Spot-facing for 39gr. lifters

[yetibone]

In order to install the sleeves for the 39gr. lifters in my 2270, it appears that the original lifter bores must be spot-faced in order for the sleeves to press in correctly as the original lifter bores do not terminate with a flat facing.

What depth should the original lifter bores be spot-faced before pressing in the new sleeves? Anyone here done this before, or know someone who has with positive results?

There is a picture on page 8 in the engine gallery that illustrates what I mean.


Thanks

Yetibone

[Wally]

It all depends on what cam you will run. Specificly the lift of the cam dictates how much you need to grind away.
Best to first lay the cam in the case and spot face as much as the thickness of the mushroom part of the follower plus the maximum cam lift need.
Greetings,
Walter

[yetibone]

Thanks for the reply.

By looking, It seems I would have to remove about 4.5mm just to get the oiling holes in the sleeves/bushings to line up with the gallery openings in the case. Once that is done, I think the mushroom ends will fit between the cam lobes and the spot-faced surfaces.

I will also have to factor in some clearance between the mushroom part on the lifters and the inner opening on the sleeves/bushings so when each lobe is at full lift, the lifters don't bottom out in their bores.

Many people on STF talked about the incompatibility of WebCams with anything other than WebCam lifters. I haven't heard of any premature wear issues with these lifters, and a WebCam, but I have only talked to one fellow that installed a set of these. He told me that he could not use them because of the lifters falling out of their bores. Must have been a mighty big cam he was using

So here I go...into the unknown...


Yetibone

[Wally]

Well, your not alone in the unknown: LN is making me a type 1 set of ceramic lifters for in my bushed type 4 case, that will probably be used with a Schleicher cam.
I feel pretty confident they will work together, but sometimes you must dare to 'boldly go where no type 4 builder has gone before'
Walter

[Massive Type IV]

every cam is differemt. The base circle and gross lift make all the difference in the world.

What I did was install the bushings and line them up with the oil passeages exactly. Then use a mill to lower the bosses a little at a time till I had .050 .080 clearance with the cam bearings installed......The lifters are made to be ran with cams with less lift, just like the Germans use. the problem you encounter is getting the beveled chamfer correct in the face of the lifter after all the decking work.

When you are done the bore will need to be reamed for proper clearances.

What I found was that the oil passages in the lifter when used with a high lift cam do not align correctly with those in the bushing, and cause valve train lube problems.

In have many reasons fr not using these lifters anymore. I have 2 brand new sets on the shelf that I won't be using.

[Alex]

All those lifters were taken back by the producer and exchanged for the new ones which do not have that problem anymore.

Alex

[Massive Type IV]

Alex, that was the lifter cup problem...I know they repaired that..The new ones look better but I can't risk running them.

[Alex]

The high lift cam problem was addressed too as far as I know.

Alex

[Massive Type IV]

I said something to John about it, but will have to look at them to see what they did...

[yetibone]

The cups look long enough to sustain a long range of motion for a high lift cam, but I see what Jake is saying about the oiling issue. Only at full lift does the cups get oil, and ONLY if the bushings are lined up with the oil galleries properly (i.e. correct depth). The oil gallery opening inside the stock lifter bores on a Type IV are very large, and give the bushings a good range of placement, dependant on the cam's lift. The cam's lift would also dictate how deep to spot-face the stock lifter bores.

The higher the lift, the deeper the bushing would have to be placed, not to exceed a depth in which each cup's oiling groove would never reach it's gallery opening.

I've never seen the older version of these lifters except for in pictures on this website, and from what I saw in the pictures, the ones I have seem much improved over the old ones. The new ones seem longer, and have mo' better oiling provisions, but like I said, I've never laid eyes on the earlier 39gr lifters.

Looks like I've got some math homework to do...

Thanks for all the insights on this guys!


Yetibone

[Massive Type IV]

Just beware and kep your eyes open.......I had to find out the things with these lifters on my own. All it took was ONE engine that I finally finished last week after over 2 years of fighting with parts.

I ended up going to TI Ceramic lifters with it. It was born before the TIV ceramic lifters were available.......

Be careful.

[Alex]

Not everything that gave you one time problem is automatically bad.

Otherwise I would have to ditch the Nickies I got because they needed to be sent back. It was fixed so it is not an issue.

A production run of the lifters were bad. John even sent back others and they were all replaced as far as I know. The high lift issue was addressed too. Remember that the Germans do not use high lift cams as we do here in the US. They use more duration.

Alex

[Massive Type IV]

I cannot afford for a problem to bite me more than once. this is not a hobby. Time is money, especially when you have a 7 month backlog. there is NOTHING worse than tearing back into an engine- nothing.

I know all the lifters were made good. That does not fill my pocket with money for lost labor- 80 hours of it in that particular instance.

I have several cams that have less lift and more duration than the conventional cams that US Tuners use. The cam in Crimson Axes engine is an example. it only liftsthe valve less than .450