Roller Rocker problem

[Dad]

All I can tell the membership is I've been running 1.6 rollers with Tims shims, Tims roller cam, stock height valves, Schinder springs, Stock rocker shafts (not drilled), stock rocker shaft springs and washers on a Marnal head. I have experienced no shims breaking, no aluminum pieces flying around the oil pan or engine, no reduced oil pressure and no engine performance fall off. All this for three years revving to 7000 rpms. So you tell me. Does it, or does it not work? I have never had a rocker assembly problem with this engine, PERIOD!!!! Some members can rattle off all kinds of problems with Roller set ups. Personally, I must have set up mine the correct way. And I might add, With Tim Cs help.

 

CALIBER 308

 

 

Tim Knows his stuff, your post proves it, however I am like Indy, I don't care for the shims, I have installed Tims shims, but personally I don't care for the idea,

I question the longevity. Be ok on my personal engine but I get a bit skeptical When I have to stand behind it. I will say that the couple that I did use shims on it did work.

 

I would just like to see something better, and I'm sure Tim would rather see a better alternative and not use shims, But in this Conquest world ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

 

Dad

[Caliber308]

Tim Knows his stuff, your post proves it, however I am like Indy, I don't care for the shims, I have installed Tims shims, but personally I don't care for the idea,

I question the longevity. Be ok on my personal engine but I get a bit skeptical When I have to stand behind it. I will say that the couple that I did use shims on it did work.

 

I would just like to see something better, and I'm sure Tim would rather see a better alternative and not use shims, But in this Conquest world ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

 

Dad

 

I too would like to see a roller set up without shims. Would it be custom valves, a different profile Roller cam or the Roller rocker itself. It could most likely be done, but at what cost? And would you have enough of a market for the part or parts to make it worth the time and experimentation? With what we have now to work with, I think it is uncalled for, for a member to say that this set up is "SUCKY and HACK". I don't like to recommend a set up like mine without proving it works first. It works for Tim and it works for me. Another member who has run a set up like this is Richie_Rich. So to say its "SUCKY and HACK" is beyond me :confused0024:

 

CALIBER 308

Edited October 21, 2008 by Caliber308

[Indiana]

When I start kissing a** you'll know it but don't look for it to happen in this lifetime. This is about a motor not a baby contest. If there would have been a way around using shims he would have never used them I'm sure. I've used a few different cams from Tim and I've had no problems at all with them but those shims we did try I said that and I'd not use them again and I told you what happened to them and this isn't an isolated case. You do have an alternative to the shims and we also tried this and posted about it and you may have just forgotten but it was to use LASH CAPS. Your good buddy Chad used them too. You can't get good lash caps for the price of some mashed washers though, last set I paid almost 100.00 for. Tried some cheap china crap VW lash caps, they like their china swivel and china elephant feet also SUCK.

[Tim_C.]

Man, this is all some really good stuff! I'm really glad Indiana brought up the old used rockers and shafts factor too! When you see a set of refurbished shafts that actually work better than OEM, your eyes really get opened to how much better it runs.

The reason I don't use lash caps is because it takes a special valve to run them too. More $. The valve must have an extended tip above the groove to run it on a hydraulic set-up. My first roller cam set-up required that because it was just before a custom valve could be ordered with a hardened tip, so I had to run caps for the hardening. Otherwise the lash caps will pop out because lifters tend to lose their pump and sometimes need a quick repump on cold starts (that's my theory anyway, but I didn't have a video cam under the vlave cover to see when they came out!). I've looked into caps that have a sharp molehill to dig into the valve, but I didn't like that idea, and my machinist says they come out too. Plus, all they do is ruin the valve tip and don't stick well. We could maybe try soft valves with that style lash cap?

 

I could easily come up with a better shim that perfectly fits the rocker and epoxy them in place similar to the way the slippers are adhered to the slip rocker arm. But, that would add weight out on the end of the rocker. Something we try to avoid especially with a cam lobe profile that requires considerable more spring pressure.

 

The stock cam is fine to flow out what it flows in, but it gets there by wasting the charge. It is the worst design for a turbo engine unless you want to raise the boost to an unreasonable level (for the majority of applications) and not worry about how much gets wasted. The same and more power can be made with less boost and a good cam.

