I apologize if this has been answered before, I searched and didn't find the answer.

Some stock(???) hemi rocker shafts use a light spring to push the rockers into position over the valve tip, others have a clamp to prevent the rocker from "walking" on the shaft.

Does either system have an advantage?

I am thinking about attempting a home built 572 and trying to sort out how to get a good rocker setup with stock valve covers. I was a chevy guy from 1986 - 2017 so I am trying to catch up a bit on mopar stuff.

Thanks
Craig

The clamps are a lot better way to set the rocker system up to avoid excessive side loading, to dang many angles on them 426 type Hemiroid motors

Looking at how light those springs are, I would think that my bad luck would cause the rocker to walk down the shaft and fall off the valve tip, resulting in an immediate and expensive failure. But I guess that really doesn't happen???

The pushrods won't allow that to happen
The better you control the side movement of the rocker arms the more net lift the valves will see :up
BTW, to get the best setup on each rocker arm location you may need to shim the other side of them also
Another reason why I call them Hemiroid motors

FWIW...my 572 hemi has had the stock style spring setup on it since I built it in 2006. I will be changing to the clamps at the next freshen up b/c I'm curious if they'll help w/ valveguide wear.

You can see my setup here...my daughter was "helping".

I disagree Cab, I believe Landy first used those clamps along with his 'Landy tool' to swap out broken valvesprings in a hurry between rounds. Makes it easier to keep the rocker out of the way if you don't have to fight against a spring. Look at the way the pushrods are angled. They side-load the rockers into the stands, not away. The engineering department would have performed thousands of hours of valvetrain testing. If they had observed the Gen II needed sleeve spacers or clamps on that spring side, it would have been born with them.

A good test would be a back to back dyno pull with the clamps installed, and then with the clamps removed to see if there is a significant difference in power. Or if someone would run one with a camera and strobe installed in a junk valvecover.

Just a FYI: It is a simple shaft collar that can be purchased Mcmaster carr.
https://www.mcmaster.com/shaft-collars.

Everything's been fine for over 50 years. Your OCD is kicking in. Worry about something worth worrying about.

Dick Landy claimed that the collars added horsepower by stabilizing the valve train. I don't remember how much.

Like I said earlier, I'd love to see a dyno test. Anecdotal evidence and opinions don't cut it these days, and that includes my own.

We need an episode of Mythbusters featuring the 'ole 426!

The pushrod angle jams the rocker into the stand. The spring just kept it to that side. Lash won't allow it to move too far the other way. As long as we're solving the issue, lets run torrington bearings on either side with a collar.

I agree with Rick. There's a touch of OCD floating around. My motor is 11yrs old with hundreds of 8 sec. passes on it. It has the Stage V rockers with the spring setup. Never had a problem.

Spot on right there.

DL claimed that inventing products stabilized his bank balance.

Stage V sells a kit with the collars and a set of wave springs to help the rocker rotate with less friction, that set up is the cats meow