Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lifters not pumping up

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    I suppose the purpose for your posts in this forum maybe to receive some input from others concerning your foray in this matter? Well, you left the door open; good or bad here's a thought.

    Please understand that in automotive engine applications we generally concern ourselves first, with the oil viscosity requirements that are necessary for engine survivability when under-load (even maximum-load) and normal-operating-temperature (w/ considerations for excessive oil temperature - simultaneously), where it generally spends most of it's time. One doesn't ignore cold-start-up concerns, and yes, compromises especially in the northern regions during winter, are made, but keep in mind, typically most premature engine damage/failures take place with the engine in use under-load, often due to excessive load & heat. Notice that with the Coyote 5.0 in the mustangs today, Ford recommends a 5w-50 viscosity oil. The best compromise we can make is to reduce the load & operating R.P.Ms until some heat is generated in the oil. This is good practice in your old FE engine and you more modern units also.

    Your often smaller modern engines are engineered with reduced oil clearances thru out, for a number of reasons (including E.P.A), therefore require thinner oils for proper lubrication. One of the biggest problems when the oil is cold, is their complicated (compared to the FE anyway) overhead cam valve train, which with tight clearances (didn't want the oil losses like the FE) and small and sometimes complicated routeings, (lets not forget some also have hydraulic valve timing functions), no camshaft bearings (cam runs in head, maybe not ideal bearing material?), those are probably the biggest concerns and reasons for the oil pressure step-up in your example.

    Many engine builders will recommend (speaking solely of viscosity) a "lighter" oil for break-in; but this circumstance is intended as "break-in", low load, no over-heat, controled R.P.M.s, right?

    I have already commented on my preference of filters and some of their attributes concerning bypassing function are mentioned elsewhere, and the H.V. oil pump is necessary with generous clearances, and I stated that understanding bypass values can be complicated, but also understand that the filter has less oil to contend with when the oil is cold if only (and it's not) due to the pumps inefficiency with the correspondingly cold oil.

    The 10 p.s.i. per 1000 rpm formula works fine with this type of engine in this format, as with the greater size of the parts & oil clearances, the oil flow is achieved without the required higher pressure & due to the tighter clearances of you modern example. Note that if your oil delivery system is more efficient you can/will lower the pressure required; capitalizing on this, increasing efficiency & function on a number of fronts and make more power. Many racing engines operate in the range of approx. 5 p.s.i. per 1000 r.p.m..

    And, lifters (old american V8 style) function better with higher viscosity (reasonable) oil as it is not displaced as easily. Scott.

    Comment


    • #77
      Thanks Scott. I don't think it's wise to use a race engine example as a guide to build a street engine. In a race environment oils get a lot hotter than in a street engine. According to Bob the oil guy, 100F hotter. Again, in my Jeep, normal oil temperature is 20F lower than the coolant, or 180F. There is no oil cooler that I am aware of anyway. Raise that temperature to 280F and a heavier weight oil would be necessary.

      My TBird will see many short trips, and it's a much heavier engine, so will take longer to heat up than my Jeep. So much of its life will be spent with the oil temperature less than 180F.

      Comment


      • #78
        You are correct in that one wouldn't necessarily mimic all race engineering for a street engine, but my example was to explain that basically the pressure required is that which is required to overcome inefficiencies in the specific delivery system (and in the race applications more effort is applied and therefore less pressure may be required).

        Yes, the engine under load generates more heat, and therefore the oil (among other things) operate at elevated temperatures in competition environment as compared to the average street application. But, ideally we want to keep the oil temps (as typically measured, in the oil pan) in the same average range for either application for best function/purpose of that oil. I feel that oil temps below 140are to cold & temps above 240 getting to hot. Of course there are exceptions, compromises & specific effects one might be looking for which would vary from these values, and yes some race instances do run 100+ more, but not for better effective values from the oil. Typical american V8 street engine's oil should operate normally between 185 +/- 10 range

        This is why in high load use applications you find oil coolers; so as to maintain the nominal oil temperature values even when generating more heat, and you see truckers mask their radiators in the winter.

