Well. I was determined! Since my engine block was practically brand new (30k miles), I was gonna make some simple modifications and see if I can get a hydraulic roller cam setup. I'm using a 3.4 GM crate engine. I had it installed a few years ago by Pisa Corp. It should be pretty much the exact same for a stock 2.8. I first did some research to see how hard it was to get a roller cam for the engine. I was recommended to a local company called Delta Camshafts, which just happened to be located in downtown Tacoma. They told me they could make the camshaft, but they couldn't help me with the lifters. So I did some research. I called pretty much any camshaft manufacturer in the country. I was hoping I could find a set of small block chevy hydraulic roller lifters with a detachable link bar. No luck. I guess a few companies had made roller lifters for a gen I 60 degree V6 in the past, but nobody made them currently. So ventured out and bought the cheapest set of SBC hyd. roller lifters that I could find that were sold in pairs. (SLP-HT5000RA from Summit at about $54 per pair). I bought six of them, and when I got them, I took a gander at them. I looked to see exactly how much shorter the link bars had to be to fit in the V6's bores. I came up with approximately 0.58 inches. I also did a test to see exactly how much of them ended up hitting the bottom of the intake manifold. I determined that with alot of cutting, welding, and grinding, it crazy nonsense just my work!!!

First, I found out I had to grind alittle bit of metal off of both cylinder heads in order for cylinders 3 and 4's lifter's link bars to clear the head. About 5-10 minutes with the die grinder, and I had that fixed (sorry no picts - may get some later).

Second, I looked a the crowns of the lifters. There was no way to dissassemble the lifters to keep debris out of them, since the link bar rivets were pressed in, and I would just butcher them trying to remove and install them. So I left the guts in. I began to grind away at the lifter crowns to remove enough metal to clear the intake manifold when the lifters meet the top of the cam lobes. This was incredibly tiresome. It took approximately 20 minutes of grinding per lifter. I tried the best I could to try and not get the lifters too hot by going to fast. Actually, I think 20 minutes per lifter was actually too fast, I did get some of them alittle hotter than I wanted. But it looks like all of them turned out to be alright. Since I didn't take out all the lifter guts, I took special care in cleaning all the excess metal out from the lifter. Since tollerances are so tight, there should have been slim to none of the metal shavings being able to get into the lifter. I made sure I cleaned them out as best as I could with some solvent. I tested them also to make sure they weren't binding up, and they all seemed to move very smoothly.

Now was the time to tackle the link bars. I had to shorten them quite a bit to make them work. So I measured to approximately 0.58 inches and began to cut away. Since I absolutely stink ass at welding, I gave them to one of my co-workers to weld. So he threw an even bead on them and ground up the excess. I gave them a stress test and all of them seemed to be fairly strong.

Well, I first did all the modifying to the first pair of lifters. I figured, if this one failed to work, I could send the other 5 back for a refund. But I tossed that first one in the block. I threw my stock cam back in and did a clearance test. All seemed just dandy! The lifter cleared the intake manifold. The linkbar cleared the cylinder head. The linkbar was also just the right length. So I did the same to the other 5 pairs.

After that, it turned out that 3 of the 6 pairs of lifter's link bars will still just a boob too long. I guess my cutting wasn't as accurate as I wanted it to be. I ended up having a custom welding shop cut the link bars again and shorten up some more.

Finally, all 6 pairs are properly modified and ready to go!

Time for a camshaft! I wanted something that would pull to about 6000 rpm. So I wanted something that still kept a good idle, good drivability, but also greatly improved midrange power! I waddled back over to Delta Camshafts. We looked at my stock cam and stock 60 degree roller cam. Sure enough, the roller cam will work easily in the non-roller block. Bearing sizes are the same, bearing and lobe placements are the same. Distributor gears are the same. Only thing was different was the method the gear bolts on. Since the roller cam was a single bolt, and the flat tappet cam used 3 bolts, a new timing set was in order. So I had them order me up a new timing set for the roller cam. I also wanted a custom grind for my new cam. I informed him on my build, and what I expected. I kept it realistic, so this made it easy for him to grind up. He had a blank core in stock, and told me he'd grind it the next day, and it should be done the day after. Bam!! Camshaft's done!! I now have a roller cam with .467/.488 valve lift with 1.5 rockers. 218/226 @ 0.050 duration. This should easily work the way I want it to! So what was the charge on this fantastic custom grind? I walked in expecting to pay $300-500 easily for the cam. Holy Crap!!!! $135!!!! These guys are awesome!!!!!

