How tight to set solid lifters

[66 Sat]

One reason for hot/cold differences for all iron engines is valve material. Many aftermarket valves are made of stainless steel, which has about 1.5 times greater expansion than steel.

I've got stainless steel valves in my poly - that was another reason why I went looser. I'd read .02" for the stainless.
And I am going to do what you outlined in post #12 - I'm going to doublecheck the cold right now, and then hopefully do the hot check tomorrow.

 

[Bewy]

66Sat,
Are your tappet adjusters the original friction-thread design [ no lock nut ]? if so they might have loosened up from too many adjustments over the years. If so, remove & clean threads with Lacquer Thinner. Apply hi strength Loctite to the threads & adjust. They will stay tight.
Repeat process each time you adjust the valves.

 

[RustyRatRod]

Next time I'm due to readjust the valves, I'll post a video for those who can't figure it out. The 273 is at 10,000 miles now, next adjustment is at 100,000 mile. This is not racing garbage.

I know exactly how to do it, I simply choose not to because I don't like doing it that way. I don't like gettin burned and I don't like hanging onto a moving wrench or ratchet. People have done this different ways since the beginning of the internal combustion engine with both having successful results. I think if one way was so much "wronger" than the others, we'd know it by now. I've done it both ways and I like cold non running adjustment better.

 

[66 Sat]

66Sat,
Are your tappet adjusters the original friction-thread design [ no lock nut ]? if so they might have loosened up from too many adjustments over the years. If so, remove & clean threads with Lacquer Thinner. Apply hi strength Loctite to the threads & adjust. They will stay tight.
Repeat process each time you adjust the valves.

Yes as per post #13.
I used blue loctite on the loose one. I just finished re-checking the cold setting. They are still at .016" and the loose one has stayed at .016" which is good.
I'm not looking forward to checking the hot measurement at all. Apart from the heat issue, if they have loosened further and the advice I followed is backward, then I'll have to do them all again...
Fingers crossed 66fs is right and Newbomb Turk is wrong (no offence of course, it will just save me an hour or so).

 

[RustyRatRod]

Yes as per post #13.
I used blue loctite on the loose one. I just finished re-checking the cold setting. They are still at .016" and the loose one has stayed at .016" which is good.
I'm not looking forward to checking the hot measurement at all. Apart from the heat issue, if they have loosened further and the advice I followed is backward, then I'll have to do them all again...
Fingers crossed 66fs is right and Newbomb Turk is wrong (no offence of course, it will just save me an hour or so).

If it should happen to work loose again, simply remove the rocker, remove the adjuster. Place the rocker on a vise give the side of the rocker at the adjuster hole a small blow or two with a small ball peen hammer. Better to do it one blow at the time then go to far. Perfectly acceptable if you don't want the expense of the lock nut adjusters.....which are actually getting hard to find now.

 

[66fs]

I know exactly how to do it, I simply choose not to because I don't like doing it that way. I don't like gettin burned and I don't like hanging onto a moving wrench or ratchet. People have done this different ways since the beginning of the internal combustion engine with both having successful results. I think if one way was so much "wronger" than the others, we'd know it by now. I've done it both ways and I like cold non running adjustment better.

It does not matter how you adjust the valves. Running hot just gives the 360 degrees of adjustment on an engine at steady state operating temperature. On initial I adjust them cold by turning the crank by hand. Then hot and running , rarely much adjustment needed. With friction adjusters all you need is a ratchet, an extension, and a swivel socket. No burned hands or moving wrench or ratchet. There is no right or wrong way to adjust valves.

 

[pittsburghracer]

It does not matter how you adjust the valves. Running hot just gives the 360 degrees of adjustment on an engine at steady state operating temperature. On initial I adjust them cold by turning the crank by hand. Then hot and running , rarely much adjustment needed. With friction adjusters all you need is a ratchet, an extension, and a swivel socket. No burned hands or moving wrench or ratchet. There is no right or wrong way to adjust valves.

