A good lifter vs OEM stuff can make a huge difference in power if the combination requires it. An aggressive cam, high spring pressures and high rpms should consider it. Morel lifters have been known to make 10-25 hp more than other stock style lifters on decent street strip motor setups. Some have made even more. A good cam guy told me the difference can be 100 hp!! Seems high but then again it could be possible on a all out max effort setup. Morels are pricey but worth it for an all out combination.

What size valves in the heads and what size springs/pressures? Who's cam is it? Its not floating but just falling off in power at high rpms? IF its not a lifter problem, it could be the cam just not being optimal for the combination?


EDIT: my buddy's car used LS7 lifters like I have in the past with good success. I was just stating stock bottom ends can be turned alittle higher.

 

Yes, I've heard the 100 hp story as well. Seems entirely possible to me considering what I've witnessed.
For the record, it's a Comp custom grind and Brodix Track 1 heads (with valve seat work), 26918 springs with titanium retainers.
All of the research done (not to mention 3 cams, two ignitions, two upgrades to the EFI, as well as advice from several cam manufacturers) has indicated that this cam is suitable for the application. I have little doubt about that.
Data logging shows excellent engine management yet at the top end at the track, my little Vortec setup is with him. Seems unlikely as he's targeted 450chp and I'm lucky to be pushing 400.
I've read about the Morels and Comp's short travel lifter follows that design principle.

 

I was running the old style Comp golds on my last set-up, only issue I had is I got a bad poly lock and it came loose on me after a 6,000rpm pull one day.

Your laying down some really good times for your combo, deffinatly makes me confident I can reach my goal of 11.5's. Do you know what your car weighs and what it puts down to the wheels?

 

The only issue I had with the rockers was from the bodies being so big on them and rubbing on the head studs. I had to grind a few of them down. Don't think it would have been an issue if I was using bolts tho. Really nice pieces.

Car weighs 3450 with me in it. Never been on a dyno. I'd guess 375-400 at the flywheel based on the mph. Don't want to be too optomistic. The 700r4 is holding me back a bit and I've been fighting a bog at the bottom of 3rd gear. Also I have the timing ramped in real slow and a fairly tight converter to try to save my stock rear. That hasn't worked out as planned lol. I have a feeling if I were to put a th350 in it with a good converter and rear it might touch 11.5x in good air.

 

Even tho those are good beehive springs and lightweight top end parts, I still think you may need more spring pressure at seat and open.

I honestly dont think I'd run a fairly aggressive lobe hyd roller over .550" lift and over 5800 rpms without using a good double spring around 150lbs seat pressure and 400 open.

 

I agree. I have the 26918's in my truck. Ram 5.7 hemi with a comp 268 cam. 216/220 .540 lift. Shift at 6300. Thats about the biggest I would go with these and I've been advised to get rid of them by alot of people.

 

My research says the 26918's are good to over .600" lift with an aftermarket roller lifter (and not some cam company BS hype).
So far my .560" cam has been spun to 6500 with no hint of trouble (in fact that old combo continues to over achieve). Chassis dyno graphs show a flat (or nearly so) power curve past 6000.
I'm not sure what to make of all of this however I will say that proof , one way or the other, should be forthcoming in the next couple of weeks.

 

Lobe design will really dictate the performance with those springs. Lift may not be a problem if the cam ramps are tame enough. Beehives can pull high rpm no problem with the right cam lobe, but once you start getting some aggressive profiles that make good power, it starts to lose control. Thats where more pressure is required or a tamer lobe.

 

I suppose that's really stating the obvious limitation of any spring. I've seen the massive assemblies that are needed for the extreme levels of this sport.
That said, in the text of this thread (and I thank the OP for the loan), the 26918's arent limiting the performance of this build. At least I sure as hell hope not.

 

Well I'm simply saying is some lobe designs can get away with lighter springs and still rev high. Custom solid roller for this one guys' 402" chevy turns 8000 rpm and only has like 190 lbs on the seat I believe. Its extremely light for a solid roller at those rpms but it was designed using extensive spintron testing and is stable with those spring pressures and rpms.

Its hard to say those springs are adequate without knowing all the specs of the cam and seeing it in action on a spintron at the high rpms. Dyno would should the valvefloat if its floating. If its not floating, maybe the lifter is collapsing but it seems like it wouldnt be the problem since others are running high rpms on stock lifters and LS7 type lifters. Maybe the cam just doesnt have the ability to make power on that setup at high rpms? Hard to say without trying some things.

