• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

Hydraulic Flat Tappet vs. Hydraulic Roller

  • Thread starter Thread starter nonosstang
  • Start date Start date Mar 8, 2006

Would it be worth the extra money to switch to a hydraulic roller cam?

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 64.3%
  • No

    Votes: 5 35.7%

  • Total voters
    14
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

69Rcode_Mach1

Active Member
Apr 20, 2004
1,473
1
37
Salt Lake City, Utah
Mar 9, 2006
#21
  • Mar 9, 2006
  • #21
paul302 said:
cons- removal of head to install lifters.
Click to expand...

Not on mine..... "Groove in the deck allows for the removal of roller lifters without removing the head, a concept of a bad ass race car."

 
J

jbuening

Member
Apr 28, 2005
399
0
17
Mar 9, 2006
#22
  • Mar 9, 2006
  • #22
Isn't it true that the dog bone lifters are taller than the link style, so the dog bone lifters need the head removed but the link style do not? This is purely off of memory but thought i would throw that out there. Maybe its the other way around
 

69Rcode_Mach1

Active Member
Apr 20, 2004
1,473
1
37
Salt Lake City, Utah
Mar 9, 2006
#23
  • Mar 9, 2006
  • #23
I think either one will need it, I was simply quoting Vic Edelbrock, the Vic Jr.'s were designed so you could remove them without taking the head off, that was the point I was making.
 

302 coupe

Founding Member
Mar 2, 2000
1,952
3
36
Macon, Ga.
Mar 9, 2006
#24
  • Mar 9, 2006
  • #24
the dogbone lifters are somewhat taller, thats why you have to use a reduced base circle cam, to sit them down lower in the bores, plus the oil hole is too high. The link bar lifters are close in overall height, but the oil hole is lowered, so the lifter doesn't have to sit as far down in the hole, allowing use of a standard base circle cam. With a 351, its likely that either will fit without removing the heads. On the shorter deck 289's and 302's, head removal is required for the link-bar lifters, and I'd say its probably needed for the dogbone lifters as well.
 

thehueypilot

Active Member
Feb 25, 2004
1,084
0
37
Medina,Tennessee
Mar 9, 2006
#25
  • Mar 9, 2006
  • #25
I have a roller cam "retro fit" with the horz. Links (dog bones) that I just replaced. Maybe this will help:
1. A little clean up is needed around the lifter bores to give the "dog bone" enough clearance so it won't touch the side of the block in the down position.
2. The block's lifter valley does need to be ground smooth if a casting mark is present at the two locations of the new holes and drilled and tapped to a 1/4-20 thread. No inserts needed.
3. I can install the lifters w/o removing the head but I have heard the vertical lifters are different as it applies to a “non-roller” 302 block.
4. The reduced base circle cam is needed in a "non-roller" block because the lifters would stick out too far in an unsupported position. A true roller block has taller lifter bores. Hope this helps….I like the roller cams for the reduced friction and steeper ramp angles.
 

Hack

15 Year Member
Mar 23, 2004
1,945
13
69
Minneapolis
Mar 9, 2006
#26
  • Mar 9, 2006
  • #26
Just the thought of doing a flat tappet cam break in worries me enough that I would go for the rollers if I could swing it. I understand there are tons and tons of engines out there with flat tappets, but I have heard too many horror stories of wiping a cam lobe during the initial start up.
 

zookeeper

Founding Member
Aug 25, 2001
3,415
63
109
Rogue River, Oregon
Mar 10, 2006
#27
  • Mar 10, 2006
  • #27
Don't beleive everything you hear, breaking in a flat-tappet cam is pretty much a no-brainer. I have seen a couple cams wiped out by the installer thinking he needs to slather the cam in break in lube. The stuff is very thick and if you use too much it will easily start plugging oil passages. Anyway, my take on rollers is they are awesome cams and allow you to use a much more aggressive grind, but still stay streetable. I don't have one in my car simply because I couldn't justify the cost. Comp Cams has a whole slew of dyno charts on their website and there is pretty much no difference at all in hp or torque for the cam I selected (XE268H) so I saved a few bucks and blew it somewhere else on the car!
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Ongoing Battle With Hydraulic Lifters
  • hailer06
  • Jun 8, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
282
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 9, 2026
Noobz347
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
873
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
S
Requesting Guidance for 306 motor swap - Fuel? - SD? MAF?
  • So_Flo
  • Jul 26, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 4, 2026
Mcmahst
SN Mustang Magnum T56 swap
  • revhead347
  • May 24, 2024
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
15
Views
6K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jun 28, 2026
GearHeadGuy
M
Progress Thread mnky99 2001 V6 evap core, ac compressor, heater core replacement
  • mnky99
  • Sep 5, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
503
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Sep 5, 2025
mnky99
M
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?