Some of you guys are NUTS. Adjusting Mopar valves on a running engine. Lmao.

 

[Bewy]

There is no need to adjust valves on a hot running engine. Perform the procedure described in post #12 one time, & adjust cold thereafter.

 

[RustyRatRod]

It does not matter how you adjust the valves. Running hot just gives the 360 degrees of adjustment on an engine at steady state operating temperature. On initial I adjust them cold by turning the crank by hand. Then hot and running , rarely much adjustment needed. With friction adjusters all you need is a ratchet, an extension, and a swivel socket. No burned hands or moving wrench or ratchet. There is no right or wrong way to adjust valves.

I get it and I understand, believe me. I choose to do it differently.

 

[19DART66]

On the engine that is in my Dart which has aluminum heads and solid roller lifter cam with 256I/262E @.050 .668 lift, I did a lot of experimenting with valve lash. I found that I got a more consistent valve lash hot and cold if i adjusted the valves cold. The Bullet cam card called for .018 IN .020 EX lash, I adjust them to .012 IN .014 EX with the EO/IC method cold and they always come out on the money cold and hot.
Back when I was running a W2 headed engine with a Mopar Perf. 590 solid cam I tried both methods in the Mopar books the 4 position and 8 position valve lash settings and the engine always sounded like it had a few valves louder than the rest. Check the valve lash setting from the 4 and 8 position settings to the EO/IC method and those lash settings were all over the place. So now I only do the valve lash cold with the EO/IC method to get the most consistent valve lash on my engines.

 

[Dale Davies]

Nope. Post a video of you doing it. There is no way you can accurately set the valves with the engine running.

And, I’ve never ever seen a Pro Stock engine that had the valves set with the engine running. If anyone was going to do it, it would be them.

There is no way you can hold the wrench, work the feeler gauge and get the **** right and tight with the engine running, unless you let the engine run at 200 RPM. And I would never do that.

I have done it many times. The wrench jumps around a bit but no problem. Trouble is that eventually the feeler gauge gets hammered a bit thinner.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

I have done it many times. The wrench jumps around a bit but no problem. Trouble is that eventually the feeler gauge gets hammered a bit thinner.

Again, maybe on some dead stock junk with frictions locks maybe.

But any performance cam with jam nuts it ain’t happening. You’ll be so far off it’s not funny.

And yet, no one has said why or how trying to lash the valves with an engine running is even close to better or accurate. It’s not.

 

[pittsburghracer]

Again, maybe on some dead stock junk with frictions locks maybe.

But any performance cam with jam nuts it ain’t happening. You’ll be so far off it’s not funny.

And yet, no one has said why or how trying to lash the valves with an engine running is even close to better or accurate. It’s not.

Totally beyond Stupid

 

[RustyRatRod]

Again, maybe on some dead stock junk with frictions locks maybe.

But any performance cam with jam nuts it ain’t happening. You’ll be so far off it’s not funny.

And yet, no one has said why or how trying to lash the valves with an engine running is even close to better or accurate. It’s not.

Exactly. People just spout nonsense without taking into consideration that somaone might actually have something other than stone stock interference fit junk on their engine.

I wanna see someone adjust valves on a running engine with FREE turning screw adjusters and locknuts with either screwdriver slots or female hex adjusters. Although I have the interference fit stock adjusters on Vixen's engine, I left them because they were in good shape, plus, the lift on the cam is only .465". Even though the duration is 250 @ .050" and it's pretty rowdy, it has low spring pressure and low lift, so not a lot going on there. But I still adjust engine cold and not running.

Now, the engine I have on the stand is another matter. It will have the factory closed chamber head and I have a nice set of Crane adjusters and lock nuts on that head.

People can adjust however they want. I know how I will continue to do it. I also don't use any EOIC, ABC, XYZ, adjustment method. I get each ONE on the base circle, make the adjustment and move to the next. To me, there's much less room for error. You are concentrating on ONE rocker and valve at the time. I've seen people ***** about it taking too long and I just chuckle.

