This has been incredible reading. My 69 super bee 440 has screaming tappets right now and I’m not sure what to do. Car runs great, but embarrassing noise. Change the cam? Change the lifters? Change the pushrods? Which parts to use?
Flat tappet lifters, wear patterns, cam lobe taper and other things. Let's swap opinions and ideas.
- Thread starter Kern Dog
- Start date
Having choices can be a mixed bag....It is great to be able to not be limited but all the choices can be intimidating.
I notice that you've mentioned luck more than once. It shakes my confidence a bit to read that....
Despite having the only two that I bought from them go bad, I'm not against them as an option. I stand by the opinion that they likely have more failures because they have far more sales than anyone else.
The Extreme Energy series has that "fast rate of lift" design, right? If so, I thought that it increased the likelihood of lifter failure.
The Trick Flow specs:
...The duration looks great but that lift will mean new rocker arms.
Curiousyellow71
Well-Known Member
Kern, If you want to get away from flat tappets I can mention our experience w the trick flow cam Duane posted on a edelbrock headed 440. We are running 1.6s so .640 lift. We are running comp cams endureX SOLID roller lifters. Zero lash cold. Solid lifters are much lighter then any hydraulic and so we can be conservative on our spring pressures. We aren't afraid to drive it..last trip was 240 miles. We are 11.2:1 running on 91. The trick flow works with a iron distr. gear which is nice. The cam makes a lot of torque and keeps pulling to 6500+. I have been impressed by it in a 440..but, since you have a stroker motor I would get a custom roller cam. Very little increase in investment.
The other similiar set up we run is from bullet. It is on a iron headed engine and is quieter then the valve train on a new hemi. There is no noise. The grind is actually for either solid or hydraulic roller lifters and their are lots of duration choices. The one we are running is pretty much a size larger then the trick flow, but with a wider LSA..it is in a stroker motor and was a custom grind. Everything from bullet cams is custom. Can also do a custom from comp cams.
The other similiar set up we run is from bullet. It is on a iron headed engine and is quieter then the valve train on a new hemi. There is no noise. The grind is actually for either solid or hydraulic roller lifters and their are lots of duration choices. The one we are running is pretty much a size larger then the trick flow, but with a wider LSA..it is in a stroker motor and was a custom grind. Everything from bullet cams is custom. Can also do a custom from comp cams.
Last edited:
It has been proven that a cam that is rowdy in a 383 will feel milder in a 440. Also, the power peak goes down. With that stated, I wonder if that Trick Flow cam that runs strong to 6500 in the 440 may peak a few hundred lower in an engine that is 55 cubes bigger.
Summit Racing shows no other roller cams for big blocks. The lifters that Dwayne/PRHeads listed are spendy but if they were actually able to be used again with another cam, that would be great. That usually is the case, right ?
Summit Racing shows no other roller cams for big blocks. The lifters that Dwayne/PRHeads listed are spendy but if they were actually able to be used again with another cam, that would be great. That usually is the case, right ?
Curiousyellow71
Well-Known Member
I would expect the powerband of the trick flow to be 500rpm lower in a 500..vs 440.
We do have more compression and the cam was installed straight up..so the engine operates retarded -2 on our 440.
We at one time had the same cam in a 383, 440, and 510. Power band jump of 500 rpm jump was pretty close to each. Certainly the street manners were also improved in the bigger motors.
I also wouldn't expect a hydraulic lifter to perform like a solid at the upper rpms. The hydraulic likely will hit a peak and be done.
Last edited:
This is the cam that FBBO moderator HawkRod has:
I don't remember all the specifics of his build but I thought he said it was around 500" and made 550 HP or thereabouts.
My rocker arms push the lift to around .580, a bit less than I have now.
I don't remember all the specifics of his build but I thought he said it was around 500" and made 550 HP or thereabouts.
My rocker arms push the lift to around .580, a bit less than I have now.
Opinions on this setup?
(A local ad i found)
“COMP Cams Thumpr Hydraulic Flat Tappet Cam and Lifter Kits K21-600-5
Cam and Lifters, Hydraulic Flat Tappet, Advertised Duration 279/296, Lift .486/.473, Chrysler, Big Block Motors, Kit
(Mfr. #: K21-600-5)
bought two from Summit but only used one, this is a brand new 100% complete cam kit for big block mopar engines such as 383 ci and 440 ci.
