Lifter Rant, the heist goes on......

[thumper 823]

For a certain, there are so many brands of lifters out there it confuses anyone.
As of late now I find some to a lot of these are just cheap counterfeits from of course china...where else right?
I read,  interneted, or was told the truth can be discerned by the type of retainer on the top.
The cheap one use the wire, the better ones use an actual flat spring retainer.("C" clip")
Yooo and behold according to where ever I got this info  from, there are those
buying the cheap crap and installing the better retainers then selling them as a high-quality lifter.
Go figure.......
Now I have almost no chance at all of sorting it all out.
My Johnson Hilifts work well, but i don't like the fact there is no lower shields that
extends dwn past the roller bearings to keep them in place
should they want to make a mass exodus.
To the point,- what is the best choice for hydraulic lifters with about a 600 lift?
 
 

[wfolarry]

The ones you have. 
All Evo lifters are the same design. That's how the lifter stays straight in the lifter blocks. If you want an enclosed roller you need to buy a Twin Cam.
The wire retainer doesn't mean it's a cheap lifter. That's the most common type. It just keeps the lifter together until you install it. Under normal operation the plunger never contacts the retainer.
Hylift uses the wire retainer in their standard lifter. The next one up is the c clip style. They also have a press in retainer for the guys that spin their motors to 10,000 rpm's. I don't think you'll find any in the Harley crowd though. 

[thumper 823]

Not EVER switching to a Twink!....so that's out.
If I had to have a twink with two cams I would want four!!,  like a Sporster, and solve all the geometry issues.
Is it "Jims" that makes a power glide? ,
Someone or maybe a few make a lifter with axle and bushing rather than needles that cant come apart get strewn about.
Never have I found much of a review on many a lifter from people that should know.
There are just the big vacuum of silence out here in the middle of nowhere,
and of course claims of grandeur from manufacturers.

[kd]

I believe Iskenderian (Isky) first developed them and IIRC have a match for Harley.  I don't see a listing on a quick search though.

http://www.iskycams.com/downloads/ISKY-EZRollHelixFlyer119.pdf

[Don D]

Isky and Jim's  buy from the same manufacturer. Once again as Larry said more articulated than I can the Hylifts are suited to the build and are not the constants that are limiting either power or reliability.  Bushing lifters can be purchased for a twin cam not for EVOs to the best of my knowledge.

[thumper 823]

OK, thanx
I bent a push rod after a couple of runs and I know the one lifter got rattled pretty good.
So I don't want to risk it coming apart.
I will just replace it or all 4 with another set of Hi Lifts if there is nothing better.
Truly I was hoping there was /is .
These have about 20K look fine, feel fine,  work fine ..but I have learned the hard wat the Evo cam chest is the weakest link .
thanx

PS
i once watched an S&S video of cheby lifters in a Harley....They never did pump oil to the top the way the V Twn needs it done.

[turboprop]

Jims Steady Roll Lifters (bushings) are available for evo engines. Page 48 of the current catalog.

[kd]

Isky and Jim's  buy from the same manufacturer. Once again as Larry said more articulated than I can the Hylifts are suited to the build and are not the constants that are limiting either power or reliability.  Bushing lifters can be purchased for a twin cam not for EVOs to the best of my knowledge.

I forgot this was an evo thread.      Good Manufacturer info though.

Thumper, if you are running any type of heavier spring pressure or higher rpm, at 30 to 35,000 miles they are considered a service item (even by the MOCO) and should be changed. 

[Deye76]

I've had Jims lifters fail in both Evo's and TC's. No thanks.

[thumper 823]

Thanx-
Good info so far.
through the Grapevine The rumor has been "don't use Jims".
I have no fact here, other than that is what another Harley fix it shop told me.
  Then there is the rumor there are two Johnson HiLIft companies and one has to sort out which is the real one to buy from.

[Don D]

Johnson lifters and Hylift/Johnson. Two separate  companies.  OK whats the point. They are both USA manufacturers. Johnsons are much more expensive, not necessarily better.

[thumper 823]

OK for this thread i want to stay away from the K mart/Wallmart basement stuff.
Focus on what you /we think is the best,  price is secondary.

[motorhogman]

S&S and forget about them.. 

[Deye76]

"You do know that Jims offers a bunch of different lifters for both the Evo and TC platforms?"

my post: "I've had Jims lifters fail in both Evo's and  TC's.
Jims lifter failures are well documented. Once bitten, twice shy.
The Jims that act like solids, are reported to be good, hardly anybody runs them on the street. Do they even produce them any more?
Edit; Every motor failure I've had in the last 20 years has been low mile lifter related.

