dharrison

iTrader: (3)

has anyone run RHOADS LIFTERS? what are there advantages and disadvantages?
will they work on computer control fuel injected motors? i was told they are noisey at low RPM, how loud are they? are they too loud to put up with?

Vader

Yes, they're a little noisy. If you're not expecting it and willing to tolerate it, you may want to consifer a hydraulic roller setup instead. You can get nearly the same kind of advantage with the possibility of greater open/close rates with the rollers, although the duration won't vary as it will with the leaky lifters.

If you're not expecting it, the apparently random and scattered valve train noise might drive you goofy trying to determine the correct lash. (Does that now explain me better?)

Stekman

Vader,

What if he already has a flat tappet camshaft that has specs that he is content with?

dharrison,

yes, Rhoads are loud. At lower RPMs the bleed rate is such that the oil leaks out so soon that the plunger inside the lifter literally bottoms out so to speak. That is the noise maker. I have a friend who runs them. They are a ruckus. I personally feel my roller cam (solid) has a better idle/low RPM sound. I think they were designed to 'lower' the cam specs at lower RPMs to make a more streetabile cam. However, i think the noise by far offsets them. Theres a lot of bad reviews out there. Or at least, less than desirable.

Streetiron85

The lobe design of the cam effects the noise of the rhodes lifters.
I had a cam that was designed to be used with rhodes and it was pretty quiet. I haven't seen those cams around in a while tho.
The lifters do what they claim to do.
It might be worth it to call rhodes and ask if they'd be good with your cam.

RB83L69

I was a bit skeptical about them when they first appeared. Having been bit many times by various things, I guess I'm more convinced than most people, that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

However all that may be, I built a couple of motors with them right when they came out, I guess it was about in the early 80s, for people who just had to have them. I advised them all against them, for a variety of reasons; unpredictable results (dependence on oil pressure & viscosity, valve spring pressure, component weight, rocker ratio, etc. etc.) was the main issue I saw as likely to cause problems. But they wanted them anyway, so I did it. In each case, they had picked a cam that I saw as unsuitably large for their application.

Every single one of them either replaced them with normal ones within a year, or paid me to do so; and usually stepped their cams down at the same time.