RB hyd Roller lifter issues?

First, the basics. A good friend asked me to build him a RB stroker for his 69 Charger/4spd/8-3/4-3.23. He is looking for a torque monster, low maintainence, drive it on the street and occasional road trip, no drag strip use combo. The engine will be a 505 ci, 440Source based rotating assembly with TF240 heads. I called Dwayne Porter, as always, for some advice on a cam for it, my intention being to use a retrofit hydraulic roller. My reasoning was that it would make good power with low maintainence and eliminate the need to use oils with high zdpp levels. I, personally, have no experience with hydraulic rollers, I have run solid lift FT and Rollers for 30 years with zero issues. When talking to Dwayne, he advised me to do my research, as in his experience, it was about 50/50 on owner happiness on the retrofits with the problem being excessive lifter noise. Taking his advice, I started checking on the internet and YelloBullet,etc. and found out that it is a very common problem with retrofit cams for non roller engineered blocks. I talked to a friend who has run them in his BB Chevy and said that it is a common problem with them, that it varies greatly between lifter manufacturers, some excessively noisy at idle, some louder at higher RPM's. Some were mainly loud until the engine warmed up, some never quieted. I want to build my buddy a non finikey trouble free engine. Tell me your experience with these cams for this use and help me advise him whether to chance it, or go with a solid FT.

Hello Lee, Charlie from Katy Tx. I went with the $1000 Morel hydr rollers for my street build & a Hughes cam, it is noisy for a hydro, car runs good, 2500 miles so far street strip, I went this way because I read MANY times that the solids on the street would not last very long .

You'd think that any kind of hydraulic setup with no lash would be quiet. If noise and no adjustment is an issue just put a good hydraulic in it. The cubes will provide everything necessary in the torque dept.

Im in the machining process with my 512 build. With the same criteria your buddy wants. I had the same conversation with Dwayne also about hyd rollers. After a couple talks with him about the cars intent and some pros and cons on cams. I ended having him spec me a solid ft. I will be using HYLift Johnson lightweight EDM lifters. They weighed 80 grams compared to the Comp 901 EDM at 100 grams. I may switch out the Trick Flow head springs for beehives. This should make for a pretty light valve train. Other than the TF valves being kinda heavy. If I were to do a hyd roller. I would use the HYLift Johnson slow bleed hyd roller lifter. But that's just me. But like you. I read around and found the same answers about hyd rollers. Which was. Some really liked a hyd roller and some not so much. I probably could have used one because this engine is 99% street. I just felt after Dwayne and I talked. The solid ft was the best choice and fit for my build and it's intent.

anything with fast opening and closing ramps will make noise. don't want noise? then get something with an asymmetrical lobe, and that will be a challenge anymore.

Man, I saw a few on you-tube that sounded like a worn out diesel, LOUD clattering. I run the Isky bushed solid rollers on my roller in my Hemi and I am always surprised how little valve train noise there is. I really have to thank Dwayne for the heads up, cause I just assumed all the bugs were worked out. My buddy is chomping at the bit to order the heads, so we have to figure out which way to go. You know how it is, you want to help your friends out and not get them something that they will not be happy with. Charlie, if you are heading to Baytown anytime soon, or a cruise or something, please give me a heads up as I would love to check out your car! I am in Deer Park. Please keep the experience coming!

I don;t have issues like some with hyd stuff making a racket. Its not the lifters,its the lobes! IMO .They are rpm limited but with the right parts they are ok for street builds. I stay away from anything very "extreme" and use Bullet cams.

I just finished dyno testing a new stroker engine for my Coronet. I used the retrofit lifters from Gaterman along with a custom Comp cam that Dwayne put together for me. I also used the conical springs from Comp and high quality 1.50 rocker arms. The engine was very quiet and pulled hard to 6000 rpm. It is a pump gas street engine and it made 610 hp and 630 ft-lbs of torque. Based on this experience I'm going to go with the Gaterman lifters for future builds.

Who sells the Gateman lifters Andy?

This is a short idle video of my 400 based 512. It has a Comp retrofit roller cam and lifters in it. It does sound like diesel at idle and I just attributed it to the valve train making all that noise. I've never owned a motor with a retrofit roller setup, nor have I owned one with a stroker rotating assembly. It was recently pointed out to me the sound I'm hearing is most likely piston slap as a result of the pistons essentially being hockey pucks. Mine sounds exactly like a couple of other stroker big blocks with flat tappet cams.

