Here's the summary of the information I gave Mike at B3 some years ago from my measurements w/ different pushrod length, adjuster screw, and shaft location configurations:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measuring valve lift curves w/ different length pushrods and with standard and relocated shafts. Cam is a COMP Cams RX-series endurance roller measured in my block w/ .815”-wheel lifter.

Seat at .018" lash (.012" lobe) = 315
SAE duration at .018" lash (.016" lobe) = 307
.020 = 300+
.050 = 266+
.100 = 232
.200 = 184
.300 = 136
.400 = 68
Peak at .433"

Before & after valve lift curve measurements for changing from ball-type adjuster to cup-type adjuster w/ longer pushrod and, then changing from standard rocker shaft location to B3RE kit optimized for .650" net lift. All measurements taken with Hughes “1.6” standard-offset rocker using soft checking spring and .018" lash.

A = w/ Smith Bros. ball-type adjuster, actual Smith Bros. 3/8" x .120"-wall x 9.200" EL pushrod used in engine
B = w/ T&D cup-style adjusters, ball-ball style adjustable pushrod set at .375" longer than Smith Bros. ball-cup style
C = w/ B3RE shaft relocation kit set for .650” net lift, T&D cup-style adjusters, ball-ball style adjustable pushrod extended longer than w/ test “B”

Lift --- _A_ --- _B_ --- _C_
.010 --- 302 --- 302 --- 300
.020 --- 293.5 - 293.5 - 292
.050 --- 273 --- 273 --- 271
.100 --- 250 --- 249 --- 248
.150 --- 231 --- 230 --- 228
.200 --- 215 --- 214 --- 212
.250 --- 199.5 - 198 --- 196
.300 --- 185 --- 184 --- 181
.350 --- 170.5 - 169 --- 166.5
.400 --- 155 --- 154 --- 151
.450 --- 139 --- 138.5 - 135
.500 --- 122 --- 121 --- 117
.550 --- 102.5 - 101 --- 96.5
.600 --- 78.5 -- 77 ---- 69.5
.650 --- 42 ---- 40 ---- 17

Lift -- .668" - .667" - .653"
Ratio - 1.584 - 1.582 - 1.550

Sweep for A & B: ~ .085"and centered; pushrod/adjuster angle slightly under parallel at half-lift
Sweep for C: ~ .045" and offset slightly inboard; pushrod/adjuster angle slightly over parallel at half-lift

Comments:
1. Every "before and after" combination is going to be different, but in this case it will require a different cam and/or rocker ratio increase to recoup the lost high-lift duration. You might want to give your relocation kit customers a "heads up" (no pun intended) that a higher rocker ratio might be a good upgrade along w/ the kit, to maintain the overall lift curve. Obviously, the only way anyone will know for sure is to do what I did and measure all the options.

2. I expected more difference in the lift curve – and a ratio increase – from moving the pushrod end closer to the rocker arm w/ the cup-style adjuster w/o changing the shaft location. The results are very different from what I graphed out, other than the “swing” (length of the arc) of the rocker-end of the pushrod is reduced significantly.

3. My prior measurements comparing the delivered ratio of this style of rocker using the checking spring vs my PAC 1243 spring (240# closed, 600# open) showed about a .04 loss in ratio; the loaded net lift was .650" +/-.

//////////////////////

More valve lift curve measurements for changing from ball-type adjuster to cup-type adjuster w/ longer pushrod and, then re-running the measurements for both styles after changing from standard rocker shaft location to B3RE kit optimized for .650" net lift. All measurements taken with Hughes “1.6” standard-offset rocker using soft checking spring and reducing lash to .008" (don't have any thinner feeler gauge)

A = w/ standard shaft location, Smith Bros. ball-type adjuster, actual Smith Bros. 3/8" x .120"-wall x 9.200" EL pushrod used in engine
B = w/ standard shaft location, T&D cup-style adjuster, ball-ball style adjustable pushrod set at .375" longer than Smith Bros. ball-cup style
C = w/ B3RE shaft relocation kit set for .650” net lift, Smith Bros. ball-type adjuster, ball-cup style adjustable pushrod
D = w/ B3RE shaft relocation kit set for .650” net lift, T&D cup-style adjuster, ball-ball style adjustable pushrod extended ~ .220" longer than w/ test “B”

Lift --- _A_ --- _B_ --- _C_ --- _D_
.010 --- 316.5 - 315 --- 314.5 - 315.5
.020 --- 305 --- 303.5 - 303 --- 303.5
.050 --- 281 --- 279.5 - 279 --- 279
.100 --- 255 --- 253.5 - 253 --- 253
.150 --- 235.5 - 234 --- 232.5 - 233.5
.200 --- 218.5 - 217 --- 216 --- 216
.250 --- 203 --- 202.5 - 200 --- 200.5
.300 --- 189 --- 187.5 - 185.5 - 185.5
.350 --- 175 --- 173 --- 170 --- 170
.400 --- 159.5 - 158 --- 155 --- 155.5
.450 --- 145 --- 143 --- 139 --- 140
.500 --- 127.5 - 126 --- 121 --- 123
.550 --- 109.5 - 107.5-- 101 --- 103
.600 --- 87 ---- 85 ---- 76 ---- 79
.650 --- 56 ---- 53.5 -- 35.5 -- 42.5

Lift -- .685" - .682" - .663" - .670"
Ratio - 1.600 - 1.594 - 1.550 - 1.565

I ran each set of measurements twice; the #s never varied by more than 1/2 degree and most measurements repeated. The max lift values all repeated, except one time when there was a -.001" variance.

All I can say is geometry is a funny thing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------