So anyway. All I had to do was buy a $5 cam gear bolt. I'm gonna have to set up a cam button to prevent walking. I haven't installed it yet, since my engine is still getting machined. But it should work. The biggest thing I'm worried about are the welds. I'm fearing that they might crack and break. They don't get put into any stress, but they could still crack from the vibration. As long as those hold up, everything should work just fine. All the oil recesses are in the proper spots, so everything else should be fine. Here's the picts:

http://216.240.155.171/dfireweb/Smeg/Camshaft/

Man, that is cool. I hope it works.

www.lazercams.com
like the lifters sold in pairs, there are also lifter brackets, which you mount to the lifter valley, which handle a pair of lifters. basicly a "roller kit". it setup to bolt in - but, you need to drill/tap holes into the block
and, finally - the easy way - just get 3400/3200 shortblock already done. but, I understand in this case why ya didnt.

Yeah, much cheaper to buy a 3100 or 3400 and just swap the engine or disassemble and install your internals into that block.

Actually, I don't think it would be cheaper. I spent $330 on the lifters. $135 on the cam. $50 for a timing set. $5 for a bolt. $520 total. I don't think that's too shabby. Especially for the fact you don't have to tear apart the entire engine or replace the block in order to do it.

If one were building the engine from scratch, I agree, using a roller block is probably the way to go.

I was talking to Bud from Bud's Out Back about retrofitting a roller block lifter retainer to my block. It just seemed like too much of a hassle. It would have been a hassle for me to find a machine shop willing to make the modifications to the block. And I wasn't about to spend $200 shipping my block round trip to Bud's.

I'm just putting this out there as a possible option in the future for people who are determined to get a hydrualic roller.

quote Originally posted by Will: Yeah, much cheaper to buy a 3100 or 3400 and just swap the engine or disassemble and install your internals into that block.

True, but with Most GM 3400's (EDIT: Aluminum Head) falling apart in the cars that already have them, that might be a problem. I've got 2 3400 Pontiac cars that need new head gaskets because of blundering GM engineers.

[This message has been edited by timgray (edited 12-21-2006).]

Damn people like you are the $hit. I would have thought the 3400 shortblock would have been the easier route.

Tim...3400s aren't that dependable? They have got to be better than 2.8s though.....right?

Nothing wrong with my 3400 block with iron heads. Is the 3400 engine having problems with the aluminium heads, valvetrain, intake? What have you heard?

------------------

3.4L S/C 87 GT www.fierosound.com
2002/2003/2004 World of Wheels Winner &
Multiple IASCA Stereo Award Winner

Nope the 3400's with aluminum heads have all kinds of problems. Starting with the crappy DexCool they started using in 1997 it eats the gaskets. So every car that had a 3400 engine in it and DexCool has faulty gaskets all over it unless the owner violated the warranty and had the coolant changed out to something traditional. GM refuses to acknowledge the problems and will not repair the problem... Add to that the intakes on many also fail miserably because the lower intake is warped from the factory on lots of cars.

Basically if the car was made in 1997 -2006 has a 3400 in it with aluminum heads and still has dexcool in it, get away from the car as fast as possible. it is a ticking time bomb.. The local mechanic I trust has seen the problems so much he knows what's wrong when a car rolls in. My aztek has the problems at 62,000 miles, the father-in-law's Grand Am with 35,000 miles on it and the same problems.