That being said I don't think noise from a roller cam is going to be a concern from what you'll get from piston slap.

https://www.gatermanproducts.com/

Thanks, I went through a lot of hassle several years back on trying to use some of the first Comp Cams hydro roller lifters in a 426 Street hemi type motor, I could not adjust them so they wouldn't click, no matter how little or how much preload
That dang motor sounded like a old 327 Chevy SB with a .030/.030 solid Duntov cam and lifter no matter what I did hot or cold
I heard months later that Comp had returned over 1500 sets of hydro lifter to the lifter company do to noise complaints
I've been against using them again since then

I built a small block with Crane hyd rollers 15 years ago. Never needed adjustments since. They're dead quiet.
Doug

Here's what my 520" stroker sounded like:

It made 650hp on dyno, 10.5-1, Indy ez 295 cnc, Indy dual plane, 1000cfm carb and Bullet hydraulic roller 252@.050, 585lift and 110lsa, Comp lifters.

Not that I cared about the the noise, but my current 505 solid ft engine is quieter. Less power though, but really what's more important:)

https://youtu.be/_clJwJ8PfSM

Imo, it’s as easy as this........

You’ve done some research and are now aware that an old school build with retrofit hyd roller lifters can be pretty noisy in the valvetrain.
There are enough examples of it on the ole interweb to know that it’s not a fluke.

You just have to decide if you want to try it or not.
Nothing you read here or anywhere else is going to have any impact on whether or not your build will be noisy.

Case in point, Gaterman lifters. Nice and quiet in Andy’s build, yet I have a solid flat tappet cam on order to replace a hyd roller that’s too noisy for a customer that has tried Comp lifters and Gaterman lifters.
Interestingly, the two sets of lifters were noisy in different ways.
The Comps were real noisy at start up but got a little quieter after the engine was up to operating temp, while the Gatermans were quiet on start up but got progressively louder as the engine warmed up...... and were described as “quite noisy” with the engine at full operating temp......a lot louder at that point than the Comps.

DVW has a nice thing going with his 15 year old Cranes........ unfortunately those exact lifters are not available anymore.
They were built in house by Crane, but the equipment used to make them went elsewhere when Crane was sold.

We recently had a 446 on the dyno with a hyd roller and the Howard’s base hyd roller lifters, which are the “street” Morels.
Pretty quiet.........but..... made two pulls to 6100 and after the second pull some clattering was heard........one of them stuck/seized a plunger.

Dwayne, glad you joined in! I mainly posted this to raise the level of awareness of the issue for those,like me, who were not aware of it. Since I never ran a Hyd roller, I never paid much attention to them, and even though I read almost all of the engine building posts on Moparts, I don't ever recall one talking about the high noise issue. I know for me, I am sticking with what I have the most experience with and that is solids. It is interesting to get all the feedback, and it mostly confirms that it can be a crap shoot. Not everyone wants extra horsepower at the expense of having an engine that rattles loud enough to scare small children and dogs! Switching to a hydraulic roller can be a significant investment, only to find you are one of the unlucky ones and then it is just tough luck. I hope we see more contributors and they tell us what brand of lifters they are running.

Lee...... from a strictly “noise” standpoint....... I feel it’s totally a crapshoot.

For every positive review, for any particular brand of lifters(or just about anything else for that matter)....... you can find a negative one.

If it’s a path you want to go down, at least you’re going into it well informed.

I think Andy has used hyd rollers in numerous BB Mopar builds........ and I don’t recall him having any issues.

One thing that can be done to help with the success rate is to bush the lifter bores.

Yep, I've switched all of my stuff over to hyd roller, even the Duster race car project has a hyd roller in it. My reasoning is that with a 4.25 stroke crank the peak power is going to be in the 6's somewhere so why not run a hyd roller? I've never had any noise issues with any of my own engines but we have seen issues at the engine shop with various engines. Noise is subjective so I'm not sure exactly what other people find objectionable but on my engines the lifters seem quiet to me. There might be a slight ticking noise at idle but between the fan noise and the exhaust noise it isn't really noticeable. The engines that we've had issues with on the dyno typically have a clattering noise and many times they won't RPM very well.

