Ok, I need some opinions on this that I can print it out to help a buddy make a decision.

Here are the questions. On how they compare to each other. Looking at a cam in the 250-260 .050 range.

1,What are the reliability issues.
2,The maintenance of each.
3,Power difference.

The Hypothetical engine is a 421, 14.1, Brodix 11X heads,Alky injection.

Thanks
Glen

Glen,

These are the sort of questions that I love......

Back in 1980, I designed 2 cams, a solid flat tappet and a solid roller tappet.
They were both 288/296 at .020", 255/263 at .050". The flat tappet was 166/173 at .200", .540"/.556" valve lift. The roller tappet was 176/183 at
.200", .626"/.626" valve lift. Both cams used .026" valve lash, hot.
They became the 2 most successful camshafts that UltraDyne ever made, and both earned us our reputation. They are both still popular today, 26 years later, and still hard to beat.
Around 1983 or 1984, Peter Guild, of ProMotor Engineering, ran dyno tests where he compared both cams, just swapping cams, lifters, and springs, in a 12.5:1 355, 6.00" rods, 210cc AFR heads, Victor Jr, 750 Holley, his typical good engine.
The flat tappet cam made 440 ftlbs at 5200, 516 BHP at 7000.
The roller tappet cam made 470 ftlbs at 5200, 576 BHP at 7200.
The only real difference is in the shape of the lift curve. Both cams shut the valve on the seat at the IDENTICAL seating velocity.
The flat tappet cam has gone over 100,000 miles in both 10:1 SBCs and BBCs, and the roller cam has lived as long as 10 years in SBCs, on the street.
If the valve train and the crank/rod assemblies aren't right, the life is a whole lot shorter......
The spring pressures involved were 135 lbs on the seat, 340 lbs open for the flat tappet, 210 lbs on the seat, 525 lbs open for the roller, with 1.6s on the intake for both.
I recommend running the valve lash around .018" hot for maximum street life with either cam, as they both have excessive bottom-end power at .026"...
And it goes without saying, they both need a very good fuel system, using 1/2" #8 fuel lines from tank to carb.....

UDHarold

I am sure this is going to be a great thread, very interesting.

Harold, how much of the power difference between the two cams could be explained by the difference in lift at the valve? Also, would the difference be roughly the same on a big block? Thanks for posting as this is the first time I have seen back to back dyno results from similarly size flat tappets and rollers.

Yes, reading right along??

Great thread too..............

pdq67

That's a decent power gain I suppose for the extra cost of roller lifters, etc.

Interesting stuff Harold....

Along the same lines...just how "fast" could you have made the flat tappet lobe? It looks pretty serious...but that roller is getting with the program!

Could a flat tappet that was out in the 170-172* range say at .200 live fairly well on that short of a .050 and adv #'s lobe? I guess if it would you would have made it that way....but those two cams seem to have such big differences in acceleration rates it's hard to compare apples to apples it seems. Maybe not...

I know we've talked about this before..but what can we get in a flat tappet BBC cam that will live fairly well? Like .680-.700+ lift? Can we go to 1.8 rockers on a more normal lobe without losing control of the valve? I'm also thinking the 255-270* range on lobes.

Have you checked the 555" Hot Rod thread? This exactly what we've been asking for. Maybe your new cam ventures need some press? Make up a few cams for DF to test.....

Thanks,

JIM

Going to a 0.904 lifter body will allow higher rates of acceleration (flat tappet) - but the block work just paid for the entire roller setup.

I suggest smashing a few of your fingers flat with a hammer - this will give you 10% of the sensation of a cam going flat in your new BBC.

MAT

both being solid lifters, I would say the flat tappet, after break in.
Fewer moving parts. I have seen pictures or rollers wear into a lobe or skid, causing lifter/cam failure.


not an expert,
JMO

Solid roller is the way to go. With that type of compression on on alky you are going to need some seat pressure to control the valvetrain. You are limitied with the solid flat tappet stuff.

