PDA

View Full Version : Engine: R2+ camshaft valve lash



starliner62
09-27-2017, 05:45 PM
I have a 289 equipped with a R2+ camshaft. It has relatively low miles and runs great, just noisy. I contacted Phil Harris, knowing that he built the engine. He told me that the valve lash could be much tighter that a stock Studebaker cam. I went from .024 down to .018 in a couple of increments. The engine sounds better but the valves are still pretty loud.
I'm looking for opinions from those of you running this camshaft. Thanks in advance!

64studeavanti
09-27-2017, 07:29 PM
The valve train noise is likely the nature of tge beast
It is my understanding that the r2+ is similar to the isky st5. I have the st5 in one of my Avantis. Isky recommends .018 valve lash. It is pretty noisy.

Chicken Hawk
09-27-2017, 09:15 PM
I have a 289 equipped with a R2+ camshaft. It has relatively low miles and runs great, just noisy. I contacted Phil Harris, knowing that he built the engine. He told me that the valve lash could be much tighter that a stock Studebaker cam. I went from .024 down to .018 in a couple of increments. The engine sounds better but the valves are still pretty loud.
I'm looking for opinions from those of you running this camshaft. Thanks in advance!

I don't know where Phil is having these ground but when I was in the parts business and had them made, the lash could be as low as .010" hot. I advised people to start out at .020" and go down a couple thousands at a time until they were happy with the sound as far as noise. With power brakes I wouldn't go that tight though.

Ted

PackardV8
09-28-2017, 12:07 AM
Yes, when reducing the valve clearance, the clicking noise is reduced, but it's not just about the noise. Tightening the lash increases the cam duration and overlap; the idle gets slightly rougher, vacuum is reduced, low speed torque is slightly reduced, as is fuel economy. The high RPM power is slightly increased. It's all a tradeoff and as Ted says, find your own best compromise.

jack vines

starliner62
09-28-2017, 03:53 AM
Thanks guys. I am aware of the trade offs when reducing the valve lash, just wasn't sure of how far to take it.

Quentin
09-28-2017, 07:56 AM
I have a 289 equipped with a R2+ camshaft. It has relatively low miles and runs great, just noisy. I contacted Phil Harris, knowing that he built the engine. He told me that the valve lash could be much tighter that a stock Studebaker cam. I went from .024 down to .018 in a couple of increments. The engine sounds better but the valves are still pretty loud.
I'm looking for opinions from those of you running this camshaft. Thanks in advance!

Ditto with the engine - new build, 0.040 rebore, with Phil's cam - valve train set up to factory spec, cant tell you exactly what that is as a friend set it up, but we went by the book; it is noisy, i.e tickety tickety, and it worried me for a while, noisy compared to other brands.... however power is solid under acceleration with the idle as good music.

Endl98
10-14-2017, 08:38 AM
I set mine on the tighter end at .010 it's pretty quiet, cam is crazy choppy with open exhaust. Feels good on the street.

Buzzard
10-14-2017, 12:56 PM
I have a Racer Brown custom grind off an Avanti 288 degree factory camshaft. It works terrifically in my R4 Clone and the settings are:
Intake: .012 Hot
Exhaust: .014 Hot
Net lift .485
Duration: 266
Max RPM: 7000
I would classify the valve train noise to be about the same as the 60's Chev 365 HP Solid lifter 327 L76
Sorry I can't seem to be able to post the Racer Brown cam card.
Bill