I've been chasing a noisy lifter since putting my engine back together earlier this year.
Every component is new (lifters, springs) or nearly new (rockers, push rods, etc). I've done the lifter preload about a dozen times, by several different methods including a couple of rounds with the engine running. Still one lifter won't adjust.
The last item on the list is the cam itself.
I've always just gone ahead and yarded out the engine for a job like this. It makes everything so much easier especially degreeing the cam and ensuring a good oil pan seal.
Is there anything unusual I should be prepared for when doing a swap with the engine still strapped in?
I'm familiar with procedure but not the details in a 3rd gen.
I would assume the pan can be dropped but probably not removed, does that sound right?
Any insights would be appreciated. I'd really like to actually drive this thing instead of working on it as I have so far this season.
Thanks in advance.

 

Sure it's not pulling a rocker stud? In-car cam swap requires pulling the radiator, maybe the hood latch upright support ( barely recall, been 12 years ) You can remove all the pan bolts, and then get the timing cover loose, but re-sealing it will never be truly leak-free, no matter what you try. If you don't want oil leaks, you'll have to lift the engine from above for pan dropping, and for pan re-sealing. Get everything perfectly clean, use new FelPro gaskets, don't use any gasket sealer or silly-cone, don't over-tighten, it'll never leak.

 

Easier and quicker to pull the motor. (for me at least) More reliable as well; less chance of leeeeeeeks.

 

I've done it in-car twice now, no room in my tiny garage for engine dropping. Didn't remove the pan bolts completely, just left them a couple of threads in and carefully cracked the gasket, then dropped the front of the pan just enough to remove timing cover. Lucked out, no leaks. Well no new ones anyway

Need to remove starter and y-pipe to get to all the bolts.

 

I see the buzz word is "leak free".
I've been lucky in the sense that this particular engine has always been tight despite being apart several times. I use the FelPro one piece oil pan gasket with great success but I know trying to seal it up without being able to remove it completely will be a challenge.
I see the parts in the way and yes, the latch support will have to be removed.
I want to have enough room to be able to degree the new cam (specs yet to be determined). It may be that I will decide to pull the engine out.
As for a rocker stud giving me trouble, I now have brand new RHS Pro Torker heads with screw in studs. (the Vortecs are on the shelf waiting for a rebuild) I've been banging my head against the wall trying to find out where the problem might be and this is all that's left. For the record, this is the same valve that had a stud break while cruising on the highway last year. #6 exhaust. That was on the old Vortecs and all the valve train components have been replaced with this new build. I suspect some kind of damage to the lobe but it's very difficult to see even with a bore scope.

 

I just finished heads/cam install on my car with motor in. was gonna pull it but didnt want to go thru that hassel as my nose would have to come off since the hoist arm isnt quite long enough.

Wasnt bad. I had everything out tho, rad and all the accessories as you'd expect. Pulled the timing cover with the oil pan intact and got it back in...really had to work it but its in and I hope it dont leak I had the motor running for a few seconds so far and no issues but thats not really a good test.

Definately easier to do installs with motor out since you have more room but its not bad to do it in car. That was my first time doing it in car. Last 2 builds were on stand.

 

Once all the front accessories and rad are out, there is a ton of room for a degree wheel.

 

I've done all my builds on a stand as well.
I can see that there's quite a bit a space in front once all the stuff has been removed. I hoping that it's enough for me to work in.
I'm anxious to see what this cam looks like after 40 000 miles.

 

I'm 5'9" 180 after a good meal and I was in my engine bay torquing the heads on...theres a good bit of room


Yep plenty room for degree wheel

 

I forgot all about those

 

Well that wasn't too bad.
Lots of room work and access the pan bolts. No need to remove the starter as I have a ultra small unit from a 96 Chev pick-up. No y-pipe either.
The latch support wan't an issue and the only thing in the way are the cross braces that run diagonally across the rad opening. A simple push provided enough room to slip the cam out.
What I WAS hoping to find was a wiped out cam lobe that would explain the one noisy lifter. That wasn't the case. The cam looks to be OK.
NOW WHAT!!

 

Are you sure you want to know the next step? Okay, Now what is trying another block. But most guys just order a new set of lifters from another manufacturer. I'd swap in a new custom-ground cam, because if you're not trying new ideas, you're not learning anything.

