Mikey over on the Pelican 914 BBS said that he talked to Debbie at Web-Cam. She told him that they had switched lifter suppliers, and the new lifters were good. She also said that you (Jake) were aware of these developments.
Have you tested any of their new lifters yet? Are they indeed OK? It would be nice to have a solution available that is less $$ (even if it is less optimal) than the ceramics or the "will be done soon" NASCAR-based lifters...
--DD
Web-cam lifters OK now?
-
MASSIVE TYPE IV
- Posts: 20132
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2000 12:01 am
To my knowledge the lifters have not changed since the supply of Johnson lifters was depleted. If they have no one has informed me of the changes, and I have not seen any differences since my tests began.
The webcam lifters are the best off the shelf right now, BUT they are not perfect and still wear in my engine tests and spintron tests both.
I have 3 sets to send back for warranty now.
I need to have a long talk with them- I tried to call them today.... I have not called them since October and talked about the issues because I have been waiting to gather more data.
The issue is not solely lifter related!
I have found the true issue (after a very painful set of processes we happened to stumble on the issue) and the fact is that its not going to be easy to remedy.....
If I told you how we have been seeing excellent results you'd call me a liar....
Problems solved- No...There is still a big risk and we are still seeing accelerated wear, not lifters necessarily going flat right away- but they are wearing more than I would feel is acceptable.
Web cam has no testing fixture and they don't build engines- So unless they are having things returned that are flat they feel things are fine and thats all they can assume.. They are doing all they can without the abaility of having an engine to tear down and look at as well as the spintron.
The direct answer is that there is no lifter that equals the Johnson of yesteryear- I used them in over 400 engines and had ONE set go bad- ONE. When we tore engines down between races and for research work the Johnsons never wore- No lifter is that way today.
So far I have opened my wallet for 12,000 bucks worth of R&D and received ZERO support in the way of sponsored products from any manufacturer. Web has decreased some prices for the efforts but it has been minimal.
I am really getting tired of having to recreate parts manufactured by others with no support.
Anyone want 40 junk cams and several hundred wiped out lifters??
There is light at the end of the tunnel, Charles has been busy spending his money on having some new treatments done to our lifters that in days past have remedied similar issues that MG owners faced. I will start teting those within the next few weeks as soon as we have a few batches of various ones to try out....
At this point I am skeptical that we can solve the issues and get an arrangement as fool proof as the Johnsons were.
BTW- The NASCAR lifters performed horribly, we are on round 4 of that fiasco and its looks pretty much like a lost bunch of time.
The webcam lifters are the best off the shelf right now, BUT they are not perfect and still wear in my engine tests and spintron tests both.
I have 3 sets to send back for warranty now.
I need to have a long talk with them- I tried to call them today.... I have not called them since October and talked about the issues because I have been waiting to gather more data.
The issue is not solely lifter related!
I have found the true issue (after a very painful set of processes we happened to stumble on the issue) and the fact is that its not going to be easy to remedy.....
If I told you how we have been seeing excellent results you'd call me a liar....
Problems solved- No...There is still a big risk and we are still seeing accelerated wear, not lifters necessarily going flat right away- but they are wearing more than I would feel is acceptable.
Web cam has no testing fixture and they don't build engines- So unless they are having things returned that are flat they feel things are fine and thats all they can assume.. They are doing all they can without the abaility of having an engine to tear down and look at as well as the spintron.
The direct answer is that there is no lifter that equals the Johnson of yesteryear- I used them in over 400 engines and had ONE set go bad- ONE. When we tore engines down between races and for research work the Johnsons never wore- No lifter is that way today.
So far I have opened my wallet for 12,000 bucks worth of R&D and received ZERO support in the way of sponsored products from any manufacturer. Web has decreased some prices for the efforts but it has been minimal.
I am really getting tired of having to recreate parts manufactured by others with no support.
Anyone want 40 junk cams and several hundred wiped out lifters??
There is light at the end of the tunnel, Charles has been busy spending his money on having some new treatments done to our lifters that in days past have remedied similar issues that MG owners faced. I will start teting those within the next few weeks as soon as we have a few batches of various ones to try out....
At this point I am skeptical that we can solve the issues and get an arrangement as fool proof as the Johnsons were.
BTW- The NASCAR lifters performed horribly, we are on round 4 of that fiasco and its looks pretty much like a lost bunch of time.
