Flat tappet lifter failure

[Terry Cain]

Originally Posted by Barry Polley

Terry I’m retired like you and I get it. I’ve never failed a cam or lifter yet….. I hope never. Lately I’ve had some costly issues not related to part fail.
I like others see it as a huge cost increase as well as another way to rpm these things. That brings on taxation of parts. Like the rest of the changes -it doesn’t stop there.
What’s next?

Barry,
Change is inevitable.
I feel your pain about no where to race in Cal. Does that mean your gonna quit? Prob not. Would that be considered change? Get the point? Some changes we like, some we don't.The lifter issue is not going away. Hell, cam companies won't even suggest a lifter because of failure rates. I bet half the guys running flats are using 15 year old Shubecks. That's a gamble I don't want to do, again. lol

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by L.Fite

So can you elaborate?
Feel free to PM...
I'm here to learn.

It comes down to the different way that the information encoded in the lobe is transferred to the valve train. If you look at a flat lobe and a roller lobe that will produce identical valve lift curves, you can see how much different the lifter lobe interface is.

Stan

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by Terry Cain

Barry,
Change is inevitable.
I feel your pain about no where to race in Cal. Does that mean your gonna quit? Prob not. Would that be considered change? Get the point? Some changes we like, some we don't.The lifter issue is not going away. Hell, cam companies won't even suggest a lifter because of failure rates. I bet half the guys running flats are using 15 year old Shubecks. That's a gamble I don't want to do, again. lol

Terry,
You are running "Stock". Just how many of your engine parts came from the OEM as part of that engine?



Stan

[Doug Hoven]

It is very easy to say that "change is inevitable" when the change in question is of your personal interest. There is a difference between inevitable and preventable. Big changes like this that would effect everyone are definitely preventable. In no way am I saying that flat tappet cams and lifters are superior to their roller counterparts. The issue would be me trying to come up with at least another $1,000 just to try and remotely keep up with my competitors with much deeper pockets. At this moment in time, I doubt that any lobes for, example, a flat tappet sbc with a .390/.410 lift exist in a roller profile. And I highly doubt that they are going to want to design new lobe profiles for free.

[Terry Cain]

Originally Posted by Doug Hoven

It is very easy to say that "change is inevitable" when the change in question is of your personal interest. There is a difference between inevitable and preventable. Big changes like this that would effect everyone are definitely preventable.

WRONG. It would effect aprox 40% of stock. Remember, flat tappet are the minority now.

[Terry Cain]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Terry,
You are running "Stock". Just how many of your engine parts came from the OEM as part of that engine?



Stan

Well let's see.
Stock 50 year old head castings.
Stock 50 year old intake casting.
Stock 40 year old OEM oil pan and Timing cover.
Stock 50 year old Carburetor.
Stock 40 year old rods that have been reconditioned.
Stock 50 year old crank that has been reworked.
Seems the few things like valves, springs, cam, lifters, rings, pistons, and bearing are about all that isn't OEM.
OH, stock 50 year old valve covers.
Really not sure what your getting at with the question??

[Doug Hoven]

Originally Posted by Terry Cain

WRONG. It would effect aprox 40% of stock. Remember, flat tappet are the minority now.

So you're saying that the current roller cam cars wouldn't be effected by this? How about them trying to figure out how to make their cars faster when suddenly they are being outrun by cars that used to have flat tappet cams, even though in a lot of classes, but not all, the fastest cars in said category are currently flat tappet combos?

[Terry Cain]

Has anyone converted Shubeck Hyd over to solids?

[1347]

Originally Posted by Terry Cain

WRONG. It would effect aprox 40% of stock. Remember, flat tappet are the minority now.

Will you stop with your 40% quote. I looked at Indy qualifying last time you wrote that and found 3/4 of the field were older cars..You then told me it wasn't a fair race to judge. I just looked at our D1 maple grove divisional, and with 118 cars. 70 of them were 1983 and earlier.
You sure like to slant your agenda. You need to come up with a plan to make a cam survive in your car. Maybe get with John, who although supports your cause, stated he has 8000 rpm big blocks that survive. Haven't you been trying to sell your car? Are you building a roller cam car if you do?

[john ancona]

Originally Posted by 1347

Will you stop with your 40% quote. I looked at Indy qualifying last time you wrote that and found 3/4 of the field were older cars..You then told me it wasn't a fair race to judge. I just looked at our D1 maple grove divisional, and with 118 cars. 70 of them were 1983 and earlier.
You sure like to slant your agenda. You need to come up with a plan to make a cam survive in your car. Maybe get with John, who although supports your cause, stated he has 8000 rpm big blocks that survive. Haven't you been trying to sell your car? Are you building a roller cam car if you do?

You would be much better served if you , and many others on here with your misinformation about what I support or don't support , I would hope you are smart enough to stop assuming, you have no clue about many topics that are discussed on here ,you out of all people would ask others to stop with there quotes when yours ,and your partners are false ,one sided , and worst of all you lack any knowledge on what is really going on with the lifter challenges. You may want to catch the next bus ,and come out here to Pomona I will be there to discuss with you and NHRA any ,and all the facts