 

Yes, I've been considering a fresh short block. This time around I'd build a forged bullet and would also like to go up in displacement however, for budgetary reasons (and my own sanity) I may invest in a thorough cleaning and re-ring re-bearing of the existing block. It has a fresh .020" overbore and .010" under (cast) crank so there's a lot of life left in it.
My thinking is that there's a piece of crap stuck somewhere that's preventing proper lifter operation on the one valve but truthfully, I have no idea what the hell is going on.
That said, I've been working on a new cam spec for some time now. It wasn't until I made the decision to shelve the Vortecs and step up to a much better RHS head that I could start to zero in a new cam profile.
Stay tuned......

 

The way the oil galleys intersect the lifter bores, there's no way that some trash could only obstruct one lifter, unless the trash got stuck inside that lifter. The bore for that lifter might not be indexed correctly, might consider milling / bushing. RHS heads are great, but to say they're better than Vortecs you need to specify in what way they're better. There's not a single RHS head I'd choose over GM Vortecs for a true-street 250 for daily driving. A race 350 or a daily 383? Yes, the RHS Vortecs. A race 383 or daily 400? The 180 cc with 2.02s. A race 400 or daily 434? 200 cc, and so on. Considering Dart got 525 HP from a 400 with their 180 heads and a too-small carb, everyone using larger ports on lesser cubes seems insane.

 

I agree on the oil galley. I can't see how anything blocking the passage to #6 exhaust wouldn't starve those downstream.
I don't see how there could be a problem with indexing as this engine has been alive for several thousand miles (like 40 000+) with several rebuilds and reassemblies along the way.
That's why I'm at such a loss to explain what the heck is going on.
As for my RHS heads, I may have picked up the last set of their Vortec 170cc/2.02/1.60 models. They've since been delisted from the RHS website.
From what I can see of the bowl and seat work and 3rd party flow bench results, they out perform a stock Vortec head by a wide margin.
You and I had discussed before the advantages of the small port too. I'm in total agreement with the thinking that if two ports have similar flow numbers, then the smaller port is the one to choose.

 

Did you disassemble the lifter in question? Was there any scoring? If so, did you get pics? If so, did you post them? Was it more difficult to disassemble than any other lifter? Good score on those heads, but I still wouldn't put them on any street 350. They need help in their exhaust ports, be sure the exhaust valves are undercut and get a back-cut. Be sure to fully polish those exhaust ports. Then I'd conversationally suggest you at least consider how they'd like a 10:1 383 with Comp's smallest HR Thumpr HR cam.

 

[QUOTE=Atilla the Fun;5290942]Did you disassemble the lifter in question? Was there any scoring? If so, did you get pics? If so, did you post them? Was it more difficult to disassemble than any other lifter? QUOTE]

The problem with these lifters is that the link bar is riveted to the lifter body. Disassembly means destruction.
I ground the rivets off two of the lifters that had collapsed.
It appears that the metering disc (for lack of a better phrase) has been broken. Comp isn't sure what has happened but they APPEAR willing to help me out in some way.
The lifters in picture have gone a lot of miles, some of them very difficult miles.

 

I thought they were a pretty good deal. I purchased them bare and then ordered the install kit. Ferrera valves (which I had back cut) included but the valve springs (Comp 987s)weren't to my liking especially considering the hydraulic roller. I opted for the Comp 26918 springs and associated hardware.
The valve job looks excellent with a radiused exhaust seat and 4 angle intake. All in all they appear to be good looking heads.
Yes, I've considered going to a 383. Thinking about it briefly (and conversationally) the small Thumper cam would build MOUNTAINS of torque.
I'm going to try that in my simulation program and see what the results are.

 

I did a little (simulation) dyno testing comparing my late XR276HR and the smallest Thumpr available (74 degrees of overlap!!).
Interesting results.

 

Never seen exactly that before, but I can easily see that causing problems. If they'll just do a direct replacement, and them pay shipping, I'd be inclined to go for a test-drive. Your images of sim-dyno results didn't work for me. Guess I need to download some image conversion filter? Anyway... And liking that cam with those heads on a 383 came from this: (1) Study enough dyno results for 383s, you'll see they're best with about 20* overlap at 0.050", which the baby Thumpr has. Those heads are better above 0.475" intake lift than GM Vortecs, yet still need extra split in the cam. It's a perfect match. It isn't a cam you'd ever go Power-Touring with, or I'd say 9.5:1 What specs were you thinking for your next cam? If it's secret, please PM.

 

I've printed the files as a pdf which you should be able to open. Let me know if it doesn't work.
As far as my next cam spec goes, I won't have any secrets. In fact I appreciate the input.

 

Those showed, thanks. No surprise there, the Thumprs are wrong for a 350, I'd rather try a 334. Did you use RHS' advertised flow numbers? If so, did you correct for them testing on a larger bore than your block is at?