five7kid

iTrader: (14)

My boss gave me a little end-of-year attaboy, after the governments took their cuts there's enough for some toy upgrades. I've had my eye on a Comp XS274 for the 396 for a couple of years, and was wondering if the Howards Cams direct-lube solid lifters are worth considering. The concept seems sound enough, but I'll be under .6" lift, so won't have extremely high spring pressures.

Of course, I could also put the money towards a console Megashifter for the Camaro...

1991 RS/SS

The Howards products are made/distributed only about 25 miles from me. I have heard of quite a few people that run their products for circle and dirt track race applications with no problems. I personally would have no problem with running any of their products in my car.

I looked at the lifters and I like the direct lube concept. May not be absolutely necessary in your case, but what can it hurt. I dont know if that little extra oil on the cam lobes would cause a power loss, but I doubt it.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

I haven't figured out how much they cost yet. Their website catalog doesn't seem to be working today. A set of "regular" Comp Cams solids is $95 from Summit. Why they are so high is beyond me.

I don't see how a little more oil on the lobe would drop power, unless you're talking about crank windage.

1991 RS/SS

I called Competition Products (1-800-233-0199) and they sell the Howards Direct Lube lifters (P/N 91118) for $109.95. They also have the same lifter under P/N 651080DL for the same price.

I wasnt sure if there would be any reason that the added oil would cause a power loss (I have always been under the impression that you want as little oil on parts as necessary for proper operation). Competition Products said - If anything, the power may slightly increase from the added lube to the lobes.

ross

I have used them in a small block thay worked great its just a little insurance to help keep you from wiping a lobe.

Rogue86

I asked my engine builder about it, he said that they were a pretty new concept, and he had wondered if it would effect the crown in the lifter, thus effecting rotation. He suggested I just go with the tried and true regulars... which I did.

Just my (tiny) experience with them.

Vader

Hmmm. What end of the lake are you located? I'm from O-Town originally. Howards' has some unusual stuff, and isn't afraid to try some unconventional things. Depending on the hole they EDMed in the face, it seems the little extra oil should help create a partial hydrostatic condition. Even that should not prevent spinning, so long as the lifter is oiled in the bore adequately. With excessive lash, there may be potential problems, but I can't comprehend any negatives if everything else is working properly. There almost couldn't be enough flow to induce aeration and foaming, since the lobe itself should control the flow to a large extent. It's not much different from an oil hole in a crank throw.

1991 RS/SS

It actually might be about 35 miles. Im in the Kaukauna/Wrightstown area. Are you still in the Oshkosh area?

Irockz

iTrader: (1)

I'va had as many healthy bigblocks as I have smallblocks,and in my experiance,you really don't have too much trouble mashing lobes until you get over the .550 to.560 range.
When I used to mudrace,I ran a .598 lift solid,and I used an old time trick on the lifters.I know it sounds nuts,but I ground a very slight flat spot on the side of the lifter.After deburring with emory cloth,they still spun freely in the lifter bore,and increased lube to the cam.Worked great,cam wasn't down at all after 3 seasons of racing!

RWB____s

And to think Howard Cams started in So-Cal. Another fine company that left the state. I ran a Howard Steel Billet Steel Billet solid flat tappet cam with chilled iron lifters years ago. Awesome cam and lifters ran almost forever.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Well, the XS274 is .568/.578".

Summit doesn't appear to carry them. I suppose I could see how much Comp Prods wants for the cam. Why the two p/n's on the lifters with CP?

Vader

Plain and mushroom? Standard or long? I can't tell - Both their sites are locking up.

1991 RS/SS

Im not sure about the part numbers. Being that Howards and Competition Products are basically sister companies and under the same roof, im guessing that Comp Products buys the lifters bulk from wherever they are made and then puts a portion of them out under the Howards name or the other way around for marketing purposes (just a guess though). The guy said they are exactly the same part.