[Indiana]

Those OS stainless valves have enough sticking up you can use the caps and there is clearance and those are what we last used on the last cam we got from you on Kurt cars back like 4 years ago. I know I have close up pictures of that. I thought that the lash caps at that time were sticking to the tip, those OS valve have a hardened tip so that was ok, and then found out there is actually a puller for caps and its normal for them to stick. I'd rather see an insert of some kind that threads into the rocker arm tip that is threaded in the center to put the swivel feet in, or stock adjuster screws to make the rollers mechanical. You hear about valve float but its the hydraulic lifters, weak springs, back pressure from stock manifolds that is causing this and just changing to mechanical screws helps allot, we never had any valve float and rev'd up well past 7500rpms on stock used springs and I still have those. Lots of energy has been put into pistons and crankshafts lets see if we can start to focus on valve train and get that to be replaced much more often cause most don't think about it.

 

been so long I forgot, that stuff is all here and it was when we tried that insane high lift cam you sent us. I should go back and edit those pictures and that motor was changed to JE pistons and at this time isn't reassembled and its been a few years, porting the combustion chamber out in the head like that ruins the CR he didn't know that at the time and I forget where that head is now I think it may be on the shelf

http://www.b2600turbo.com/K88-Head.htm

 

this is an OS valve with a cap on the end

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM009454.JPG

[Caliber308]

When I start kissing a** you'll know it but don't look for it to happen in this lifetime. This is about a motor not a baby contest. If there would have been a way around using shims he would have never used them I'm sure. I've used a few different cams from Tim and I've had no problems at all with them but those shims we did try I said that and I'd not use them again

 

Tims ran them for 25,000 miles. I've run them for three years. Richie_Rich has also run a set up like this for many years. Dad even runs a Roller set up with the shims installed. I don't have a clue into how you installed them or how much RPM or BOOST your trying to get out of them. All I can tell members is my experience running this set up "Shims and all". I DON'T KISS A--. But I do tell it like it is. We have this set up now. Many members have proven it works for them and have said so. Your not only hearing it from me. Until someone comes up with a better way (without shims) to run a Roller set up, I'll stick with what I have installed. Is it the fact that you haven't come up with a solution? or you just want to bash a member (Tim C.) who for years came up with something that actually works. I will say this. If I were a member considering running a Roller set up. I would listen to the successful stories from members running Roller set ups, who they purchased their parts from, how everything was installed and who they think is the most knowledgeable person to help them accomplish it. In my book, It's Tim C. There I go again: "KISSING A--". Or is it really giving credit where credit is due.

 

CALIBER 308

Edited October 22, 2008 by Caliber308

[scott87star]

The stock cam is fine to flow out what it flows in, but it gets there by wasting the charge. It is the worst design for a turbo engine unless you want to raise the boost to an unreasonable level (for the majority of applications) and not worry about how much gets wasted. The same and more power can be made with less boost and a good cam.

 

Can you elaborate? I for one would like to hear your educated/experienced opinion.

 

Scott

[Dad]

Tims ran them for 25,000 miles. I've run them for three years. Richie_Rich has also run a set up like this for many years. Dad even runs a Roller set up with the shims installed. I don't have a clue into how you installed them or how much RPM or BOOST your trying to get out of them. All I can tell members is my experience running this set up "Shims and all". I DON'T KISS A--. But I do tell it like it is. We have this set up now. Many members have proven it works for them and have said so. Your not only hearing it from me. Until someone comes up with a better way (without shims) to run a Roller set up, I'll stick with what I have installed. Is it the fact that you haven't come up with a solution? or you just want to bash a member (Tim C.) who for years came up with something that actually works. I will say this. If I were a member considering running a Roller set up. I would listen to the successful stories from members running Roller set ups, Who they purchased their parts from, and Who they think is the most knowledgeable person to help them accomplish it. In my book, It's Tim C. There I go again: "KISSING A--". Or is it really giving credit where credit is due.

 

CALIBER 308

 

 

Heads up, I run a stock hydraulic setup on my car at this point. but have assembled some heads with the shims.

just to clarify.

 

 

These darn cam setups are dificult because we can't get new blanks and have them cut to our specs.

 

I'm sure Tim would love to get new blanks.

 

Dad

[Caliber308]

Heads up, I run a stock hydraulic setup on my car at this point. but have assembled some heads with the shims.

just to clarify.

