new Comp Cams?

[JDEstill]

Was just browsing the Comp Cams website, and in their New Products for 2003 section they have 3 hydraulic roller cams listed specifically for TRs: a 206/206, 212/212, and 218/212.

Anyone heard of or used one of these yet? After the econo roller fiasco, I remember someone saying that Comp was going to put out a proper even fire hydraulic roller that didn't require all the odd fire nose pieces that most of the roller kits require. Is this it? Do we now have a simple to install hydraulic roller at last?

I've still got all the pieces from my PT&E econo roller, just need a good shaft to go with it. I went back to a flat tappet when I pulled mine out.

Here's a link:
http://www.compcams.com/information/NewProducts/2003/Page-5.pdf
John

 

[tminer]

I did hear of a new econo roller from Comp. It is ductile iron construction.

Tom

 

[325DR]

I have the Comp Cams 212/212 hydrolic roller that you are talking about. Im surprised to see the power range is from 1200-5800 because when I was on the dyno, my car made its peak power at about 5700 and stayed up there until 6000 when I let off. Ill bet it pulls strong to 6400, but I wont spin my motor anywhere near that high. I think the power range on that cam is more like 3000-6400. These cars dont make power at low RPM's. No complaints about the cam and I know that there are several others using it with ZERO reported problems. HTH's

p.s. Idle (850RPM) is surprisingly smooth. Its almost impossible to hear it once the car is warmed up. Sounds stock

 

[tminer]

AintGoinSlo,

What anti-walk setup is used? Any special machining or other parts required beyond roller lifters and proper springs and pushrods?

Thanks,
Tom

 

[325DR]

tminer,

Yes, some anit-walk mods need to be done. Im not sure if it is the block or the timing cover, but I will find out from my engine builder and reply if someone else doesnt jump in and post before me.

 

[ChrisCairns]

Originally posted by JDEstill
Was just browsing the Comp Cams website, and in their New Products for 2003 section they have 3 hydraulic roller cams listed specifically for TRs: a 206/206, 212/212, and 218/212.

Anyone heard of or used one of these yet? After the econo roller fiasco, I remember someone saying that Comp was going to put out a proper even fire hydraulic roller that didn't require all the odd fire nose pieces that most of the roller kits require. Is this it? Do we now have a simple to install hydraulic roller at last?


John

I just put one into an engine I'm putting together. It's the same as stock setup....no machining necessary. Accepts stock timing gear and nose button.

When I asked the vendor/engine builder why he didn't go public with these and make some money he said he didn't want the flaming that would come along with it.

I was kinda not very confidant about using it because of the last fiasco....but the vendor guaranteed me there wouldn't be any problem.

I don't know how long until I get the engine into the car since I built it as a learning experience for me and I have my S2 engine to get back into my race car. But the stock blocked one's almost finished....just have to put the manifold on after putting the new pushrods in last night....and then wait to take the other engine out of my T-Type for the accessories. And hopefully it'll start.

 

[brian]

I am using a 206/206 roller,and am very pleased with it. 750rpm idle, and it pulls strong.
Brian

 

[tminer]

Maybe I am confused on the anti-walk as I thought that it was the reason that the rear of the block or timing cover needed some work to install some of the roller cam kits. Also an added cost for machining the cam, Torrington bearings, etc.

Tom

 

[Nick Micale]

Originally posted by AintGoinSlo
tminer,

Yes, some anti-walk mods need to be done. Im not sure if it is the block or the timing cover, but I will find out from my engine builder and reply if someone else doesnt jump in and post before me.

There must be some kind of anti-walk device to use the new ductile roller Comp cam. I have been waiting a week now to hear back from Comp on what they recommend. The first cam I installed will move enough to hit an adjacent lifter with the stock set up.

One Comp rep suggested a rear anti-walk which sorta ticks me off as Comp never mentioned this when they sold me the cams. It was touted as a "drop-in" replacement for a stock cam, no mention of any special other parts. Using a cam button, plastic or roller, will not work.

There are ways to do this but I want to know what Comp says since they took my money. Would sure like to hear from anyone that has this running in their Buick and if anything special was done?

 

[EightSecV6]

We have used quite a few of the new "Econo rollers" the standard available grinds and some customs as well,a couple before they were actually even available to the general public. The factory type anti thrust button functions flawlessly and there is no need for any special machining. Good luck on talking to the 800 free cam help line......only certain people at Comp can give you the info you need (care to comment on this one Chris C.?). They are pricy but not nearly as pricy as the billet grind once you have to put the hardware on it.
I really have not said a buch about these new cams because of all the hassle with the old ones because SURELY people are going to compare them and it's like apples to oranges, it is a totally new core with an actual hydraulic grind instead of putting a hyd roller on a solid grind as is the case on MOST billet rollers. The valve train is much more quiet as the ramps are not nearly as aggressive.
Bill Anderson
Anderson Perf. Auto
410-282-9335

 

[Nick Micale]

Originally posted by EightSecV6
....... The valve train is much more quiet as the ramps are not nearly as aggressive. Bill Anderson

The first one I sold to a customer he installed and it is NOT quiet as the cam moves enough for many of the lobes to hit an adjacent lifter!

