i'm comparing the solid roller to hydrualic on my desktop dyno, the choice seems pretty clear, but i'm wondering if its worth the extra say $400 over a hydrualic cam.
my hydraulic combo is:
355 ci. small block
9.72:1 comp. forged pistons
Dart Iron eagle heads 2.02/1.60 manley stainless valves
750 cfm double pumper
Victor Jr. Intake
Comp cams 280H cam 230 dur 480 lift
it made 430hp at 6000 420 tq at 4500 on DD2k

if i switch to roller i'll use the 280AR solid roller which is 550 lift 236 dur, still very streetable and i'll still be able to use the 11" converter i had plans on, since non of this is any fun if i cant use it on the street.
on the dyno it made, 457hp at 5500 rpms, and only dropped to 456hp at 6000 rpms.
470 ft lbs of torque at 4500 rpms, but a much broader range then the hydrualic.
if the hydraulic runs my into the low 12's, say 12.20 on the 1/4, will the switch to solid be able to put my into the 11's?
keep in mind, with the 355 engine and me in the car, it'll weight about 3250 lbs, and i'll have a TH-350 behind it, and a 3.73 gear out back.

I don't think you want a solid roller in a car that's driven a whole lot. The spring pressures get a bit ridiculous, and your cam wears out really fast. I'd say a hydra roller is the ultimate street performer.

-Joe

------------------
79' Z28 4-spd- built 355, TRW 10:1 forged flat tops, WP SportsmanII heads, Crane Energizer 230/230 duration .480"/.480" lift, Edelbrock Victor Jr., Holley 750cfm, Dynomax headers, dual 3" flowmasters :) 3.73 Posi 10-bolt

.

[This message has been edited by CamaroNOTcamero (edited 11-21-2001).]

why would it be any worse then a hydrualic roller?
i've looked into a few Hydr. rollers the XE282HR is a nice one. produces better torque on the low end then the solid does, but less HP on the top end.
it seems like they would need the same size spring reguardless, so wouldnt it have the same pressures on the cam ethier way?

[This message has been edited by CamaroNOTcamero (edited 11-21-2001).]

Solid roller and true street driving don't go together well, learn from my mistake. The lifters lasted a bout 1500 miles and took the cam with them. It was a solid "street" roller. I personally will never run a solid roller in a street car again. As mentioned above you do have to have pretty stout springs (not very good for cam life at idle). If you are dead set on a roller for the street, go with a hyd. roller and save yourself the headaches. I think rollers may be a little over rated for street applications (for all out race, you can't beat them). Maybe I am just a little sour now that I have to do some repair work. I am going to stick to the basics from here on out (KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid). The rollers are just another thing to go wrong. Is a 6-71 blown 383 simple? (maybe I will never learn)

Royce

------------------
70 Camaro 383ci
69 Camaro 385ci
2000 GMC Z71
Link to my 70

http://profiles.yahoo.com/camaroman7d

Oh yeah and the spring pressures are different, because the ramps of the solids are so much more agressive. You need stiff springs to keep the lifter from jumping off the cam. If you don't plan on seeing 7000+ RPMs on a regular basis then stay away from the solid roller. If you plan on spinning it like that you could also do it with a solid flat tappet. Do your research and ask around before you spend close to $1,000 on cam, lifters, springs, stud girdle, rev. kit.

Royce

ok ok, i'll go with a Hydra roller, any problems associated with them. everyone gets me hyped up about the benefits of rollers and then i find out that they wear out fast?
i'm not dead set on rollers, but i would like my engine to benifit from there increase bottom end, and broader ranges.

I feel solid rollers should only be considered if you want a quick ET as your main concern...otherwise, save your money and run a solid flat tappet...hydraulic rollers are a waste of money IMO...they cost the same as a solid, yet are rpm limited due to heavy lifters and don't have agressive enough lobes to make comparable power to a solid roller.

