FYI: It looks like a significant portion of s54 Cat Cams are failing

[SamGrant951]

Just a datapoint, my 280/272 (reused stock followers) from the GB have been in for close to a year, lots of dyno pulls, 6 track days so far and some street driving, no issues. We broke them in off idle as I guess that's the worst beating a cam can take during break in? and used and have been using MoS2 from Liqui Moly. Pulled the valve cover and checked everything over - all wearing well so far, oil filter clean, no strange noises etc. Just in case anyone wasn't sleeping well at night after installing these, mine so far aren't showing any signs of failure. Will update if that changes!

[Advorsor]

pm’ed

[rbg]

Shoot me a pm I have 272/280

[Advorsor]

Any chance anyone here would be selling their cams?

[jet_dogg]

Some contingencies along with conjecture, but as long as you agree it's a compromise.

[terra]

We've no idea what success means in that context re: 280/272s. Is it defined as the opposite of failure?

The reason is the geometry is significantly different than the worn mating surfaces of the rockers. The mating surface on them as worn by the stock cams will cause premature wear on more radical cams hence the familiar recommendation.

Shops that give a visual inspection are not disassembling the valvetrain and mic'ing them with starretts. You cannot visually discern loss of material, measurements need to be taken. They're just looking at the physical condition itself.

I would always replace followers with different cams but that's just me. Do it right or do it twice.

If the valve clearance isn't changing dramatically and the rockers are not visibly worn, realistically the extra wear isn't worth stressing over. A few microns will have no performance ramifications. Maybe you'll shave a few thousand miles of potential life off the valvetrain, but when "doing it right" triples the cost of the parts and adds several hours of extra labor, that's an acceptable trade off.

[jet_dogg]

We've no idea what success means in that context re: 280/272s. Is it defined as the opposite of failure?

The reason is the geometry is significantly different than the worn mating surfaces of the rockers. The mating surface on them as worn by the stock cams will cause premature wear on more radical cams hence the familiar recommendation.

Shops that give a visual inspection are not disassembling the valvetrain and mic'ing them with starretts. You cannot visually discern loss of material, measurements need to be taken. They're just looking at the physical condition itself.

I would always replace followers with different cams but that's just me. Do it right or do it twice.

[terra]

288/280 require follower replacement on either brand of cams. For whatever reason 280/272 seems to be the limit.

Officially. But there’s a few of us who took the risk with Schrick 288/280s without replacing the followers and have no premature failure to report.

[Arith2]

The standard 288/280 12.75mm/12.50mm Lift. 80k miles were on the followers.

288/280 require follower replacement on either brand of cams. For whatever reason 280/272 seems to be the limit.

Mileage isn't really that important but like you said, a high mileage car will be affected differently. I would say anything above 100k should get new followers but then again, that's also relative to the condition of the engine. 150k could be just fine or a car with 50k could have spent most it's life in high rpms. Most have had success for many miles on 280/272s without replacing the followers and that's the point I make.

[digger]

Duration and lift seems meaningful/relevant. Mileage less so, since we're not seeing them wear out with mileage with stock/schrick (280/272s).

... unless we're talking, say, 400,000+ miles, at which point I'd expect the followers (not cams) to wear.

I think he meant mileage on the stock used followers prior to swapping which I think is relevant.

[LemansM]

What was the duration and lift? How many miles were on the followers?

The standard 288/280 12.75mm/12.50mm Lift. 80k miles were on the followers.

[Obioban]

What was the duration and lift? How many miles were on the followers?

Duration and lift seems meaningful/relevant. Mileage less so, since we're not seeing them wear out with mileage with stock/schrick (280/272s).

... unless we're talking, say, 400,000+ miles, at which point I'd expect the followers (not cams) to wear.

[Arith2]

Yes.. I did have a failure on non-group buy cast cat cams (not billet), re-using the oem followers. Cat Cams replaced them under warranty and I'm using new shrick dlc rockers with them now.

What was the duration and lift? How many miles were on the followers?

[LemansM]

Yes.. I did have a failure on non-group buy cast cat cams (not billet), re-using the oem followers. Cat Cams replaced them under warranty and I'm using new shrick dlc rockers with them now.

[0-60motorsports]

That thread is pretty well known and sort of old news at this point. That group buy was the problem. I used it to actually order my valves to prepare for getting the cams. Where Schrick M taxes us, Cat cams doesn't. Companies have issues at a single point in manufacturing, however, they dealt with it well and fixed the problem. They aren't SGT. Has anyone had a failure outside of that group buy? THAT is what will really tell us the quality or the lack thereof. 5 failures that we know is NOT the majority. People have been running Cat cams for years without replacing followers. The title of this thread is misleading.

This, Very misleading title. I'll be ordering a set of CAT Cams as soon as I can 272/280 and will be using my original followers.