Sells for $735.00
Selling for $450.00”
(A local ad i found)
“COMP Cams Thumpr Hydraulic Flat Tappet Cam and Lifter Kits K21-600-5
Cam and Lifters, Hydraulic Flat Tappet, Advertised Duration 279/296, Lift .486/.473, Chrysler, Big Block Motors, Kit
(Mfr. #: K21-600-5)
bought two from Summit but only used one, this is a brand new 100% complete cam kit for big block mopar engines such as 383 ci and 440 ci.
Sells for $735.00
Selling for $450.00”
ynst
Well-Known Member
I've never used a bronze gear. I always re-use an existing intermediate shaft gear.
The issue arises when you use a NEW gear with it's sharp edges. Use a worn-in gear and it'll last forever. I put over 244,000 miles on a Crower roller cam before a brand new Hot Heads oil pump fell apart and three rods scattered themselves at 75 mph just coming int Maryland on the way home from Louisville in 2011. One rod took out the camshaft.
The replacement Crower roller is just fine with a used gear and it's been in there since 2011 and approaching 37,000 miles.
ynst
Well-Known Member
Use a high-zinc content oil like 20W-50 Valvoline VR-1 (by far, the best) or Mobile 1 Racing oil.
In 1994 the industry removed zinc from motor oils because it had a negative effect on catalytic converters. While this benefited newer engines, it dealt a death blow to older engines with flat tappet camshafts and, as a result, worn out camshafts became the norm. The lubricating properties of zinc and phosphorous are essential for maintaining the longevity of older internal combustion engines.
Zinc can damage catalytic converters. For that reason, the EPA has mandated that zinc levels be reduced in today's oils. Most, if not all, modern automotive and truck engines are using overhead camshafts or roller lifters. These motors don't require a lot of zinc because the loads on the cams and lifters aren't as great as those in flat lifter motors
Avoid the problem by choosing the right oil-- that has a zinc content of at least .11%. If you're running zero zinc content oil in an old engine
Bottom Line:
It the vehicle doesn’t have a catalytic converter, use a high zinc-content motor oil.
2014 engine oil zinc content chart sorted by viscosity, zinc content, brand name
In 1994 the industry removed zinc from motor oils because it had a negative effect on catalytic converters. While this benefited newer engines, it dealt a death blow to older engines with flat tappet camshafts and, as a result, worn out camshafts became the norm. The lubricating properties of zinc and phosphorous are essential for maintaining the longevity of older internal combustion engines.
Zinc can damage catalytic converters. For that reason, the EPA has mandated that zinc levels be reduced in today's oils. Most, if not all, modern automotive and truck engines are using overhead camshafts or roller lifters. These motors don't require a lot of zinc because the loads on the cams and lifters aren't as great as those in flat lifter motors
Avoid the problem by choosing the right oil-- that has a zinc content of at least .11%. If you're running zero zinc content oil in an old engine
Bottom Line:
It the vehicle doesn’t have a catalytic converter, use a high zinc-content motor oil.
2014 engine oil zinc content chart sorted by viscosity, zinc content, brand name
| 20W-50 | |
| Valvoline Race | 0.2 |
| Kendall GT-1 | 0.16 |
| Shell Truck Guard | 0.15 |
| Spectro Golden 4 | 0.15 |
| Spectro Golden M.G. | 0.13 |
| Valvoline Turbo | 0.13 |
| Unocal | 0.12 |
| Exxon High Performance | 0.11 |
| Valvoline All Climate | 0.11 |
| AMSOIL (new) none | |
| AMSOIL (old) none | |
| Castrol GTX .12 | |
| Havoline Formula 3 none | |
| Pennzoil GT Perf. none | |
| Quaker State Dlx. none | |
| Red Line none | |
| Valvoline Synthetic | 0.12 |
| 20W-40 | |
| Castrol Multi-Grade | 0.12 |
| AMSOIL none | |
| Quaker State none | |
| 15W-50 | |
| Mystic JT8 | 0.15 |
| Chevron | 0.11 |
| Mobil 1 none | |
| Red Line none | |
| 5W-50 | |
| Castrol Syntec | 0.1 |
| Quaker State Synquest none | |
| Pennzoil Performax none | |
| 5W-40 | |
| Havoline none | |
| 15W-40 | |
| Kendall GT-1 | 0.16 |
| Mystic JT8 | 0.15 |
| Valvoline All Fleet | 0.15 |
| Castrol | 0.14 |
| Exxon XD3 | 0.14 |
| Exxon XD3 Extra | 0.13 |
| Shell Rotella w/XLA | 0.13 |
| Valvoline Turbo | 0.13 |
| AMSOIL (new) none | |
| AMSOIL (old) none | |
| Chevron Delo 400 none | |
| Red Line none | |
| 10W-30 | |
| Valvoline Race (VR-1) | 0.2 |
| Kendall GT-1 | 0.16 |
| Shell Truck Guard | 0.15 |
| Exxon Superflo Supreme 133 | 0.13 |
| Shell Super 2000 | 0.13 |
| Castrol GTX | 0.12 |
| Shell Fire and Ice | 0.12 |
| Unocal Super | 0.12 |
| Valvoline Synthetic . | 0.12 |
| Chevron Supreme | 0.11 |
| Exxon Superflo Hi Perf 135 | 0.11 |
| Valvoline All Climate | 0.11 |
| AMSOIL (new) none | |
| AMSOIL (old) none | |
| Havoline Formula 3 none | |
| Mobil 1 none | |
| Pennzoil PLZ Turbo none | |
| Quaker State none | |
| Red Line none | |
| Spectro Golden M.G. none | |
| Valvoline Turbo .13 | |
| 5W-30 | |
| Valvoline Turbo | 0.13 |
| Castrol GTX | 0.12 |
| Chevron Supreme Synt. | 0.12 |
| Shell Fire and Ice | 0.12 |
| Valvoline Synthetic | 0.12 |
| Chevron Supreme | 0.11 |
| Exxon Superflow HP | 0.11 |
| Valvoline All Climate | 0.11 |
| Mystic JT8 | 0.1 |
| AMSOIL (new) none | |
| AMSOIL (old) none | |
| Havoline Formula 3 none | |
| Mobil 1 none | |
| Quaker State none | |
| Red Line none | |
| Unocal .12 |
Didn’t read all the posts so if I repete sorry. First thought is spinning lifter, it takes FRICTION between the cam and lifter to turn. If lifter starts sliding what happens there? Back in the day 60s & 70s springs were on the weak side for average builds so I’m thinking todays springs might be the culpret? In that time the only failures I heard at the speed shops were from Chevy engines, none from Chryslers. My 383 had the 509 (made in 76) with triple .550 springs and adjustable rockers, 3/8” pushrods. Turned it 6800 every run. When I got my 64 440 Savoy in 92 in went that cam-lifters (not in same spots either) (1977 block) still there today. So that leads to old parts were better imo. I have a new cams, 2 for the Hemis and 2 for the next 440 BUT I’ll use the nos lifters (pre 75) on them and the solids will get refaced for the Hemi. Then cross my fingers! Also about the oil, use non detergent with the zink, maybe 2 stroke oil. Maybe these new oils are to slick?!
BTW we used 40-50 weight oil for race cars then not the thin stuff today, that’s a thought!
BTW we used 40-50 weight oil for race cars then not the thin stuff today, that’s a thought!
ckessel
Well-Known Member
The ZDDP deletion/dilution for sure has happened for quite awhile. The OE's and feds pushed on this because the Zinc polluted the Cats, O2's and other components. But from what I've seen and witnessed is, in my opinion, that many of the manufactures have very poor PCV/CCV systems combined with blow by that shouldn't happen until well passed the 100k mark. We had an Audi TT, 07, with the turbo'd 4. The car didn't even have 10k on the odometer and ate 3 quarts of oil. The dealer of course pushed the company line. Thats normal. I called Audi corporate to see WTF, same line. They said that its because the engine was race car derived. I told her I worked at domestic dealers and even the "crappy by euro trash standards" US cars didn't have that problem until close to 200k on many. Years later Learned from an independent tech that there was some baffle in the Valve Cover that didn't work correctly. The 09 Honda Accord V6 that replaced it ate oil too. Same line from Honda. 4 out of 6 plugs oil fouled while under warranty. The tech either wasn't smart enough to question that or it was SOSDD to him. When it got to 80k, it started happening again. Under the extended warranty, the short block got replaced because one back cylinder had stuck oil rings. No ffn wonder. Until the ventilation/blowby issue gets squared away, ZDDP is the least of the worries. As an example, look at all of the catch cans that are being sold for late model vehicles.
Dave Hughes has a very informative read on oils.
https://www.hughesengines.com/Index...el0=VzItIFdlZGdlIFdvcmxkIFRlY2g=&partid=35668
Dave Hughes has a very informative read on oils.
https://www.hughesengines.com/Index...el0=VzItIFdlZGdlIFdvcmxkIFRlY2g=&partid=35668
Curiousyellow71
Well-Known Member
I don't know anything about your combo to tell you if it is a good fit for you. That is a good price for spring/retainers/chain/cam/ lifters.