Chris..you're right...I never answered his question..I got off track there with Harold....

For sure your combo needs to be a solid roller. No doubt..that's race stuff and it needs serious race parts. No use going to all that trouble and leaving power on the table..because the other guy won't!

JIM

On the street, if well taken care of, and adjusted right, would a good solid flat tappet cam shaft work in an everyday driver? Or is it not a smart idea? Are there any substantial gains going to a solid flat tappet from say a hydraulic roller? Or would you see more horsepower out of the Hydraulic roller cam AND more streetability?




Thanks,
Joe Phillips

First of all, that flat tappet is very fast---A Comp Cams 290-1, of several years earlier, is 290 at .020, 255 at .050(the same!), 160 at .200(quite a bit smaller!), and the same .540" valve lift. It took me 15 years to do the NF71, same 255 at .050, 166 at .200, but only 283 at .020 and .550" valve lift---The differences in valve lash and valve lift made .020" difference at the valve.
About the same time I did the NF57 for the .904" tappet---282 at .020, 255 at .050, 172 at .200, and .582" gross lift.
A Comp Cams 288-5 Roller cam is 252 at .050 and 169 at .200, according to their catalogs.
Improving on the NF71 has been hard, and where my attention has been for flat tappets. I'm looking for 2 more degrees at .200, vrs more lift.....

The difference in performance between the 288 flat and the 288 roller is almost exclusively the difference in the lift curves, which includes the total lift. It is always better to have a better lift curve than to have a higher lift curve---Just like with women. Those with superior curves are more appreciated than those with just more height........

It is entirely possible to have solid lifter cams go for 10 years and 100,000 miles or more, with good design. Proper closing ramps do much to ensure this kind of life.

Solid cams make better torque than hydraulic rollers, so they may improve low-speed drivability for the same top-end power.

Each type of camshaft has its' place, and that's why I design them all....

UDHarold

Harold,

(Guys, sorry I'm high-jacking here, but please bear with me).............

We talked about this several years ago b/c I am scared to death to run a solid roller on the street is all..

Please spec. your vesion of CC's 288AR solid STREET roller, but in a solid lifter cam.

I ask this b/c I figure the 288AR is one DANDY STREET motor BB cam!

I am pretty sure there are other guys here that want the power of the 288AR, but are like me and won't use a solid roller cam.. But rather only an aggressive solid lifter cam.

Thanks,

pdq67

PS., CC's 288AR, (PN 11-692-8), per their cat. PN 106-03..

288/246, 110/106, .625"/.625" gross lift, lash at .020"/.020". (160(???) at .200").

ttt...

Bear with me here b/c I figure more than just me want's a solid cam spec'ed like what I asked above from Harold.

Harold, please come back...

pdq67

pdq67, why so scared to run a solid roller on the street?

I guess it's b/c I've been around here and Team Camaro long enough and read enough horror stories about the little-bitty needle bearings and such going south AND then eating everything up that it REALLY concern's me b/c I don't have another about $38 to $4000 to go through my motor again if it happens driving down to Birmingham to see my Buddy......

That's all...............

pdq67

Long as we are highjacking this thread I have a Q for Mr Harold also.

I recieved a Lunati solid roller today, and want to first compliment Harold if he had anything to do with the finished product. This cam is nice. I like the way it has radius cuts between the lobes.

Anyway, I dont have the part number right now, but it is .269/.276 @ .050 with .680/.696 lift on a 110 (best as I recall).

But my question is, I see the cam has the EVERWEAR gear on it. Does that mean it will work with a stock distributor gear? There is no mention of the gear on the paper work and I didnt realize you could get the solid roller with the everwear, thought that was a hyd roller option?

Thanks
Scott

This thread is going the way I wanted it. Both sides weighing in.

pdq67... You are reading my mind. See the money for the Roller isn't the problem. And I know its a race car... the thing is the car is/will be a Index car, and the Roller isn't really needed to run the Index he is wanting. So my thinking was why risk the lifters coming apart and trashing the engine.When you can get good power from a solid.

