www.CVOHARLEY.com
CVO Technical => Twin Cam => Topic started by: bakon on October 27, 2017, 09:31:38 PM
-
Thinking Redshift 587 cam and lifters for the winter project. Maybe do a .030 gasket instead of adjustable pushrods. Zippers confirmed the stock pushrods will work so still half the cost for all gaskets compared to adjustables.
Running 2014 cvo limited with 27k and just some pipes and SERT. Cross country runner so don't need to be on the edge.
-
The 587 is their bolt-in, but if your doing heads off lots of other options !
-
Got all winter and just thinking out loud. Heads off is no problem.
-
Thinking Redshift 587 cam and lifters for the winter project. Maybe do a .030 gasket instead of adjustable pushrods. Zippers confirmed the stock pushrods will work so still half the cost for all gaskets compared to adjustables.
Running 2014 cvo limited with 27k and just some pipes and SERT. Cross country runner so don't need to be on the edge.
Could you please explain the correlation of the gasket and push rods?
Thanks
-
If one uses a head gasket that is thinner, the distance between the location of the end of the tappet, where the pushrod sits, and the rocker arm, where the pushrod fits on the top, is decreased. Therefore if a cam has a base circle that is smaller than the one that is being changed out, let's say by 0.015 in, and if the head gasket is likewise a drop from .045 in to 0.030 in, the pushrod length would be the same.
If the cams had the same base circle, the pushrod would be 0.015 in "too long".
In actuality most hydraulic tappets have an range of 0.200 in to help account for changes in growth of the cylinders, heads etc as they heat up or cool down. Typically an adjustable pushrod is adjusted to the mid point of the range or down 0.100 in.
I have no idea if this is what the OP is talking about or what considering I know nothing about the Zippers cam in question. He may have meant that since he is taking the heads off to do the gasket, he would reuse the stock pushrods instead of springing for adjustables.
-
Thanks Mike!
Cryogenically speaking, it makes perfect sense.
-
Thanks Mike!
Cryogenically speaking, it makes perfect sense.
LOL
Now if you treat your pushrods using the official HBRR Kryogenic Chamburrr you would shrink them precisely 0.0000001% of 0.0001 in.
-
Yes. Base circle and change of gasket. Plus don't need adjusts and save a dime reusing the stock ones.
-
i have been reviewing the specifications on cams.
How to you determine what the base circle is on cams. Let’s say you have a SE 255 cams and want swap them out to RS587 cams. Keeping all else the same, how do you determine if the stock push rod will work?
Thanks
Jim
-
Sometimes the manufacturer will tell you in the advertising for the cam. Words like "requires adjustable pushrods" is French for has a different base circle than stock.
Such is the case with the Kury 24D cam and others. Looking at Zippers site I see no such verbiage for the 587.
In your case since you have already upgraded the rocker box area with rocker lockers, I would get adjustables simply because you would save time by not have to remove the tank and rocker assemblies again. That is what I am going to do. I am going to use Harley tapered quick adjustables, part number 18404-08. They come with all o rings and with the proper sized pushrod tubes to ensure that they don't rub inside the tubes.
-
Thinking Redshift 587 cam and lifters for the winter project. Maybe do a .030 gasket instead of adjustable pushrods. Zippers confirmed the stock pushrods will work so still half the cost for all gaskets compared to adjustables.
Running 2014 cvo limited with 27k and just some pipes and SERT. Cross country runner so don't need to be on the edge.
What is your question, you seem to be on the road with a solution.
-
Dumped this idea for a 117 kit. Now thinking about .030 gasket with it and using stock push rods since the ones in kit are .030 longer perfect fit ones. Have to measure the Head gasket in kit. Probably be off either way I go there. Unless I have the heads shaved down some but I hear there is not much room on the wetheads.
-
Lifter plunger travel on most is ~.210". Plant the preload at .060-.180 and it will run fine with no issues. Limited travel lifters are more critical but not needed on builds of your type, bolt in cams is all.
Preload in a hydraulic lifter is not as critical as the internet would have us believe.
:drummer:
OK flame on
-
Lifter plunger on most is ~.210". Plant the preload at .060-.180 and it will run fine with no issues. Limited travel lifters are more critical but not needed on builds of your type, bolt in cams is all.
Preload in a hydraulic lifter is not as critical as the internet would have us believe.
:drummer:
OK flame on
:2vrolijk_21: :2vrolijk_21:
Jerry
-
Lifter plunger on most is ~.210". Plant the preload at .060-.180 and it will run fine with no issues. Limited travel lifters are more critical but not needed on builds of your type, bolt in cams is all.
Preload in a hydraulic lifter is not as critical as the internet would have us believe.
:drummer:
OK flame on
Pre-load as a range rather than a specific tolerance is a shades-of-gray concept that is more than many will accept or comprehend. You're so going to get flamed :huepfenlol2: !
-
But the truth is they will work and run over a broad range.
Manufacturers recommend .100 preload most commonly and then the internet takes over with all the hocus pocus about reduced noise and more power.
I suggest following the manufacturers recommendations and if there are issues look for the root cause.
-
You’ve just been Flamed :).