That was for a small block. Very different application than we are talking here.

don't believe me? I know... part of my agenda again? let me see if I can find the text ...

my lifter bores and lifters look fine, never spread any forks that was part of what I seen happen with morels and other brands if there are issues...never happened to me personally..guys you gotta get off this lifter bore thing with me... if they were the issue I would have other issues and my cams would not look exactly like dozens of others...

My comment about the lifters spreading forks, was in response to the lifter sales talk, about why a .700 wheel with a shrouded body is better than a .750 wheel fork style lifter. If the design can work fine in applications running rocker ratios in excess of 2.0, top fuel engines, nascar, pro stock, etc, I think it should be ok in a 6k rpm hydraulic combo.

Did cam motion ever get back to you on the cams?

I wonder if the smaller, shrouded body on a higher lift, short duration cam, is actually causing the gouging from the bottom of the encapsulated body hitting the lobe before the wheel can. Anybody seen witness marks on the encapsulated skirt of the body? Seems plausible to me once a smaller wheel and full skirt is involved.

have not sent cams back yet. I think the big time fork lifters are big body, not running the crazy lift and valve train on small hydraulics that's whole different world.

As far as the forks vs not that's only in the .842 lifter size that was said not larger body's

The pic of the cam Joe posted last was a Comp cam that had 100's of hours on it with Comp lifters. The cam was re-used on another build and had lifters put on it with a .700 wheel and you see the results of one season of use. The cam didn't look anything like that when it was installed. The block the cam was installed in had been previously run and the cam (crane) did not look like that at all it was a little less aggressive. The re-used block was re-machined on a RMC CNC block station. Before anything is done machining wise the block is checked 100% from front to back. If anything is out of spec the machining is corrected or if need be on lifter bores they are over sized and bushings installed to correct everything. The block was perfect. The cam was perfect the only difference was the change in lifters. And you see the results. The lobes on that cam were Comp's 3356/3357 lobes far from what I would consider to be aggressive and far less aggressive than what we normally run and don't have any issues.

I been supper busy so it's going slow right now... And holidays will slow me down, taking things a day at a time..

..

So now the johnsons suck even though many have he success there also?

If crower, Isky and Teague are using them for the last few years I can't say they are suck lifters, many guys I know use morel also with no issues as we have seen guys state earlier in threads, not trying to get into a pissing match with a friend or anyone here but now it's a hate Johnson post with no proof of anything