        Today's synthetic oils, as compared to what was available when your car was manufactured, are much more stable at varying temperatures and this helps greatly during cold start-up with much more fluid flow (increased pourability). Scott.

        Comment


        • #79
          From what I've read about synthetics, since the molecules are derived from natural gas they are uniform, thus can be "dialed in" to a specific application. That and there are no impurities. Going way back into my organic chemistry class, I recall that crude oil is basically a "soup", a combination of big heavy molecules all the way to the light ones and volatiles. Thus a 30W oil is really a range of molecules that when mixed, make up a certain viscosity. And of course there are impurities that aren't doing your engine any good at all.

          Guessing now, the behavior of the range over operating temperatures is therefore going to vary considerably between batches, and especially dependent on the source crude.

          I remember back in the 70's that Quaker State used to advertise itself 'using Pennsylvania crude', with some explanation of consistency. Any consistency was probably more that that source had a longer history, thus wealth of specific data, to evaluate from.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Yadkin View Post
            Last night I disassembled everything on the motor...
            ...One change I want to make is to put an "RV" type cam in this motor. Roller hydraulic, but I'm going with smoothest idle and low end torque available...
            Yes, I was wondering what you found in the lifters.

            Most people know the performance they want but they don't know how to get it. They normally go overboard on their selection of cams with no understanding of exactly what they are buying. This is where the engine builder needs to intervene as the buyer listens intently.

            I hear terms like "mild street cam" or "RV" cam. What they really want is something that pickup trucks offer. RVs are not driven on a daily basis. Pickup trucks are. RVs sit for long periods. Pickup trucks are used daily.

            Truck heads have small valves for low end torque, without bogging down. In fact their engines are built for a heavy vehicle (like a classic T-bird) that is just as comfy around town as it is on the interstate. This service includes hauling a trailer but NOT racing.

            If you want to race, get a small car with a huge engine like a Cobra or a Mustang because we go by 'horsepower-to-weight'. Build it up and you won't be beat.

            Examine this TRUCK piston (C8TE.. from a 390 F-100):


            Look at the color all around the inside. I heard all the talk about oil and how it runs about 200F. No it doesn't! The only way this piston was cooled was from OIL, bathing the bottom side. Combustion temps far exceed the melting temp of aluminum. This is a testament to aluminum and how well it transfers heat. Even so, conventional oil takes much more heat before it discolors, as the witness marks clearly show. All eight of them commonly send your oil pan to nearly 300F.

            Today's oils are better than they were but they don't have ZDDP, a 'must have' for flat tappets. There are many reasons modern engines last 300k (even flat tappet Jeep engines). They LOWERED the compression ratios, raised the operating temps, use far more aluminum and they control coolant temps and air-to-fuel ratios much closer to 14.7:1.

            Economy is another issue. If you are running a mechanical fan you're wasting HP by running it when it isn't needed, like at startup and for the next mile or two. Some winters, my electric fan doesn't turn on for months. Your doctor will tell you to lose weight. Your car should lose weight too because a heavy vehicle produces a lot of power to get it going.
            My latest project:
            CLICK HERE to see my custom hydraulic roller 390 FE build.

            "We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?"
            --Lee Iacocca

            Comment


            • #81
              [QUOTE=Examine this TRUCK piston (C8TE.. from a 390 F-100):
              Look at the color all around the inside. I heard all the talk about oil and how it runs about 200F. No it doesn't! The only way this piston was cooled was from OIL, bathing the bottom side. All eight of them (pistons) commonly send your oil pan to nearly 300F. QUOTE: DAVE

              If you are referring to numbers in my post?; also note that I qualified them with the - as typically measured in the oil pan - where one finds most (not all) temperature sending units installed. I think this is the relevant perspective to most other forum discussions. And yes, many assumptions are made even here, example: a temp. sending unit mounted high vs low in the reservoir may/will register significantly different numbers.