 

Would this 402 be running an OEM lifter?
Just to recap, the direction here is lifter failure not inadequate springs. I appreciate all that you've said regarding springs.
Just recently (last week in fact) I passed on the 987 comp spring that was in the assembly kit I purchased for my new bare RHS Vortec castings. It was the Spintron tech article I read that demonstrated the limitations of the 987 in this application. I opted for the 26918's instead (this is in addition to the 918's in my current Vortecs).
That said, although we've considered the spring requirements very carefully, if this last gasp at flushing out the problem via the new lifters doesn't work it's back to the drawing board. It's this kind of dialogue that got me into investigating the 26918 in the first place so I hope that's not going to be an issue.

 

Wow then 11.5 should be a walk in the park, I'm shooting for 375-400 at the wheels, around a 3200lb race weight and deffinatly going with a TH350 and 3600+ stall. What size stall are you running?

 

Its a vigilante "supposed" to be 3200. However, I can only footbrake it to 1800. It will flash to about 2200. I'd be curious to put it on a dyno just to see what it has and more importantly, where the power peaks. It seems to still be pulling really strong past 6k, I just can't bring myself to shift that high just to pick up a few numbers. All this talk about springs has me thinking about a hydra rev kit too. If I find a deal on one with the install kit I would scoop it up. Really nothing to lose. It would be nice to do an honest comparison with a fairly common setup and see what the gains were.

 

I agree as AFR claims as it can pick up up to another 100hp, but its probably the same situation as Orr was saying with the Morel lifters and that being on all out set-ups.

I havent heard to many great things about the Vigilantes. I was running a Trans Specialties 12" Big Shot converter with my last set up. It was there "low stall" 2200-2400rpms but it actually flashed around 2700ish and I could footbrake to about 2000, but that was just on 235 Cooper Cobras so they would always start to spin first. I'll probably end up going with them again, alot of guys seem to like there stuff.

 

I'm not sure I buy into the rev kits.... they are ok in that they provide more insurance to keep the lifter on the cam lobe in the event of a valvespring failure or float, and may extend the rpm range abit by taking some load off the valvesprings, but it seems like a band-aid to the problem.

It wont help a lifter bleed down situation. If you are having valvefloat you have too much weight in the valves, valvesprings, retainers, pushrods, etc and not enough spring. Or your cam is simply too aggressive.

 

That is a pretty good way of looking at it. Now are these the same thing like what Comp sells as there "rev kits"? Comps are a bit cheaper and claim there purpose is in the event of a lifter or spring failure they hold the lifter in the bore to prevent loss of oil pressure.

 

I could be wrong, but last time I checked, nobody but afr made a rev kit for oem roller blocks. And for the record, my next motor will be a solid roller.

 

I'm not sure myself but rev kit is a simple device so many manufacturers could make them and they do. Whether or not they fit OEM blocks is another matter.

I've seen enough people use LS7 lifters and springs like AFR 8019's, Patriot Extreme Golds, and similar dual spring setups that are in the 1.26-1.29" diameter range, around 150-155 lbs seat pressure and 380-412 lbs open pressure with great success on hyd roller motors that I dont think you'll ever need a rev kit. Keeping the lifter on the cam and in the lifter bore is nice, but if a spring fails and you drop the valve into the cylinder, you will have bigger problems than just a lifter jumping around... you will have a broken piston and messed up cylinder head and likely trash the entire motor. Its not gonna save a valve from dropping. Dual spring with 2 springs has less chance of breaking both springs than compared to a single spring or single beehive. Thats one advantage to a dual spring.

With AFR heads life is grand because they have 8mm lightweight lsx style valves. Other head companies are using standard stuff which is a tad heavier but still can be controlled. Just may have to spend time on the details of the cam lobe. For big valved heads and high rpms that may require a 3/8" pushrod, you start to push the limits of hyd rollers and spring pressures so lifters like the Morels or limited travel designs would be best suited.

I'm playing that $550-650 game right now .... 2.100" valves, 6800 rpm, 3/8" pushrod with a fairly aggressive cam. Do I want to chance it with LS7's or should I get the Morels? I've had 2 people I trust tell me 2 different things, so its hard to make that decision. From an engineering standpoint, I've got too much invested to skimp on lifters and the tool steel design is likely well worth it on an application like this. Rev kit was never discussed.

