I was using the Joe Gibbs break in oil which is a fairly heavy oil. That could be the case, maybe a synthetic oil would have more film pressure.

It seems to me that the spray bar would have to be on the carb side of the valve cover rather than on the top of the valve cover in order to really have a chance of getting the oil into the cups. But that seems a little complicated, it just seems easier to buy roller lifters that oil the pushrods and then get pushrods with holes in each end. That would solve the problem and wouldn't cost much more if anything.

Once you get your oiling issue figured out, I would love to see the intakes compared.
I am needing to make a decision on intakes for my car. I now run the 440-2 and it with the 2 inch spacer/adapter it burries the carb in the scoop. But the 3x is just a 1/4 inch shorter than the -2 with 2 inch spacer. The 440-3 is the only good option I have and I dont want to give up HP to use it.

FWIW, one of my customers is running the 572-13 heads with 1.7 Jesel rockers and a .775 lift cam, using the spray bar valve covers.
3 seasons, no problems at all.

another has a 622 with 600-13 heads, .880 lift cam, triple springs, 1.75/1.7 rockers.....no problems with the spray bar oiling.

all im saying is.....there are plenty of people out there using it succesfully, so its not like it wont work.

both of those motors are running ball/ball pushrods.

Cool deal, thanks for the update.

I was thinking the same thing. I would think if all was working well, it would make even more power higher up.

Those were the peak numbers recorded on the run but the dyno operator was backing off the load since the torque gauge needle was pegged. My guess is that the motor would've made a little more power on a SuperFlow or DTS setup that was capable of more power. On the other hand, we might have just blown the bottom end out of the block if we had loaded it hard for another 1000 rpm.

Jim - actually the roller cam has less duration at 50 and 200 than the MM305 flat tappet. I'm pretty sure it has more duration at 300 lift and above though but I didn't measure those points. I think this is just an example where the published cam info doesn't really convey the full picture.

Actual numbers on the camshaft: MM305 intake lobe is 305/279/197 for the seat duration, 050 duration and 200 duration. This roller cam was a 1722 intake lobe which is 308/275/195 so a tiny bit bigger on the seat but a tiny bit smaller on the 50 and 200 duration. These cam lobes were selected to have identical duration to the flat tappet but more lift. That was one of the things I was interested in looking at.

Of course, it isn't apples to apples since I used a 1.50 rocker arm with the MM305 and a 1.70 rocker arm with the roller. The bigger rocker arm ratio gets the valve open sooner so the valve sees more duration.

( This is a stock block with stock main caps so at 800 hp we're living on borrowed time.) AndyF, the F is for Fearless!

"all im saying is.....there are plenty of people out there using it succesfully, so its not like it wont work."

both of those motors are running ball/ball pushrods. "


--------------------
I have 2 seasons on my Ball/ball Jesel combo with the spraybars and have not had any problems!
Mike