Actually the 1988-1995 GM 2.8 and 3.4 is an incredibly reliable engine. the 95 3.4 even more so because all bugs have been chased out. the improved oiling they did in the 3.4 in 95 is quite astonishing... this held over for the iron head 3400 but not the aluminum head engines.

It's a major problem on the cars. I have been a Pontiac guy cince I started to drive. I have always owned a Pontiac and bought a pontiac as my first choice... how bad the aluminum head 3400's are and how badly GM is handling it (what bad headgaskets/Dexcool eating gaskets/plastic impeller on water pump, warped lower intakes, bad body control computers, etc...) by ignoring the problems and not admitting to them nor honoring them.

Honestly the 3.4L pushrod is a darn reliable engine. the last year they were made in 1995 they had the best oiling and other designs figured out (typical, get an engine really good and kill it). After reading several books on that engine and 60* GM V6 engines in general I have a ton of respect for the engine (the ones the problems were fixed after 1987) 1988 2.8's going 200K miles is not unheard of... 1985 and 1986 engines making that far with rod bearings still in them is a miracle simply because of the far better oiling designs on the crank

If we can get roller lifters and a roller cam in a 3.4 that would simply bring us more tech and possibly better reliability. (flat lifters have advantages that roller lifters do not and vice-a-vers-a)

[This message has been edited by timgray (edited 12-21-2006).]

quote Originally posted by timgray: Nope the 3400's with aluminum heads have all kinds of problems. Starting with the crappy DexCool they started using in 1997 it eats the gaskets. So every car that had a 3400 engine in it and DexCool has faulty gaskets all over it unless the owner violated the warranty and had the coolant changed out to something traditional. GM refuses to acknowledge the problems and will not repair the problem... Add to that the intakes on many also fail miserably because the lower intake is warped from the factory on lots of cars. Basically if the car was made in 1997 -2006 has a 3400 in it with aluminum heads and still has dexcool in it, get away from the car as fast as possible. it is a ticking time bomb.. The local mechanic I trust has seen the problems so much he knows what's wrong when a car rolls in. My aztek has the problems at 62,000 miles, the father-in-law's Grand Am with 35,000 miles on it and the same problems. Actually the 1988-1995 GM 2.8 and 3.4 is an incredibly reliable engine. the 95 3.4 even more so because all bugs have been chased out. the improved oiling they did in the 3.4 in 95 is quite astonishing... this held over for the iron head 3400 but not the aluminum head engines. It's a major problem on the cars. I have been a Pontiac guy cince I started to drive. I have always owned a Pontiac and bought a pontiac as my first choice... how bad the aluminum head 3400's are and how badly GM is handling it (what bad headgaskets/Dexcool eating gaskets/plastic impeller on water pump, warped lower intakes, bad body control computers, etc...) by ignoring the problems and not admitting to them nor honoring them.

Yeah, he's right. I had two 1997 Grand Ams, although both of them were TwinCams, I was looking for some time to get a loaded 96-98 Grand Am GT Coupe with the sunroof and all that other great stuff. I decided against it after every single Grand Am (with the V6) that I saw for sale, had evidence of a leaky intake manifold. Literally more than half of all the V6s I saw in GAs (whether I wanted to buy them or not), they had the leaky intake manifold. In 96-98 though, it was the 3100 V6... but still it's basically the same motor.

------------------
Todd,
2006 Pontiac Solstice
2004 Volkswagen Beetle Convertible (Wife's Car)
2002 Ford Crown Victoria LX
1987 Pontiac Fiero SE / V6 (3.2) 5-Speed
1984 Porsche 944 5-Speed
1981 Pontiac TransAm (Olds 455BB)
1973 Volkswagen Type-2 Transporter

It's my understanding that was a gasket design problem which was remedied with a new design gasket so the engine itself with aluminum heads was fine however the early production models had the first design gasket which frequently failed between the heads and intake a similar problem I also noted with what I believe was the 2.2L which leaked at the front driver corner of the headgasket. Once the newer gaskets were installed the problem went away and the engine outside of that was quite reliable. I doubt the 06 model can be grouped in the bunch and possibly the 05 as well since at some point the 3400 has seen some of the same improvements that the 3500 and 3900 has particularly starting with an even stronger crank as well as rubber o-ring like gaskets for a near perfect seal. Otherwise a little time spent on the 60 degree forum would suggest resoundingly otherwise regarding dependability since about 95 % of the vehicles discussed are fwd 3100-3400 and very little talk about dependability problems since most of them are aware of the gasket weakness and have probably taken care of it already.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 12-21-2006).]

