Anyone running a hydraulic roller cam in a jet?

[wet77]

Oh yeah this is alot of guess work and going by what others say because I have never had this boat in the water yet and am not sure what is to be expected :clover:
I have posted since I bought the boat over a year ago and have recieved many helpfull pointers from everyone on the boards especially the ones with the same 21' daytona as me
I actually was convinced to drop my 468 motor and go to the 540 after some replies on me wanting to "SOMEDAY" see 100mph in my boat.
Maybe that means lots of NOS, no seats, fumes in the tank, and perfect water but I would like to do it once in a boat I worked on
In the future
With all the help here it should be one hell of a ride :jawdrop:
My last jet did a honest 70 mph just setting my goals higher:chi:

[HBjet]

If you plan on .650 or more lift scratch the Pro Magnum rockers from your list, I was warned of this myself and I confirmed with a call to Comp tech's, step up to Comps Hi-Tech series.
I would only agree to this if you are using the Comp Valve Springs I was using... Since one of my springs broke last year and I had to replace them all, we noticed the springs were about a 1/2 inch shorter then when they went into the motor (DNE tested each one to see how much loss each one had) Due to this, the rockers started to or came close to starting to hit the retainers and a few of the rockers themselves needed to be rebuilt.
Now run ISKY springs and retainers. Rockers are fixed and she is running strong!
HBjet

[Jet City]

Ok so what's wrong with the magnum rockers :2purples:
I think the lift is .688 on the cam its been a long day :sleeping:
I was told with the motor I was building and the pump setup I could see from 6200-6500 rpm :220v:
I was warned by HTP that a hydrualic roller at those rpm's was not a good idea :argue:
Duane if your out there chime in
I couldn't tell you why Comp doesn't recommend the Pro-Magnums for above .650 lift, I didn't ask them for particulars, I just went ahead and spent a few bucks more and bought the SS Hi-Tech's.

[FILUCKY]

Hey WET77, is that a 20' scorpion jet? If so i thought i would just throw out a few numbers for ya. My scorpion with about 850 HP. was high 90's and with new motor 1020 HP i'm hoping for about 108 MPH. And as far as lifters, i run solids on all performance applications, as much money as you can spend looking for that last 50 HP why pass it up on lifters?

[wet77]

No its a 21' daytona eliminator just like the picture in my avatar
Thats not my boat but what I hope it will look like some day in the water
I am going with Isky springs in the heads with titanium retainers,with inconel exhaust valves after the post about the rockers I spoke with my builder and he is going to call comp and check it out for my aplication :idea:
We are going to run .800 isky springs and he said something about adjusting them so they wont hurt the lifters??
Its all a learning experience for me :rollside:

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Dunno if this is what he means but when I installed my new cam kit this spring from Duane (a measely .565 lift on lazy hydraulics ($500 more I didn't have could have gotten me lazy-rollers)) :boxingguy He advised me to leave the inner springs out for break-in, thus reducing the force on the cam & lifters. Maybe he means something similar? I'll be putting my full springs in soon as I get a bit more time on my motor (only about 8 hrs now), then I can see what the new setup has when hit with my old N2O setup. 'Course, I'm running a 400HP family ski/tube boat (with an "Ace-in-the-hole" er, engine bay).

[bp]