              Your observations of the coked oil on the underside of pistons, and conclusion that it must indicate a higher temperature for the effect is correct. But, we could explore 300 values a little. Does oil (especially modern oils) burn & coke down at this temperature, and considering the time element available w/ parts in motion?

              The temperature of the oil as it is ejected from the surfaces of the engine components in operation, it is plumbed to (for in this discussion, limiting to it's cooling value, and to avoid some odd scenario, assume normal operating temps & intentions), IS going to be elevated over that - as measured in the pan - no doubt. Otherwise, where is the heat transfer & cooling function here? These temperature values within a singular engine at any one time, will vary greatly based on specific component involved, engine load & R.P.M.s, and include other variables such as state of tune & ambient temps & weather, conditions, etc., to much to conclude here, that's for sure. But, your value of 300 I'm sure is some where in the mix @ some time & place, but, there ARE other values, far higher also.

              Oil is a main source of cooling for the pistons, but not only path of heat dissipation. Others include piston-to-rings-to-cylinder wall-to-water jacket, unfortunately, at times, pistons direct contact w/cylinder wall (until, if persists, friction overcomes), incoming air & fuel charge on piston dome, etc. Scott.

              Comment


              • #82
                Squrarebirds.org is one of the friendliest sites on the planet. We are dedicated to helping others as set forth by our founder, Alexander.

                With all due respect and I'm trying to be tactful as possible, I'm having a hard time understanding your post and I don't see a question. Usually, I can grasp the main idea but parts of this is far beyond me. Let's take it in small bites:
                Originally posted by pbf777 View Post
                If you are referring to numbers in my post?; also note that I qualified them with the - as typically measured in the oil pan - where one finds most (not all) temperature sending units installed. I think this is the relevant perspective to most other forum discussions. And yes, many assumptions are made even here, example: a temp. sending unit mounted high vs low in the reservoir may/will register significantly different numbers.
                Classic Thunderbirds only use a coolant temperature sensor in the intake manifold while BabyBirds have one in the right head. Factory oil pan sensors are not relevant to our site.

                Originally posted by pbf777 View Post
                Your observations of the coked oil on the underside of pistons, and conclusion that it must indicate a higher temperature for the effect is correct. But, we could explore 300 values a little. Does oil (especially modern oils) burn & coke down at this temperature, and considering the time element available w/ parts in motion?
                I'm not quite sure what you are asking. I posted a picture that clearly shows evidence that speaks for itself. The truck was not used for racing and it was not abused.

                Originally posted by pbf777 View Post
                The temperature of the oil as it is ejected from the surfaces of the engine components in operation, it is plumbed to (for in this discussion, limiting to it's cooling value, and to avoid some odd scenario, assume normal operating temps & intentions), IS going to be elevated over that - as measured in the pan - no doubt. Otherwise, where is the heat transfer & cooling function here? These temperature values within a singular engine at any one time, will vary greatly based on specific component involved, engine load & R.P.M.s, and include other variables such as state of tune & ambient temps & weather, conditions, etc., to much to conclude here, that's for sure. But, your value of 300 I'm sure is some where in the mix @ some time & place, but, there ARE other values, far higher also.
                Maybe I need to go back to school because from all this I have gleaned; oil temps vary.

                Originally posted by pbf777 View Post
                Oil is a main source of cooling for the pistons, but not only path of heat dissipation. Others include piston-to-rings-to-cylinder wall-to-water jacket, unfortunately, at times, pistons direct contact w/cylinder wall (until, if persists, friction overcomes), incoming air & fuel charge on piston dome, etc. Scott.
                Advancements in alloys has produced the hypereutectic aluminum piston which has a lower coefficient of thermal expansion. This allows engine designers to specify much tighter tolerances that ultimately adds to engine life. Tighter tolerances demand thinner oil viscosities if we can hope for flow and oil cooling. - Dave
                My latest project:
                CLICK HERE to see my custom hydraulic roller 390 FE build.