 

 

Dad

 

My misunderstanding

 

CALIBER 308

[Dad]

My misunderstanding

 

CALIBER 308

 

 

No problem, been there done that.

 

Juat want to see a good result from all of this.

 

New blanks would be awesome!

 

Dad

[Metric-man]

Making big HP isn't the challenge. Making it last long is. There have been many big HP engines that get torn down way too often. The challenge is making enough HP, and making it last. Not all of us want to tear into our engines all the time.

 

Kelly doesn't make heads. There are quite a few decent slipper cams out there, but those are easy to get results from because they are very fast acting. Also, proper rocker arm geometry and function goes a long way to getting more out of it. You can't just throw in an old set of worn slippers and expect it to perform well on a higher profile cam than before. That's why I sell upgraded refurbished assemblies that function perfectly (better than OEM) and retain the correct geometry as good or better than OEM.

 

Rollers follow much steeper profiles than any slip rocker can. I guess I don't follow your 'close profile' logic. It's the other way around. No slipper can follow a roler lobe, but any roller can follow a slipper lobe.

 

I don't know the last time you talked to Kelly but yes he will not make a cylinder head for you

 

I wouldn't like to see his expression if I told him your were speaking on his behalf, and yes they Kelly's (cylinder heads) have lasted, with out washer shims and 83 valves or valve caps.

 

A slipper has more surface contact area than a roller.

 

A roller can use a steeper profile than a slipper yes for an opening ramp, (Roller + angle of rocker tip)

but on the closing ramp they can and do fall short off the profile and slam shut, especially with high spring pressures.

 

You know I think the DOHC engines benefit more from a steeper profile cam that SOHC,

for just the reasons you are stating in the degree of angle.

 

 

 

And what part of the Refurbished assemblies do you sell ??

 

Kelly has fresh cut cams from a reputable source ..

not regrinds.

So there is never a wait for a blank.

Edited October 22, 2008 by Metric-man

[Caliber308]

No problem, been there done that.

 

Juat want to see a good result from all of this.

 

New blanks would be awesome!

 

Dad

 

Agreed!!! Too bad the rocker itself couldn't be reconfigured to work, or could it??? Perhaps a redesign on the lifter side of the old Mitsu.(MD195450) roller rocker??? Any members out there with CNC machining or aluminum molds experience??

 

CALIBER 308

Edited October 22, 2008 by Caliber308

[Metric-man]

Agreed!!! Too bad the rocker itself couldn't be reconfigured to work, or could it???

 

CALIBER 308

 

 

I'm sorry you guys are having such a tuff time tryng to re invent the wheel.

This is a non issue for me since Kelly and chris viper have solved this problem.

[Tim_C.]

I'm sorry you guys are having such a tuff time tryng to re invent the wheel.

This is a non issue for me since Kelly and chris viper have solved this problem.

 

I know how to set up or grind a roller cam. This has been a non-issue for me for over 7 years. I have a .510 lift, 284 duration roller cam with over 25K miles on it and revs past 7500RPM.

 

I sell everything that needs refurbished in the rocker arm assembly, which are the rockers and shafts.

[Tim_C.]

I don't know the last time you talked to Kelly but yes he will not make a cylinder head for you

 

I wouldn't like to see his expression if I told him your were speaking on his behalf, and yes they Kelly's (cylinder heads) have lasted, with out washer shims and 83 valves or valve caps.

 

A slipper has more surface contact area than a roller.

 

A roller can use a steeper profile than a slipper yes for an opening ramp, (Roller + angle of rocker tip)

but on the closing ramp they can and do fall short off the profile and slam shut, especially with high spring pressures.

 

You know I think the DOHC engines benefit more from a steeper profile cam that SOHC,

for just the reasons you are stating in the degree of angle.

 

 

 

And what part of the Refurbished assemblies do you sell ??

 

Kelly has fresh cut cams from a reputable source ..

not regrinds.

So there is never a wait for a blank.

 

Yes, there is more surface contact area with a slipper. I don't see how that makes the roller not able to follow the lobe of a slipper cam. That's what I was referring to. A roller rocker stays on the cam lobe very well especially on a slipper lobe. It follows the lobe perfectly even better with high spring pressures. The slipper acts faster than a roller up and down and can't handle the steep lobe. Maybe I misunderstood you? This is what you said that I am asking about, "The nature of the slipper is it's close profile I don't think there is a roller made that is small enough to follow the same profile".

