Quote:
25 years worth of insight, that's useful right there.. Thank you for sharing.
Having said that I will say. I have had both roller fulcrum Harland Sharps, Crane and now Hughes. I believe the roller fulcrum uses more oil which takes more from the bottom end. This is only my opinion no proof. Any quality one will certainly perform better than stock. I have swapped from stock rockers to Crane rollers on a engine with a small cam and good springs, the results were surprising 500 plus useable RPM. It idled better and pulled harder on our up hill grade in top gear. Considering how bad stock stamped rocker ratios are or can be. I am certain the resulting improvements were a result of that and correct lifter preload.
Ah, but the question wasn't about rocker ratios, just was there any tangible benefit from a roller fulcrum on a shaft mounted rocker that was documented. Not interested in extrapolations based on observed data from stud mounted rockers, not interested in gains based on rocker ratios, whether do due improved accuracy or increased ratios. Just is there a tangible improvement using rollers at the fulcrum over the plain bearing design. Any by relationship is the cost benefit worth it? If I gain 5hp with roller fulcrum bearings but it cost me $200 more for them, not worth it in my book. But if I gain 200hp for an extra $5, then I'd be stupid not to use them. Extreme example but you get the point.
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question.
They say there is always the exception that proves the rule.
Don't be the exception.
| 