[Dave*M]

Isky does have lifters for evo. part#100EZR or 200EZR for over 160 lbs for seat pressures

[thumper 823]

Thanx I willl look into the ISKY lifters!
and
What about thse fueling racer stuff?

https://www.amazon.com/Feuling-Race-Lifters-Standard-Diameter/dp/B002VVJEXK

[hbkeith]

I run S&s premium precision lifters in Zippers blocks , spin them to 8100 , all good

[Hossamania]

I run S&s premium precision lifters in Zippers blocks , spin them to 8100 , all good

You're running an Evo to 8100? That's got to sound great!

[thumper 823]

STD cases?

[thumper 823]

Thanx I Will look into the ISKY lifters!
and
What about these fueling racer stuff?

https://www.amazon.com/Feuling-Race-Lifters-Standard-Diameter/dp/B002VVJEXK

Transparently the Isky stuff will supply enough oil to the top end?

[hbkeith]

I run S&s premium precision lifters in Zippers blocks , spin them to 8100 , all good

You're running an Evo to 8100? That's got to sound great!

No , there in my XL Drag Bike

[Hossamania]

I run S&s premium precision lifters in Zippers blocks , spin them to 8100 , all good

You're running an Evo to 8100? That's got to sound great!

No , there in my XL Drag Bike

That also must sound great!

[hbkeith]

I run S&s premium precision lifters in Zippers blocks , spin them to 8100 , all good

You're running an Evo to 8100? That's got to sound great!

No , there in my XL Drag Bike

That also must sound great!

Cut off Cycle Shack Stepped open pipes , YES IT DOES !!

[Hossamania]

I run S&s premium precision lifters in Zippers blocks , spin them to 8100 , all good

You're running an Evo to 8100? That's got to sound great!

No , there in my XL Drag Bike

That also must sound great!

Cut off Cycle Shack Stepped open pipes , YES IT DOES !!

Do those same lifters fit in the Evo?

[thumper 823]

There is always something to be learned -
Something I am going to try-
David Vizard the engineer highlighted here by at least one other person turns out to be very informative.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=david+vizard+head+porting

His analyzation is something I have not ever thought of. Perhaps it might be new to you guys too?
Lifter pump up according to him is not the fault of the lifter ,it is doing what it should be doing!
The fault is in the slop in the valve train.
Take the time to get the rest of the parts fitting correctly, the rocker geometry, etc  and the lifter is not going to override
the spring pressures.
His advice is to not center the lifter but to bottom it and come up 1/4 of its travel rather than giving lots of room (SOP.)
Lifters may have been discussed in-depth here, but there is always something new to learn.
  Back in the day- early 70s,  in our race cars, we used to set the lifters just 3/4 turn dwn attempting to solve problems ...
We all get smarter every day. Hopefully.

[kd]

This has been discussed here plenty.  The "manufacture" stroke target in a hydraulic lifter we use is .200".  The factory recommended "adjustment" target for that stroke is mid way or .100".  I would guess that most of the members here (especially those with performance builds) bottom the lifter and shoot for anywhere just off the bottom to .140" deep (instead of midway at .100").  As the engine gets hot the heads and barrels grow up to .060" taller.  That adds to the cold pushrod setting travel.

For example, my twin cam with 660 lift and corrected geometry is set barely 1 flat off the bottom. Barely free from the resistance point felt spinning the pushrods when adjusting. When hot, if you add the .060" growth, that becomes (.200" - .060")  or .140" deep. That engine valve train is as quiet as a mouse and hits the 6200 rpm  limiter several times EVERY time it's ridden.  Your cold setting is never what it is when hot. If you set them mid section for .100", the depth will become .040" when hot.  Those, or one lazy one, or the front exhaust, may tick when that shallow when hot and fully expanded.

[Don D]

I know the story about growth but people forget the pushrods get warm too and even with steel at a ROM of 50% expansion VS Aluminum, worth considering is also the cylinders are aluminum with a cast iron integrated splined cast liner. So what is the real growth net?
Setting the lifters off the bottom works with springs that are stout and rpms controlled. A flat or two off the bottom provides the function of a hydraulic, noise/lash control, and the benefits of solids, less loss of motion due to bleed.