He is using a double roller chain that may let it move fore and aft more than a stock type? It was like this at start up as I was there to start it for him. Guess you are one of the customers that Tim said had installed them with no problems.

 

[PEACHS]

Inexpessive roller

All Roller cams do not have a tapper on the top of the lobe, that keeps the cam driving forward, that cam needs a torrington bearing on the face of the block to keep it from wearing. Using a rear anti walk device will not prevent that kind of wear. Webber racing sells the best set up to prevent an oil filter full of metal shavings. I have never heard of an inexpensive roller cam set up, not even in a SBC application.
Peachs

 

[EightSecV6]

When under a load, the cam will thrust toward the rear of the engine, the NEW roller has a large surface, the same as the stocker that rides against the block. The billet cams have a relatively small flange that will destroy the face of the block if you dont put a thrust system on it. You might have gotten a bum spring on the roller button or something, did you actually remove the cam and lifters to determine if this was really happening? I am not doubting it but I would be amazed to see that happening with a good roller button. I see it as being only remotely possible at idle but there is something else probably going on there because if it is moving forward enough to hit a lifter, sooner or later it is going to break it off.
Bill


P.S. on budget SBC engines, that small cheap button with the cork like tip has worked fine for years and it presses against a thin metal timing cover.

 

[EightSecV6]

Originally posted by MIKE10SECV6
I got one of these cams about 2 months ago and was told by Dennis M that they were a true billet cam.
Are they billet or not??
I pulled my old cam out today,it is a pte roller that has a roller butten with shims.(econo roller)
Now this new cam looks like it will need machine work to set it up the same way,OR can a needle bearing cam button with a spring be used????

No they are not billet, they are ductle iron (same material OEM uses in late model cars with rollers)
You can use the spring type thrust button or the slid one PTE used on the budget rollers.

 

[tminer]

If they have a hydraulic flat tappet profile instead of an aggressive roller one, then what is the point? Might as well go hydraulic at least for the 3 standard grinds.

Tom

 

[ChrisCairns]

Bill was the vendor/engine builder that gave me the info and sold me the cam. Thanks for jumping in here Bill.....now I don't have to pu$$y foot around.

What he referred to was that after I talked to Bill regarding this relatively new econo cam I phoned Comp to get more input. Even though I consider Bill one of the top engine builders I wasn't 100% convinced of the new cam's ablility to withstand what the last econo cams couldn't.

Anyway, the tech guy at Comp didn't know anything about this new cam, and if fact hadn't even heard about the last fiasco that took out so many people's engines. I even asked him how long he had been at Comp on their tech line and he told me for years so he wasn't new and should have heard about the fiasco. That leads me to think Comp's tech line is manned by dummies.

I read what Nick had to say about his cam. After I read this I went to my manifoldless engine and looked at the clearance between one lobe and the next where each roller rides. It isn't so much the roller but the body of the lifter that is close to the next lobe. I checked with a flashlight and then stuck a feeler gauge through the oil drain holes (as best I could) and on one I came up with a clearance of 13 thou. Not much.

I remember examining this cam before I stuck it in and noticed that the side of one lobe had a little lump, a piece of poor casting, sticking out of it. I didn't think this mattered at the time but now I'm wondering if this is what Nick is referring to...perhaps some cams have more lumps than others.

I'm going to remove each lifter tonight and dress the sides at the bottom with a file...just in case.

 

[ChrisCairns]

Originally posted by tminer
If they have a hydraulic flat tappet profile instead of an aggressive roller one, then what is the point? Might as well go hydraulic at least for the 3 standard grinds.

Tom

It doesn't. I have my old roller and a new flat tappet cam on hand and I compared them both to the new econo roller. It most definitely has a roller profile. A flat tappet is more "pointy" and these rollers have the more squared off box look.

 

[Nick Micale]

Originally posted by ChrisCairns
...........
I read what Nick had to say about his cam. After I read this I went to my manifoldless engine and looked at the clearance between one lobe and the next where each roller rides. It isn't so much the roller but the body of the lifter that is close to the next lobe. I checked with a flashlight and then stuck a feeler gauge through the oil drain holes (as best I could) and on one I came up with a clearance of 13 thou. Not much.

......I'm going to remove each lifter tonight and dress the sides at the bottom with a file...just in case.

What you describe Chris is exactally what is happening with this cam. The ductle iron cam has lobes slightly wider than a billet roller since I measured this. The adjacent lobe just barely contacts the bottom of the lifter body. It was fine when turning the motor by hand, but when started, there was enough movement in the cam for contact on many lobes.

Chris, see if your cam can be moved enough for this contact to take place. We used a new metal roller button.

 

[Steve Wood]

Could this possibility be increased by lifter bore position variation between blocks?

 

[JDEstill]

Thanks for all the good info guys. What's a rough price for this cam?

John