I run a Comp Cams Xtreme Energy solid roller in my race car (XR286R-10, bbc), but it's a street cam, not a race grind. The spring pressures are only 170 seat, and about 440 lbs open. This is much milder than a race grind that typically requires over 200 lbs seat and 600+ open pressures. I know one racer that has many thousands of miles and hundreds of passes with these cams using quality lifters.

Also, if you buy the best quality roller lifters, then failures should not be happening...Crower or Isky are the best you can get for the money.

------------------
Malibumotorsports (http://www.Malibumotorsports.cjb.net)
79 Malibu, 414 ci BBC, 3550 lbs.
10.75 @ 123.8 mph, 1.50 60'

Slowazzbu,
Most cam companies will tell you that solid rollers don't live on the street. Mine was/is a street grind and I used all the "right" stuff. I'm not saying they are junk by any means, but they are not ideal for the street. I agree with everything you said and I learned the hard way. They are not worth the money unless it is for Race Only duty (IMO). By the way mine was Crower the whole kit (cam, lifters, rev kit, springs). There were two options on the springs and I chose the stiffer of the two cause I was more concerned with performance. I guess when they say "limited street use" they mean it. Just thought I would share my experience.

Royce

camaroman7d, how would you characterize the type of street driving you did? Was it a lot of slow stop-and-go with periods of idling like in town, or was it highway driving?

I'm very curious to know since what you say happened is exactly what the guy I talked to at Comp Cams said, and I was pretty skeptical at the time. It seems to me that once your RPM was above 2000 or so you'd be getting enough splash off of the crank to provide the necessary lubrication.

What were your cam and spring specs.?

Sorry for the 20 questions, but I've been considering the whole roller cam deal, and this is one issue I'm concered about.

I'm again for small solids here so I will continue.

There is one cam lifter combination that I would love to try on the street but I gotta feeling that It IS WAY OUTTA LINE, price-wise!

It is the roundy-round cam and lifter set-up that has the lifter made with the follower end like half of a cylinder laid sideways cross the end.

You know, like a solid roller w/ a stationary wheel!!

The lobe profile of the cam also looks like a very aggressive solid roller!! Plus, both are made out of (I assume) ceramics OR "cermets" or possibly both are thick TiN coated/plated to withstand the marriage of the roller cam lobe design and the solid lifter designs needing extreme spring presuures.

I wonder what would happen to a cam that was made like this but milder like a very high lift CC282S type cam w/ .050", .100" and .200" duration numbers like an aggresive solid roller if it was ran on the street and that the funny looking lifters were drilled so that they were pressure lubed like some solids are now that you can buy at a premium price to fight spring pressure wear and low oilling from idling around town!!

Sorry, I'm getting windy, here!! I will watch it next time. pdq67

Ballistic, sorry it took so long to get back to you I was away for a little while. My cam is/was a Crower p/n 00426 adv. duration 288/290, @ .050 250/252 112LSA, .570/.584 lift. This car is a true street car (which to me means can and should be driven any and everywhere). I drove it around town a lot, but also on the highway. Any type of driving you do with your daily driver I did with this, just not as often. I do let my car idle for long periods of time because I don't like to drive it until it is at operating tempature. It was/is not driven daily, but it is driven a few times a week. spring pressure ~125lbs closed and ~350lbs open, plus add to that the rev kit (which adds more spring pressure to the lifters and cam). Stop and go driving and long periods at idle is the killer on the roller cams. Lack of oil is not the problem, it's the spring pressures along with the agressive ramps, these factors are murder on the cam at low RPM's. I called to make sure (or at least I thought) the cam would live on the street, I was told I should be able to get about 25,000 miles out of it (actually turned out to be much much less, 1,500-2,000 miles). I will be running a solid flat tappet when I put it back together, that was an expensive lesson. The car was still running great when I was going to change the oil pan and SURPRISE little needle rollers in the pan. I hope this helps, I would take the advice of the Comp Cams guys (if anyone knows they would).

