4.6 V8 Pushrod dimensions

[TheTree]

Hi

I have a noisy lifter in my P38 engine and adding some lifter tune up has not solved the issue so I intend to replace them.

While I am at it I am thinking very seriously about a set of smiths adjustable pushrods

I know that the standard pushrods are 8"/203.2mm long and 5/16"/8mm diameter, but smiths are asking about the tip sizes for the rocker end and the lifter end.

Can anyone help me with these dimensions?

Thanks
Steve

PS: Smiths full reply to my query
"Our adjustable pushrods have a max adjustment of 1/4" from collapsed. So we just need the length you would like them at and the tip sizes for the rocker end and the lifter end. We can typically make and ship within 24-48 hours."

[PLR]

Hi

I have a noisy lifter in my P38 engine and adding some lifter tune up has not solved the issue so I intend to replace them.

While I am at it I am thinking very seriously about a set of smiths adjustable pushrods

I know that the standard pushrods are 8"/203.2mm long and 5/16"/8mm diameter, but smiths are asking about the tip sizes for the rocker end and the lifter end.

Can anyone help me with these dimensions?

Thanks
Steve

PS: Smiths full reply to my query
"Our adjustable pushrods have a max adjustment of 1/4" from collapsed. So we just need the length you would like them at and the tip sizes for the rocker end and the lifter end. We can typically make and ship within 24-48 hours."




G`day ,

3/16 both ends if using standard rover arms and lifters .

3/16 is a radius .

If i was going that way i`d also look at lubing through the rod , which may mean the std rover size may need to be altered .

[TheTree]

G`day ,

3/16 both ends if using standard rover arms and lifters .

3/16 is a radius .

If i was going that way i`d also look at lubing through the rod , which may mean the std rover size may need to be altered .

Thanks Mate

I was thinking about these Crower lifters would they perform the same kind of function do you think?

Hydraulic CamSaver Buick & Land Rover V8 - Lifters (https://www.crower.com/lifters/hydraulic-lifters-hi-lube-buick-215-300-340-350-v8-345.html)

Regards
Steve

[101RRS]

What other mods are you making to the engine to make it worth while using adjustable pushrods? If the rest of the engine is standard and the heads/blocks have not been shaved what are you trying to achieve?

Even with a bit of shaving, standard pushrods etc work fine and no playing around with adjustments but with other mods they may be some advantage.

Cheers

Garry

[PLR]

Thanks Mate

I was thinking about these Crower lifters would they perform the same kind of function do you think?

Hydraulic CamSaver Buick & Land Rover V8 - Lifters (https://www.crower.com/lifters/hydraulic-lifters-hi-lube-buick-215-300-340-350-v8-345.html)

Regards
Steve


G`day ,

i don`t think the hollow rod reduces oil pressure because of where the oil is taken from the camsavers give a 1 or 2 psi drop .

Both would give 16 extra oiling points the camsaver is direct to the lobe the hollow rod would do the arms/rods and drain down etc .

I don`t think the running engine causes the main wear for the lobes i think more likely the start causes most wear because while running if all good there should be oil enough to be between the surfaces and the extra 350cc per minute the camsaver gives would not really be required in a std engine .


The hollow rods would have no effect on drain back while its lifter type valve is working .

The camsavers may drain the gallery the lifter lives in .

The picture of the camsaver doesn`t seem right because .0025 is not very wide .

If there was more information about how the camsaver is intended to work it would be of more interest . There is already oil around the outside of the lifter why not slightly undersize or oval the lower part of the lifter below the oil feed .

Mostly all i found was 20-30% more oil to the lobe which they say is 350cc ( 12 ounces ) per minute which is 1/2 a teaspoon a second .

A loss of 1 to 2 psi oil pressure .

A groove of .0025 which is thinner than most auto feeler gauges start at .

[TheTree]

What other mods are you making to the engine to make it worth while using adjustable pushrods? If the rest of the engine is standard and the heads/blocks have not been shaved what are you trying to achieve?

Even with a bit of shaving, standard pushrods etc work fine and no playing around with adjustments but with other mods they may be some advantage.

Cheers

Garry

Hi

The heads have been shaved and I am using MLS head gaskets.

