Roller Rocker problem

[Shelby]

Tim an aussie member name'd Redzone, post'd in the BS forum ,maybe he can find a use'd one for you

[PDX87Starion]

With all the magna heads that have been shipped over, I cant believe no one asked for the cam and rockers to be included. They all were bare heads I guess.

 

 

 

I have one grind that will flow as much boost as you want to throw at it, but the grind specs don't look impressive, so I rarely can convince people to buy it. Everyone wants big lift and durations that require more valvespring than an HD spring can give.

I can totally see that. Everyone just wants the biggest number like 292 thinking the bigger the better. I like the low end torque #'s of the stock cam, because I dont plan on trying to get this engine to rev past 6000, and if there was a roller cam that was close to how the stock cam performs (or better) I would be interested. So far I haven't seen any dyno results (for TBI) to to convince me to change from my stock cam.

 

I also find it interesting in the Saab and Chrysler (2.2) turbo engines both have gained power by taking out the "turbo" cam, and putting in the N/A cam. Strange.

[Indiana]

I have a TS head with a roller cam, that was the last version, the lobes are very narrow

[juice_2]

can get you a magna roller cam from australia if you like here are the specs

 

CAMSHAFT SPECIFICATIONS

Inlet Opens 25º BTDC

Inlet Closes 61º ABDC

Inlet Duration 266º

Exhaust Opens 66º BBDC

Exhaust Closes 20º ABDC

Exhaust Duration 266º

Overlap 45º

Inlet Cam Lobe Height 42.50mm

Exhaust Cam Lobe Height 42.56mm

Nominal Cam Lift 10.50mm

[juice_2]

the only mod you need to do is to cut off the water pump pully extension.

[Indiana]

won't do any good to have specs, he wants a cam physically to see the ramps and there aren't specs for those

[Caliber308]

How did we go from a member with roller rockers, a stock camshaft with a Caravan cylinder head looking for help, to a Magna roller camshaft??????? To answer the posters question: You can run 3.0 roller rockers (MD195450) with a roller camshaft and stock length valves on hydralic rocker arm shafts, But only with spacers between the roller rocker arms and the lifters. The only way to get them that I know of is through Tim C. That's why I suggested that you talk to him. He helped me with my roller set up and it works great. I've heard that "you have to drill new holes in the rocker shaft" I never had to, and the oil passages line up fine. Set it up just like using the stock slipper rockers, same springs and washers.

 

CALIBER 308

Edited October 17, 2008 by Caliber308

[Tim_C.]

won't do any good to have specs, he wants a cam physically to see the ramps and there aren't specs for those

 

Yes, I hope to see if it is possible to get the same grind from a standard US head stock cam core. Blanks are way too expensive. Cores are getting hard to find too. I troll the bone yards when I travel, and have run across a handful.

 

It sounds like an easy bolt in, but I would like to see one and try it to know for sure. I'm definitely up for buying a cam and rockers but I don't want to get between anyone who already has a deal going. I understand there aren't too many of the magna rollers in AU either. However, a part number might help us to see if a warehouse somewhere has them.

[Indiana]

So, how do we get this made?

[Indiana]

How did we go from a member with roller rockers, a stock camshaft with a Caravan cylinder head looking for help, to a Magna roller camshaft??????? To answer the posters question: You can run 3.0 roller rockers (MD195450) with a roller camshaft and stock length valves on hydralic rocker arm shafts, But only with spacers between the roller rocker arms and the lifters. The only way to get them that I know of is through Tim C. That's why I suggested that you talk to him. He helped me with my roller set up and it works great. I've heard that "you have to drill new holes in the rocker shaft" I never had to, and the oil passages line up fine. Set it up just like using the stock slipper rockers, same springs and washers.

 

CALIBER 308

He asked but it won't matter what I type here cause you IGNORE me right? He can't use the rocker arms he has because he lacks the Magna cam necessary to do so. On your Marnel head did you ever measure the distance from the tower cap to the center of the slot with just the rocker shafts only bolted on with the only the tower caps to see that all the slots line up with the center of the oiling holes in the rocker arms? If you did you'd find out they DON'T. BTW "spacers" under the lifters is a sucky noisy hack way to make that happen. How do you suppose those washers react at 7500rpms, oh wait you won't rev your motor that high I forgot. The alignment of the oiling holes HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH USING TWO OLD WAVE WASHERS AND OLD SPRINGS its in the how much of the ends of the tube that protrudes off the side of the tower cap to determine where the rockers are spaced, at every cap, and isn't at all related to the fact that the bolt holes line up with the caps or that you can reuse old springs and wave washers.

