I didn't say it was either one. I said this "IMO, the slant six did not do well with the conversion to hydraulic lifters. They never ran "quite" right and had problems with valve train ticks." and I stand by it. That statement does not equate to "a big fail for durability or performance" and if you think so, might I suggest brushing up on your English comprehension?
Your slant six has an upgraded camshaft and better than stock lifters. That's not what I was referring to, OR what I said. I was talking about the changeover that CHRYSLER did from the factory and I stand by it, because I've seen and worked on a lot of them when they were new. They made valve train noises. They didn't run very smooth. They got less than stellar mileage, all compared to the solid lifter engines. It's all true, whether you like it, agree with it or believe it. Some of them were lucky and gave decent service, but none had the reliability (made noises) or smooth running characteristics of the solid lifter engines and I believe that was simply because Chrysler never did a redesign on the oiling system on the slant six to take advantage of the hydraulic lifters. That's my opinion from my experience and I'm stickin to it.