 

I don't have a problem with Kelly. I just said he does not make cylinder heads. I could be wrong, but last I knew only OEM and a few foundrys actually make the castings. I'm not competing with Kelly, I don't need a head from him, no problem here.

[Tim_C.]

Those OS stainless valves have enough sticking up you can use the caps and there is clearance and those are what we last used on the last cam we got from you on Kurt cars back like 4 years ago. I know I have close up pictures of that. I thought that the lash caps at that time were sticking to the tip, those OS valve have a hardened tip so that was ok, and then found out there is actually a puller for caps and its normal for them to stick. I'd rather see an insert of some kind that threads into the rocker arm tip that is threaded in the center to put the swivel feet in, or stock adjuster screws to make the rollers mechanical. You hear about valve float but its the hydraulic lifters, weak springs, back pressure from stock manifolds that is causing this and just changing to mechanical screws helps allot, we never had any valve float and rev'd up well past 7500rpms on stock used springs and I still have those. Lots of energy has been put into pistons and crankshafts lets see if we can start to focus on valve train and get that to be replaced much more often cause most don't think about it.

 

been so long I forgot, that stuff is all here and it was when we tried that insane high lift cam you sent us. I should go back and edit those pictures and that motor was changed to JE pistons and at this time isn't reassembled and its been a few years, porting the combustion chamber out in the head like that ruins the CR he didn't know that at the time and I forget where that head is now I think it may be on the shelf

http://www.b2600turbo.com/K88-Head.htm

 

this is an OS valve with a cap on the end

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM009454.JPG

Yes, lash caps work great with mechanical adjusters and are a very cheap and effective way to lengthen the valve above the groove. The problem is only with the hydraulic rocker of any kind. It looks like Indiana has a good cap that will stay on the valve with a hydraulic set up too. That's great, because you really can't beat the benefit for cost ratio on that one!

I've been very busy with my real job, and haven't had much time to devote to research like I did years ago.

[Metric-man]

Yes, there is more surface contact area with a slipper. I don't see how that makes the roller not able to follow the lobe of a slipper cam. That's what I was referring to. A roller rocker stays on the cam lobe very well on a slipper lobe. It follows the lobe perfectly especially with high spring pressures. The slipper acts faster than a roller up and down. That's why you don't want to run a roller rocker on a slipper cam.

 

I don't have a problem with Kelly. I just said he does not make cylinder heads. It seems you are talking for him, not me. I'm not competing with him, I don't need a head from him, no problem here.

 

Your kinda talking circles now...

 

I never mentioned having a roller on a slipper cam... everyone should know by now that is redundent.

 

The angles on the roller profile are what was refereing to.. but if I have to rewrite what I just wrote that is too in it's self (redundent).

 

I'm glad you don't have any problems.

I'm sure as with anything there is going to be exceptions.

[Indiana]

Nobody said you couldn't use new blank rocker shafts either cut to oil an aftermarket rocker arm or aftermarket lifters

[jinx]

The stock cam is fine to flow out what it flows in, but it gets there by wasting the charge. It is the worst design for a turbo engine unless you want to raise the boost to an unreasonable level (for the majority of applications) and not worry about how much gets wasted. The same and more power can be made with less boost and a good cam.

 

whoa! we've seen a stock cam prove its' worth. Small turbo, big turbo, low boost,

hi boost, dyno and ET. In fact, several members have removed their so called "performance cam" and reinstalled this "worst design" oe cam.

I wouldn't knock it.

 

Boost makes torque, thats why they run an "unreasonable level".

400+ ft-lbs tq from this 4 cyl, at low boost ? Ain't happenin'... regardless of cam.

more power at less boost sounds good "on paper and in theory", but any tests confirm this "good cam" exists for the g54 ?

I liken that to the 7500 & 8000+ rpm G54s often mentioned. Sure u can 'rev' a motor,

but without seeing a tq curve plot vs rpm;

1. we don't know if we're chasing ghosts (revving further past the tq fall off).

2. Have no idea if in exchange for that 'peak hp', it wiped out the robust 3-400+ ft-lbs at ~4000-4500rpm the G54 'makes naturally'... and we've seen what these have produced at the strip.

[jinx]

I'm sorry you guys are having such a tuff time tryng to re invent the wheel.

This is a non issue for me since Kelly and chris viper have solved this problem.

