What should cold lash setting be?

-
I know Stock Eliminator guys who run solids even if they
are on hydraulic profile camshafts, they set them at
.004 which scares me. I was just talking to a well know
engine builder out of Arizona this week and I asked:
Are you not scared of burning an exhaust valve for it
being on the seat a shorter time to cool?

He said it was never a problem as he is way smarter than
I am (I am just a hobbyist)! Our cars only run for a couple
minutes so I assume he is correct. But it still scares me.
 
GTX JOHN said:
I know Stock Eliminator guys who run solids even if they
are on hydraulic profile camshafts, they set them at
.004 which scares me. I was just talking to a well know
engine builder out of Arizona this week and I asked:
Are you not scared of burning an exhaust valve for it
being on the seat a shorter time to cool?

He said it was never a problem as he is way smarter than
I am (I am just a hobbyist)! Our cars only run for a couple
minutes so I assume he is correct. But it still scares me.
Click to expand...

Running close to zero lash with solids lifters on a hydraulic cam has been done forever. But all the details are critical and needs to be right.

Not to offend anyone, but I would not recommend it to most of today’s hobbyist.
 
MOPARMAGA said:
during the last few Dyno pulls we tried tightening the lash to see what my engine liked, I think I ended up tightening the lash .006 - .008 on both intake and exhaust and it picked up power.
Not a big gain but it was around 8-10 HP.
I would have liked to do more tuning but I was already around 25 pulls.
Click to expand...

The devil is in the details in the balance of the motor build. I have seen the opposite when comparing average hp in the shift-to-shift recovery rpm range.
 
BSB67 said:
The devil is in the details in the balance of the motor build. I have seen the opposite when comparing average hp in the shift-to-shift recovery rpm range.
Click to expand...
I edited my post earlier because I didn't format my sentences very well, then I completely forgot to add in the fact that " my smallish camshaft" responded well to the tighter lash.
There's the devil in the details.
That cam is 264-268 @.050 in a near 13.0:1 470 cubic inch low deck.
 
our gk stocker cam is at .006 cold, makes it .004 hot, seems to work ok, no problems, had a comp stkr cam called for .006 lash on intakes, zero lash on exh, int was a solid lobe exh was hyd lobe. just food for thought
 
MOPARMAGA said:
I edited my post earlier because I didn't format my sentences very well, then I completely forgot to add in the fact that " my smallish camshaft" responded well to the tighter lash.
There's the devil in the details.
That cam is 264-268 @.050 in a near 13.0:1 470 cubic inch low deck.
Click to expand...
It’s telling you it wants that bigger cam you have:poke:
 
BSB67 said:
And in my case, my motor could probably benefit from a smaller cam.

Loosening lash make the cam look smaller to the motor, but also makes it act like it has faster lobes.
Click to expand...
Up until a year ago , I never really put much thought into lash and doing testing on the dyno really made me start thinking a little further into everything going on in the engine.
 
GTX JOHN said:
I know Stock Eliminator guys who run solids even if they
are on hydraulic profile camshafts, they set them at
.004 which scares me. I was just talking to a well know
engine builder out of Arizona this week and I asked:
Are you not scared of burning an exhaust valve for it
being on the seat a shorter time to cool?

He said it was never a problem as he is way smarter than
I am (I am just a hobbyist)! Our cars only run for a couple
minutes so I assume he is correct. But it still scares me.
Click to expand...
Air cooled VW guys run them at .000. They just warm them up in the pits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top