Since this will be someone else's money I will be playing with, I want to give him good information and let the decision be his.


I'll go even farther and let you pick the cam.
Here is what he has now.
67 Camaro mostly fiberglass.
2,300#
Glide W/brake Low first gear.4,500 stall
5.13 gears and 32' tires

OK we got the car done late last season and threw this motor together to test it all out. I know its miss matched, but it was a collection of parts we all had. Now with the mutt engine below the car ran pretty consistent 6.80's in the 1/8. Not exact on the 60' times i know they were high 1.4's He really doesn't want to go past the 6.0 index. High 5's like a 5.90 would be great.

406
11.1 compression
Pro Action 220cc Iron heads
Super Victor
Comp Hyd. cam 270/278...226/234...480/.498...Ls111
Headers IIRC are 2"
And a old 750dp we pieced together.
running gas

So what do you suggest to get the "Hypothetical" 421 in the first post to a 5.90.

DragRacer383,

If you are asking me, I can't b/c I am really only into more the milder street motor stuff.

I HAVE to concur to the guy's that drag and so know one heck of a lot more about this..

Please come on in guys..

With that said, if it was mine, I would probably lean towards something like a Z-27, Z-30 or Z-35 Isky solid cam is all.. BUT again, I have to concur to the racers..

A P/G needs grunt, but yet you have a heck of a gear but at the same time, BIG tires to lower the overall eff. rearend ratio and it is a light car to boot..

All this and I really don't like twisting on a big inch SB, but rather the shorter stroked one's instead b/c they will rpm waaay up there fine, imho..

Not much help am I??

pdq67

PS., and I'm a solid lifter kinda guy too...

AND I really hope Harold comes back with his recommended spec's for a custom solid cam to approach the spec's of CC's 288AR solid STREET roller too!!!!

I was throwing that out there for anyone. I replied to your post because I also have been scared by the guys on here with the Solid roller horror stories.
I'm a solid lifter kinda guy too.
Not to mention one friend/acquaintance that "Bought" his engine a 406 with a solid roller. It went about 1/2 a season and a lifter came apart and wiped it all out.Well thats what his engine builder told him. I don't know what parts were used in it.He is a buyer not a builder so getting info from him is not good. I do know that he said that he was out $9,000. Last I heard the car was in his shop, no engine, and that was 3 years ago.

This guy I will be building this for is my best friend,and he trust me on this stuff.Since I have never ventured into solid roller territory,I just want to be able to give him the best info I can. We all know that if you race it stuff will break and maintenance is a must. I just don't want to limit him because I'm not sure if their safe.

So it will boil down to a Reliability Vs. Horse Power decision.

To run 5.90's @2300lb race weight should only take about 580hp in a well set-up car. That should be easily attained with the right flat-solid. I would think the difference in hp between the right flat and right roller would be close to 100hp for that motor. Since this is a drag race only deal, I wouldn't have any reliability concerns with running a roller as long as you spend the money on a good lifter with direct pin oiling such as the Isky Red Zone. The right solid roller would put 2300lbs in the 5.5-5.6 range.

OK, for a solid flat tappet, you could look at the Lunati 401C7LUN or the 401C8LUN.

401C7LUN--300/308@.020, 267/275@.050, .573"/.590" valve lift, 106 LSA
401C8LUN--308/316@.020, 275/282@.050, .590"/.595" valve lift, 108 LSA

The 421 CID, the high compression, the alcohol injection, the light weight, all indicate the 401C8. However, if the 108 LSA bothers you, the 401C7 is one we would run in similar OVAL TRACK engines.

pdq67,

Because of all you want, with reliability being paramount, it will take me a few days of computer-playing to tell you what I can do.
I already have designs of the same .015" duration and valve lift, but they have faster opening/closing ramps, and are around 255@.050, about 167-168@.200---A little big for what you want.
I'll get back with you......

