So after all of this measuring , losing, gaining lift I ask. What was the difference at the track? Or was it never track tested?
Doug
This exactly!
All I'm saying is with the shaft spaced up and over like that there is NO way it stays still. ONLY way I would ever correct geometry would be to mill the stands off and make new ones that TOTALLY surround the shaft. W2's were a good example. I would bet some of your lift loss is from flex in the studs.
So it's ok to make a rocker with a said 1.6 ratio but it's not 1.6? That's what i call JUNK. As Brad posted above even T&D will tell you ALL rockers FLEX. Every. Single. Brand. Always.
Of the rocker is designed correctly, that rocker will be over the nominal ratio so that under LOAD the rocker will have the nominal ratio.
T&D screwed up. That's just a simple fact.
The other simple fact is what happens under load now? The rocker was already down on ratio, and now you load it and put some RPM to it. You lose even more ratio.
Why settle for something made incorrectly? Chrysler people just awe me with what they tolerate from the aftermarket.