EDIT: Does not matter, until a recall is issued the safest thing is to assume every 3400 aluminum head engine Has bad head gaskets and is leaking at the intake base.

I cant wait until the 3.4 pushrod with roller bearings is ran through it's first 1000 miles... This is a very cool upgrade.

[This message has been edited by timgray (edited 12-21-2006).]

It'll be another couple months before I finish building the engine. I still got alot more work to go on it. This engine's gonna have to hold up to some punishment. It'll see it's share of the road course. So, I'd say, after the break in, and after the first full day on the road course, if the lifters are still holding up, I'd say it was a success! We shall see.

I was on the fence between the 3400pontiac and the 3.4chevy. i like the idea of a roller cam, but i like the 3.4GM because I know it. I was gonna try and use the AL heads too but I guess the irons are good enough for me. I really like the thought of a roller cam. And I've told a few people how cheap delta cams is...they do a lot of grunt work for comp cams.

are the lifter galleys on this engine the primary galleys , like the 2.8 motors? i wanted to put roller lifters into my 2.8 after it ate a cam but i was told roller lifters bleed off too much pressure to work in a 2.8 .i found lots of rollers that i could adapt but gave up because of the oiling issue .with the short bars is there a binding problem? thanks

quote Originally posted by timgray: Nope the 3400's with aluminum heads have all kinds of problems. Starting with the crappy DexCool they started using in 1997 it eats the gaskets. So every car that had a 3400 engine in it and DexCool has faulty gaskets all over it unless the owner violated the warranty and had the coolant changed out to something traditional. GM refuses to acknowledge the problems and will not repair the problem... Add to that the intakes on many also fail miserably because the lower intake is warped from the factory on lots of cars. Basically if the car was made in 1997 -2006 has a 3400 in it with aluminum heads and still has dexcool in it, get away from the car as fast as possible. it is a ticking time bomb.. The local mechanic I trust has seen the problems so much he knows what's wrong when a car rolls in. My aztek has the problems at 62,000 miles, the father-in-law's Grand Am with 35,000 miles on it and the same problems. Actually the 1988-1995 GM 2.8 and 3.4 is an incredibly reliable engine. the 95 3.4 even more so because all bugs have been chased out. the improved oiling they did in the 3.4 in 95 is quite astonishing... this held over for the iron head 3400 but not the aluminum head engines. It's a major problem on the cars. I have been a Pontiac guy cince I started to drive. I have always owned a Pontiac and bought a pontiac as my first choice... how bad the aluminum head 3400's are and how badly GM is handling it (what bad headgaskets/Dexcool eating gaskets/plastic impeller on water pump, warped lower intakes, bad body control computers, etc...) by ignoring the problems and not admitting to them nor honoring them. Honestly the 3.4L pushrod is a darn reliable engine. the last year they were made in 1995 they had the best oiling and other designs figured out (typical, get an engine really good and kill it). After reading several books on that engine and 60* GM V6 engines in general I have a ton of respect for the engine (the ones the problems were fixed after 1987) 1988 2.8's going 200K miles is not unheard of... 1985 and 1986 engines making that far with rod bearings still in them is a miracle simply because of the far better oiling designs on the crank If we can get roller lifters and a roller cam in a 3.4 that would simply bring us more tech and possibly better reliability. (flat lifters have advantages that roller lifters do not and vice-a-vers-a)

Well if you're that afraid of the aluminum head engines, don't use one. Or better yet, use one an exercise some preventative maintenance before you put it in the car. You know what goes wrong with them... I don't think there's any reason not to use one once you know that. The power potential of the iron heads will never compare to that of the aluminum heads.