UDHarold

Thats the thing, I know it can be done with a solid.
I think he really wants a Roller.
So If we go roller My thinking is build it to Rip of close to a mid 5. Then throttle it down or short shift or something to slow it down if thats where you want.

There is a 5.50 index at the Track :D

The only way that Camaro weighs 2300 lbs. is if the car is a tube frame car from the ground up. That would be dry weight, no driver. If it has any steel body parts or stock type steering the pounds pack on. My 63 vette is a tube frame chassis car with all light weight drag components and it weighs 2300. It is an all fiberglass after market body with an aluminum head 454 in it. The car goes 5.80's with a glide and a 620 ish hp 454. 5.2's with a 200 shot off the transbrake.

Harold,

I just thought about the .960" foot mushroom lifters so please work one up for them b/c I figure using them will help you a lot designing what I am talking about as well as a stock dia. foot lifter cam too.

AND thanks,

Will be waiting for your results.

You just might pick up a small, but dedicted cam following here for us non-solid roller lifter guys that still want STREET motor power like the 288AR seems to create.

pdq67

Long as we are highjacking this thread I have a Q for Mr Harold also.

I recieved a Lunati solid roller today, and want to first compliment Harold if he had anything to do with the finished product. This cam is nice. I like the way it has radius cuts between the lobes.

Anyway, I dont have the part number right now, but it is .269/.276 @ .050 with .680/.696 lift on a 110 (best as I recall).

But my question is, I see the cam has the EVERWEAR gear on it. Does that mean it will work with a stock distributor gear? There is no mention of the gear on the paper work and I didnt realize you could get the solid roller with the everwear, thought that was a hyd roller option?

Thanks
Scott

Sorry I'm not Harold, but that sounds like the 50204. Very good cam for 454 based engines with lots of mid range. 269/276@.050, .685/.692" I think. I ran one for years. It pulls to 7500 but made peak power in my 468 closer to 6800. Not sure about the everwear gear, but it sounds like the one you can run a stock dist. gear with. That cam is also easy on the valve train. I had mine installed @108 ICL, or 2* advanced.
Edit: The cam had 100+ passes on it when I pulled it out, looked like it had dyno time only. That was with the "cheap" Lunati lifters.

I may be off on the weight. I pretty sure that is right though.We did scale it on all 4 corners for weight distribution etc. It is a tube chassis car. I did say its mostly Fiber glass. The front clip,hood,doors,quarters,trunk all fiber glass. The only real Camaro metal is the top and the rocker panels.Lexan windows,aluminum interior.

http://pic14.picturetrail.com/VOL504/826697/1477679/110170519.jpg

I run a solid roller on the street with crower hippo lifters. Only been in for a year though and only about 1000 street miles and mybe 60 passes at the track. So far so good. I went from the comp xtreme eneregy hyd. flat tappet 240/246 @ .050 to an xtreme energy street roller that 254/260 @ .050. Wasnt that impressesed, picked up 1.5 tenths and 3 mph. I guess thats O.K.

We run a Camcraft solid roller with Isky Red Zone lifters in our road race motor. 5000+ miles on the motor with no problems at all. I've only adjusted the valves twice in 2 years.

Ya, that looks more like a light weight car. I thought you meant more of a street car with some drag stuff added on. Nice car, good luck

The body was so rusted that the junk yard gave it to him. The roof was pretty good. The rest was trash. So it worked out good. He got that classic muscle car with out having to cut up one. Me and the guys have been hot rodding and racing all our lives, Just Hillbilly's with tools. That is the first tube car we built. Everyone got there hands on that project. Its pretty good for a first time. I wish it was mine.

