COMP-Cams quality.........

[dlotz]

Just cut open the oil filter..... It's full of fine fine particles, nothing large. Looks like graphite dust in the oil.... i.e. cast iron dust.

Pulling the engine and taking it bact to Barry this weekend to open it up and take a look. We talked this morning and he has a replacement on order. He also said he will take care of warranty issues with Comp himself.

No sense in taking a chance...... Who know what else is damaged!

God I hope nothing else is trashed.


Unfortunately, I cannot go to a roller. This is a vintage solid lifter Side-oiler.

Anyone have suggestions to another cam to go with that may be better (more reliable) than CompCams? I would realy hate for this to happen again. Not sure Comp has any of my confidence at this point. Let see how they handle the warranty issues come Tuesday.

[Barry_R]

I responded to Dan's post on the other forum for those who follow along on both. If indeed the cam is the culprit - and it sure is looking that way - this will be the FIRST flat tappet failure I have had on an engine I broke in on the dyno. I guess it had to happen eventually given everybody else's experiences over the past several years. I'd wager I have installed more FE flat tappets in the past year than most guys will in two lifetimes...

The break in procedure was meticulous, and I expect no problems in dealing with Comp. They have always been a very good company to work with for me. That said, the warrantee is my concern - not theirs - nor Dan's. Its gonna be a PITA to pull that engine out, but I'll take care of it from there. **** happens.

Changing cam brands will make absolutely no difference in regards to hardness issues. Every single cam grinder purchases their semi-finished blanks from one of two Michigan based companies - either Camshaft Machine or Engine Power Components. Those two companies purchase all of their castings from CWC-Textron in Muskegon Michigan - and they are flame hardened on rollers prior to delivery. In simple terms - they all come from the SAME PLACE.

[ERA Chas]

Barry,
Excellent service on your part with your customer and as always, a very clear explanation of how things run in the industry. Eliminates a lot of myths and prejudices.

[vector1]

after the flat tappet engines are broke in, is the zddp supposed to be added for the lifetime of the engine or can it be discontinued?

[CobraEd]

Originally Posted by vector1

after the flat tappet engines are broke in, is the zddp supposed to be added for the lifetime of the engine or can it be discontinued?

Extremely critical during break in but should also be added all the time.


http://www.zddplus.com/


.

[IKE]

Built my cleveland with a Crower cam kit but it rattled the china inside the cabinets when it cranked up. Changed to a Comp cam which only lasted a month, it had several lobes worn down nearly to the base circle. This after using every precaution possible on the install, first cam I ever had this problem with. Replaced with a Crane, no problems since although I sometimes think the Crower should be put back in, china can be replaced.

[Gaz64]

I'd be looking at all the reasons for the necessity of lifter rotation.

Lifter base radius, cam lobes ground with the taper to suit, lobe to lifter bore offset, lifters not "hanging up" or binding in the bores, excessive camshaft end float.

One lobe can fail on it's own, or it could be a sign of others about to follow.

Obviously once something like this happens, investigation generally starts before any further damage occurs.

[Excaliber]

Well, seeing how the builder was Barry, there is no doubt it was done right. Guess we can rule out the dyno breakin as the culprit!

....the plot thickens.

...the paperwork that came from the cam has a disclaimer blaming oil for flat tappet cams breaking.

Standard warning, should be applicable to all flat tappet cams. Oil remains a primary concern with flat tappet cam's, perhaps now even more than ever. USED to be Shell Rotella was OK, not anymore, ZDDP has been drastically reduced in that oil as well.

So, do you need ZDDP for the life of the cam/motor? Some folks like it for ANY motor, for the life of the motor. Others say you don't need after break in. I use it all the time, always will, just paranoid I guess.

[Keithc8]

We use Joe Gibbs break in oil with great luck. The flat tappet camshaft deal can be a pain in the ass. You are right about building engines as a full time job. you will never make it on 40 hours a week. There are to many problems that companies will not stand behind.
One thing that we try to do when building the engine is to make sure that the lifter is turning in the bores. In the past with our stocker stuff which have a pretty aggressive lobe we would run the front of the camshaft with a drill and watch to make sure the lifters would rotate in the bores. We would run the camshaft this way for a while and try to break the lifters in a little to the lobes. All of this trouble is one reason we have gone with the hydraulic roller stuff.
I do not know how aggressive the camshaft was but like Barry we have had pretty good luck in the last couple of years since using the break in oil, light spring pressure and higher rpm break in for about 30 minutes. More than likely Comp Cams will warranty the the parts but that does not make it any easier on the customer or Barry.
I have had a few wierd things happen here lately at my shop that have cost me a few thousonds dollars. Takes a little time to recover from that and extra work.
Make sure the lifters turn in the bores when you go back together, use a good break in oil that are special made by a few companies including Comp Cams. Sounds like evrything else was done right. Could have just got a bad core. I had a problem with the hydraulic roller stuff a few years back eating the cam gear on the cam shaft up. I know it was a core issue but Comp said I was the only one with the problem and I know better than that. When you do as many engines as we do you seem to be the one that has some of these problems. Good luck.

Thanks, Keith Craft

[Ant]

KC did my engine with Comp flat tappet, and Schubeck composite lifters, the engine has done dyno work only, we had to modify the oil pan for my starter motor etc so I then had the chance to inspect the camshaft and it was nicely run in with no visible problems, I guess this has a lot to do with the Schubeck lifters not requiring the same break in and Keith being careful in break in procedure and running good cam lube and oil.

I will be using Delo 400 15w40 for the first few hundred miles to sort the car this oil has 0.15ppm zinc etc and is designed for petrol as well as diesel, I may drop a bottle of zddp in for good measure. I am one of those people that has to go the extra mile on most things just to make sure.