 

I'm most likely going with the Erson grind efi guy mentioned 286/294 advertised with 226/234 @.050 and .568" lift. Maybe he can chime back in on how aggressive the lobe design is? So rev kits/hydra revs have been ruled out, a little bit more money I can put somewhere else. AFR heads are a deffinate just waiting to sell the old heads and bottom end so I can buy them.

I'm still tossing in my sleep about wether I should keep the HSR or trade it for a Vic-E efi, especially after pulling this motor apart and seeing for myself the rear cylinder fueling issue. My front 2 where just about right maybe a tad rich and the back 2 where white. I really dont like the thought of that on a higher output motor. Is there anything I can do to help it??

GTAmatt, whats the advertised on your cam? I noticed its extremely similar to the Erson grind.

 

I posted this a few years ago when I was trying to find a good cam. I'm not sure where they measure the advertised duration at.

 

Talk to him about the cam and have him suggest springs for the application. A cam guy should know springs equally as well as the cams Its a package system so they go together.

Just tune the motor to the rear cylinders.... My car I think was the opposite tho, with the rears looking more rich.

OR you can have a set of injectors flowed and find the 2 that flow the most and put them on the leanest cylinders. Talk to an injector dealer that matches injectors and see if they can find 2 oddball injectors that flow more than advertised and stick them into the group.

Other thing you can TRY is a air flow divider in the plenum. Put a small air dam in the middle to help direct airflow to the front cylinders because they need it. Air doesnt want to make the big bend off the TB. OR perhaps buy a big throttle body spacer and push the throttle body out as far as you can. Hood clearance will be an issue unless the spacer angles the TB downward. This can help even out the air stream over the front cylinders.

 

I can't see why you WOULDN'T make the investment in the Morels or equivalent. With what you've put into your build, it's a small amount percentage wise.
Think of what a failure would mean.
I haven't read back to check but what are you running for springs?

 

One would hope that would be the case, but depending on the company, I have my doubts.

 

PAC 1300 series circle track springs in my new build.

Every bit saved helps fund other projects but I know what you mean and I was kicking the idea around. I was originally in a hurry to get the car before end of the December holidays but things didnt pan out, I decided to change the setup and now that I can take my time, I may just go Morels

 

Can you tune like that with batch fire set-ups?
And with the spacer wouldnt it still have the same turn as it goes from the spacer into the plenum? Or is it the fact that the throttle blades are right infront of the plenum kind of directing the air in as a strait shot? If you know what I mean lol.

 

Thank you. Happy to help. Email me anytime.
fastone01@hotmail.com

 

They push on the body of the lifter and against the head, so you don't need to run crazy spring pressure which would collapse the lifter.

If I was using a hyd roller over 6500 I'd probably run a kit.

-- Joe

 

Nope. It fires all injectors the same so you cant tune the front/rear cylinders. Thats why I'd suggest running injectors that are known to flow more than advertised on the lean cylinders to overcome the fuel differences. Its a band aid but does work.

IMO, a spacer up front would allow air to slow down behind the TB blades and make it possible to make the turn. With the TB sitting so close to the front 4 cylinders in the HSR, its hard for air to make that turn. Having it alittle further out increases plenum volume and could help distribution issues. I originally thought those first 4 would suck the incoming air charge down first and thus the rear cylinder groups would not get enough air. That seemed to be what I had going on in my HSR, but I can see it happening either way.
It depends too I guess. Low airspeed small throttle opening situations may starve the rear cylinders more and WOT situations may allow the rear to see more air than front. Hard to say without flow testing the intake manifold and getting some wideband o2 data on each cylinder to see whats going on.

 

Correct. But don't forget the valving has a lot to do with it too. That's why the latest LS lifters are so popular. They work well at high rpm and reasonable spring pressures.
And more springs pressure is harder on the roller pins as well.

 

Yes, some aftermarket systems allow you to do that. And the better ones even allow you to do it based on load and/or rpm. Neat huh?

 

Agreed, I'm also using light valves in my AFR's but when you run a fast ramp rate on a hyd roller, the OE style rollers want to go off into orbit and you need to keep them in check without collapsing the plunger. That was my biggest issue with comp cams lifters. If I went to crazy on the cam, they would become unstable yet more than 135/450lbs on the spring and they would bleed down at idle.