 

now that is as intersting as it is amusing(to me at least).

So they've sorted this 'roller' dilema and moved on.... like the Felpro/o-ring ?

Are these the cams dyno'd in the most powerful TBI and MPI cars ?

If so, whats the problem..... what am I missing ?

[Chad]

I'm sorry you guys are having such a tuff time tryng to re invent the wheel.

This is a non issue for me since Kelly and chris viper have solved this problem.

 

I think the problem lies in the fact that you (they) are not sharing it.

 

You kinda have to reinvent the wheel when the wheel salesman isn't selling wheels.

[Tim_C.]

Nobody said you couldn't use new blank rocker shafts either cut to oil an aftermarket rocker arm or aftermarket lifters

Yes, new OEM parts are almost always preferred, and a surely good quality. I just wish they weren't so expensive. That's a great idea too! Using blank shafts cut to a new rocker style.

[Tim_C.]

whoa! we've seen a stock cam prove its' worth. Small turbo, big turbo, low boost,

hi boost, dyno and ET. In fact, several members have removed their so called "performance cam" and reinstalled this "worst design" oe cam.

I wouldn't knock it.

 

Boost makes torque, thats why they run an "unreasonable level".

400+ ft-lbs tq from this 4 cyl, at low boost ? Ain't happenin'... regardless of cam.

more power at less boost sounds good "on paper and in theory", but any tests confirm this "good cam" exists for the g54 ?

I liken that to the 7500 & 8000+ rpm G54s often mentioned. Sure u can 'rev' a motor,

but without seeing a tq curve plot vs rpm;

1. we don't know if we're chasing ghosts (revving further past the tq fall off).

2. Have no idea if in exchange for that 'peak hp', it wiped out the robust 3-400+ ft-lbs at ~4000-4500rpm the G54 'makes naturally'... and we've seen what these have produced at the strip.

I'm just saying good performance results aren't necessarily efficient, and the OE cam is inefficient. I have cams that help a few different applications gain power where it is needed most. I have a mechanical cam that I know blows the OE cam away for general all around performance, but maybe not for hi-boost levels.

Yes, correct. Low boost doesn't take enough advantage of the best power gain we have. I don't mean extremely low boost, but I'm talking roughly 22PSI max depending on the turbo. For me, that is very hi-boost. Anything over that, and I will know the engine's life is lessoning considerably, but I won't whine when it blows up. Personally, I don't trust even the best head gasket seals on our bolt pattern over 18PSI starting with 8:1 static.

[Tim_C.]

Your kinda talking circles now...

 

I never mentioned having a roller on a slipper cam... everyone should know by now that is redundent.

 

The angles on the roller profile are what was refereing to.. but if I have to rewrite what I just wrote that is too in it's self (redundent).

 

I'm glad you don't have any problems.

I'm sure as with anything there is going to be exceptions.

This is what you said that I am asking about, "The nature of the slipper is it's close profile I don't think there is a roller made that is small enough to follow the same profile".

 

Actually I understand now! I was thinking cam lobes, but you said slipper. Comparing the curve of the slipper to a roller. Ahh, yes, the slipper is very hard to beat. You were saying the same thing, my bad. The roller never leaves a roller lobe though. It follows it nicely, and the sharp corners of the lobe are needed to speed up the reaction time. Unlike the slipper which reacts lightening fast so to speak on its own.

[Caliber308]

Your kinda talking circles now...

 

So, If your so sure Kelly has the solution to the "Roller set up problem" And your willing to bash others for not knowing.... Do you really know????? or is it only what you have heard???? Do you have a running Roller set up by Kelly to comment on. It's real easy to condemn members who use Tims cam and shims. If your not using Tims set up Kellys or any other Roller set up.....STFU. Because your commenting on something you know nothing about. "Well ,Kellys set up works because he says it does"...... If your running it (which I doubt) and can prove the numbers you spouted off... PROVE IT!!!! , if you have never ran a standard roller set up: Kellydahmans, Tim Cs or for that matter ANY kind of roller set up, you don't know S--T, and your observations and opinions don't mean S--T to me or anyone else on this site. There were only two members who offered to help me when I decided to go with a roller set up in 2005, Tim C. and Richie_Rich. I didn't see your name or *DMs on the list of members willing to help. So, who's talking in circles????

 

CALIBER 308

Edited October 22, 2008 by Caliber308