Jeep Strokers

Well, I talked to Crane Cams yesterday, they will make make a billet cam Roller or flat, for a Jeep inline 6. It's not cheap probably about $800.00 It can be made to the pre 99 design or the post 99 design to work with the thrust plate. The price was for a cam made from 8620 steel. Delivery was about 3-4 weeks.

OUCH!!!

Sounds good. Did they mention any specs or profile/s?

This would be a custom cam, so anything you want. You would probably need to work with an experienced engine builder, or use a program like Desktop Dyno to calculate a cam profile that meets you needs and is suited to your motor.

Does this indicate that the cam companies are getting closer to making a roller cam for the I6? Before they wouldn't even talk about it.

Delk

They still are not talking about making a roller cam for the jeep . This is a fully custom cam, with a price to match. Because roller cams have not existed for the I6, profiles have not been developed. A roller will let you keep the valve open more for a longer time, with the same cam duration. the profile will be much different than a flat tappet cam. I don't know if a roller cam would be much benefit for an engine that only revs to 5200 rpm.

Plechtan wrote: I don't know if a roller cam would be much benefit for an engine that only revs to 5200 rpm.

I agree

A billet roller wouldn't be as likely to wipe a cam from the craptastic oils on the market now.

I don't think of Hydraulic Rollers as particularly High RPM friendly... roller lifters are heavy and don't tend to like to spin up into the RPM ranges you'd see on a Drag strip or a salt flat. Most people into these apps are going to go with a Solid lifter and cam setup.

A roller cam for lower RPM applications has all sorts of benefits, reliability, reduced friction, lower oil temps, better MPG, and longer valve openings at mid RPM ranges which promotes streetable torque...

Basically hyd. roller valve trains are very suited to street level performance applications, and most of them are oriented at that... A great example would be the latter Mustang 5.0's with factory rollers, the 5.0's factory red line wasn't significantly higher than a 4.0's. Can't remember exactly but I think it was mid 5k

Anyway, $800 for a fininished cam seems better than aproximately twice that for the rotophase blank that still requires a grind. Question is are they going to make the lifters too?

1bolt wrote:I don't think of Hydraulic Rollers as particularly High RPM friendly... roller lifters are heavy and don't tend to like to spin up into the RPM ranges you'd see on a Drag strip or a salt flat. Most people into these apps are going to go with a Solid lifter and cam setup.

A roller cam for lower RPM applications has all sorts of benefits, reliability, reduced friction, lower oil temps, better MPG, and longer valve openings at mid RPM ranges which promotes streetable torque...

Basically hyd. roller valve trains are very suited to street level performance applications, and most of them are oriented at that... A great example would be the latter Mustang 5.0's with factory rollers, the 5.0's factory red line wasn't significantly higher than a 4.0's. Can't remember exactly but I think it was mid 5k

Anyway, $800 for a fininished cam seems better than aproximately twice that for the rotophase blank that still requires a grind. Question is are they going to make the lifters too?

Yes, o, I would definitely, like to here how they would address a roller lifter in a 4.0L Block...............Delk you had better get you idea patten before some one does
Definitely cheaper then the alternate idea.............Have you have a chance to read this thread. Its kinda long................ ..........plechtan?????????????..... viewtopic.php?f=5&t=105&hilit=Hyd+Roller+Cam

Flash

I had forgotten how in depth that one became, viewtopic.php?f=5&t=105&hilit=Hyd+Roller+Cam thanks for the reminder. By the way Flash, McEnroe said we were both wrong on the score....
John

John wrote:I had forgotten how in depth that one became, viewtopic.php?f=5&t=105&hilit=Hyd+Roller+Cam thanks for the reminder. By the way Flash, McEnroe said we were both wrong on the score....
John

O really! (had to go back and read the last two pages to remember Mr McEnroe ) And what did the "instant replay" reveal.......................................He has been replaying it for a while now.

I have went back, many times and re read the CNC link, you posted on page 4 of the above link/thread. That guy really impressed me

Flash

He lays out areas of consideration that the average builder will never see, but when you start designing a cam for individual motor/use performance characteristics, it gets really interesting quick. We had a custom cam in the shop that was used for smashing empty cans, finally found something it was good for, I knew of a 2 stroke motorcycle racing engine (prototype) that was used for the same thing elsewhere. When they don't work they become expensive scrap.
John

1bolt wrote:Basically hyd. roller valve trains are very suited to street level performance applications, and most of them are oriented at that... A great example would be the latter Mustang 5.0's with factory rollers, the 5.0's factory red line wasn't significantly higher than a 4.0's. Can't remember exactly but I think it was mid 5k

It was 5900rpm. I know 'cause I have a '95 Mustang 5.0 GT.

mine was a 95 GT as well For some reason I thought you had a Mod motor... In any case I never hit the red line as it was a DD at the time. Now the Cobra on the other hand...