Hyd. roller lifters Gen 6
08-25-2005, 05:12 PM
#41
MarineKinetics
Platinum Member
Re: Hyd. roller lifters Gen 6
Nordicflame,
I think the confusion stems from the fact that two different OEM dog bone lifters are being discussed here.
The GM OEM dog-bone lifters are limited to .355" travel due to the length of the lifter body
The CRANE 16535-16 LONG TRAVEL HYDRAULIC ROLLER lifters have a longer lifter body to accommodate the extra lift. Hope this helps clarify.
Bob
I think the confusion stems from the fact that two different OEM dog bone lifters are being discussed here.
The GM OEM dog-bone lifters are limited to .355" travel due to the length of the lifter body
The CRANE 16535-16 LONG TRAVEL HYDRAULIC ROLLER lifters have a longer lifter body to accommodate the extra lift. Hope this helps clarify.
Bob
Last edited by rmbuilder; 08-25-2005 at 05:16 PM.
08-25-2005, 10:47 PM
#42
Registered
Re: Hyd. roller lifters Gen 6
Thanks Bob,
I realize the Cranes are longer shelled on the top end. It's obvious this is so the lifter can drop further down with the smaller base circle to increase lift. I think I covered that fairly well above. However, it was mentioned that if you went over .355/.359 lobe lift that you would run out of flat area on the lifter itself and actually push the retainer up. The Crane lifters could never actually be lifted so high that it would hit where the flats end and lift the retainer unless the lobes exceeded the bearing journals which we know is not possible.
I'm not sure the GM ones would hit either but I've only used them up to .600 and there was never an interference issue. They did drop into the retainer a bit and caused some irregular wear which is why I wouldn't use them again. Maybe if someone has some in hand they could measure the distance from the wheel to where the flats start on both. This would tell you.
Thanks for the input,
Dave
I realize the Cranes are longer shelled on the top end. It's obvious this is so the lifter can drop further down with the smaller base circle to increase lift. I think I covered that fairly well above. However, it was mentioned that if you went over .355/.359 lobe lift that you would run out of flat area on the lifter itself and actually push the retainer up. The Crane lifters could never actually be lifted so high that it would hit where the flats end and lift the retainer unless the lobes exceeded the bearing journals which we know is not possible.
I'm not sure the GM ones would hit either but I've only used them up to .600 and there was never an interference issue. They did drop into the retainer a bit and caused some irregular wear which is why I wouldn't use them again. Maybe if someone has some in hand they could measure the distance from the wheel to where the flats start on both. This would tell you.
Thanks for the input,
Dave
08-26-2005, 09:51 AM
#43
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tri-Cities, TN
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Hyd. roller lifters Gen 6
08-26-2005, 10:06 AM
#44
Registered
Re: Hyd. roller lifters Gen 6
That article sums up exactly what I said. The quote from above I'm trying to understand here is this:
"This flat goes only so far down then stops. Now max lobe lift of .355 to .359" is where the lifter will rise to a point and start to lift the dog bone off of the flat."
If I'm reading this right and you mean the flats on the lifter itself only go so far down and where they stop actually lifts the lifter on lobe lift, then this is not physically possible. By the looks of the picture of the two lifters side by side the stock would never lift it either unless they dropped down too far and grabbed it.
Maybe I'm not coming accross clear. It wouldn't be the first time
"This flat goes only so far down then stops. Now max lobe lift of .355 to .359" is where the lifter will rise to a point and start to lift the dog bone off of the flat."
If I'm reading this right and you mean the flats on the lifter itself only go so far down and where they stop actually lifts the lifter on lobe lift, then this is not physically possible. By the looks of the picture of the two lifters side by side the stock would never lift it either unless they dropped down too far and grabbed it.
Maybe I'm not coming accross clear. It wouldn't be the first time
08-26-2005, 10:28 AM
#45
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Tri-Cities, TN
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Hyd. roller lifters Gen 6
Nordic,
Read the caption under the picture showing the stock GM spider assembly to the right. I read what I put down and did not explain my self. Valve float is where this can happen. The OE lifter gets itself into trouble starting around 53 to 5800 rpm depending on profile. I saw this happen first hand when doing endurance testing for marine engines on dyno pulls that were held at various rpms in the 5K range for periods of 10 to 20 minutes.
Does that help? Am I making sense to you? Would it be better if I called and explained?
Chris
Read the caption under the picture showing the stock GM spider assembly to the right. I read what I put down and did not explain my self. Valve float is where this can happen. The OE lifter gets itself into trouble starting around 53 to 5800 rpm depending on profile. I saw this happen first hand when doing endurance testing for marine engines on dyno pulls that were held at various rpms in the 5K range for periods of 10 to 20 minutes.
Does that help? Am I making sense to you? Would it be better if I called and explained?
Chris
08-26-2005, 10:48 AM
#46
Registered
Re: Hyd. roller lifters Gen 6
Just misunderstood what you were saying I guess...
On the same page now
Valve float is never a good thing and should always be avoided (just like the stock lifters
)
Thanks,
Dave
On the same page now
Valve float is never a good thing and should always be avoided (just like the stock lifters
) Thanks,
Dave