 

[Bewy]

Consider this. You are using one of the above adjustment methods, 4 pos, 8 pos, etc to set lash.....
For each method, you are measuring the lash on the same point of the base circle, which will have some run out.....You could be on the high point, the low point or in the middle.....
If you are using a SFT cam, along with stock rocker arms, then you will have the least variation of lash.
Now add roller rockers. You have a roller tip that might not be centered; rockers might run on needle brgs that have wear/play. The higher the rocker ratio, the greater the variation.

Roller cam now. Wheel on the roller lifter might have the hole not quite dead centre. Or wheel is slightly out of round.
The ball ends of the pushrods look perfectly round to the naked eye. But are they? If there is a 0.002" flat spot, which you won't see, & that is where the ball makes contact with the rocker, you gain 0.003" of lash with a 1.5 rocker. Next time around, the prod moves & contact is made elsewhere on the tip...& lash is less.

All of the above variances can show up in 'WTF, the lash has changed?'

I use the 4 position method for initial lash setting. It is veeeery accurate for 95% of cams being used.
After that, I use the random method which is the most accurate.

 

[rumblefish360]

On the engine that is in my Dart which has aluminum heads and solid roller lifter cam with 256I/262E @.050 .668 lift, I did a lot of experimenting with valve lash. I found that I got a more consistent valve lash hot and cold if i adjusted the valves cold. The Bullet cam card called for .018 IN .020 EX lash, I adjust them to .012 IN .014 EX with the EO/IC method cold and they always come out on the money cold and hot.
Back when I was running a W2 headed engine with a Mopar Perf. 590 solid cam I tried both methods in the Mopar books the 4 position and 8 position valve lash settings and the engine always sounded like it had a few valves louder than the rest. Check the valve lash setting from the 4 and 8 position settings to the EO/IC method and those lash settings were all over the place. So now I only do the valve lash cold with the EO/IC method to get the most consistent valve lash on my engines.

Have you tried various lash settings with the MP .590 cam?
Where did you find it best and what’s the tightest you have run it?
TIA

 

[66 Sat]

Exactly. People just spout nonsense without taking into consideration that somaone might actually have something other than stone stock interference fit junk on their engine.

I wanna see someone adjust valves on a running engine with FREE turning screw adjusters and locknuts with either screwdriver slots or female hex adjusters. Although I have the interference fit stock adjusters on Vixen's engine, I left them because they were in good shape, plus, the lift on the cam is only .465". Even though the duration is 250 @ .050" and it's pretty rowdy, it has low spring pressure and low lift, so not a lot going on there. But I still adjust engine cold and not running.

Now, the engine I have on the stand is another matter. It will have the factory closed chamber head and I have a nice set of Crane adjusters and lock nuts on that head.

People can adjust however they want. I know how I will continue to do it. I also don't use any EOIC, ABC, XYZ, or LBGTQ adjustment method. I get each ONE on the base circle, make the adjustment and move to the next. To me, there's much less room for error. You are concentrating on ONE rocker and valve at the time. I've seen people ***** about it taking too long and I just chuckle.

I thought the EOIC method WAS making sure the lifter was on the base circle?
That's the method I used, going from No. 1 cylinder, around the engine as per the firing order. Slowly, methodically, one rocker and valve at a time in order.

What is the difference to that in the method you used?

 

[RustyRatRod]

I thought the EOIC method WAS making sure the lifter was on the base circle?
That's the method I used, going from No. 1 cylinder, around the engine as per the firing order. Slowly, methodically, one rocker and valve at a time in order.

What is the difference to that in the method you used?

I'm not arguing for or against. I simply stated the method I use over the method I don't. I also know for a fact, that the larger a camshaft gets, the more skewed the EOIC method can become. But again, I'm not arguing the point. Just sharing how I do it.

