

[GotFast?]

Now what about a roller???

[SATAN]

with that piece flipped around do you think it has the strength to support everything on that little bump where the check vavle sits? I wouldnt want that to crush it or somthing. that and I was thinking of shimming it all the way as far out as I could get it so it would look like a stock lifter as to where it sits and then need just a little lash adjustment instead of running the adjuster all the way down.

[SATAN]

DAH! You guys are killing me! its allready 1230. I gotta go to bed. I'll pick up on this tomorow.

[FreeLanceBum]

That "little bump" fits inside the the top piece. No pressure is on it at all.
See

[GotFast?]

What a sissy!!! Its 1:40am in wisconsin and I have class tomorrow!!!

There is only so much room between the cam, the lifter, and the Rocker arm.

Hydralic roller lifters are going to be really tough to do!!

[FreeLanceBum]

GotFast? wrote: There is only so much room between the cam, the lifter, and the Rocker arm.

Hydralic roller lifters are going to be really tough to do!!

Well aware, it was pretty much a joke.
Unless someone knows of a really effin short hydraulic roller lifter application?

[SATAN]

FreeLanceBum wrote: That "little bump" fits inside the the top piece. No pressure is on it at all.
See

Yeah, I thought about that after I got off and was laying in bed.

[SATAN]

Ok, are you ready???? This is why roller lifters will not work with a cam not designed for them. And if they do work they wont work like they are supposed to. The duration will be way shorter. You will still have the same lift but not the same duration, not even close. This is what I was trying to explain last night on lack of sleep. BUT I drew a picture(by hand) and took a picture of that :lol: cause I'm a computer retard but the idea is the same.




You can see the difference in the lift with the cam at a 45 degree angle is 3/8" or .375" THATS A LOT! Granted my picture is just an example and not real cams but you get the idea. Also note where the contact point is on the roller vs. the stock lifter. On the roller it is slightly off to the right of the center line. On the stock lifter it is WAY off to the right. So with my picture with both cams at a 45 degree angle the difference in lift is .375"!

The picture is not PERFECT but its pretty fukcing close! Close enough to make my point.

[SATAN]

The only reason I would want to run a solid lifter is because I dont like the idea of my lifter possibly compressing. If it does that then the specs of my cam grind wont show up in power. If it is solid then it has NO CHOICE but to follow the cam exactly. I will trade the lack of a need to adjust for the ability to have my cams do what they are supposed to do.

Is pulling the valve covers off and adjusting lash every 10k-30k really that bad? I could see on a normal passenger vehicle why you would want the hydro lifters. Hydro lifters = less maintenence. Its that little bit that the lifter is allowed to compress which turns me off. That and my Z doesnt even see close to 10k a year and pulling the valve covers takes all of about 2 minutes literally.

Who knows, maybe I just have a bad taste in my mouth due to my hydro lifters being so loud. If they are ticking then they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing, and therefor not adjusting properly.

[2+2turbo]

another thing , it might be a problem im not sure , is that all of the solid lifters i've seen are on engine with timing chains not belts .... nbow again im not sure if this is one of the reasons why not to do it , im just throwing it out there so you can or not throw it into the equation....

[FreeLanceBum]

OKAY, I see what you are talking about.
Good picture.

Hmmmm..... If you wanted the mid range power oriented cams and rollers, it could be possible to go for a cam with more duration, and with the rollers the duration would be reduced, and have a nice high lift. That is of course, IF we get rollers to fit in there in the first place.

Just thinking out load here.


And for the chain vs. belt.
Either way the chain or belt is just spinning the cam. The rollers reduce friction, so I don't think that will be an issue at all(less stress on the belt if anything).
There are also hydraulic lifters available for chain driven cams.

[G-E]

ok I didn't spew in this thread since the other was going so well....

if you want to free up hp and reduce friction the last thing you want is to add a heavy heavy chain to drive everything

also even with a hot lash adjustment you still want clearance, consult a l-series motor building guides, they use lash adjusters and the same valve springs and similar other hardware as the vg-e's

and about that angle thing satan was raving about, yes the stress on our lifters is almost all vertical, on a roller lifter (cam side) there is more side loads and in turn more side load on the camshaft as well, but the side load isn't on the roller that turns, the load goes into the lifter body potentially wearing out (egging) the lifter guide assembly

remember a wheel of any kind is always under side load when rolling, the load varies yes but the angle is irrelevant to the wheel