-- Joe

 

Does anyone happen to know if EBL will allow me to do that? If not would I have the 2 highest flowing from a matched set in back or like 2lb/hr more injectors?

Orr, after my last post yesterday I was thinking and my old motor just had some 170cc heads and stock TB so maybe it was a little easier for the front 4 to hog the air compard to bigger head motor with bigger throttle blades, cam etc. I wish I had taken a picture, you could see a variation between every cylinder front to rear, tan-white.

The spacer idea seems plausable, I still looking for a cowl hood so clearance wont really be an issue. I dont remember seeing any distribution issues in any of my TPI combos.

 

The factory LT1 and LS1 stuff (and all mustang 5.0) have the same functionality. It's nice to be able to trim against a faulty intake design.

I fought through a lot of the horizontal draw stuff that had uneven distribution, but never had problems with the singleplanes.

GM obviously figured out how 'off' certain cyls are in the LT1 and LS1 applications, I'm not sure how you would properly dial in on a different combo without 8 02 sensors or simply guessing by plug pattern. The problem is, reading plugs only tells you what the cylinder was at a specific point. Was it idle, wot, cruise, decel??

-- Joe

 

Yeah isn't that amazing? Comp will sell you a fast ramp cam but they don't have a lifter setup that will handle it without a bunch of spring pressure or a rev kit.
My stuff isn't as hard on valvetrains as theirs.

 

No, EBL is batch fire in it's most basic batchy form.

If your dead set on sequential with cyl trims, look at the LSx stuff which a bunch of guys have converted to, or look at the newer megasquirt.

I wouldn't go too crazy with the aftermarket stuff, you could quickly end up spending twice what the car is work on a system that may or may not drive well on the street.

-- Joe

 

Yep. Makes me cranky.

I currently have a XR288HR10 with 'moderate' ramps, it's a little faster than a normal roller grind but nothing like a solid roller. I'm running howards link bar lifters and basic 130lbs AFR springs with light 8mm valves.

On a 412 though, that cam is done by 6,200..

I've got roughly 70psi of oil pressure at idle, and based on my initial break in and testing around the farm the lifters seem to keep lash.

-- Joe

 

You can get systems with more drivability/adjustability than the stock stuff or MS for less than 2K, complete.

 

2K might be worth more than the car

The newer stuff does look nice, but that's just a whole lot of money. Stock ECM's are still $50 and an ostrich is what, under $200? Real time tuning for well under $500 leaves lots of hard part money left over.

The EBL is a nice hybrid setup too for guys on a budget. I like Megasquirt because it's open source, if I want to change something it's quite easy.

If your buying, I'll take a new Holley setup


-- Joe

 

I deffinatly looked into the LSx pcm, but priceeyyyyy.

If I let the car idle, all the plugs would richen up, if I took out out on the highway and brought it through the gears a few times then they start to variate.

I've looked into megasquirt but I'm not sure I fully understand it, EBL just seems like the best way for me to go.

 

EBL is probably the best bang for the buck. I'd run an EBL if I didn't have a ton of stock stuff lying around. Plus Rob knows what he's doing.

-- Joe

 

I see that said alot. Plus the price and ease of installation.

 

Soooooo, I just got an incredible deal on a new Edelbrock 29785 Vic E manifold with rails and 4 bbl TB for $400. I already picked up my AFR's.

With that being said how does this affect my cam selection and power output???

 

Is it the original version with the clips that hold the rails? I recently saw the "version 2" manifold, which looked really nice.

Is it already set up for a felpro 1205 port?

Tony Mamo @ AFR regarding the 8017 springs. I had asked him if
the 8017 can control the valve with a XFI cam to .600 lift on a hydraulic
roller, because of my concern that the 8019 springs would be too much pressure at .600 lift:


"Joe...

We set the springs at 1.800

The .600 lift recommendation isn't determined by coilbind figures (some
applications are....some aren't)....in this case we recommend a stouter
spring rate (for .600+ applications). Meaning you could run a .650 lift
cam with our 8017 spring but that much lift is better handled with a
stouter spring (our 8019).

Sounds like you have the info you need....just wanted to qualify your
confusion regarding the specs.

