There were never very many performance hydraulic cams for the Stovebolt. Clifford only had like three of them in his catalog, the most radical of which was only .449 lift. That was about as much as the hydraulic lifters would take in terms of ramp speed and spring pressures. That cam was advertised to make power from 2200 to 4800. If you did not know to adjust a mechanical cam and did not want to learn, this was your cam. Now Clifford was not a cam grinder. He had cams reground. Erson was his source for a good many years. Schneider will grind a hydraulic cam still. But most grinders only offered solid grinds for the 235/261.

And make no mistake, I am with Jerry on this, a hydraulic performance cam for a 235/261 is not that great. Which is why you did not see many offered, even back in the day. If you want the convenience of a hydraulic cam, use a mild cam grind. The other issue, lifters. The new lifters are terrible. So you have to dig really really hard to find nos gm.

The solid cams on the other hand can have faster ramps, can be ground with higher lifts. Generally better performing cams, both in terms of power and/or torque, and in my opinion, reliable. Setting the valves is not a big deal. You just need to get through your first adjustment and then you know how to do it. Frankly, they don’t need all that much maintenance. They hold the adjustment pretty well. Everyone who ground cams ground solid lifter cams for the inline six. My first performance cam was a Chet Herbert regrind. He use to advertise in hot rod and car craft 39.95 any cam any grind. Howard, Isky, Schneider, Erson, Weber, McGurk, Racer Brown, Clay Smith, all would grind a cam but generally a solid cam.

I have run Howard, Isky, Erson, Herbert, Clifford and Schneider. Herbert, Clifford and Schneider were the better cams.

Mike