Theo- My line of thinking as well. I thought I read in an earlier thread where
the person wanted to add roller lifters but changing the cam wasnt mentioned. I
may have not read it correctly or misunderstood what they where trying to
accomplish.
as usual, THANKS for the input Theo.
TtT
--- On Tue, 8/18/09, Smit, Theo <Theo.Smit@dynastream.com> wrote:
> From: Smit, Theo <Theo.Smit@dynastream.com>
> Subject: RE: [Tigers] Roller 289
> To: "Tony Somebody" <achd73@yahoo.com>, tigers@autox.team.net, "Jeffrey
>Nichols" <jxnichols@sbcglobal.net>
> Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2009, 1:03 PM
> Hi Tony,
> You shouldn't use a roller lifter with a non-roller cam
> because (besides
> the cam hardness issue) the cam lobe profile is totally
> different. A
> flat tappet cam is designed to push a flat surface up at
> the right rate,
> while a roller cam is designed to work against a radiused
> surface and
> still achieve a comparable lift profile to what was
> originally obtained
> with the flat tappet interface.
>
> If you compare a roller cam lobe to a flat tappet cam lobe,
> you'll see
> that the roller cam tip is a lot more rounded compared to
> the flat
> tappet cam, even though the lift-at-the-valve profile might
> be quite
> similar.
>
> Cheers,
> Theo
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tigers-bounces@autox.team.net
>
> > [mailto:tigers-bounces@autox.team.net]
> On Behalf Of Tony Somebody
> > Sent: August 18, 2009 11:34 AM
> > To: tigers@autox.team.net;
> Jeffrey Nichols
> > Subject: Re: [Tigers] Roller 289
> >
> <snip>
> > requiring change if used with a roller cam. Is there a
>
> > problem using roller lifters with a non roller cam
> because of
> > the hardness-like w/ the dist. gear.
> > TtT
> > _______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Tigers@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/tigers
http://www.team.net/archive
|