[DeTomaso] Comp Cam's roller lifters
cengles at cox.net
cengles at cox.net
Fri Oct 13 13:55:01 EDT 2017
Dear Dan,
Wow. That was very enlightening, if not definitive. Thanks
for the inside scoop.
Warmest regards, Chuck Engles
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Daniel C Jones wrote:
>> I have not used Johnson Lifters, but it is my understanding that
>> they
> have a good reputation and are good quality.
>
> There are two lifter companies using the Johnson name. HyLift Johnson
> (
> www.hylift-johnson.com) and Johnson (https://johnsonlifters.com).
> Hylift
> owned the Johson brand when they were an OEM supplier and, like
> Stanadyne
> and Eaton, they were a high quality supplier. Hylift went out of
> business
> due to dropping sales volume as the OEM's moved to OHC engines. As I
> understand it, Johnson is in no way related to Hylift. Also, Hylift's
> name
> was bought and a new plant was opened with new people so they aren't
> really
> the old Hylift Johnson company, either. Much of the flat tappet cam
> issues
> were due to Hylift exiting the business and the void being filled by
> sub-par Mexican (Moresa) and Chinese suppliers. Be aware that Eaton
> sold
> their aftermarket lifter business to Stanadyne then later purchased
> the
> Moresa plant and re-entered the business.
>
>> Anybody have any experience with Johnson Lifters?
>
> I've not used either Johson or Hylift-Johnson hydraulic roller
> lifters. On
> their website, they list four versions of the SBF lifters. Two of
> them
> have "short travel" in the name but if you follow the links all four
> of
> them mentioned reduced travel. Not sure what's up with that but
> elsewhere
> on the site it claims all hydraulic lifters are available with short
> travel, variable duration lift and axle oiling features. Variable
> duration
> would be a fast bleed rate lifter like the old Rhoads lifters.
>
> Dan Jones
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 9:40 AM, <jgkrenton at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Dan et-al:
>>
>> I stumbled over these guys while looking for something else.
>>
>>
>> https://johnsonlifters.com/Products/HydraulicRollerLifters/2222SBR.aspx
>>
>> Anybody have any experience with Johnson Lifters?
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From: *"Daniel C Jones" <daniel.c.jones2 at gmail.com>
>> *Cc: *"detomaso" <detomaso at server.detomasolist.com>
>> *Sent: *Friday, October 6, 2017 11:51:22 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [DeTomaso] Comp Cam's roller lifters
>>
>>> Does anyone have any experience with the Comp Cam's retrofit kit's
>>> such
>> as this?
>>
>> There are two ways to run a hydraulic roller cam in a 351C. The
>> first is
>> to run link bar lifters. The other is to run the spider and dog
>> bones
>> arrangement similar to what was introduced in the mid 1980s on the
>> 5.0L
>> Ford V8. The Comp retrofit kit is the latter. We've run both
>> arrangements
>> and there are some issues to be aware of. It varies from
>> block-to-block
>> and depends upon the size of the chamfer at the top of the lifter
>> bore but,
>> on many blocks, the oil feed is exposed at maximum lobe lift on stock
>> base
>> circle cams. Some manufacturers (like Comp) will reduce the base
>> circle of
>> the cam so the OEM type lifters can be used. As a rule, irregardless
>> of
>> how much lift that a camshaft has, the lifters generally all stop in
>> approximately the same location at the top unless the base circle is
>> deliberately reduced which can cause problems at the other end of the
>> lifter bores. With a reduced base circle cam, the OEM lifters will
>> usually
>> be safe at maximum lift but some blocks will have interference
>> problems
>> with the dog bones. A local shop which uses the Comp retrofit kit
>> has a
>> fixture to machine the block for clearance but it can also be done by
>> hand. Comps link bar lifters have the oil feed (and associated band
>> on the
>> lifter) in the same place as the OEM lifters so have the same
>> problems at
>> max lobe lift.
>>
>> Other retrofit link bar lifters like the Crane, Gaterman (copies of
>> the
>> Crane), Howards (made by Gaterman), Lunati (made by Morel) have the
>> oil
>> feed placed lower on the lifter body and do not have the max lift
>> problem. My favorites are the Crane link bars but they are quite
>> expensive. The Lunati/Morel hydraulic roller lifters cost about half
>> what
>> the Cranes do and seem to work well. Be aware there are some Chinese
>> knock-offs of the Cranes that should be avoided (tested on a spring
>> load
>> machine and failed).
>>
>> Comps kit comes with pushrods, springs and timing chain set. Comp
>> doesn't
>> make the timing chains and gets them from a variety of manufacturers.
