Is there a better roller lifter than gm for .....?
#11
Also if your lifters have a .750" wheel, they are not the cast bodied Street replacement design, which means they are a 4603 or higher. That would be another incentive to re purpose them into this build.
Bob
Bob
#12
#13
Registered
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 239
From: Michigan
Tim I understand and respect that, but I will disagree! I have been running more than .600 lift with them and 6000 RPM in the same engines for 15 years never had any issues. I never bought into that. Now I know many will doubt my experience with these lifters, but they work for me! I can run 5800 rpm for extended runs, and run north of 120mph ( as long as the drives stay together)
#14
Registered

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,439
Likes: 93
From: yorkville,il
Tim I understand and respect that, but I will disagree! I have been running more than .600 lift with them and 6000 RPM in the same engines for 15 years never had any issues. I never bought into that. Now I know many will doubt my experience with these lifters, but they work for me! I can run 5800 rpm for extended runs, and run north of 120mph ( as long as the drives stay together)
#17
Registered

Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 14,094
Likes: 3,684
From: On A Dirt Floor
Tim I understand and respect that, but I will disagree! I have been running more than .600 lift with them and 6000 RPM in the same engines for 15 years never had any issues. I never bought into that. Now I know many will doubt my experience with these lifters, but they work for me! I can run 5800 rpm for extended runs, and run north of 120mph ( as long as the drives stay together)
If using the factory lifters, it is advisable to check in the motor when using a .600" + lift cam (1.7 rockers) just in case the cam grinder reduced the base circle at all/or enough where the lifter vs dog bone issue occurs. I wish Crane mentioned it this way, but they probably figured stating a lift figure would make it easier to understand for most....but who really knows why.
#18
The 525 EFI came direct from Mercury Marine with Crane 16535-16, .300" long body, to accommodate the reduced base circle of the .372" lobe. The confusion stems from "factory" , GM or Mercury.The Merc "factory" lifter is not the same.The ability to run a short body lifter is all predicated on the base circle of the cam.
Bob
Bob
#20
Registered

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,332
Likes: 73
From: chicago
When I said "GM" lifters, I should have been clearer, as I was referring to lifters that were sold by "GM Performance" label,
#17120061 is a taller lifter I believe.
#17120060 is the lifter used in say a 1997 454 Truck engine.
The 525 Lifter, was a crane piece. Not a GM piece. I was incorrect for associating GM lifters and crane/merc lifters. Sorry for the confusion there.
The 525 style lifters have an exposed lifter wheel, where the GM lifters, have the shrouded wheel. Possibly the GM lifters made by eaton or someone?
#17120061 is a taller lifter I believe.
#17120060 is the lifter used in say a 1997 454 Truck engine.
The 525 Lifter, was a crane piece. Not a GM piece. I was incorrect for associating GM lifters and crane/merc lifters. Sorry for the confusion there.
The 525 style lifters have an exposed lifter wheel, where the GM lifters, have the shrouded wheel. Possibly the GM lifters made by eaton or someone?
Last edited by MILD THUNDER; 04-09-2015 at 08:14 PM.