Royce

A while back, there were posts on this subject and someone said they have had long life with a solid roller. While I have not done another search yet, it's an interesting subject. I currently have a solid lifter design and have, emotionally, leaned towards a solid roller for the next go around. If not, I'd stay with the solid flat tappet design.

------------------
Rick Dorion
69 RS Conv,355,M20,4.10's and I don't worry about stone chips.

Little needles in the oil pan, that sucks.

Your cam profile, by roller standards, isn't that aggressive, and the springs aren't super stiff either. In fact your cam specs. are very similar to what I was considering.

You said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Stop and go driving and long periods at idle is the killer on the roller cams. Lack of oil is not the problem, it's the spring pressures along with the agressive ramps, these factors are murder on the cam at low RPM's.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The amount of oil getting to the lifter bearing was the only factor I could think of that would be detrimental at low revs. The pressure loading between the lifter and lobe, as well as the load on the lifter bearing will be less at low RPM since the mass of the valvetrain is being accelerated more slowly than at high RPM.

Comp has an Endure-X tappet 888-16 that has an oiling groove, but they are a whopping $460 for a set.

Did any of the needles get sucked into your oil pump?

The roller I'm installing .525 lift 224@.050 calls for 132lbs at the seat and 280lbs open. I don't know where the lack of longevity comes from in rollers. All newer, I believe '87 and up GM V8's are roller from the factory. Is the short life only solid roller?

------------------
...Dennis
"The '69 (http://chevelles.com/showroom/fine69_03.jpg), the '96 (http://chevelles.com/showroom/fine69_02.jpg) & the club (http://camaroslimited.com/)"

camaroman7d...With only 125lbs seat pressure maybe the rollers got hammered at the closing event maybe some uncontrolled bouncing and all. What i understand about roller and streetability is that for longer life yes lighter spring pressures are needed as the valve needs to be set down gently... but enough pressure needs to be maintained so as to prevent floating.
I am in the process of changing out my solid roller now..I`m going to a much shorter grind .
The roller I had was 200lbs seat and nearly 600lbs open when I took it apart after 7800 miles and about 100 run`s down the quater as lifters go i had one getting a little gritty.
I think i just caught it..
But anyway maybe too little sping was the perp.
That`s crappy to have that happen though ...sorry to hear it

------------------
68 biscayne 4060lbs
468 iron oval port 10.25-1 TH400 Flowmasters&radials
11.85 ET @ 113.7 MPH

I wanted the bigger thing, too! (you know, boy's "My thing is bigger than your thing" stuff) but got scared away when I heard about eating the roller lifters axles and needle bearings. It's not the cost of them, it's the engine overhaul cost that got me if it destroy's itself completely!!!

You can buy a little tool that you use to put a very tiny notch in each lifter bore sidewall. Something like .020" wide at the surface of the bore and .012" deep in a "V" cut. The notch starts down from the top a bit so that oil can only bleed down to the lobe. The notch is placed 90 degrees to the roller axis. I don't know if you can put two notches in the bore for double the oiling capacity OK or even if it is overkill. I would also check to see if this is one time the hi-vol., hi-pressure oilpump is needed.

I personally, when I go w/ another solid cam, will go w/ a custom grind that will approach the roller's numbers with regard to going max on lift, and .200" figures for a solid. Then I will use the recommended springs along w/ solid lifters that are drilled for lobe oiling.

And It will be a short duration, tight lash cam for street rpm power production. Less than 240 for BB (and 230 for SB and depending on engine cubic inches,too), duration at .050". You know, a SOTA 2000 to 6000 rpm type cam.

I will check on close, (106 or 108/104 or 106 vs the fairly standard 110/106 up to the 114/108+) LCA's/ICA's stuff.

One last point is to gain max. lift like the rollers have, I will ask several tech guy's their thoughts on upping the lift at the rocker arm.

Don't get me wrong here b/c solid rollers have their place, but I don't think it is in a true street car that you need to commute to work in say 30 miles one way every day.

