Slant Six Forum
https://slantsix.org/forum/

I need a recommendation for a Hydro cam
https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37783		 Page 2 of 2
Author:  Joshie225 [ Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:21 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
OK, yeah, I can see that, but it also complicates the (slant-6) lifter oiling path considerably.
The top-feed lifters and valve gear Chrysler used allowed hydraulic lifters with no changes to the block, but that's it. I content that if the slant had an oil galley to feed conventional side-fed hydraulic lifters the oiling path would be less complex and more reliable than the factory devised hydraulic arrangement.
Author:  SlantSixDan [ Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:44 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
I content that if the slant had an oil galley to feed conventional side-fed hydraulic lifters the oiling path would be less complex and more reliable than the factory devised hydraulic arrangement.
Simpler, certainly. More reliable...? I haven't heard of reliability problems with the oil path to the top-fed hydro lifters, have you?
Author:  DusterIdiot [ Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Lol...
Quote:
Will this be enogh cam, or do I need to request a different grind.
I bought an old unused UltraDyne Cam from Slantzilla-and still haven;t used it...and checking the markings against the Ultradyne information I have it looks to be a 266/276 LSA 114 with a .515 lift at 1.5 ratio rockers.... There's always a bit of room for a bit more cam and compression.... or with a wide LSA...Turbo comes to mind....

:wink:

-D.Idiot
Author:  Reed [ Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Anyway, pros and cons of the hydraulic cam oiling system aside, can anyone answer the question of how big of a hydraulic cam one could use before one was required to use custom length pushrods?
Author:  Joshie225 [ Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
Reed,

I know pushrods aren't expensive, but most of us are cheap so...

It should really depend on how much block and/or head milling is done along with any changes in valve stem height. To get .060" more lift that means at least .040" off the cam's base circle so you should be able to take .040" off the head or block and come out even with the same head gasket thickness.
Author:  Reed [ Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thanks. I anticipate some head milling will occur to obtain the correct dynamic compression ratio. Thanks for pointing that out about the cam regrinding. If I subtract the stock max lift form the reground max lift, I will know the minimum amount of cam thickness that has been removed. So, as long as I shift the entire valve train down the same amount (by milling the the head or deck), the overall geometry should remain the same.

Thanks Josh! :D
Author:  Joshie225 [ Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:36 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Thanks. I anticipate some head milling will occur to obtain the correct dynamic compression ratio. Thanks for pointing that out about the cam regrinding. If I subtract the stock max lift form the reground max lift, I will know the minimum amount of cam thickness that has been removed.
Don't forget to divide the lift difference by the 1.5:1 rocker ratio.
Quote:
So, as long as I shift the entire valve train down the same amount (by milling the the head or deck), the overall geometry should remain the same.

Thanks Josh! :D
The valve train geometry is fixed as long as the valve stem height doesn't change and the rocker shaft isn't moved. Valve train geometry is is independent of pushrod length with shaft mounted rockers.

You're welcome Reed!
Author:  66aCUDA [ Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:01 am ]
Post subject: 
Reed
Dont forget you will go from a steel Shim head gasket to a Composite one.
Frank
Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC-08:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/