Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller

Mustang Australia

Author Topic: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller  (Read 1558 times)

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #25 on: November 04, 2019, 12:25:38 PM »
My brain's hurting just thinking about trying to answer his questions.  :fingerx:

Ooops...too late...here I am...for whatever that is worth.

1. Need the exact trick flow part number for the heads. I can't find them with the number you gave.

Your 3.70 gears will give you good bottom end with a moderate size cam.

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #26 on: November 04, 2019, 12:31:37 PM »
What kind of cost roughly am I looking at with the roller conversion ? Cheers.

Depends if you use a cam that utilizes the stock spider and dog bones (small base circle) or a cam that needs link bar lifters, but a dog bone roller might be at least $250.00 more usd and a link bar roller might be around $300.00 more usd than a non roller cam. This does not include stiffer springs if you need them.

The cheapest setup is a regular non roller cam. I use crane anti pump lifters. Unless you plan on doing some drag racing or like to roast the bejesus out of tires etc, a non roller cam is more than fine. People have been using them for a bazillion years.

One decent non roller cam for good bottom end with your setup is a comp cams xe268h. The most common non roller cam used in a 347 in the us is a comp cams xe274h. That cam revs to around 5600 rpm before falling off at around 5900.

A non roller cam will work fine with most springs in the trick flow heads, but still need the part numbers to know for certain what you have.





« Last Edit: November 04, 2019, 12:39:28 PM by barnett468 »

Offline HAMBURGLAR

  • Worked
  • ***
  • Posts: 455
  • I NEED MORE MONEY
  • Location: south coast NSW
  • Name: mark
  • Car: 66 A code fastback 6R09A
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #27 on: November 04, 2019, 01:25:02 PM »
Depends if you use a cam that utilizes the stock spider and dog bones (small base circle) or a cam that needs link bar lifters, but a dog bone roller might be at least $250.00 more usd and a link bar roller might be around $300.00 more usd than a non roller cam. This does not include stiffer springs if you need them.

The cheapest setup is a regular non roller cam. I use crane anti pump lifters. Unless you plan on doing some drag racing or like to roast the bejesus out of tires etc, a non roller cam is more than fine. People have been using them for a bazillion years.

One decent non roller cam for good bottom end with your setup is a comp cams xe268h. The most common non roller cam used in a 347 in the us is a comp cams xe274h. That cam revs to around 5600 rpm before falling off at around 5900.

A non roller cam will work fine with most springs in the trick flow heads, but still need the part numbers to know for certain what you have.
       Thanks for the info mate , for a second I thought you'd left the planet. I don't have a spider or dog bones. Just couldn't understand why you would change a roller engine into a non roller , but quite happy to leave it a non roller but thought that CR296H might be too big for a 56 f100 cruiser.  So where will I find the right part numbers for the heads ?
66 A code fastback 289w , t5 , 3.8truetrak.
56 F100 Deluxe custom cab. Major frame off resto. 347w , AOD , Custom 9inch , 3.7 powertrax , IFS , Parallel 4 link rear. Airbags , Low enough to kill ants. Still in progress.

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #28 on: November 04, 2019, 01:39:21 PM »
       Thanks for the info mate , for a second I thought you'd left the planet. I don't have a spider or dog bones. Just couldn't understand why you would change a roller engine into a non roller , but quite happy to leave it a non roller but thought that CR296H might be too big for a 56 f100 cruiser.  So where will I find the right part numbers for the heads ?

Nope, still here and still annoying as ever.  :lmao:

Who knows why some people do things.

Yes, 1956 F100 truck AND the word "cruiser", suggest to me that you really do not want that 296 cam and do not need a roller and that the xe274h cam is the biggest you need and if you don't plan to rev it very often to the max rpm of around 5800 that the xe274h will give you, then the xe268h or a similar cam will suit your goals AND your pocket book far better.