Put them in your toy and run h-ll outa it. And have fun!! IMHO. pdq67

My cam was a "street roller" that's why it is not as radical as most solid rollers. This was designed to live on the street. BigRed maybe you are on to something with the spring pressure thing, but I used the kit recommended for the cam (I bought the whole shabang), what you said makes sense. I don't know what the spring pressure at the cam was, I know the rev kit added a lot of pressure (any one looking for a rev kit for a small block?) The comp cams solid lifters with the groove are nice, Crower now offers a service to do this to their lifters.
Ballistic, maybe you are right about the oil thing. What I learned was that, there is more pressure on the rollers at lower RPM's. Most guys actually run oil restrictors in their solid roller race engines (this should not be done on the street).
Luckily for me all the rollers were in the pan along with parts of the lifter. I will have to sleeve/bush one lifter bore and that's it, no other damage. None of the needles looked galled &lt;sp&gt; or blue. Heat was not an issue the cam was still in decent shape other that the lobe that didn't have needle bearings in the lifter. Maybe it was a fluke, but it is just not worth the risk to me to try it again.
BigRed glad to hear you caught it in time, did you do much driving around town with that cam? 7800 miles is not a lot for a street car, but 100 passes it quite a bit (how long was this thing together?). I think a solid rollers are just not designed for the street. I bet your cam is a billet roller too, that is why your cam can stand the higher spring rates. The street rollers are not billet.
I mis-spoke on my spring pressures they were 155 closed and 450 open. There were two options one was for daily street use (which is what I posted before) and the other was for limited street use (which is what is posted above).

Royce

DjD,
Check out the actual cam spec's of the factory hydraulic roller cams. The ones in the 4.3 V-6 and mild 350's and I think you will find that they are actually very mild in the ramp and lift spec's much like the old factory solid cams are. Remember the -346, 30-30 Big Duntov is rated at 345 and is really like a 304 or so. This is to up the mileage that they have to last to as well as them not being all that aggressive like the aftermarket ones. I'm interested in how long the lifters actually last in the hi-po Camaro's b/c they will probably be out of warantee when they let loose.

Look at CC's line of street hydraulic rollers and you will see that the BB ones stay pretty much low-lift up until they get real big. I think about .510" or so up to 240? But could be off some here. pdq67

Cost of screwing up a good roller cam and roller lifters: $800.00

Cost of David Vizard's book "How to modify Small Block Cheverlot Camshafts and Valvetrains: Priceless

camaroNOTcamero,
Ok, time for another opinion, stick with the hyd roller,low maintenance,reasonable spring pressures, revs up real fast in my 383. Any way Ive got a Crane grind you might want to run through your desk top dyno. Grind number HR-296-2s-12 IG also give it a whirl w/1.6s.

BTW where in Jersey are you located, Im in northern Bergen.

Good luck with your selection.

The issue with the mech rollers on the street is an oiling issue according to comp cams.I run a mech roller on the street in my 540.Comp cams new roller lifters have a oiling groove cut in them that they clame sloves the oiling problem.I friend of mine is a engine builder for Roush racing and builds big block chevys on the side for extra money.He just built a new 540 engine for his street car a he used a mech roller in it.I don't think he would have done this if the mech rollers won't live on the street.

Brian.

Look at the 93-97 LT1 and 96,97 LT4 which are roller setups. These engines run great, pull down good gas mileage and idle nice and smooth. I know they aren't ground to make 450hp, but they get you into the 300+ range easily. Go with the hyd roller setup.

------------------
Jeff H - 93 Indy 500 Pace Car(supercharged) & driven daily, Hugger Orange 69 Z28 with JL8 brakes, cross-ram & GM fiberglass hood, TI setup, heater and radio delete, being restored

Go with the HYDRA-Roller as long as you keep the rev`s(with the correct parts)Below say 6800rpm you will be fine.

