I know stock stuff runs for a bazillion miles with no worries but lets not go there.

I've whittled down the head selection on my 543. The Eddy RPM heads are heading out for a tasty CNC job. Now, I need to solidify the uppy downy bits that lets the poor thing breathe.

Again, 5300 lb street car built for general hooliganism and the occasional road trip. That means trading off crazy power for longer life. It's also in my best interest to keep this thing under 6000 RPM so the crank doesn't go on vacation.

I'm looking hard at the Hughes 232/236/110 hydraulic flat cam. Teaming that thing up with some 1.6 rockers looks pretty tasty. Lift goes to .571/.582 and isn't too hard on parts. Typical lifter weight and moderate specs open up spring options.

However, I'm tempted to go with a more aggressive hydraulic roller cam like the Comp 236/242/110 .544/.541 which moves to .580/.577 with the faster rockers. The roller lifters are a lot heavier and will put more load on the springs and the rpm is a bit closer to my self imposed red line.

When it comes to racking up the miles will there be a significant difference in longevity of the components? Neither of these cams are radical but the motion is starting to get a little snappy, especially with the higher ratio rockers. I don't mind the price difference of going roller if longevity is there.

Valve spring technology has taken a big jump since I built my last motor. Ovate wire beehive type springs are doing the job of those old dual springs but I'm not sure if the action rate of these cam combos merit that type of thing. Each cam retailer has their preferred spring but there are sometimes better options available.

As for the rockers themselves, are the Mancini's good enough for daily type use or should I drop the coin for Harland?