Hello:
Why do we insisit on using adjustable roller rocker arms on street engines? Is it really neccessary?
A recent article in “Engine Masters” magazine featured a 383 rebuild.. The final analyisis was of the installation of a “Comp Cam # XE 285 HL. Using stock valve train the engine showed 455hp@6,000
RPMs. Just wondering why use pricey adj. Roller rocker arms when heavy duty stock arms will work.
No hassel figuring out pushrod length or worries about adjustments or lock nuts loosening up. For a
Street engine it just seems much simplier.
Thanks
Maynard

For the most part I agree. No two ways roller rockers are over sold as a performance enhancement on stock or mild street engines with mild cams. When you start getting in to high lift, high spring pressures, long duration cams thats a different story. Biggest draw back with stock rockers is the ratio is all over the place - and usually on the low side ( less than 1.5:1 ). If you are well over 1/2" lift or in to dual springs, I would start considering roller rockers.

I run stock on my stuff. simple, works fine and cheap(i.e. free). I think with the majority of hydraulic cams there is not much benefit to running roller rockers instead of stockers.

I agree stock style is fine up to about 1/2" lift. Beyond that the roller helps compensate for less than perfect geometry plus they're often build stronger for higher spring pressure needed with an aggressive cam.

With stock rockers pushrod length still matters... if milling of block or head or tolerence stackup gets the hydraulic lifter out of its design range shorter life and/or performance loss is likley.

I agree and here is a clip out of a mag written by Dulcich: