Who runs a solid flat tappet in their stroked 400/440 ?

[wsutard]

THis is actually the cam that I went with!
It is a 3 bolt setup. I had to buy a new timing set but I usually do when I have changed cams before.
It has been a windy road.....I first went with a pretty rowdy Lunati solid, the 316/326. the actual specs are a bit fuzzy to me since I ran the cam several years ago....Lift was .556 intake, .578 exhaust (1.6 rocker ratio) and the duration @ .050 was something like 261/271 I/E...It ran friggin strong but at that time, I was getting annoyed with my loose converter and the whole setup in general. I had a GV overdrive and while the reduced freeway rpms were great, the throttle response was soft. I toned it all down a bit by swapping in the 528 cam, an 11" converter that flat out WORKS and I pulled the GV and sold it. I now run 3.55 gears and a regular 727.
Oh...The 3 bolt VS 1 issue: I can only guess that the 3 bolt design is favored for the reduced chance of shearing off the bolts or dowel?

Are you happy you went with a solid FT over a hydraulic? I am doing the same debate right now. From all my reading it seems like solid is the way to go.

 

[747mopar]

I've always ran hyd lifters in the past but after several bad lifters I switched to a solid lift cam, no complaints. Everytime I go to adjust them (once a year) they don't need it plus there's no additional noise.

 

[wyrmrider]

kerndog what did you end up with as far as liffers? did I miss that in the thread
Those of you thinking of solids
Only run grinds designed for the larger MOPAR lifter- why give away your advantage
Comp recommends a different lifter for early engines DONT'do it It is designed for the small ball pushrods which wear out- there is a reason Chrysler changed- get later lifters and pushrods
run lifters which can oil through the pushrod (AMC-Magnum type) and run oil through the pushrod to the rocker ball/ cup- no more smoking your balls
do not order pushrods till you get your geometry right including raising the roller rocker fulcrum if you are running roller rockers
the iron rockers work just fine when set up correctly- better than rollers with bad geometry
I have not done it recently bur ROCKER ARM REBUILDERS in I think Anderson CA (they moved) can set you up with Iron rockers with bushings and Hard Chrome Shafts
if you have soft valves run lash caps
increasing the valve tip height 1/2 the increase in lift compared to a MAGNUM makes getting the geometry correct easier (lash caps or longer valves) (or too many valve jobs)

 

[wsutard]

kerndog what did you end up with as far as liffers? did I miss that in the thread
Those of you thinking of solids
Only run grinds designed for the larger MOPAR lifter- why give away your advantage
Comp recommends a different lifter for early engines DONT'do it It is designed for the small ball pushrods which wear out- there is a reason Chrysler changed- get later lifters and pushrods
run lifters which can oil through the pushrod (AMC-Magnum type) and run oil through the pushrod to the rocker ball/ cup- no more smoking your balls
do not order pushrods till you get your geometry right including raising the roller rocker fulcrum if you are running roller rockers
the iron rockers work just fine when set up correctly- better than rollers with bad geometry
I have not done it recently bur ROCKER ARM REBUILDERS in I think Anderson CA (they moved) can set you up with Iron rockers with bushings and Hard Chrome Shafts
if you have soft valves run lash caps
increasing the valve tip height 1/2 the increase in lift compared to a MAGNUM makes getting the geometry correct easier (lash caps or longer valves) (or too many valve jobs)

Thanks for the advice. How can I tell a grind designed for the Mopar lifter? Only one I know about is the Comp XE-HL series.

 

[wyrmrider]

IT takes some digging
you can see if they use the same lift and duration for a small block chevy (also 1.5 ratio rockers) (some get sneaky and give durations at different lifts)
or
with comp you can get their lobe master catalog and match up the lobes
last time I did it some cams were and some werenot
Howards, Lunati (now comp) Ultradyne and a few others have some Chrysler lobes, so does Crower but you have to ask
MANY OF THESE LOBES ARE OBSOLETE (including the DC lobes) were the masters generated on a CNC or hand filed?
virtually no one who has used the same lobes for years has Chrysler only lobes (for years Isky only had ONE)
harder to find in the shorter durations
Some that do have lobes that are obsolete designs- from the age of weak valves springs and hand file finished masters done with a hand calculator
so what to do
get your head flows, true compression, intake and exhaust plans gears, trans USE and fill out one of Rick Jones cam request cards (or another grinder you can trust)
you can end up with a cam that is shorter on the seat giving you more low end with more area under the curve giving more torque all the way up
get the cam and rockers specced together (also the compression)
you will also find LESS IS MORE

 

[Kern Dog]

Are you happy you went with a solid FT over a hydraulic? I am doing the same debate right now. From all my reading it seems like solid is the way to go.

I was hesitant to make the jump. When I read that there were solid lifters that had that EDM hole in the center for direct oiling to the cam lobe, I was sold! I heard that solid cams rev higher and deliver better vacuum. I don't rev mine much past 6000 though.
I was also concerned about constant valve lash adjustments but mine never changes. I went with a Mancini Racing 1.6 ratio roller tipped rocker arm set. They use a ball and cup design. I'm reasonably happy with the cam but I do miss the racy sound that I had with the Lunati.