 

These are SOME of his questions:

Ok, i put in some 1.6 roller rockers from a 3.0 v6

im kinda confused as someone said b4 on here that these where a bolt on upgrade, does anyone have some input on this PROBLEM

I believe it is a stock Caravan cam?? it has adjustable screws on the rockers that came off of it

where can i get a roller cam?? can i go pull one off a vehicle or do i have to order one??

I know because I have one and it came from a 1994-1996 TS Manga car, he asked and I told what I know to be factual and that it may also be on a TR Magna.

 

any input is very appreciated

Input would be comments and or opinions right?

 

but would like to know what cam i need... is it a magna cam?? and what vehicles had the cam i need?

Ya that would be a MAGNA for an original roller cam.

I agree with the magna cam idea... i think i will do some research and try to locate one as well

See, he can't be all bad he agrees with those comments.

 

ppl pls feel free to keep giving out advice about roller rocker installs

I'd take the unwanted hydraulic lifters out of the head and reuse the roller rocker arms with the roller cam and install adjustable valve screws (swivel feet) so I'd not have high rpm issues but who over here if anyone knows how the valve springs we have to pick from end up performing.

Edited October 17, 2008 by Indiana

[chiplee]

I don't know if there is even any input needed here but I'll just say that if someone could come up with a stock spec (or close) cam that bolts in with the 3.0 roller rockers we can use it would be worth it for EVERYONE to do. The slip type rocker on a 292 cam made WAY more torque and HP than my roller setup and I still refuse to go back to it. The roller just adds too much to my car's drivability to go back. I don't run an ISC or stepper so I was used to having to sit and pedal my engine on cold starts for 2 or 3 minutes 'til it would idle. With the roller I can reach in and turn the key from outside the car and it'll start and idle on cold mornings with not one touch of the gas pedal. part throttle performance used to be completely unruly and is now smooth. Go roller if you can, even if it's not a performance grind. Edited October 17, 2008 by chiplee

[Shelby]

more to life then hp and tourqe right Chip

[PDX87Starion]

I have a TS head with a roller cam, that was the last version, the lobes are very narrow

 

Narrow lobes eh. Maybe they arent that different.

It would be nice to know if the rockers are the same as the ones available here. Can you tell if they are the same? What about how they are oiled... any difference?

[Tim_C.]

I'm going ahead with getting one of the Magna cams and rockers in. The only problem I see maybe is making a bolt-in roller without at least using some shims in the rocker. I think we should be able to do something relatively stock, and it should bolt-in with just some shims like I use on the performance grinds.

 

The good thing about a stock cam is it flows out as much as it flows in (basically), so you can at least raise the boost for power. I just don't like the idea of running big boost on these long stroke engines. However, I am in the minority of members who are satisfied with what 18PSI gives you. My grinder is hard to sell on most ideas that I come up with, but the roller cam I have that flows big boost was one I really wanted him to make, and I had to pay more for it. He still doesn't like to grind it. However, I hope to get the same or close grind as the stock Magna roller if it tests well in one of my cars.

 

The cam I would like to design would flow more exhaust than intake and have a long intake and exhaust duration with a big overlap, and a few degrees later centerline. It requires a blank to start with. My grinder says bigger duration and wider lobe separation requires a lot more taken off the base circle. When we start with a stock core cam, the base will be very small like the Schneider roller cams that require very custom set-ups to run like longer valves with a custom groove location, springs that give 110 - 120 Lbs of seat pressure, etc... It also goes further away from the optimal geometry, but my .510 lift, 284 duration Schneider roller cam still runs well after 20K+ miles and revs to 7500+RPM. It has a very small base. That kind of lift isn't really needed either. I had to notch the pistons, and raise the valve cover to run the 1.5:1 ratio 2.0 liter NA SOHC engine rockers. I didn't even try to go with the 1.6:1 ratio V6 rockers.

 

My theory is we can always raise the boost if we want more intake charge, but it won't do any good if the exhaust can't flow out fast enough.

[chiplee]

more to life then hp and tourqe right Chip

 

 

yeah, not much more but yeah

[Indiana]

I never removed the cam but I could and I'd not be surprised if the base is larger diameter and there is no difference in the valves and I don't think the lobes are as pointed and being the ratio or higher and the roller wheel changes I'd say its the opposite and that the open close points and lift may have not changed with. I have a folder on just the TS engine the guy sent me with the head, it has already been cleaned and checked out and I got the valve cover. Why in the last stages of life would they have bothered to make unique rockers, valves and springs for a head that was only made for 3 model years? I'm just guessing that part like I said I haven't taken it apart after I got it over a year ago I just sat it down and put it away in a plastic bag and went on working.

[Shelby]

i seem to recall the Tainters had a huge cam in their stock quest head and swap'd it over to the magna head it hit the casting under the cam lobes , not sure if the cam center line is lower or more alum in the head under the lobe area

[Caliber308]

I'm going ahead with getting one of the Magna cams and rockers in. The only problem I see maybe is making a bolt-in roller without at least using some shims in the rocker. I think we should be able to do something relatively stock, and it should bolt-in with just some shims like I use on the performance grinds.