The top Transam/sport sedan teams here in NZ quite a few are running the Schaeffer supreme 7000 20w50 semi synthetic right from the first startup and they claim excellent ring seal and performance, plus this oil is recommended for road use as well, I intend to change it more often than leave it for extended oil changes.

[barabar]

I tried to talk to a tech at comp cams (after waiting 30 minutes) and needed some info on valve overlap for a hyd roller. To make a long story short, I could have got more info from the Gal at Mc Donalds about cams. (they have great coffee.) If the tech is that ignorant imagine the guy putting the grind on the cam. "What Lobe". I don't buy from them.

[blykins]

Pretty common from any cam tech line. They pay guys a little over minimum wage to read info off their online catalogs. If you really want some good answers about a cam, call an engine builder.

[puppster]

All the stories of oil quality going south, and part quality not being what it should, my next build will employ a roller cam. It's very sad. Breaking in a cam has always been a scary part of building an engine, we certainly don't need more head aches. Technology should make this stuff easier, but it's technology that's making it harder. OEM's are all using roller cams for this very reason (as well as other reasons), fewer warrenty claims are probably a big part of the story.

[barabar]

Something you might want to check is the gyometry from the lobe to the push rod, rocker and make sure the rocker is centered on the valve stem. Talk to a person who regrinds cams for a living, he should be able to solve your problem. This isn't my first rodeo when it comes to engine building. To bad you can't change to a HYD roller, they are different then solids. The lobe seperation and valve overlap you have to pay close attention to and you will lose a little top end. Just some freindly advice. My opinion without looking, CAM.

[joyridin']

"Changing cam brands will make absolutely no difference in regards to hardness issues. Every single cam grinder purchases their semi-finished blanks from one of two Michigan based companies - either Camshaft Machine or Engine Power Components. Those two companies purchase all of their castings from CWC-Textron in Muskegon Michigan - and they are flame hardened on rollers prior to delivery. In simple terms - they all come from the SAME PLACE."

I assume you are talking blanks for solid and hydraulic cams and not rollers?

[Barry_R]

Originally Posted by joyridin'

I assume you are talking blanks for solid and hydraulic cams and not rollers?

correct.

these are the extra characters needed for a response.....

[madmaxx]

The huge gap with these incompetent idiots is their zero understanding of quality control. The last entity to touch the component prior to the customer has responsiblity to ensure it is delivering what it is advertising. How does GM, Ford, Lexus, BMW guarantee their cam do not fail? When is the last time you heard of a cam failing in a modern day engine? Tens of millions of automobiles are sold annually.

It takes less than 4 minutes to do a hardness test, 20 minutes to do a dye penetrant test. 10 seconds to do a positive material identification test. Cost per cam would be under $5.00 per camshaft. I think I answered my own question on how manufactures prevent failures due to inadequate components.

[Barry_R]

As far as I know every popular car engine sold today has gone to roller cams for improved efficiency and mileage.

Waaaaay back in the 90s (remember those?) GM had a huge spate of defective cam cores and subsequent failures. In the early 2000s Chrysler had an equally large scale problem with cam failure on 2.5L engines even though they were rollers.

It only seems simple - but a surface hardness test will not give an adequate measure of hardness depth. A core that does not have a deep enough hardness layer - either from inadquate processing or incorrect core grinding or selection - will suffer premature wear and eventual failure as the underlying material deforms and fails.

The only way to check for this is destructive testing of a statistically significant number of finished product samples. That is how the OEMs do it, but its pretty tough for a lower volume, high sku count aftermarket supplier to follow suit. Its common for them to run spot checks on cut cores. Even that may not find a casting where a single burner went out during flame hardening...

Stuff happens, and it ill happen most often to the company that sells the highest volume of product.

[olddog]

Sorry somehow I caused a double post.

[olddog]

I haven't the experience of a professional builder and wouldn't make a pimple on Barry's butt. That said I only speak to learn more, as it is an interest to me.

The overhead cam engines I have had apart used cam followers. Many may be rollers, but some are not. Specifically they were the 2.2 Chrysler, and a 95 Ford 4.6 4v. The followers rub against the cam lobe. There was no roller tip. I believe the 2v modulars were a similar design. I don't know the geometry to understand if the ratio is similar to a rocker arm set up. So the loads could be way different, but the design would have some things in common with a flat tappet lifter, as far a a flat part rubbing directly on the lobe.

In the Ford modular case, the lobes are made from powdered metal that is harder than the hubs of hell. Then the individual lobes are slid onto a hollow shaft. The shaft is expanded to grip the lobes and a cam shaft is made. A very different process, to make a cam. Lobes will crack, but not wear.

I saw an engine that was assembled without the intermediate shaft between the oil pump and distributer. (Red neck mistake, it was not primed with a drill) It ran for a good 5 minutes before, the zero oil pressure was believed (didn't think the electric gauge was correct). When the lifters started to tap, a mechanical gauge was installed and it was restarted. It ran on the assembly lube only. No splash oiling; no oil being pumped. The intermediate shaft was installed. No damage to the engine. It lived a long life. It was a mild after market cam with normal springs and rockers in place. The point being that you could not have broke a cam in more wrong, and there was no problem. Then a guy like you meticulously does everything right and a cam wipes a lobe.

I cannot help but think that all the cam break in procedures is a magicians trick to keep our eyes focussed on something other than the real problem. I'm not saying that they do not help reduce failures. They might, but that is beside the point. If it does matter, it is because the design is on the ragged edge of failure. It sure does give the cam manufacturer a bunch of cover to claim you didn't break it in correctly.

I have never understood what needs to wear on a cam break in and how that wear is supposed to stop. I understand that a cylinder is honed and the rings will wear it to get a perfect fit/seal. Why would I want a cam and lifter to wear together to get a perfect fit?