-
raygreenwood
- Posts: 11907
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:01 am
Jake, on the same subject...did you not recently mention that there may be some issues with cam billets as well? I am close to ordering a cam. I need one of your modified #73's. If need be...of course I will get ceramics...but what are the issues with cam billets. I have arranged to have my cam "rimmed". Are you familiar with this process? Its a multistage process. It micro polishes, while simultaneously filling microscopic surface pores with a permanent etched layer similar to what comes from using phosphoric acid, then re-tumble, fill again retumble. It takes "0" meaureable metal off of the part...but reduces the surface rz to less than 2um (2 microns). Thats smooooth.
I have seen a lok of cranks and cams going out of a certain place this way. It makes them about 3 times smoother than standard micro polish. They also use it on differential side gears and spiders to significantly drop friction in racing. I'm wondering if this...along with the lifter oiler/squirters that are part of my piston squirter system will help. Ray
I have seen a lok of cranks and cams going out of a certain place this way. It makes them about 3 times smoother than standard micro polish. They also use it on differential side gears and spiders to significantly drop friction in racing. I'm wondering if this...along with the lifter oiler/squirters that are part of my piston squirter system will help. Ray
-
MASSIVE TYPE IV
- Posts: 20132
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2000 12:01 am
We are seeing the effects of "microwelding" with many cams and lifters. Different tapers on the cams have not solved it, different lifters also see it and as we change the radius on the crown of the lifter it also doesn't really change...
I am not in the position to point any fingers or make any statements directly but I will say that there is more to the sum than just one part of the equation.
To do any more test work I am going to have to start a lifter fund to try and raise more money to do the test work or I simply can't do any more.
I am not in the position to point any fingers or make any statements directly but I will say that there is more to the sum than just one part of the equation.
To do any more test work I am going to have to start a lifter fund to try and raise more money to do the test work or I simply can't do any more.
-
raygreenwood
- Posts: 11907
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:01 am
I would think...and this is pure speculation....that on something under extreme pressure, that as long as the geometry is correct, the hardness of both surfaces correct an compatible, that the smoother you can make the surfaces, the less friction there will be. Before I started laying out my oil squirter system...I might have worried that getting a part overly too smooth, may not allow enouh tooth for break in, or to hold lubricant on the surface. But with forcefed on the spot oil, I think thats less of a worry. just hoping to not buy a cam AND ceramic lifters and have there be other "worries".
One last question. I have never heard of anyone doing this, but would it be possible (and worthwhile) to put thrust bearing style bearings on a cam...other than just at the gear end? It seems a decent thought that the more thrust surface you have working for you...the better. Ray
One last question. I have never heard of anyone doing this, but would it be possible (and worthwhile) to put thrust bearing style bearings on a cam...other than just at the gear end? It seems a decent thought that the more thrust surface you have working for you...the better. Ray
-
dstar
- Posts: 3733
- Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:01 am
Ray, there is only one place on the cam saddles that is machined forraygreenwood wrote:One last question.
I have never heard of anyone doing this, but would it be possible (and worthwhile) to put thrust bearing style bearings on a cam...other than just at the gear end?
Ray
thrust....
If you have TWO thrust surfaces, the machining has to be VERY precise
on both the cams AND the cases!! That ain't gonn happen!
How many thrust surfaces do we have on our CRANKSHAFTS, HMMMMM?
Don
-
MASSIVE TYPE IV
- Posts: 20132
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2000 12:01 am
In ALL my tests we have NEVER seen a difference in wear with spring tension...
Unless you are on coil bind or bottoming out a retainer its not going to kill the lifters or wear them any more..
I have actually observed the heavier tensions have been a GOOD thing for the situation!
Now doesn't that just defy everything anyone has ever said before!
Unless you are on coil bind or bottoming out a retainer its not going to kill the lifters or wear them any more..
I have actually observed the heavier tensions have been a GOOD thing for the situation!
Now doesn't that just defy everything anyone has ever said before!
-
raygreenwood
- Posts: 11907
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:01 am
Jake, you may have mis-interpreted what I meant in my "geometry" comment. I was speaking more about the geometry issues in how the lifter faces and cam lobes are ground in relation to each other. What I was getting at...is if you had noticed , that when all other things cam and lifter wise ...were normal or correct....if also having the lifter faces and cam lobes very much smoother in level of polish than normal....had shown to be a help at all? I can't see why it wouldn't help. The process I am looking at, makes the surfaces many many times smoother.
By the way...I was looking at some wrist pins for a v-8 that had DLH coating. Very very cool. Any word on possible uses for lifters or other parts?