 

But Indiana says using shims is a "sucky, noisy, hack" way to do things??? Well, He hasn't listened to my engine or driven my car with 1.6 roller rockers, Tims roller cam and Tims SHIMS!!!! There's more than just Indianas way to do things, Does my Tim C. set up work? My car has been running this set up for 3 years now without problems to 7000 rpms. P.S. It's not noisy, and certainly not hacked.

 

CALIBER 308

Edited October 19, 2008 by Caliber308

[Indiana]

Those mashed washers under the lifters is a crap idea period if you think otherwise prove it

 

How ATE UP is the inside of the rocker arm?

 

That stainless steel WASHER slipping around under there you think its not going to chew up that ALUMINUM?

 

Where does that ALUMINUM end up?

 

INSIDE the high pressure chamber of the lifter of course

 

You car develop a strange MISS?

Loss of power you can't explain?

You have to "bleed" your lifters from time to time?

 

Think about it moron THEY SUCK

[Metric-man]

Those mashed washers under the lifters is a crap idea period if you think otherwise prove it

 

How ATE UP is the inside of the rocker arm?

 

That stainless steel WASHER slipping around under there you think its not going to chew up that ALUMINUM?

 

Where does that ALUMINUM end up?

 

INSIDE the high pressure chamber of the lifter of course

 

You car develop a strange MISS?

Loss of power you can't explain?

You have to "bleed" your lifters from time to time?

 

Think about it moron THEY SUCK

 

Indiana,

Kelly and chris viper have perfected the slipper and roller setup

they won't give out any specs on the cam but Ivan's yellow beast is over 500hp with a roller setup.

I've seen a couple of the cylinder-heads Kelly makes with a slipper setup and manual lifters those cams are the shizits.!!

 

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.

That and one less extra moving part to stress.

 

There is another way to raise the non 83 height valve and save the valve seals and save spring binding.

[Tim_C.]

Yes, of course a custom valve set-up is the best, but a few hundred dollars more expensive. I've designed several different set-ups from the beginning (years ago) that work with people's budgets.

1. The preferred set-up: Custom length valves that do two things: Properly preload the lifters, and move the groove up some for more stem seal clearance. However, more stem seal clearance isn't as important as proper spring tension. The roller lobe will float the valves over 5500RPM or so if the tension falls below 100 seat pressure. New springs lose 10Lbs or so very early in their life. You really don't need to move the groove up if you have the proper spring tension.

2. Using the '83 valve to give you a little more of both preload and seal clearance. This works in many applications, but not the more agressive ones, and it depends on the head you are starting with. Old head, new head, marnal, OEM, etc..

3. Shimming the lifter inside the rocker to preload the lifter. With the proper spring tension, this works fine in some applications. I have this set-up working for 25,000+ miles on one of my cars.

The only drawback from the shims has been that they can break in two if the lifters fully lose their pump and the operator tries revving it high with a ticking lifter.

The inside of the rocker arm can get indented, but I've never seen one chew up aluminum. The stock lifters indent them too. That is one reason the OEM hydraulic set-ups have ticking problems. The whole design of an aluminum rocker taking the abuse from the lifter is not the best, but the lightweight arm gives you a large advantage over anything stronger.

Of course the valve can be raised. That is listed on my instructions from years ago. But that requires more machining and more money to move the seats up for the best result, or sink the valve more into the seat to get a little more for much less money.

Or do what Dad has always suggested, and does, is shave some room off the top of the stem seal boss to lower the seal. That at least gives you more clearance, but doesn't help preload.

[Tim_C.]

Indiana,

Kelly and chris viper have perfected the slipper and roller setup

they won't give out any specs on the cam but Ivan's yellow beast is over 500hp with a roller setup.

I've seen a couple of the cylinder-heads Kelly makes with a slipper setup and manual lifters those cams are the shizits.!!

 

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.

That and one less extra moving part to stress.

 

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.