In your case, depending on the heads, I would prefer a little more lift with the xe268h cam but this means that you may need new rockers unless it already has rockers that have a higher ratio than the stock ones, but howards or lunati may have a similar cam to the xe268h that has a bit more lift if your rockers are stock.

The cam shaunp suggested is also an xlnt cam, as is everything he suggests, but if it's a roller type, it is probably a tiny bit more of a cam than you need or will use, plus, keep in mind that he and that glenn guy  :grin: are tire burners, so no cam is really too big for them.  :leaving:

As far as figuring out what the part number is for the heads, I don't know but may be able to find out.

Where did he order them from?

Also, unless you plan to roast the tires much off the line, I would use a smaller converter like 2500 max as shaunp inferred.




« Last Edit: November 04, 2019, 01:47:35 PM by barnett468 »

Offline GLENN 70

  • GT 500
  • *********
  • Posts: 8418
  • Location: Gold Coast .
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #29 on: November 04, 2019, 01:51:18 PM »
Yep that cam is too WILD for your F truck .  Triple springs too .  And Barny Banna it's tyre / tire fryer not tyre burner  :burnout: :lmao:

Offline HAMBURGLAR

  • Worked
  • ***
  • Posts: 455
  • I NEED MORE MONEY
  • Location: south coast NSW
  • Name: mark
  • Car: 66 A code fastback 6R09A
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #30 on: November 04, 2019, 02:29:03 PM »
Nope, still here and still annoying as ever.  :lmao:

Who knows why some people do things.

Yes, 1956 F100 truck AND the word "cruiser", suggest to me that you really do not want that 296 cam and do not need a roller and that the xe274h cam is the biggest you need and if you don't plan to rev it very often to the max rpm of around 5800 that the xe274h will give you, then the xe268h or a similar cam will suit your goals AND your pocket book far better.

In your case, depending on the heads, I would prefer a little more lift with the xe268h cam but this means that you may need new rockers unless it already has rockers that have a higher ratio than the stock ones, but howards or lunati may have a similar cam to the xe268h that has a bit more lift if your rockers are stock.
 
The cam shaunp suggested is also an xlnt cam, as is everything he suggests, but if it's a roller type, it is probably a tiny bit more of a cam than you need or will use, plus, keep in mind that he and that glenn guy  :grin: are tire burners, so no cam is really too big for them.  :leaving:

As far as figuring out what the part number is for the heads, I don't know but may be able to find out.

Where did he order them from?

Also, unless you plan to roast the tires much off the line, I would use a smaller converter like 2500 max as shaunp inferred.
We are trying to get info on the heads now. Also the roller rockers are 1.6 ratio.
66 A code fastback 289w , t5 , 3.8truetrak.
56 F100 Deluxe custom cab. Major frame off resto. 347w , AOD , Custom 9inch , 3.7 powertrax , IFS , Parallel 4 link rear. Airbags , Low enough to kill ants. Still in progress.

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #31 on: November 04, 2019, 04:18:11 PM »
We are trying to get info on the heads now. Also the roller rockers are 1.6 ratio.

ok, here's another option that i would prefer a bit more than the comp cams xe268h.

https://www.lunatipower.com/voodoo-hydraulic-flat-tappet-cam-ford-351w-302-h-o-268-276.html

Offline GLENN 70

  • GT 500
  • *********
  • Posts: 8418
  • Location: Gold Coast .
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #32 on: November 04, 2019, 04:18:46 PM »
With a smaller cam a smaller hi stall is needed .  3.7 gears are ok but can you tell us what tyre size you going for ? . Just sell me that engine and all your problems will disappear  :evilone: :lmao:

Offline HAMBURGLAR

  • Worked
  • ***
  • Posts: 455
  • I NEED MORE MONEY
  • Location: south coast NSW
  • Name: mark
  • Car: 66 A code fastback 6R09A
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #33 on: November 04, 2019, 07:33:14 PM »
With a smaller cam a smaller hi stall is needed .  3.7 gears are ok but can you tell us what tyre size you going for ? . Just sell me that engine and all your problems will disappear  :evilone: :lmao:
The whitewall tyres (tires) will be either L78-15 =29.3" tall or  H78-15 = 28.36" tall. I was going to sell it and put in the coyote and running gear out of my FG xr8 ute but the boss wouldn't have a word of it.
66 A code fastback 289w , t5 , 3.8truetrak.
56 F100 Deluxe custom cab. Major frame off resto. 347w , AOD , Custom 9inch , 3.7 powertrax , IFS , Parallel 4 link rear. Airbags , Low enough to kill ants. Still in progress.

Offline HAMBURGLAR

  • Worked
  • ***
  • Posts: 455
  • I NEED MORE MONEY
  • Location: south coast NSW
  • Name: mark
  • Car: 66 A code fastback 6R09A
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #34 on: November 04, 2019, 07:43:35 PM »
ok, here's another option that i would prefer a bit more than the comp cams xe268h.

https://www.lunatipower.com/voodoo-hydraulic-flat-tappet-cam-ford-351w-302-h-o-268-276.html
[/quote                             :thumb:   Similar to what shaun recommended. This will go with a AOD , 3.7 and 28 or 29 inch tall tyres (tires) :grin:
« Last Edit: November 04, 2019, 07:45:40 PM by HAMBURGLAR »
66 A code fastback 289w , t5 , 3.8truetrak.
56 F100 Deluxe custom cab. Major frame off resto. 347w , AOD , Custom 9inch , 3.7 powertrax , IFS , Parallel 4 link rear. Airbags , Low enough to kill ants. Still in progress.

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #35 on: November 05, 2019, 02:15:46 AM »
ok, here's another option that i would prefer a bit more than the comp cams xe268h.

https://www.lunatipower.com/voodoo-hydraulic-flat-tappet-cam-ford-351w-302-h-o-268-276.html
[/quote                             :thumb:   Similar to what shaun recommended. This will go with a AOD , 3.7 and 28 or 29 inch tall tyres (tires) :grin:

All things considered, including cost and your massive tire size, I for one would prefer the smaller xe268h to the 272 roller, and if you don't need a performance type idle sound and don't plan to roast the tires, and don't plan to rev it over around 5,000 rpm, you might consider something slightly smaller than the xe268h.

The fact is that it will run just fine with a wimpy little xe256h cam, and it will have massive torque and low end power, and killer throttle response, but it's almost a crime to put a tiny little cam like that in an engine like that.

.

.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2019, 06:47:31 AM by barnett468 »

Offline HAMBURGLAR

  • Worked
  • ***
  • Posts: 455
  • I NEED MORE MONEY
  • Location: south coast NSW
  • Name: mark
  • Car: 66 A code fastback 6R09A
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #36 on: November 05, 2019, 12:28:18 PM »
Found some more digits near the valve springs. "TFS-SBF-1".  Waiting for a reply from Trick flow at the moment.
66 A code fastback 289w , t5 , 3.8truetrak.
56 F100 Deluxe custom cab. Major frame off resto. 347w , AOD , Custom 9inch , 3.7 powertrax , IFS , Parallel 4 link rear. Airbags , Low enough to kill ants. Still in progress.

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #37 on: November 06, 2019, 01:30:42 AM »
There should be some numbers somewhere on the machined exhaust surface. You need a mirror to see them.

Offline HAMBURGLAR

  • Worked
  • ***
  • Posts: 455
  • I NEED MORE MONEY
  • Location: south coast NSW
  • Name: mark
  • Car: 66 A code fastback 6R09A
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #38 on: November 06, 2019, 08:08:07 AM »
There should be some numbers somewhere on the machined exhaust surface. You need a mirror to see them.
The numbers I posted first up were the one's on the exhaust surface. TFS-SBF-1 was in the valve spring area.   Trick Flow said they are Twisted wedge 170 heads with 2.02 / 1.60 valves and a 61cc chamber unless they have been modified.
66 A code fastback 289w , t5 , 3.8truetrak.
56 F100 Deluxe custom cab. Major frame off resto. 347w , AOD , Custom 9inch , 3.7 powertrax , IFS , Parallel 4 link rear. Airbags , Low enough to kill ants. Still in progress.