-Tony"

Now, Keep in mind, this was based on an XR288HR-10 on a 400 sbc, which would see peak power around 5800 RPM, and shift before 6200 RPM, and Tony also said this:

"We have valve float completely in check but I advise you step into our
upgrade spring for the most accurate valve motion at high RPM's ($100
additional). Our standard spring might give up the ghost a bit in the
low/mid 6000's.....the 8019 is good for 300 more RPM....not an
insignificant number when you consider how much more power is available
with another few hundred R's."

When we talked about cams that would push me into 6500 RPM land. I went with the XR288, but if you end up going with something that will pull to 6500 you may wish to go with the #8019 spring.

I'd email Tony. He knows what works best with his heads. You may also want to reach our to Jim Barth. I'll ask him to chime in on this thread.

-- Joe

 

Yes its version 1, I'm unsure of what gasket its to right now, but there looks to be ALOT of room for porting.


RPM's are my main concern with the springs, 99% of the cams I've been looking at are under .600" of lift. But I'm building a 355 so its obviously going to want to peak higher, especially now with the SP.

 

My vic is opened to 1207 gasket and looks like it could go alittle higher. Its not 1205 out the box and should be ported alittle to match to the heads for best results.

IMO the 8017 spring will handle alot of milder hyd rollers but any XFI stuff goin over 6000 rpm should use the 8019's. I've seen the 280xfi float at 5700 rpm with 120lb seat/320 lb open springs on a 360" motor. 1989GTAtransam here has floated a 268xfi cam around same rpm with beehives that were suppose to be 130lbs seat but when checked only measured 107 lbs I believe...

Follow the LSx crowd. They use 8019 springs and very similar small diameter double springs from other manufacturers..they all may even be the same spring just renamed! Not sure where its sourced. LSx guys run very aggressive cams to high rpms and even tho their valvetrain is lighter than most standard sbc's, they still have some high rpm from hyd rollers. Look at their spring pressures...i've seen 160-170lbs from shimmed 8019 springs run on their motors. Thats where I put my 8019's spinning a .603/.613 lift combo to 7K rpms. I've seen some race setups turning mid 7k range using near 200lbs seat pressure and morel lifters, but i've also seen the 8019 type springs turn 7500 rpm on LS1 type heads on 4.8-5.3L motors with boost, on ls7 lifters! Its good insurance

 

The 8017 are 135lbs seat, at .600 lift they are 351s.

The 8019 are 155lbs seat, at .600 lift they are 411lbs.

The concern I have is that 411lbs is a bit much for a hydraulic lifter, I think it might bleed down. I've specifically spoken with Howards and Morel, and they don't want more than 380lbs on their lifters. So I think at .550 (390lbs) lift you start getting into the trouble zone (at idle, part throttle).

I guess that is why AFR makes rev kits, that won't collapse the lifter at high RPM.

-- Joe

 

The High performance/race Morels will take 500 open pressure, not sure why they are telling you different. Unless that was for their stock replacement lifters. Chris Straub is a dealer who also does cams and other valvetrain stuff over at chevelles.com. There are many who use 200-220lb seat pressures and 450-500 lb springs on Morel hyd lifters in all out race applications. The fastest street legal vette in Europe runs 220lbs seat and I believe near 500 open on a aggressive hyd. roller cam using Morels in a LS7 motor with twin turbos. My new setup uses around 170 seat/450 open. I went morels but I was told LS7's will handle it. Its gonna be .640" lift and 6500+ rpm with a big solid 2.100" valve.

I've run my LS7's just fine with 411 open. They may bleed down abit at very high rpms and thats where a morel lifter could make large power gains. But I never had a problem with them from what I could tell.

 

This is their street/strip retrofit lifters. We're talking nearly $500 just for lifters. They told me 380 open is about max they want to see.

-- Joe

 

Interesting...mine were the 4602's that ran about 600 shipped... I would NOT hesitate to take them over 400lbs. you NEED it on some cam lobes at high rpm. AFR's may get away with less pressure since they use 8mm stem valves. Combine that with titanium retainers and a small diameter double spring, the weight is cut down and you can rev higher with less spring.

I just know many guys use LS7 lifters at 400-420lbs open and have no issue at all. Vast number of LS guys out there with much more aggressive stuff than most of the sbc crowd uses, but we have some very aggressive cams available.

 

Has anyone seen this TB before? I cant find it anywhere, it doesnt even look like the ebay one.