We never had a problem with Dex-Cool eating gaskets or causing warped heads at our shop, as long as it was properly maintained. First thing is to get the customer to understand that Dex-Cool does not last 5 years or 150,000 miles, that around the 3rd or 4th year of continued use it starts gelling up in the radiator, heater core, hoses, block, water pump and intake. Every 3XXX-series engine, in the Dex-Cool era, we serviced with warped heads or blown head gaskets had gelled up and overheated from the restricted flow.

I cannot say I have ever seen any kind of anti-freeze eat a gasket before.

Here is where the problem comes in for the DIY'er, your average DIY'er doesn't have a $1,500 coolant exchange machine in their garage. Since my move to running a retail auto parts store, I find out the methods of repair used by those who don't frequent repair shops unless it is completely out of their league. Typically they will open the draincock on the radiator, drain out the coolant in the radiator, from here it splits, some use a chemical flush and distilled water and run it until the thermostat opens and then drains again, or the other half just adds the 50/50 mix back in the radiator and leaves the old antifreeze stuck in the block and heater core (Which is usually the majority of your coolant). That latter half I usually see later on buying a can of K&W Block Seal or a bottle of Blue Angel.

Remember the different formulations of anti-freeze are designed for different applications. IAT, In-organic Acid Technology, or "the green stuff", antifreeze was designed around iron block, iron head and copper/brass core radiators. OAT, Organic Acid Technology, Dex-Cool, antifreeze was designed around aluminum or iron block, aluminum head and aluminum core radiators. HOAT, Hybrid Organic Acid Technology, usually "the yellow stuff" or "G-05", antifreeze was designed as a medium between IAT and OAT, retaining the good properties from both, the superior metal protection from IAT and the long life from OAT. I removed Dex-Cool from my last vehicle with a coolant exchange machine at the shop and ran a 30/70 (antifreeze/water) mix of Zerex G-05 with a bottle of Royal Purple's Purple Ice. I ran it for three years and had no complaints. This vehicle had an all aluminum engine and aluminum core radiator.

i hate to break it to you guys but they make lifters for the 3.1 and 3.4 http://store.summitracing.c...%2D2270&autoview=sku

Can these be used in a 2.8 block converted to a 3.1?

If those roller lifters for a 3.4 (that Sage mentioned in his post) would work well with the Delta Camshafts' custom-ground hydraulic roller camshaft (that Zewerr mentioned at the outset of this thread), that would be quite the breakthrough for the 3.4 pushrod V-6 engine. Does anybody know if those roller lifters would be compatible with that hydraulic roller camshaft in the 3.4 pushrod engine? Would the link bars that are not included with those roller lifters be an issue?

quote Originally posted by SageMoonblade: i hate to break it to you guys but they make lifters for the 3.1 and 3.4 http://store.summitracing.c...%2D2270&autoview=sku

Those are stock replacement lifters for factory roller cam engines. They will not work with the non-roller blocks.

quote Originally posted by Will: Those are stock replacement lifters for factory roller cam engines. They will not work with the non-roller blocks.

Correct. Those would require some way to mount the factory retainers that prevent the lifters from rotating.

------------------

3.4L S/C 87 GT www.fierosound.com
2002/2003/2004 World of Wheels Winner &
Multiple IASCA Stereo Award Winner

It looks like we'll simply have to await word on the outcome of Zewerr's commendable toils in trying to make a roller cam compatible with the 3.4L pushrod crate engine he's using. He posted the following on this thread almost 3 months ago, which suggests the project he's taken on for himself and the rest of us has been something of a handful:

quote Originally posted by Zewerr: It'll be another couple months before I finish building the engine. I still got alot more work to go on it. This engine's gonna have to hold up to some punishment. It'll see it's share of the road course. So, I'd say, after the break in, and after the first full day on the road course, if the lifters are still holding up, I'd say it was a success! We shall see.