ONE POINT THAT APPEARS TO BE OVERLOOKED is that those solid roller cams that fail are usually matched to far higher than stock spring pressures and lower than ideal upper engine oil flow rates, cooling the components ,and noticably larger lift at the valve than the stock engines have. which results in more violent accelleration lobe ramp rates and which tends to put a major increase in the stress on the valve train.
why I bring this up is that I build quite a few big block chevy engines,and Ive seldom seen problems when the engines are set up for long term street useage,(now that usually means a cam with under about .670 lift (well under in most cases)and running the engine to no more than about a 4200-4500fpm in piston speeds) and designed with a slightly lower cpr to run 92 octane or less fuel, which puts alot less strain on the engines while still allowing a good power curve without the use of excessive valve spring pressures
now its true you can get more peak power with a differant combo, no question, but if you realistically expect those big block engines to operate for YEARS at a time on the street you build them far differantly than a "DYNO QUEEN" that may produce an extra 10%-15% in peak power but is constantly on the ragged edge of self destruction due to detonation,overheating, valve spring & roller rocker stress ETC.
it comes down to a choice, would you rather make absolute peak power for bragging rights, or would you prefer to drive the car with few problems for years at a time.
now IM not saying you can,t have impressive power levels, but I am saying that you might need to redesign your engine combo to run slightly lower rpm levels, or have a slightly larger displacement and a carefully thought thru combo to get the performance your looking for in a HOT/STREET/STRIP CAR
it makes little sence to me to build a 468 designed to spin 7500-7700rpm that might last a season when you can build a 496-540 that spins 6200-6400rpm and only makes slightly less or equal power levels but that can last for years between rebuilds.
if your useing tricks like running a qt low, restricting oil flow to the upper engine, to reduce windage losses,running a cam with over .650-.670 lift, valve spring rates that exceed about 500ft lbs at full open,or spinning the engine over about 4500fpm in piston speed your generally looking at a shorter engine life expectency

GrumpyVette, looks like what you and I consider street/strip is similar. I run 660/666 lift and 92 octane with a shift point around 7000. I would like to shift a bit lower but I'm week. Any way any slick tricks I should know to make my roller live a happy life.

ONE POINT THAT APPEARS TO BE OVERLOOKED is that those solid roller cams that fail are usually matched to far higher than stock spring pressures and lower than ideal upper engine oil flow rates, cooling the components ,and noticably larger lift at the valve than the stock engines have. which results in more violent accelleration lobe ramp rates and which tends to put a major increase in the stress on the valve train.
why I bring this up is that I build quite a few big block chevy engines,and Ive seldom seen problems when the engines are set up for long term street useage,(now that usually means a cam with under about .670 lift (well under in most cases)and running the engine to no more than about a 4200-4500fpm in piston speeds) and designed with a slightly lower cpr to run 92 octane or less fuel, which puts alot less strain on the engines while still allowing a good power curve without the use of excessive valve spring pressures
now its true you can get more peak power with a differant combo, no question, but if you realistically expect those big block engines to operate for YEARS at a time on the street you build them far differantly than a "DYNO QUEEN" that may produce an extra 10%-15% in peak power but is constantly on the ragged edge of self destruction due to detonation,overheating, valve spring & roller rocker stress ETC.
it comes down to a choice, would you rather make absolute peak power for bragging rights, or would you prefer to drive the car with few problems for years at a time.
now IM not saying you can,t have impressive power levels, but I am saying that you might need to redesign your engine combo to run slightly lower rpm levels, or have a slightly larger displacement and a carefully thought thru combo to get the performance your looking for in a HOT/STREET/STRIP CAR
it makes little sence to me to build a 468 designed to spin 7500-7700rpm that might last a season when you can build a 496-540 that spins 6200-6400rpm and only makes slightly less or equal power levels but that can last for years between rebuilds.
if your useing tricks like running a qt low, restricting oil flow to the upper engine, to reduce windage losses,running a cam with over .650-.670 lift, valve spring rates that exceed about 500ft lbs at full open,or spinning the engine over about 4500fpm in piston speed your generally looking at a shorter engine life expectency

But how fun is a bigblock under 7000? I had my rev limiter for the first years at 6800 then 7000 for a year, 7200, 7400, 7600... And the fun continues.