[Indiana]

A new cam with a larger base would eliminate the need for a shim = $

A machined rocker with a new insert would eliminated the need for a shim = $

A rocker re-designed for a mechanical screw, which is what I'd do, would eliminate the need for a shim = $

Seats installed or cut lower, the correct valves, chamber ported, would eliminate the need for the shim = $

 

this is changing compression ratio, chamber shape, flame burn but at least those shims aren't used

 

Yes we used shims on two different motors, one new, one fine it was the original 89 engine from the car I sent to CNM and I stll have it. The rebuilt motor broke the end out of a rocker arm, the other motor they would come and go as far as being noisy. Eventually the old motor was loosing so, and both motors had NEW lifters installed at the time the shims were installed, so much it was like a 3cly and it wasn't running worth a damn. I never liked at all how the motor ran using these with a stock cam. Too many people pull these from a junkyard car and want to use them and that will not work. Saying will not work doesn't mean the motor won't run it will but it SUCKS. Using a stock reground cam isn't going to be able to increase the base so you will still need the shims. The shims are two more surfaces to make noise, to require oiling, oil mashes from the surfaces and that is effecting valve lift. If valve lift is sooo so critical to the point you are measuring it in 1000ths well guess what the thickness of two oiled surfaces is? How much oil pressure is in the rocker shafts at 6000rpms pushing those DAMN SHIMS as the valves are being closed? Worn rocker shafts, worn JUNKYARD roller rockers and shims the may not get any oil. People aren't concerned about these details they hear "roller rocker" and jump. If you have 85psi oil pressure, a lifter, a shim and a stock spring (those are 78lb installed height btw) what is going on with your valve lift-open-close points? Too many oiled surfaces are changing open/close points when the engine is RUNNING and you degree your cam with it NOT RUNNING.

 

See any reason for a mechanical adjuster at high rpms now?

 

All you need is the correct cam to use them.

 

They have specs listed for the stock cam for the valve opening and closing points, sorry if you degree the cam and use the intake for your centerline do you know that the exhaust is WAY OFF? I mean its frickin WAY off. Why? The lash from the mechanical lifters is a big factor of the opening and closing points of the valves. The stock screws that wear very quickly on the ends is changing those opening and closing degrees as you drive your car. Weekly you could degree that cam and it would be off from where you set it from that wear. You are supposed to readjust the screws once a year as routine maintenance for just a stock motor? What about your new motor?

 

Why did we decide to use those swivel feet in the first place? It was because those stock screws also SUCK and they suck allot more than shims under a lifter.

 

The guy I got the TS head from, he said he would tell me if I was interested the things they do to rev this motor to 10k rpms. this isn't done over here and its not on some lame AU starion board either. Another AU guy I talk to has billet cranks made in Cali. but nobody here wanted to deal with him his parts were "too expensive". You got to get off this GP crap and spend some $$$. Those GP sell you crap nobody will buy in the first place why would it be on "sale" if it was selling?

 

No, sorry I haven't seen a head Kelly has made as a result of the car Chris tuned but I'd suspect its the cam he was working on over a year ago along with some porting, OS valves and springs -and I bet he isn't using Schneider springs either.

 

Taking the two cams roller or not and looking at a graph with the ramps and open/close rates and the duration/overlap gets you information but until its tested what's the point but in the end they since both made by Mitsubishi they should be the SAME. If they weren't the same then why did they keep the same cam for so damn long; it was over TEN years? I'd pick the cam that did the job and I'd prefer to not have a regrind.

 

Its still all about the cam and if there is corrected cam for the open/close points great I just don't have one yet and I've never checked what Schneider did exactly either. I don't have as much against the slipped cam as you may think but if I had to pick if both were there in front of me I'd pick the roller but if the roller had those shims I'd pick the slipper.

 

and no I don't care and nobody else should either that your motor is "fine" and you don't think its "noisy" you can apply the same comments to tires so what that isn't any reason to want to have the same thing as you do but beat it with a stick until its DEAD you do every time.

[jinx]

there are too many reports of roller setup problems for the g54 imo. They just seem

too complex.... and what performance advantage have they shown for the effort?

If you go that route, follow a proven recipee to the T

Compare the costs, then draw your own conclusions.

 

Since you're changing a cam in search of enhanced performance, head straight over to

the dyno page to see what's "making power".

http://www.starquestclub.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=8890

The torque curve vs rpm is the ONLY true yardstick.

TEP race, HKS, *DM(roller?), Schnieder & stock cam used in majority of those setups.

I'd stick to the "simpler" & less costly valvetrain (the fastest 2.6s ran 'em).

 

You may find that a stock cam will suffice, rather than opening a can of worm$$$$.

Camshaft is the last single part I'd change on a performance G54 build. So you can

clearly 'evaluate' its effect

 

this torquey 4cyl should have no problem hitting 30+ mpg well tuned (that's if you

can keep your foot out of it), with any 'mild' cam

[Caliber308]

All I can tell the membership is this.... I've been running 1.6 rollers with Tims shims, Tims roller cam, stock height valves, Scheider springs, Stock hydraulic 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(i'm sure i'd see them at my oil changes) no reduced oil pressure and no engine performance fall off. All this for three years reving 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 this: With Tim Cs help. If you think there are no performance gains with this set up.... Ask Shelby. He had a write up about the performance gains with Roller set ups.

 

CALIBER 308

Edited October 21, 2008 by Caliber308