Hyd Roller Cam with Solid Lifters

I've been trying to read as much as I can and have decided to go with a roller Cam. I know in a perfect world the HFT cam would be just fine for my street motor but I'm new to engine rebuilding and honestly all the HFT failure issues I have been watching/reading lately (Youtube, break-in protocols, etc.) scare me to death. Motor specs: 466, Aluminum Heads, stock stroke around 9.5 compression (Street motor). Will the below combinations cause any issues with a tight lash I have seen in other posts?

Comp Xtreme Energy Hydraulic Roller Cam 230/236@0.5 110LSA, #34-432-9
Comp Endure-X Solid Roller Lifter, #836-16
Comp Valve Springs, 924-16 (Comp Recommended for the Cam)

Clark W Griswald wrote:I've been trying to read as much as I can and have decided to go with a roller Cam. I know in a perfect world the HFT cam would be just fine for my street motor but I'm new to engine rebuilding and honestly all the HFT failure issues I have been watching/reading lately (Youtube, break-in protocols, etc.) scare me to death. Motor specs: 466, Aluminum Heads, stock stroke around 9.5 compression (Street motor). Will the below combinations cause any issues with a tight lash I have seen in other posts?

Comp Xtreme Energy Hydraulic Roller Cam 230/236@0.5 110LSA, #34-432-9
Comp Endure-X Solid Roller Lifter, #836-16
Comp Valve Springs, 924-16 (Comp Recommended for the Cam)

There will be valve train noise which a lot of people would find objectionable.
You MUSH keep a close watch on the tight valve lash; (close to ".001/.003" lash cold).

Can't be any worse than my old 7.3 powerstroke lol. That is definitely a point one might not appreciate until they are sitting in traffic. Would you say the noise is a little less pronounced with the hydraulic cam over a solid cam? Or is it purely a function of the hot lash clearance?

Clark W Griswald wrote:Can't be any worse than my old 7.3 powerstroke lol. That is definitely a point one might not appreciate until they are sitting in traffic. Would you say the noise is a little less pronounced with the hydraulic cam over a solid cam? Or is it purely a function of the hot lash clearance?

It is slightly more pronounced than a normal solid roller street cam.

I am no cam expert but hydraulic roller cams dont have lash ramps. When solid lifters are used this will lead to a crashing experience for the roller lifter and a lower lifter life than if Hydraulic lifters were used.
Having personally destroyed three sets of lifters with none of them lasting the full life I became a believer in Jones Cam Designs. They are the only place to buy inverse radius lobe designs. This is accomplished by using a smaller grinding wheel where the shock to the lifter wheel at the lobe entrance is reduced and the close is controlled to help reduce/eliminate bounce. My solid lifter Jones cam has .780" lift and only 530# over the nose. I run a SR-71 head motor to 7,000 rpm. I'm using stud MotorSports aluminum rockers and the parts are real happy. After one season there was no change.

Speed-Talk.com has some posts on hydraulic roller cams with solid lifters that's no good. Mike Jones comments match my comments.
If you decide to go HRC with solid roller lifters.... good luck on life.

Also those Endure-X lifters are some of the worst. Comps anything is not good enough let alone their springs. I recommend PAC springs and BAM lifters.

For the sake of longevity, I'd run the lash very tight. I'd set them about .003" HOT.

BBFTorino wrote:For the sake of longevity, I'd run the lash very tight. I'd set them about .003" HOT.

You usually can not set them HOT.
When it gets COLD the engine may not start because the valves are a little open, if the valve train changes from expansion.

Why not just get a cam ground for the correct application?

dfree383 wrote:Why not just get a cam ground for the correct application?

That is what I would do if it was mine... have the hydraulic roller cam reground to a solid lifter grind.

rmcomprandy wrote:

dfree383 wrote:Why not just get a cam ground for the correct application?

That is what I would do if it was mine... have the hydraulic roller cam reground to a solid lifter grind.

I suppose I'm not totally familiar with lash ramps etc.; I need to read up on this. I'm not opposed to getting a cam reground or custom ground I just thought the whole hydraulic roller cam with solid lifters was the work around to get proper rod/rocker geometry with lower spring pressure requirements instead of a solid cam with solid lifters. Believe me I want to get it right the first time.

I don't know if you have seen this. DaveDe had mentioned it about the HFT's and SFT cams. I put the link just incase you missed it. It is a break in service for the above cams.

http://www.camresearchcorp.com/camking/

PS: That link is the same Mike Jones that Dave was talking about in the above post. I would give him a call.

If you don't have the Comp.Hyd. Roller yet I see no sense in buying a $490 dollar cam to regrind. If you found a used one on the cheap, sure. If there are no blanks, OK, I could get it.

Clark W Griswald wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:

dfree383 wrote:Why not just get a cam ground for the correct application?

That is what I would do if it was mine... have the hydraulic roller cam reground to a solid lifter grind.

I suppose I'm not totally familiar with lash ramps etc.; I need to read up on this. I'm not opposed to getting a cam reground or custom ground I just thought the whole hydraulic roller cam with solid lifters was the work around to get proper rod/rocker geometry with lower spring pressure requirements instead of a solid cam with solid lifters. Believe me I want to get it right the first time.

"Street" solid roller cams don't need super high spring pressures ...

Clark W Griswald wrote:I've been trying to read as much as I can and have decided to go with a roller Cam. I know in a perfect world the HFT cam would be just fine for my street motor but I'm new to engine rebuilding and honestly all the HFT failure issues I have been watching/reading lately (Youtube, break-in protocols, etc.) scare me to death. Motor specs: 466, Aluminum Heads, stock stroke around 9.5 compression (Street motor). Will the below combinations cause any issues with a tight lash I have seen in other posts?

Comp Xtreme Energy Hydraulic Roller Cam 230/236@0.5 110LSA, #34-432-9
Comp Endure-X Solid Roller Lifter, #836-16
Comp Valve Springs, 924-16 (Comp Recommended for the Cam)

I've been running a 3 pattern HR grind with SR lifters and Beehive springs on my personal ride (570 hp 11 to 1 460) for almost 10 years. No issues excepting a broken / defective comp 26120 spring. 12.500 miles so far. 6500 to 6700 rpm shift points.

Dozens of crate engines doing the same but using the pac HR springs that come with the AFR heads.

Usually XM lobes and snug 0 lash set above 60f. Lash opens to about .005" in most cases. Even with iron heads.
The lack of a lash ramp requires tight lash.

The EX street roller lobes work as well but the recommended springs are in the 550 range open where we are using 420 to 460# open with the XM lobes.
Some of the EX solids and the attendant spring open pressures get wonky at about 10K street miles so we are careful with spring to avoid this when we use them mostly on the exhaust side.

I can't get billets to custom grind to save my soul right now.



Hope this helps.




My concern is the modest valve springs. Not really enough open IMO. 930's would serve you better. Modest spring pressures help avoid making the lifter a consumable.