The hair is standing on my body when looking at movies afterwards.

Youll se 632 engines hauling around. But how fun are them (all out race machines are fun)

The sound of it, and the kicks when it pushes harder and harder over 7000 is going to end upp in disaster. But its worth it. Just buy new stuff and do it again.

Its not girls here that you cant play rough and remembers all your misstakes! ;)

Most of this has already been mentioned, but Ill sum some of it up again(some Im sure you already know.....so I just might not be telling you anything new). But anyways, as the others have said....if you want long life, you need good parts. That means billet cores and good lifters for starters(like the red zones or the crowers with the pin oiling option). Stiff and strong pushrods are important as well. Normally you want to do what you can to save valvetrain weight. In the case of pusrhods, dont use some wrinky dink, "fancy lightweight" pieces. You want something sturdy(and that can mean heavier). This is cause you dont want any flexing or what not in this area.

Also, more than adequate spring pressure is a good thing. If your running it hard, aggressive roller lobes really like a good spring to keep everything under control. Keep the lifters firmly planted at all times and the cam will thank you for it! Try to skimp on spring pressures and you might get a case of the lifters jumpin around(no good). By the way....this is why billet is good. Try to run "adequate" pressure on a cast core and you can often run into some problems. It only gets worse if youve got a cast core and things ARE NOT kept under control.

Another thing that isnt mentioned a whole lot but is useful is a rev kit. Yep, I said rev kit! These are often associated with hydro roller cams, but they do well on a solid roller platform. Reason being, during the lash period on a roller cam.....there really aint no pressure on the lifter keeping it fixed to the lobe while riding on the base circle of the cam. So, the lifter is free to bounce around at this period if it feels so inclined to do so. And when the lash is taken up....the lifter can skid across the lobe. Think of trying to hop on a tread mill when its already going. Your feet want to fly out from under you unless your real quick and your feet/legs can catch up right away. Its the same deal with the lifter. When the lash goes away, your expecting it to immediately catch up to the pace of the lobe under it. If not, it can skid(like you and your feet on the treadmill). This can shorten the life span. A rev kit will keep the lifter firmly planted at all times and help alleviate these issues.

Also, keep after your springs and your lifters. Even great parts dont last forever. If all is well, the springs are probably gonna lose their edge first. Thats why you wanna keep after em. Worn out springs are no good either. Might as well just buy "not enough spring" up front if your gonna let your springs wear out to the point where they are "not enough spring". Same deal with the lifters. They wont last forever. depending on the amount and severity of their useage, have them inspected at sensible intervals. If you catch something going wrong....might just take a simple rebuild or replacement of the lifters. If you never see it coming, you might have to replace a lot more. And try to avoid idleing the engine for long periods of time. That might not actually be as much of a deal with the new pin oiling lifters, but it has always been a caution with your run of the mill lifters due to oiling purposes(and not having as much at idle).

And lastly...the simplest of them all....just plain and simple good geometry through the valvetrain is important. Dont take anything for granted. Measure everything and put it all together right. Pretty good might last for a while, but a spot on assembly is gonna last longer.

Weren't rev kits originally designed way back when for high revving solid roller and solid flat/mushroom tappet cams to keep the lifters in check? I've always thought rev kits were an integral part of a solid roller high rev set up. There's no way I'd run a solid roller without a rev kit.

And restricting oil to the lifters and top end with aggressive lobes and high pressure springs is crazy talk. On the street at least. For drag cars that only go quick trips down the strip this might be ok.

Great info you two!!

Harold mentioned once to me about running solid lifters on his 274H, SB hy-cam. 274 at .006, 226 at .050, 137 at .200, and .468" lift.

He said it has been done SOME in the past when I was bugging him for a good small solid cam for my 283 motor!!.

he said to run it like this and be done with it!!