                "We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?"
                --Lee Iacocca

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Yadkin View Post
                  Last night I disassembled everything on the motor and the car is getting towed to Mike's tonight or tomorrow morning, then they'll pull the engine out. His engine builder, David, is going to tear it down and inspect everything...
                  What did he find?
                  My latest project:
                  CLICK HERE to see my custom hydraulic roller 390 FE build.

                  "We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?"
                  --Lee Iacocca

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Interested to know how you went with the lifters Steve?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Me too. Waiting on engine guy.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Just met with David, Mike's engine guy. The only thing he found was that the rings had not seated properly, and two valve stems were worn. He can find no reason why the lifters failed. Everything else was perfect. The cam looks brand new.

                        He's going to install valve guides where needed, re-hone the block, install new rings and bearings. The other changes that he recommends, and I just approved, is to smooth out the oil drain back holes in the heads, change to a Lunati base type roller cam to get the smoothest idle, a regular flow high pressure oil pump, a stock type oil pan, and use 5W-30 oil.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Unfortunately, as I read your post, no conclusion on the failure of the lifters has been established? And, although other tasks have/are being accomplished, the priority reason (lifter failure) for the engine disassembly is going to be ignored, and just hope for the best?

                          I, can not tell you what the failure is from here, but, based on previous posts explaining your efforts in diagnosing this, may I suggest that you communicate such, and you engine builder's observations to the lifter manufacturer. And not to the first person whom answers the telephone, but hopefully further up the food chain with some-sort of knowledge and capability.

                          I am hesitant to provide examples of previous experiences, as they may not be directly relevant and may only cloud the factual observations in your case, but, since we have no conclusion to date, allow me.

                          We had a similar complaint/observation (collapsed after short duration in use) on a new set of hydraulic roller lifters. After lengthy B.S. responses (oil viscosity? etc.) which we said enough! - I finally was forwarded to an engineer in production, who admitted they had been having problems, and in this case, it had been traced to a new water-based machining coolant (E.P.A. got the blame) that was causing corrosion on the micro level on the surface of the body barrel bores during/post machining, and due to improper follow-up procedures, propagated into something that caused the lifters to seize once put into service. Remember, these are very tight clearances in the relationship of the body bore vs. plunger, and there is motion involved in each cycle.

                          Is this your failure? I didn't say that. But, if you accurately rule out all else, then I would look closely at the lifters themselves and consider the complex execution & function required, and realize that in the current performance-aftermarket lifter supply, you wouldn't be the first dissatisfied customer. Scott.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by pbf777 View Post
                            Unfortunately, as I read your post, no conclusion on the failure of the lifters has been established? And, although other tasks have/are being accomplished, the priority reason (lifter failure) for the engine disassembly is going to be ignored, and just hope for the best?

                            I, can not tell you what the failure is from here, but, based on previous posts explaining your efforts in diagnosing this, may I suggest that you communicate such, and you engine builder's observations to the lifter manufacturer. And not to the first person whom answers the telephone, but hopefully further up the food chain with some-sort of knowledge and capability.

                            I am hesitant to provide examples of previous experiences, as they may not be directly relevant and may only cloud the factual observations in your case, but, since we have no conclusion to date, allow me.

                            We had a similar complaint/observation (collapsed after short duration in use) on a new set of hydraulic roller lifters. After lengthy B.S. responses (oil viscosity? etc.) which we said enough! - I finally was forwarded to an engineer in production, who admitted they had been having problems, and in this case, it had been traced to a new water-based machining coolant (E.P.A. got the blame) that was causing corrosion on the micro level on the surface of the body barrel bores during/post machining, and due to improper follow-up procedures, propagated into something that caused the lifters to seize once put into service. Remember, these are very tight clearances in the relationship of the body bore vs. plunger, and there is motion involved in each cycle.

