Author Topic: The BIGG Briggs! (Read 22458 times)

eddiehenjr · « **Reply #45 on:** February 24, 2007, 08:18:45 pm »

That sucks!

mightymowe · « **Reply #46 on:** February 25, 2007, 10:37:46 am »

The roller cams are not that necessary on the briggs engine because of the size of the cam follower.

eddiehenjr · « **Reply #47 on:** February 25, 2007, 03:01:09 pm »

Well would a roller cam reduce some amounts of friction?

mightymowe · « **Reply #48 on:** February 25, 2007, 08:07:22 pm »

they might but it would be a lot of work for very little gain.

fordman21 · « **Reply #49 on:** February 26, 2007, 08:30:10 am »

The real reason for the roller cam is so a huge profile camshaft can be used without having contact problems between the lobe and lifter, its actually not for friction at all, the advantages come from the cam profile and not the fact that it has a heavy roller on the end of the lifter. As mentioned because of the mushroom style of the briggs lifter there is no reason for a roller set up, its a nice light strong efficient design that can handle a lot of camshaft. Ryan.

eddiehenjr · « **Reply #50 on:** February 27, 2007, 01:16:50 pm »

I see what you're saying... you can have a taller profile camshaft (that would be too steep for tappets) and the roller tappet is the only thing Lunati, FoMoCo, or Edelbrock, but one of them claims on a V-8, you can free up up to 3hp per cylinder. Not much, but with a Briggs and Scrap-iron, you need every horsey you can get hour hands on!

Roger S · « **Reply #51 on:** February 27, 2007, 06:04:23 pm »

The lifter bore is so small on a briggs I don't see room for roller design

fordman21 · « **Reply #52 on:** February 27, 2007, 07:25:13 pm »

I could see a less friction hp increase on a v8 because it will have big valve spring pressures and a heavier valve train to work against compared to a small engine. Ryan.