Flat tappet lifter failure

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by Terry Cain

As stated above. I'm retired. On a fixed income. Would like to spend a few of my retirement years racing. Hell, I ain't sure I can even get into the car anymore, it's been so long.
Keep in mind we're talking about motors that were produced in the 1960's and 70's. There hasn't been a flat tappet motor to come out of Detroit since 1985. So, we're talking at least 40 year old motor design. When was the last set of Shubeck's made? At least 10 years maybe 15.
Some people have said. I see you have your car for sale. YES I do. Mainly because it's a pain for an old timer with arthritis to get in and out of. Some have also said it's another nail in the coffin for the stockers. Let me tell ya something. That horse left the barn A LONG TIME AGO. If the rule were changed I doubt it would say you have to run the roller lifter.

Yes and No. Some of the OHC motors are cam on bucket and the bucket really is nothing more than a large diameter flat tappet.


Stan

I don’t see any ( Likes) so that pretty much sums it up.

Exactly Billy.
It’s not just a cam and lifter change, it’s pushrods/ springs and Ret. Possibly valve length too…

Then comes the gear stack plus converter and tune changes. Cha ching!

Even funnier, telling someone you don’t like their opinion on an open forum.

[Terry Cain]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Are you delusional? If you're running a big-block anything in Stock then you're in a highly populated class. If the rule is changed then your competitors WILL take advantage of it meaning you WILL be forced to take advantage of it or you will not be competitive.

Billy,
Realistic might be a better word. Yep, your right the Big Blocks classes are very competitive. Maybe that's what makes me tic.? The Oval Big Blocks are not as much desired because they just won't spin like the rec port motor. The request for roller lifters has nothing to do with being more competitive as it does with fairness and NHRA waking up and looking at motors that are 40 years old (big and small block) and making parts available without a wait of 4-6 months and a quote of $2400 from one manufacture.

[Terry Cain]

Originally Posted by Barry Polley

I don’t see any ( Likes) so that pretty much sums it up.

The likes are coming in by Email since no one wants to show they do like. Hell, I was union steward for over 20 years. I've heard it ALL BEFORE. No ones getting a cherry. .

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?

[e vassar]

Have yall looked at the Howard's direct lube solid lifters?

[Terry Cain]

Originally Posted by e vassar

Have yall looked at the Howard's direct lube solid lifters?

Yes.

[L.Fite]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Ignoring pushrod angle against the lifter. A flat lifter / cam really produces no side loading.


Again ignoring pushrod angle against the lifter. A roller lifter / cam will produce side loading. Look at pressure angle.


While a roller lifter doesn't the max velocity limit of a flat lifter, at does have other limits. Again look at pressure angle.



Stan

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

[L.Fite]

Is this really a spring pressure problem, or a material quality issue?
I seem to hear others having similar issues with street/strip type cam profiles.
Wondering if it is not a more widespread problem than aggressive profile / high spring pressure that magnifies the problem?