                            Is this your failure? I didn't say that. But, if you accurately rule out all else, then I would look closely at the lifters themselves and consider the complex execution & function required, and realize that in the current performance-aftermarket lifter supply, you wouldn't be the first dissatisfied customer. Scott.
                            Brand? Production problem fixed?
                            59-430-HT

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Many of our members eagerly awaited your test results because they are fearful of buying defective roller lifters and they truly want a root cause for failure of three sets from different major cam companies.

                              To our members, rest assured that hydraulic roller cams and lifters have been in our production engines for decades without a single recall. Rockauto.com sells these Sealed Power cams and roller lifters as replacements for these cars:

                              FORD BRONCO 1992-1993
                              FORD COUNTRY SQUIRE 1987-1991
                              FORD E-150 1992-1993
                              FORD F-150 1992-1993
                              FORD F-250 1992-1993
                              FORD LTD CROWN VICTORIA 1985-1991
                              FORD MUSTANG 1985-1995
                              FORD THUNDERBIRD 1985-1993
                              LINCOLN CONTINENTAL 1985-1987
                              LINCOLN MARK VII 1985-1992
                              LINCOLN TOWN CAR 1985-1990
                              MERCURY CAPRI 1985
                              MERCURY COLONY PARK 1987-1991
                              MERCURY COUGAR 1985-1993
                              MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 1985-1991

                              This small list represents MILLIONS of cars times 16 lifters each for 8-cyl engines. (6-cyl engines also use roller lifters.) It does not include millions more produced by GM and Chrysler or Ford models past 1993. Believe me, there are MANY lifter manufacturers (not three) because the numbers required are staggering. Hydraulic lifters are common and so are roller lifters again, without recall. Inside the lifter, they are identical to flat tappet but 1/2" taller to accommodate the roller.

                              Here is a picture of the lifters Rockauto.com sells with their Sealed Power camshafts. The internals are identical to yours with a link:

                              Originally posted by Yadkin View Post
                              Just met with David, Mike's engine guy. The only thing he found was that the rings had not seated properly, and two valve stems were worn. He can find no reason why the lifters failed. Everything else was perfect...
                              I'm sorry but this cavalier answer is no consolation for the failure of 48 hydraulic lifters. We asked for disassembly pictures and offered to disassemble a few for free. If you use the same builder, expect the same conclusion for this set of lifters as the last three sets. For your sake I hope he includes a warranty on this rebuild. Most good engine builders offer two years for free. Yes, that includes engines with roller cams. - Dave
                              My latest project:
                              CLICK HERE to see my custom hydraulic roller 390 FE build.

                              "We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?"
                              --Lee Iacocca

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by OX1 View Post
                                Brand? Production problem fixed?
                                Naming a specific brand supplier of components in this instance would do no good, as they are not involved in this scenario, they also claim that the then production difficulties are rectified, and of course many "brands" (particularly lifters) are only repackaged product, and are constantly changing. This also explains why you may purchase product for the same application, but of two different brands, and receive the same results.

                                I am not aware of how many manufactures of engine lifters there are in the world today, but it isn't many; as the production requirements are exacting, and although volumes are great, volume customers are few. As a matter of fact, in the period of "Squarebirds" Ford did not manufacture lifters but GM did, and Ford was a customer.

                                The problem today, is that the lifters your buying (FE hyd. roller & others) are a non O.E.M. contract product, of relatively low production, targeted for the aftermarket performance industry. This market generally offers no warranties to consumers and suffers minimal fear/repercussion if the product is somewhat less than ideal (no contract for a million units at risk or recalls), and therefore may use suppliers that would be described as "secondary standard" suppliers to the O.E.s at best.

                                I not implying that all are bad, it's just that sometimes there are "issues", and it is difficult to discern the good from the bad.

                                So, establish proper engine building techniques, including measure lifter/bore clearance (all 16!), and in an FE, with possible oil deficiencies to lifters to blame, I would recommend the "high volume" oil pump. Scott.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X