My thinking was that since I need to replace the pushrods anyway that I may as well investigate the adjustable ones

Regards
Steve

[TheTree]

G`day ,

i don`t think the hollow rod reduces oil pressure because of where the oil is taken from the camsavers give a 1 or 2 psi drop .

Both would give 16 extra oiling points the camsaver is direct to the lobe the hollow rod would do the arms/rods and drain down etc .

I don`t think the running engine causes the main wear for the lobes i think more likely the start causes most wear because while running if all good there should be oil enough to be between the surfaces and the extra 350cc per minute the camsaver gives would not really be required in a std engine .


The hollow rods would have no effect on drain back while its lifter type valve is working .

The camsavers may drain the gallery the lifter lives in .

The picture of the camsaver doesn`t seem right because .0025 is not very wide .

If there was more information about how the camsaver is intended to work it would be of more interest . There is already oil around the outside of the lifter why not slightly undersize or oval the lower part of the lifter below the oil feed .

Mostly all i found was 20-30% more oil to the lobe which they say is 350cc ( 12 ounces ) per minute which is 1/2 a teaspoon a second .

A loss of 1 to 2 psi oil pressure .

A groove of .0025 which is thinner than most auto feeler gauges start at .

Hi Mate

Yes I was thinking the camsavers might not be the best idea on our engine, but I was curious as to what others thought. I didn't really like the idea of a 1 to 2 psi oll pressure loss either !

Do you know who makes the hollow pushrods? I imagine they may be a bigger diameter so the holes in the heads may need to be enlarged

Regards
Steve

[PLR]

Hi Mate

Yes I was thinking the camsavers might not be the best idea on our engine, but I was curious as to what others thought. I didn't really like the idea of a 1 to 2 psi oll pressure loss either !

Do you know who makes the hollow pushrods? I imagine they may be a bigger diameter so the holes in the heads may need to be enlarged

Regards
Steve


I don`t but i`d think the mob your talking to would do them because its how Chevs are .

GM lifters that suit other than the top cup which is 5/32 are same dimensions as rover .

This is why they would ask your preference on end sizing for the push rods .

[TheTree]

Hi

Looks like Smiths do the oiled pushrods in 5/16

They replied
That is correct. The 7 & 7/8 would be the collapsed length. Would you need oiling through the pushrod?

The price in USD is184.00 for 16 plus shipping


So standard lifters ad oiled pushrods are the go

Only decision left is to cam or not to cam ? [biggrin]

Steve

[PLR]

Hi

Looks like Smiths do the oiled pushrods in 5/16

They replied
That is correct. The 7 & 7/8 would be the collapsed length. Would you need oiling through the pushrod?

The price in USD is184.00 for 16 plus shipping


So standard lifters ad oiled pushrods are the go

Only decision left is to cam or not to cam ? [biggrin]

Steve


The top end the adjustment end would still need to suit the rover arm which is 3/16 .

Their question do you need it , no you don`t but as oil is a cooling agent , which is a use often overlooked other than the dollar cost i don`t see a down side .

The oil is taken under pressure but the lifter controls the amount the oil then gravitys back down .

There would be the option of holting the original feed by covering the two holes through the heads/pedestals but i don`t see a problem caused other than oil direction , the feeds would be opposite but doubt matter .

Brand name Chev , Holden etc type lifters can be or could be when i last looked be bought at about 4 to 1 , i say this because last i bought any i bought 4 sets from an engine builder , 64 lifters for less than i could buy 1 set of Rover .

The only real difference is the Rover doesn`t have a hole in the middle of its cup and the GM type does .

Many malign the fitting of Gm lifters in a Rover but can`t give reason of substance .

Personal use , i`ve been using the GM type in Rover V8s for around 25 years and on paper the cup in the lifter and push rod ball are different sizes in practice the matting difference has no tangible effect . The wear marks in the GM lifter cup are lower or deeper when using the GM push rod , the wear marks on the Rover push rod ball when used with the GM lifter are uniform or equal as in the ball holds shape and is not ridged .

Personally i`ve never modified for hollow or adjustable pushrods the need has never been there for me but i understand the usefulness .