D-star....the second I read your post about the thrust bearings....I totally understood what you meant. If the exact distances from bearing to bearing and case flange to case flange is not exact...the cam will ride on one thrust bearing and maybe not even touch the other. Or worse....the second thrust bearing may put the cam in a bind. I was just dreaming of overkill again. I will have to be happy with a standard double thrust cam bearing I guess
Ray
By the way...I was looking at some wrist pins for a v-8 that had DLH coating. Very very cool. Any word on possible uses for lifters or other parts?
D-star....the second I read your post about the thrust bearings....I totally understood what you meant. If the exact distances from bearing to bearing and case flange to case flange is not exact...the cam will ride on one thrust bearing and maybe not even touch the other. Or worse....the second thrust bearing may put the cam in a bind. I was just dreaming of overkill again. I will have to be happy with a standard double thrust cam bearing I guess
Ray-
MASSIVE TYPE IV
- Posts: 20132
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2000 12:01 am
-
raygreenwood
- Posts: 11907
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:01 am
-
ruff
- Posts: 324
- Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 10:53 am
hello,
what camshaft do you have to use with the ceramic lifters? only webcam?
will the cam go flat with the ceramics, because i think the hardness ?? isn't the same of the lobes and lifters?
is the type 1 lifter also a good alternative? and what cam do you use with them? type 1 or type 4? i think the pushrods will need to be modified too, or am i wrong?
would it be overkill to buy ceramic lifters for my 1700? my camshaft is still original, but i would like to upgrade it when funds allow.
best regards, a poor collegeboy
what camshaft do you have to use with the ceramic lifters? only webcam?
will the cam go flat with the ceramics, because i think the hardness ?? isn't the same of the lobes and lifters?
is the type 1 lifter also a good alternative? and what cam do you use with them? type 1 or type 4? i think the pushrods will need to be modified too, or am i wrong?
would it be overkill to buy ceramic lifters for my 1700? my camshaft is still original, but i would like to upgrade it when funds allow.
best regards, a poor collegeboy
-
MASSIVE TYPE IV
- Posts: 20132
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2000 12:01 am
-
Griznant
- Posts: 698
- Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2000 12:01 am
Jake,
I don't know if you remember, but I had the one set of Webcam lifters that ate my cam when I first got the 2056 in my 912 almost 2 years ago.
Those were the Johnson-designed lifters, not the ones they were selling later. When that went bad I submitted for warranty, got a new cam and lifters, but received the ones with the little cup and spring clip in them (same as Perso had that screwed his first cam).
I never used those lifters having bought the first set of ceramics from LN and having Shad hone my case personally. Those ceramics are still running like a champ and I haven't had to adjust a valve yet!
LN Ceramics on the left, my warranty replaced questionable ones on the right.
My question is, I've still got the warranty replacement of my webcam lifters.
Is there ANYTHING I can do with these to improve them? Cryo-ing? Etc. I don't want to spend another $100+ buying lifters that may not be better, and I really don't want to drop another $400 on ceramics for a simple rebuild of a 1.7L with a mild cam.
Any suggestions on what to do? While ceramics are fantastic in my 912, for this project they are way too pricey. This car will only be driven a few hundred miles a year, so longetivity is not really a problem.
Thanks,
Grant
I don't know if you remember, but I had the one set of Webcam lifters that ate my cam when I first got the 2056 in my 912 almost 2 years ago.
Those were the Johnson-designed lifters, not the ones they were selling later. When that went bad I submitted for warranty, got a new cam and lifters, but received the ones with the little cup and spring clip in them (same as Perso had that screwed his first cam).
I never used those lifters having bought the first set of ceramics from LN and having Shad hone my case personally. Those ceramics are still running like a champ and I haven't had to adjust a valve yet!
LN Ceramics on the left, my warranty replaced questionable ones on the right.
My question is, I've still got the warranty replacement of my webcam lifters.
Is there ANYTHING I can do with these to improve them? Cryo-ing? Etc. I don't want to spend another $100+ buying lifters that may not be better, and I really don't want to drop another $400 on ceramics for a simple rebuild of a 1.7L with a mild cam.
Any suggestions on what to do? While ceramics are fantastic in my 912, for this project they are way too pricey. This car will only be driven a few hundred miles a year, so longetivity is not really a problem.
Thanks,
Grant
-
MASSIVE TYPE IV
- Posts: 20132
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2000 12:01 am