Much of this stuff doesn't matter much in context of a ~6000 rpm Vtwin. Stroke and the associated piston speed are the constraint not valve springs or lifters.

[kd]

Right you are Don. It's a tough nail to hit on the head. Hotter heads or barrels =     I remember way back testing the theory with my cast shovel head barrels and S&S solids.  I found even with cast iron barrels if I set the solids at "tight to twist", if I popped the covers when hot there was very noticeable pushrod shake present.  I never did check how many flats it took to get back to the cold setting because I knew it would hold the valve open cold and I would be kicking my guts out hoping to start it. 

The .060"  or .050" growth factor is thrown around lots and we have discussed its unreliability to fact, because of what you describe.  I certainly believe the pushrods are subjected to less heat (and less growth) due to the difference in conditions in comparison to aluminum heads and barrels that are containing combustion and friction heat. I haven't taken the time to actually measure mine because again, I feel it's irrelevant and probably wont compare to the next guy with less or more compression (heat) etc..  Using those figures is however helpful in painting a picture of changes that occur in lifter settings during growth brought on by heat of combustion.  It helps explain why so many have success in quieting down a noisy valve train by simply going deeper to .140 for example.  In fact, some of the builders here go .140" on initial assembly.

[Don D]

You bring up good points for sure. Not even sure if the archives go back far enough but Black Hills Ken ages ago did some testing and IIRC the number was closer to +.018" net on a fully warmed up twin cam.
If you took a set of lifters I sell and went .140 down you would risk keeping a valve open cold. They have .140 travel, Morels

[kd]

That Black Hills Ken stuff is interesting.  I remember FSG and a couple others (you may have been one) measuring lifter depth / travel on a number of different manufacturer's lifters.  There was a travel variance even within the same company let alone different manufacturers. I think the added effect of limiters could have been part of that discussion too. I believe that is when the practice to adjust off the bottom (regardless of the target) was discussed.  IIRC Max was a big proponent for it and had been doing it for a while. 

[thumper 823]

Being I have nodular Axtell cylinders the compensation is less.
I spent a whole night a couple of years ago researching big words
on expansion rates.
The linear is not the same for everyone.
The thermal dynamics has to include distance plus and minus for
Head types, cylinder types, valve material, P rods, ceramics etc etc .
The modulus in most of our HIPO situations is a composite.
I added and subtracted for the iron cylinders, type pushrods, Al heads with firewalls,  and the whole can of materials best I could for
a couple of hours.
  It was enough to pull my hair out.
The reason?
  I had been working with a standard .o30 squish, but because of some
machining operation ended up with only .026  (head porting)
I was quite worried.
Scott @ Hillside  (who did not do the porting)  said don't worry about it and so far he has been correct.
But My math says the clearances are within a  tattoo mark!. (He was doing something else for me.)
The point I guess here is-  no one size is a fix-all answer just ballpark if you want to live that way.
It turned out I should have about.035 , but not that much in the combustion chambers.
  This time I will be using the off-the-bottom lifter measurement rather than from the top.
The more we know the less we know we do realize.

[kd]

I think that is similar to what we all have realized and consequently favor adjusting off the bottom.  As suggested, the rest almost just amounts to noise that is mostly irrelevant at our level.

[thumper 823]

Well, shazzbutt, this is going to change my P.rod length...again.
Smith Bro? yea how ya doin.................

the devil is in the details and laugh at my indexed plugs if you want.
argh argh argh

[thumper 823]

Perhaps I have found Lifter utopia or ?
On the surface, it looks great-i have no information on then but waiting for a phone call.

https://www.compcams.com/big-twin-replacement-roller-tappet-2-cpg.html

[kd]

With the full length  body they may be heavier than the original evo lifter design.  You have made it clear that you are building a performance engine and any added weight to reciprocating valve train components is usually not desired.  It would be interesting to see a weight comparison.

[SP33DY]

With the full length  body they may be heavier than the original evo lifter design.  You have made it clear that you are building a performance engine and any added weight to reciprocating valve train components is usually not desired.  It would be interesting to see a weight comparison.

I think the full length body lifter in the photo does not represent what they are actually selling. Probably just a picture that the web artist grabbed without knowing the difference between Evo Big Twin lifters and later Harley lifters.

The wheel must be larger than the body o.d. to gude the lifter in the lifter block.

[thumper 823]

If their guy Chriss ever calls me I will ask him the specifics.
I want to know several things .