The thumper has a wide split on the exhaust and a narrow LSA at 107. With a racey idle, I have heard it called "dairy queen cam". It sounds mean but doesn't necessarily translate to performance on a BB mopar. It's origins were more for a small block with short intake runners on a low compression engine that has a choppy performance idle.
I can tell you that comp cams has had trouble with their lifters so they started coating them with a DLC coating. I don't believe this kit has those. Comp standard lifters are affordable but that is about it.. They are prone to make lifter ticking noise and are pretty average. The better lifters are typically made by HyLift Johnson and sold under other brand names. Usually a higher price comes with it.
Diamond-Like-Carbon: COMP Cams' New Tech For Solid Lifters
Last edited:
Probably a case of “you get what you pay for” i suppose. Looked like a great deal
CoronetDarter
Well-Known Member
How many of you running high profile FT cams used weaker springs on the initial break-in and then swapped in the recommended springs afterwards?
I have never done that. I have never had dual springs or really stiff springs.
The only LA series engine that barfed a cam was a 292/508 in this car in 2009:
That makes 2 Comp cams and 2 Mopar Performance cams in all of my years.
Back in 1990, I had a stock 350 in my '71 C 10 that lost a cam. That was long before the zinc was phased out.
The only LA series engine that barfed a cam was a 292/508 in this car in 2009:
That makes 2 Comp cams and 2 Mopar Performance cams in all of my years.
Back in 1990, I had a stock 350 in my '71 C 10 that lost a cam. That was long before the zinc was phased out.
PRHeads
Well-Known Member
In my mind that’s been pretty much SOP for several years.
I tell my customers, if you don’t do it, and it eats a cam……. It’s just shame on you.
They get the same story about the break in oil.
Maybe I got lucky ?
If I screwed up, I'd like to know so I can have a better chance of avoiding it in the future. That was the point of this entire thread, to highlight the mistakes and learn from them.
With the '528, the Lunati and even the MP 280/474 I used in Jigsaw, I sought guidance on choosing the right valve springs. I've never used dual springs and never used weak springs for a break in. Was I tempting fate? I didn't wipe out any cam during break in. One Comp hydraulic and the one MP solid lasted quite awhile. One Comp gave up within a few months if I recall.
I will look through my notebooks to make sure.
******EDIT*******
I did just go back through my notebooks and read the following:
The first Comp was installed in March 2006 and started misfiring within a month, then it was found to have worn a single lobe off when I dug into it in May. The second Comp Cam (covered under warranty) lasted from May 2006 to April 2009. In both cases the engine started up right away and the standard 30 minutes @2500-3000 rpms routine was followed. The second cam lost one lobe but it was on a different cylinder.
Last edited:
PRHeads
Well-Known Member
My feeling is basically that, if a new cam/lifter fails within 1000 miles, it started that process(of failing) during the break in.
Watching the Powell machine videos I saw enough evidence of poorly machined lifters to know that there are going to be cases where they are the culprit responsible for the failure.
I’ve measured the taper on cams that failed and know sometimes the taper is insufficient, and that the cam was surely a contributor to the failure.
The point being……… I don’t paint the picture of the current FT breakin process as being all “roses and unicorns”.
If you want to stack the deck in your favor, take all the precautions………and then hope for the best.
Watching the Powell machine videos I saw enough evidence of poorly machined lifters to know that there are going to be cases where they are the culprit responsible for the failure.
I’ve measured the taper on cams that failed and know sometimes the taper is insufficient, and that the cam was surely a contributor to the failure.
The point being……… I don’t paint the picture of the current FT breakin process as being all “roses and unicorns”.
If you want to stack the deck in your favor, take all the precautions………and then hope for the best.
Last edited:
My engine turned 550 HP and 675 Lb Ft of torque when I ran it on a chassis dyno at the Hot Rod Power Tour (as driven on the tour: full mufflers, air cleaner on, etc.). This was a "fun run" event, so I had no opportunity to tune anything. The horsepower dropped off after about 4900 RPM. Something was going on, and it likely is a fuel delivery problem. With 675 torque, Horsepower should be up over 600. But I haven't had time to diagnose the issue and find that lost HP.
EVERY TIME. Also, my father-in-law's shop won't even build a flat tappet engine without lifters that direct oil the cam (they do this through a small hole drilled in the bottom or a small groove in the lifter that allows oil to seep through on to the cam).
gtxrt
Well-Known Member
on my buick and all gm they have a tool that cuts a slight grove down the lifter bore so oil gets right on the cam lobes a lot better oiling then the hole in the lifter. you will loose 1-2 lbs of oil pressure at idle.
Similar threads