Camaroman7d..I had my solid roller in for about 4 years and with 7800 miles in that time and driving to and from the track some 40+ miles each way you can see how much driving i really had on it...not much
The cam is a billet core.

------------------
68 biscayne 4060lbs
468 iron oval port 10.25-1 TH400 Flowmasters&radials
11.85 ET @ 113.7 MPH

Maybe it is the oiling problem that caused my failure, but there was no evidence of that. I was just sharing my (bad) experience. Maybe I just got a bad lifter (I have heard of that happening before). Until I hear of someone with a "true" street car getting 50,000 or more miles out of a solid roller, then I won't be convinced enough to try it again. It might have been a different story if I would have used the Comp Cams lifters (but I didn't). To each their own, good luck to those of you that try it.

Hyd. rollers have been proven on the street and I think are the better choice for a "TRUE" street car. Of course this is a matter of personal preferance and usage.

Royce

------------------
70 Camaro 383ci
69 Camaro 385ci
2000 GMC Z71
Link to my 70

http://profiles.yahoo.com/camaroman7d

so lets say i use Hydra rollers to pick up the low end torque gain that they offer, would they live on the street if i used a cam say around .525" lift? 236 duration? would they last in a daily driver.
lets eliminate solid rollers here, and just consider hydras.

Why not?? afterall i believe that chevy`s HOT cam is .525 lift when 1.6 rockers are used.
I`d feel very comfortable using a fairly mild cam like that.

------------------
68 biscayne 4060lbs
468 iron oval port 10.25-1 TH400 Flowmasters&radials
11.85 ET @ 113.7 MPH

cool http://www.camaros.net/forum/biggrin.gif right now, i'll just leave the cam and valve train as the last thing on the list to buy before finishing the motor.
i'll be looking for a good deal on a BB chevy also, becuase none of this is worth it if i could have got a sweet deal on a big block.

Hey Royce,I agree the hyd roller is the ticket for the true street car.My car doesn't have many miles on it.With all the good input on this site i'm sure will figure out what the problem is.I'll be pounding my 540 next summer will see what happens,I don't need needles in my oil pan either.

i'll be looking forward to hearing how your Hydra rollers work.

I know this started out discussing solid roller to hydrualic, but since it has branched off in a few directions I thought I'd add this link for a flat tappet to roller comparison:
http://www.idavette.net/hib/camcon.htm

------------------


[This message has been edited by Bob_T (edited 11-24-2001).]

Bob-T, very good good article. At 5000 RPM and below the hyd. roller really shines, but if you want to go to say 6800 I bet a solid flat would catch up in a hurry. It really just depends on what you want. Good reading though and should answer a few questions people have.

Royce

------------------
70 Camaro 383ci
69 Camaro 385ci
2000 GMC Z71
Link to my 70

http://profiles.yahoo.com/camaroman7d

....

camaroman7d...you ran 11.90`s before the cam change did you get to run with the roller??
It was an F/T cam, but was it a solid or hyd?
Also in that dyno run mentioned earlier, any cam that is timed that short will run out of air at those lower rpm`s.

I would like to see a head to head comparison
of F/T`s(solid&hyd) VS Hydra-rollers matched of course as closely as the cam guru`s can make them,and let the cards fall where they may!! that would be interesting...

------------------
68 biscayne 4060lbs
468 iron oval port 10.25-1 TH400 Flowmasters&radials
11.85 ET @ 113.7 MPH

Big Red, I did make two passes with the roller, but I had a fuel problem and tuning issues. It went 11.98, but that was not a fair comparison. I changed to 4.10's and added a gear vendor, I didn't have a chance to see what worked and what didn't. It also wanted more carburator, which I added but never got a chance to run it again. I think 11.60's would have been very reasonable, but the only way to know is to run it. The flat tappet cam in my 385 is hyd. it has more adv. duration, than the solid roller did/does.

Royce

GOTCHA.. and that does sound like a reasonable estimate, maybe even a little conservative at that..