I give my opinions all the time Bp. But what good are opinions with no debate?
opinions are always good, especially if they have some fact behind them. now, our engines are very similar, with one of the few disimilaritys being that you have hydraulics and i have solids (our rockers are also different, but that's because mine is older). doesn't mean either of us are right or wrong, but we aren't going to agree so i see no reason to debate about it.
and i say bs, that if you're trying to maximize power within certain parameters, say with a dart 540 and dart cnc pro 1s, why waste your time with a hydraulic roller valve train? plus, this idea that guys like me are constantly adjusting valves is more bs.
[QUOTE=LVjetboy]
I figured the limits of hydraulics are worth questioning/argueing, and Wet77's thread seemed a good place since he brought it up.
i have no idea what those limits might be, and i'm not terribly interested in it, but wet might be. how i feel about it is this. in maintaining the schmidt engine for 2 1/2 years, and also seeing what others were doing, one thing that sticks is: with .950 lift, you don't run hydraulics. pretty simple, right? the thing is, if pro stock sets their valve trains up with certain components and achieves a certain level of reliability, if you reduce the level of stress, do you increase the level of reliability? without getting into the details, the answer is yes. the quality of components available today allow us to run the same "type" of valve train, at reduced lifts and rpm, for a very long time.
to me, this is basically "detuning" something that i know will work well. my choice is to go that way, rather than place another part in the system that may be close to it's edge in performance, and in fact, may not provide me the performance level i'm after.
then again, if ALL i wanted to do was cruise, and rarely pound the throttle for 2-3 seconds, basically babying the thing, who knows, maybe i'd go that way. but... i doubt it.
So I ask you a few questions which I think go to the bottom line.
- What rpm will wet77 turn an Aggressor B? (How much power?)
- Does his lift at that rpm require solids?
jer
1. dunno. old, or new? blueprinted or stock? since the engine isn't done yet, and he has no dyno numbers yet, it's difficult to say what rpm the engine will turn.
2. i say with the engine he's building, for optimum performance, solid rollers would be desirable in the 680-700 lift range.
smokindude, people don't leave valve springs out of roller motors. the valve train has to stay tight, whether it's hydraulic or not. there are little rollers and little bearings in several locations, and if the valve train starts banging because the springs aren't tight enough to keep up with the engine, really bad things can start to happen. a beaten up roller can beat up the cam, which in turn can eat up the block; all bad.
and his engine will idle just fine, tow skiers, all that stuff...

[steelcomp]

Dunno if this is what he means but when I installed my new cam kit this spring from Duane (a measely .565 lift on lazy hydraulics ($500 more I didn't have could have gotten me lazy-rollers)) :boxingguy He advised me to leave the inner springs out for break-in, thus reducing the force on the cam & lifters. Maybe he means something similar? I'll be putting my full springs in soon as I get a bit more time on my motor (only about 8 hrs now), then I can see what the new setup has when hit with my old N2O setup. 'Course, I'm running a 400HP family ski/tube boat (with an "Ace-in-the-hole" er, engine bay).
The reason you have to leave your inner springs out is that you have a flat tappet cam. This requires a break in period where the lifter face and cam lobe surface "mate". Too much spring pressure during this break in period, especially at low engine speeds or idling, will cause galling...metal transfer between the lifter and cam lobe, and quickly ruin your cam. Roller cams don't have this problem, since the roller is rolling on the cam lobe, and not wiping across it like a flat tappet lifter.
Most guys set their heads up with way too much spring pressure as it is, which robs HP. Your cam could get away with a good single spring with a dampner. 95-100# on the seat, 275-280 open. More than enough. :coffeycup

[Cs19]

My scorpion with about 850 HP. was high 90's and with new motor 1020 HP i'm hoping for about 108 MPH.
:supp:

[kojac]

hyd. cams are for lazy people.
How about people that just don't want to spend the time and money on taking off valve covers? resealing the covers with new gaskets? time spent on adjusting valves? and maybe don't have the physical or mechanical capacity or knowledge to adjust valves correctly?
Don't get me wrong. All five of my engines have mechanical rollers but I still don't like the idea of being on the water and having to think I made a mistake in adjustments due to not seeing correctly, or due to arthritis pain not being able to feel the tightness of lash or the strength to tightnen them. It would make boating a lot more enjoyable knowing I didn't have to check valve lash so often. Most of the time when I check them they are not out but I still feel like I gotta check them.
By the way my valve train is all jessel rocker system.
The only one I feel comfortable about is my brothers small street roller by comp. Five years and still not any adjustments required except after initial start up? I still check them though.
Maybe my next one will be hydraulic.
Kojac