I have bought a decent amount of stuff from Competion Products and am happy with them. Their tech is far beyond any other mail order place if you ask me, too. Talk to Butch. He works in their tech dept and he also runs Patterson Race Engines in Oshkosh. He has built some pretty sweet engines. He also assembles all of the heads for Comp Products. I like dealing with a place that knows what they sell.

Apeiron

I'm lucky, my car makes its own direct lube lifters.

ross

Apeiron its harder to keep valve lash on that brand of lifter you used

F-BIRD'88

If you want to keep your cam set all Comp Cams brand,
(Warranty Purposes)
Comp sells these direct lube lifters under # 800-16 for SBC's
and BBC's . May not be in the Summit Catalog yet but they should be able to supply these Comp lifters.

Recomend you add a bottle of GM EOS to every oil change as well as during breakin. It's cheap, effective anti skuff, anti wear insurance. Specificly to help flat tappet cams and lifters live a long life.

I would go one bigger on cam selection to the XS-282.
Simular in nature to the old GM 396-375 L-78 454-450 LS-6 grind from the 60's. A sweet running grind for the street that sees the strip once in a while.

Because you race at high altitude your engine needs to take big gulps of air, so to speak. You won't be over cammed with this cam in your 396.
Big blocks love high valve lift, More is better. If you look at flowbench test for typical BB heads, even stock heads the flow just keeps going higher and higher with more valve lift.
The XS282 #11-678-5 is just under.600" lift and the duration
244-252 @.050 is just right for your converter and gear and intake manifold , yet tame enough so that street driving is effortless.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Summit lists them on-line. $171.29 - pretty proud of that EDM hole. $326.29 for XS282 cam/increased oiling lifters vs. $215.83 for the XS274 & regular solids. Oh, well, I'm working some overtime over the holidays, could add that to the attaboy funds, perhaps. I have to save a little bit of it over the purchase/shipping costs to get the rear bearing journal machined for the '65-'66 required groove.

My heads are limited to .600" lift now with .060" insurance. The 274 is what the Comp Camhelp guy suggested (traded emails, not the typical 5-minute phone call), but that was 2 years ago. They knew the details of the setup and what I do with it, although the car is a little lighter now than it was then. He suggested opening up the exhaust lash a little for the altitude. They seem to be a little conservative with their recommendations, from what I've heard around here.

I know BBC's like lift. My heads are the 260cc intake oval port closed chamber versions, and I've cleaned them up a little (most of the work casting flash clean-up and exhaust smoothing). Still the 2.06/1.72 valves, but that doesn't seem to hurt with the "small" bore. I've had a few issues with traction lately, perhaps the additional duration would lower the off-line torque a little to help that out. Although the additional lift would probably increase the torque...

F-BIRD'88

Actually i was being conservative in my recomendation also.
With a 3500stall behind a 396 you'd actually want a cam in the mid 250ish duration for maximum all out power but the xs282 is a nice compromise with all the torque and 98% of the peak power of a max effort big cam , yet still easy driving manors. With the xs282 and RPM manifold you should be well into the torque band at 3500rpm launches.

I ran big blocks for many years with many different cams. i think you'd find the XS274 too tame.
The LS-6/ L-78 factory solid cam was a sweet gind overall.
Nice power and good street manors.
The XS282 is very simular but with more lift and valve action within the same duration group. Looks like a winner to me.

Didn't realise the Comp Direct lube lifters are so pricey.
I'd go with the Howards Cam brand lifters also. or just go with the standard Federal Mogul solid lifters.
Your setup won't need to rev real high so super pressure race valve springs are not called for or desireable. Run just enough valve spring seat and open pressure to get the job done and no more. The cam and lifters will live longer.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

They call the powerband on that XS282 cam 2400-6800. That's over the powerband of the RPM, but I suppose one could shift lower as long as it's in the powerband at launch. It probably also assumes a 454, so it would act more radical in a 396, one would presume.

Hope my rods can take it. I've had it up to 6000 a few times, but not much over that. Everything else should be good to go with it.