>> Often (usually) the gears are from one manufacturer and the chains
>> are from
>> another. There are some good and some very bad chains out there so
>> you
>> need to verify the name on the chain links. Avoid chains with no
>> name or
>> "Rolon". The pushrods are shorter for the taller hydraulic roller
>> lifters
>> but may not be correct for your engine. Due to tolerance stack up in
>> the
>> cam base circle diameter, rocker arm, whether or not the heads and/or
>> block
>> have been milled, the pushrod length you need may be different.
>> Given the
>> angles involved with the canted valve heads, it is important to get
>> the
>> pushrod length and valve train geometry correct.
>>
>> Have your heads been converted to studs and guide plates or are they
>> the
>> original pedestal mount? What rocker arms are you using? The spring
>> loads
>> required for a hydraulic roller cam may exceed the pedestal mount
>> bolt
>> strength.
>>
>> Another issue is distributor gear compatibility. The cam core can be
>> made
>> from a variety of materials, generally either on of several steels or
>> a
>> SADI core. Unless you get a custom grind, Comp uses a SADI core.
>> SADI
>> stands for selectively austempered ductile iron. SADI cores are
>> generally
>> compatible with cast iron distributor gears. Be aware the quality of
>> cast
>> iron gears varies greatly. Following several cast iron gear
>> failures, a
>> friend Brinneltested several different cast iron distributor gears
>> and
>> found that some gears (especially those purchased from auto parts
>> stores)
>> were softer than the OEM Ford cast iron gear and some were even
>> softer than
>> an aluminum-bronze gear. Mallory makes a distributor gear for their
>> distributors that is made specifically for "austempered ductile iron
>> billets" and "proferal billet" cams. "Proferal" is a grade of iron
>> alloy
>> that is used primarily for non-roller camshafts because of its
>> anti-wear
>> characteristics.
>>
>>> I used the Crane Cams roller conversion kit, with a Crane 351C
>>> hydraulic
>> roller cam and lifters.
>>
>> We've used the Crane kit before as well. It differs from Comp in
>> that
>> Crane uses an 8620 steel cam core of standard base circle. The steel
>> core
>> requires one of Crane's compatible steel distributor gears:
>>
>> 52970-1 Ford V-8 70-82, Boss 351-351C-351M-400 for 0.500" shaft
>> diameter
>> 52971-1 Ford V-8 70-82, Boss 351-351C-351M-400 for 0.531" shaft
>> diameter
>>
>> As noted above, the size of the lifter bore chamfer determines
>> whether a
>> standard base circle cam like Crane uses will work in a specific
>> block with
>> OEM style lifters.
>>
>> We've used both steel and SADI cores successfully (with the proper
>> distributor gear). The Gaterman/Howards or Morel/Lunati link bar
>> lifters
>> are inexpensive enough that we no longer use the OEM style retrofit
>> kits.
>> Rather than buying a kit with parts of unknown brand and
>> specification, I
>> prefer to put together parts of known pedigree that fit the
>> application. A
>> custom hydraulic roller cam is around $100 more than an off-the-shelf
>> grind
>> which may not match your engine.
>>
>>> When Denny Aldridge built our 351C he used Comp Cams roller lifters.
>> Thank the lord above that he then dyno'd the engine - and found the
>> lifters
>> would not stay up.
>>
>> Plus one on the dyno testing. We found a link bar that had come
>> detached
>> on a Crane lifter during a dyno test. This was back when Crane went
>> out of
>> business but before they reorganized. Someone had bought the
>> remaining
>> inventory and had sold the lifters without realizing they had not
>> been
>> finish machined. The specific problem was the link bars had been
>> pressed
>> into place but the ends of the axles had not been peened to retain
>> the link
>> bars.
>>
>> Dan Jones
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>> Detomaso Email List is not managed by POCA
>> Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
>> DeTomaso mailing list
>> DeTomaso at server.detomasolist.com
>> http://server.detomasolist.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>>
>> To manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.)
>> use
>> the links above.
>>
>> Members who post to this list grant license to the list to forward
>> any
>> message posted here to all past, current, or future members of the
>> list.
>> They also grant the list owner permission to maintain an archive or
>> approve
>> the archiving of list messages.
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> Detomaso Email List is not managed by POCA
> Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
> DeTomaso mailing list
> DeTomaso at server.detomasolist.com
> http://server.detomasolist.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>
> To manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.)
> use the links above.
>
> Members who post to this list grant license to the list to forward any
> message posted here to all past, current, or future members of the
> list. They also grant the list owner permission to maintain an archive
> or approve the archiving of list messages.
More information about the DeTomaso
mailing list