I wonder if you can do the same thing b/c we know some guys are running solid roller lifers lashed really close on billet hy-roller cams. Might be an easy/cheap way to accomplish this??

BUT we would sure have to watch the lash!!!!

pdq67

Dragracer383
For what its worth, I built a 406 last spring that went in an Opal GT tube car. At 2400 race weight car would run 5.90s (at 3000ft 5000Da air) and trip the 60ft with the rear tires untill he put it into the wall a couple of months ago.
engine has
13:1
Pro 1 heads straight out of the box
Herbert solid roller .268/.632
victor jr

Powerglide
5000 stall/ With brake
4.88 gears and 32 tall tires


Jbird,
Thanks for the reply, Yes, I checked today while I was degreeing it and the cam is the 50204.

Cam is now in a 468 with 12.8 compression, ported big valve 781s, and is going in a Henry J tube car. I am expecting it to pull strong mid range and up to about 6800 rpm, which is about where I figure the heads will run out of wind. So, it sounds like your experiance with this cam fits right in line with what I was wanting from it. The owner wanted something that would get his 2500 pound car down the 1/8 in the mid 6s. I'm thinking 5s are in his future.

pdq67,

Big lifters? You don't need those .960"s, you only need some AMC .903"s.
Either Steve at Lunati or Tim at Bullet can make you a BBC with the UD NF62 master, 276 at .015, 270 at .020, 243 at .050, 162 at .200, and .3651" lobe lift. That's .620" in a BBC, with .018" valve lash. The point-of-contact stays .017" away from the edge of the lifter, the same as all those 100,000 mile cams, although I have no evidence that this cam HAS gone 100,000 miles. I have been using it as my Purple Shaft replacement cam in 340s for 10 years, though.
This cam makes the 288AR look a little weak........
Ask either of them for whatever LSA you want, I'd guess around 110 LSA, 4 to 6 degrees advanced, and a very good fuel system......

UDHarold

Dragracer383

Jbird,
Thanks for the reply, Yes, I checked today while I was degreeing it and the cam is the 50204.

Cam is now in a 468 with 12.8 compression, ported big valve 781s, and is going in a Henry J tube car. I am expecting it to pull strong mid range and up to about 6800 rpm, which is about where I figure the heads will run out of wind. So, it sounds like your experiance with this cam fits right in line with what I was wanting from it. The owner wanted something that would get his 2500 pound car down the 1/8 in the mid 6s. I'm thinking 5s are in his future.

I ran it in a 468 with ported 781's, 11.8:1 compression, Victor intake and a 1050 Dom. It went 6.29@108 in my 3100lb Camaro. He should def. be quicker. I agree, 5's are very possible. That cam is in a lot of bracket cars around here.

This is good stuff.

Thanks guys.

With what cam companies have gone through over the last 4 or 5 years with lifter mfg quiting or going out of business, if money is not a problem, I would spend the extra few hundred and go roller. I look at it this way, if the solid goes flat during break in, the cost of going through the engine and replacing the parts is more then what the initial roller set up will cost.

If he does go soild flat I would only run the lifters that have pressure fed oiling to the face of the flat lifter.

Harold,

I use the "UD NF62 master" and MOPAR lifters on 110/106 centers to create a homemade solid lifter CC 288AR type cam, right?

pdq67

Back from the DEAD!!

Harold came through w/ a solid lifter copy of CC's great old 288AR solid street roller and here it is!!

278/249/161, 110/106, .618" gross lift and need's .018" lash!!

Spring pressure, 140 pounds seat and 340 pounds open!

And it's in my bedroom closet now.......................

I can't say enough good stuff about HAROLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

pdq67

Hey pdq, glad you revived this thread as it was one of my favorites. Maybe we can get some new info here with some of the new lifters. I am running a solid flat tappet as well, an old Clay Smith grind but would love to go roller. Anyway, hope to read some more here. Oh and pdq, when ae you going to stab that new cam in there? Get it out of the bedroom and let it fly.

Bill