I like the idea of the direct-lube. I also like the idea of an honored warranty if needed. Also like Comp contigencies when the occasion arises.

F-BIRD'88

You have to take the power band ratings with a grain of salt.
peak hp will be just under 6000. Optimum shift point will be right around 6000+/-. You won't have to punish the motor with excessive RPM. Because you have a early 396 requireing the grooved rear cam jornal, it likely has a steel crank. The old 396-427 steel cranks had cross drilled mains for high rpm rod oiling. You'll be fine to 6500rpm. I doubt you'll even need to buzz it that high to ET.
here is a articel on a 408ci Rat vs 408SB mouse.
The build is very simular to you motor except it has the hyd version of the XS282 (XE284-H10) in the dyno graph of the 408 rat peak power is at 5400rpm. Best torque band is from 3600-6000 rpm.
engine torque is near equal at 6000 and 3600 which the rpms would drop to if you shifted at 6000rpm.
The basic power band of the XS282 will be the same.
It will make a little more power but the best rpm band will be the same.

A general rule of thumb in drag racing is you want to shift the car at about 6-8% past peak hp rpm to get the car to accelerate the best thru the gears.
So based on this anything much over 6000rpm shift points would actually likely slow you down.
If you had a single plane racing manifold it would be a different story. the motor would want lots of rpm.

Here is the article

I'd even go as far as suggesting that this motor would want the cam installed closer to straight up on 110 intake CL as opposed to the typical cam card spec of 106 intake CL. Would enhance the upper end of the 3500-6000 power band with minimual low end torque shift. the only way to tell is to try it at the track and se how the car responds to these changes and go with that the car likes.

F-BIRD'88

...

Irockz

iTrader: (1)

What rods are you running?

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Stock '66 325 horse 2-bolt main 396 rods.

It's a steel crank. I don't recall that it was cross-drilled, though. They might have saved that for the higher horse versions. Or, I've got a bad memory from when I rebuilt it in 1997.

That grooved bearing journal has always made me wonder if that was a difference in block vs. later versions, or just the bearings. Probably the block, but I've never heard confirmation.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

And, "the rest of the story" in a '70 Camaro (with traction problems with both). http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/te...30/index4.html

And, admittedly, the full car set-up being optimized for neither.

Irockz

iTrader: (1)

I think I'd stay with the 274,along with an improved oiling component of your choice.The Howard's look like good option,but there are homebrewed,less expensive options.That's just my 2cents.Or go for the shifter,I love mine!!!!

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Update:

1st, got a used Megashifter for the Camaro from a TGO member (classifieds). Missing some parts, but less than a new one by the time all is said & done. So, that's taken care of.

Now, cam. Going to go with the XS282. I'll have to agree with 'Bird, the XS274 would probably be too mild, or at least not much of a step up from the current 270 hydraulic. From another thread, also going with a regular double-roller timing set.

Now, the lifters. The direct-lube are very tempting, but the funds need to stretch far enough for new slicks as well. So, saving a few nickles & dimes here and there is attractive. I figure I'll either go with the Howards, or some "regular" flat tappet mechanical. Looking at summitracing.com, some non-Comp/non-direct-lube alternatives are:

Crane CRN-99250-16, $79.88
Lunati LUN-70992, $89.95
Erson ERS-E914021, $69.95

Any reason not to consider any of these less expensive alternatives? I wouldn't be surprised if one or more of them are actually made by Federal Mogul or Elgin.

SSC

Ive talked with the local machinest about the direct lube lifters. He ran them in his daughters car last season. He dident notice any real difference in cam wear compared to a standard set. I ran the Crane 99250's in my last 402. I dident have any issues the 4000K I put on the engine. I think since the cam has been replaced by the new owner, probably user error or too much cam for a street car.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Well, the order has been placed with Summit. The Ersons got the nod.

Guess someone else will have to tell us about the direct lubes.