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #39 on: November 06, 2019, 11:45:04 AM »
The numbers I posted first up were the one's on the exhaust surface. TFS-SBF-1 was in the valve spring area.   Trick Flow said they are Twisted wedge 170 heads with 2.02 / 1.60 valves and a 61cc chamber unless they have been modified.

xlnt, will try to figure out compression and the existing valve springs now...back a little later.


Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #40 on: November 06, 2019, 12:00:08 PM »
The numbers I posted first up were the one's on the exhaust surface. TFS-SBF-1 was in the valve spring area.   Trick Flow said they are Twisted wedge 170 heads with 2.02 / 1.60 valves and a 61cc chamber unless they have been modified.

ok, the idiots did not tell you EXACTLY which of the 3 twisted wedge 170cc heads they are, so there is no way to tell what the valve springs are, and if they are for a roller cam, they could shorten the life of a flat tappet cam, although it already has a flat tappet one in there.

https://www.summitracing.com/search/part-type/cylinder-heads/make/ford/engine-size/4-7l-289/brand/trick-flow-specialties/combustion-chamber-volume-cc/61/intake-runner-volume-cc/170cc/cylinder-head-style/assembled?N=cylinder-head-style%3Aassembled&SortBy=Default&SortOrder=Default

Offline shaunp

  • GT 500
  • *********
  • Posts: 8469
  • Location: Brisbane
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #41 on: November 06, 2019, 01:17:19 PM »
think they stamp part number of the TF heads.

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #42 on: November 06, 2019, 03:14:08 PM »
think they stamp part number of the TF heads.

Unfortunately, the number they stamp on them is not the part number even though they call it that, and it is also not the UPC number, so as far as I know, one needs to give all the numbers on the heads to trick flow, which he did, and have them decode it, which they didn't do completely in this case.  :thud:


Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #43 on: November 06, 2019, 03:23:05 PM »
The numbers I posted first up were the one's on the exhaust surface. TFS-SBF-1 was in the valve spring area.   Trick Flow said they are Twisted wedge 170 heads with 2.02 / 1.60 valves and a 61cc chamber unless they have been modified.

ok, if you email the clowns AGAIN, ask them exactly what the trick flow part number is for those heads that starts with TFS just like every other single head they sell. If they are unable to tell you exactly what they sold you, which wouldn't surprise me in the least, you can take one of the heads to a local auto machine shop/engine builder (i believe fitzy has one he can suggest  :lmao:) and have them answer the items below. This would cost around $20.00 in the US and take around 10 minutes, so allowing for the conversion factor and the phase of the moon etc, that will probably be around $200.00 in oz and might take around 2 hours. 
 :thud:

1. spring rate in lbs per inch, or kilos per mm, or whatever the hell method they use over there.

2.  spring pressure with the valve closed.

3. spring pressue at .500" valve lift.

3. trapped spring height.

« Last Edit: November 06, 2019, 03:27:27 PM by barnett468 »

Offline Dwayne

  • Blue Printed
  • ****
  • Posts: 1427
  • Location: Radelaide
  • Name: Dwayne
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #44 on: November 06, 2019, 04:54:22 PM »
I only paid $20 to get springs tested.

Offline barnett468

  • Shelby
  • *********
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Hydraulic flat tappet vs Hydraulic roller
« Reply #45 on: November 06, 2019, 05:15:49 PM »
I only paid $20 to get springs tested.

You must be "special" then.  :leaving:

 

Visit Custom Mustangs

Visit Custom Mustangs