 

[66 Sat]

I'm not arguing for or against. I simply stated the method I use over the method I don't. I also know for a fact, that the larger a camshaft gets, the more skewed the EOIC method can become. But again, I'm not arguing the point. Just sharing how I do it.

I'm not arguing either, I'm asking because I don't know.
Until a few weeks ago I'd never adjusted the valve lash on any car. I only used the EOIC method because that seemed to make sense and there was a few tutorials online how to do it.

Your method seems to be the same as what I followed. What I noticed with the overlap of my cam, when I'd finished one cylinder, the next in order (firing) had already moved some, so I needed to go rotate the engine back a touch to get that one where it needed to be.

Also, I found a video of a guy checking the valves on a poly with the engine running. I looked at that and thought "no way in hell am I trying that"

 

[RustyRatRod]

I'm not arguing either, I'm asking because I don't know.
Until a few weeks ago I'd never adjusted the valve lash on any car. I only used the EOIC method because that seemed to make sense and there was a few tutorials online how to do it.

Your method seems to be the same as what I followed. What I noticed with the overlap of my cam, when I'd finished one cylinder, the next in order (firing) had already moved some, so I needed to go rotate the engine back a touch to get that one where it needed to be.

Also, I found a video of a guy checking the valves on a poly with the engine running. I looked at that and thought "no way in hell am I trying that"

The base circle of a cam......any cam is a very wide area. That makes it easy to eyeball the pushrod side of the rocker and see when it is all the way down and on the base circle. It's just always worked for me. Yeah, I'd love to see someone adjust valves on a running early Hemi. Ain't happenin. Especially on one like mine that uses adjustable pushrods instead.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

The base circle of a cam......any cam is a very wide area. That makes it easy to eyeball the pushrod side of the rocker and see when it is all the way down and on the base circle. It's just always worked for me. Yeah, I'd love to see someone adjust valves on a running early Hemi. Ain't happenin. Especially on one like mine that uses adjustable pushrods instead.

LOL, I’d pay pretty good money to watch someone lash that Hemi for you while it’s running. That would be youtube gold.

 

[RustyRatRod]

LOL, I’d pay pretty good money to watch someone lash that Hemi for you while it’s running. That would be youtube gold.

Me too! It's enough of a beeotch not running!

 

[19DART66]

rumblefish, I did play with the lash settings with the 590 cam, don't know if it was my combo or or just the 590 cam, but I don't remember it making any difference in the performance of the engine. I do remember that that after playing with the lash settings that I ended up tightening up the exhaust lash to the same(.028) as the intake lash just to make lashing the valves a little easier and to quiet it down a little.
I will say that cam hated valve springs, Oh man did the cam beat up valve springs. that 590 is one hell of a cam though.
I will admit that I replaced the MP 590 cam with a Cam Motion Roller cam with 263/270 @ .050 642/629 lift. and the car didn't run any quicker, but the car did picked up 1 mph. this was in a 372 inch engine in an 1980 Mirada.

 

[RustyRatRod]

rumblefish, I did play with the lash settings with the 590 cam, don't know if it was my combo or or just the 590 cam, but I don't remember it making any difference in the performance of the engine. I do remember that that after playing with the lash settings that I ended up tightening up the exhaust lash to the same(.028) as the intake lash just to make lashing the valves a little easier and to quiet it down a little.
I will say that cam hated valve springs, Oh man did the cam beat up valve springs. that 590 is one hell of a cam though.
I will admit that I replaced the MP 590 cam with a Cam Motion Roller cam with 263/270 @ .050 642/629 lift. and the car didn't run any quicker, but the car did picked up 1 mph. this was in a 372 inch engine in an 1980 Mirada.

View attachment 1716198937

Cool and somewhat obscure car! Don't see too many.

 

[OldmanRick]

Some of you guys are NUTS. Adjusting Mopar valves on a running engine. Lmao.

I watched a guy try it in the early 70's on his hyd cammed/273 rocker 340 12sec race car and he snapped one of the adjuster nuts clean off, lol.