I do think there is a "zone" that the engine builder needs to hit when building a hyd roller engine. That zone includes the correct spring pressure, oil weight, oil pressure, lobe design, rocker arm and pushrod stiffness. I do not know how big or small the zone is but I know that if you get some of the stuff wrong the engine just won't RPM very well. On the flip side, the Chevy guys have hyd rollers pretty well figured out. I've seen some LS stuff up around 8000 rpm with hyd rollers. So it can be done but it takes very careful selection of parts.

I think that the valve springs have a lot to do with the noise.. notice that
Andy used conical springs and I would think her went with quality ones
but this is just my opinion.. I have stayed away from hyd rollers due
to noise and they dont rev high enough for my needs

I too thought this was pretty much the “norm” in the LS world.
We have an aftermarket LS based build going on here......... N/A application with a carb for a dragster.

After numerous calls to shops who predominantly work on the LS platform, they are recommending a solid roller for this build.

My advise for those looking for quiet operation....... don’t go with the type of combo that’s “set on kill”.
Smoother lobes that can operate adequately with more moderate spring loads will generally be quieter, with likely somewhat less power.

Here is the valve train of my 496. This is the engine that is using the Gaterman lifters. I have the Comp conical springs and the stainless RAS rocker arms. The conical valve springs are lightweight and use a very small and lightweight retainer. The conical springs also have different internal physics so they don't require a damper.

Andy is it possible to set up a beehive spring to 1.95. On the TF heads with shelf cups and retainers. Or would the spring seats have to be machined.

The Comp 26915 beehives should work for most hyd roller cams. They are good to 0.600 lift.

That is what is on mine. edit,, 26120 is what I am using.

Imo, the Comp conical spring 7228 and the beehive spring 26915 are not designed for the same application.
The loads and rates aren’t really very close to each other.

7228- 136@1.800/399@1.200, 438lbs/in

26915- 105@1.800/293@1.200, 313lbs/in

I look at the 26915 as a spring suitable for a lighter weight valvetrain(like a small block) that’s using lobes that are very smooth.

For a typical BB Mopar hyd roller application where someone wants a beehive spring I generally use the 26120, which is 155@1.880/377@1.280, 370lbs/in.

Yes you are correct, the 26120 is probably a better choice for a big block. I used the 26120 springs on my Duster engine and they worked fine. I took a look at my notes and it appears that I also used the 26055 beehives on a 505 engine and I used the 26056 beehives on the 427 inch SB Mopar that I did a few years back. I've never had any lifter noise issues with any of the engines when I used beehive or conical springs. Every time I've ever run into a clattering hyd roller lifter was with a conventional dual spring with a damper. May or may not be related but that is my experience.

What are the advantages/disadvanteges of Beehive springs? I don't really know anything about them.

There should be multiple threads on that topic here, or over on Speedtalk and YB.

As with anything in this hobby, there is no universal answer.
We’ve actually taken them out of some BBC marine builds were they just weren’t up to the job.

Well, I had done some research and they sort of seem like a variable weight spring that offers light weight and control advantages. The reason I ask is that I have read lots of claims for speed products over the years that ultimately turn out to be snake oil.

If you go through the forums, just as with the hyd roller lifters...... you’ll find they are not universally loved.

I'm Sorry the 26120 is what I have, brain dead moment

Hydraulic should only make noise (caused by the roller leaving the lobe and landing again) when the spring pressure + lift rate exceed the hydraulic pressure in the tappet, and the plunger compresses. The lifter's leak rate may be too high, oil supply volume in the gallery too small, or viscosity or oil pressure too low.
Am I missing something?

Some beehive failures are from using a light spring believing that the design simply replaces a heavier cylindrical spring.
The design saves some reciprocating weight (less wire mass, smaller retainer) but the advantage is multiple progressive rate (instead of linear) - but if harmonic float isn't a problem you may not have enough pressure.

Well, my friend and I had a long discussion on this and we have decided to go with the same custom grind solid FT that Dwayne spec'd for my 493 and several others on here. It will be nitrided and use the edm lifters. I have been running solidFT's for many years with zero issues, both at the track and on a couple of Power Tours and road trips to Woodward. I think this will be the best compromise for a reliable, low maint, street toy. Thanks to all, and especially Dwayne for all of the advice!