96capricemgr

I believe most of the street failures you may have heard of were OLDER stuuf which doesn't automatically apply to LT1. If you believe all the old info you can't run anything more than about 180-190 PSI cranking compression on 93 octane but the b-body LT1 cranks 200PSI and is fine with 87 octane and I have run 245psi cranking compression on 93 octane.

Stock eliminators stuff is very interesting but not particularly applicable to basic street stuff.

Far as the rocker ratio again I believe you are miss applying OLD data. I will try and round up the article I saw on it but basically by the time the LT1 was made manufacturing had become MUCH more consistent than it was in the 70s which is where you get your data.

What makes sense to me is is someone is a little short on funds today and looking at a repair like this, instead of dropping $150 on roller tip now why not just run the stockers for a little till one can afford proper full roller? Wasting $150 on a marginal part today is NOT the way to save money.

Far as why too little spring pressure could cause a pushrod to go through a rocker in a RACE situation I would suspect float and the resulting collision of parts. Some guys who run those sort of classes have cams specifically designed to throw the lifter off the nose of the cam to get extra lift at mid to high rpms. It is called lofting.

ACE1252

I don't think the roller tip is pointless, I think it boils down to a long term reliability issue for OEM's(cost as well....).

Orr89rocz

Define old? These were on modern casting aftermarket head sbc's using modern cams and valvetrain. Some using modern replacement stamped rockers and some using those special Elgin ones for class racing. Valve train in a LT1 isnt "more special" than sbc. Its the same 23 deg stuff, similar pushrod layout Doesnt matter if its in a old school gen 1 or a gen 2 or a LSx motor. You have spring that controls a valve that has weight. Cam lobe acts upon a pushrod that moves a rocker that opens valves. Geometry may be different due to valve angles but the concepts are the same.

Now rocker arm manufacturing may have come along way and more accurate but until someone measures it, i'd be inclined to say stock rockers will flex on higher pressure/higher rpm situations.

If you find the article, post it up. I'd like to read it

Thats the only thing I could think of, float causing collision of parts and more pressure cured that. Still a bandaid. Only reason they use those parts is because of class rules. No sense in doing that in a street build. Use the proper rocker

True, but it will depend on how long the setup is run like that. If only for a little while I guess it wouldnt matter much but if its a good ways out, then i'd be alittle more concerned. Reason I suggested the cheap magnums is you can always resell them and get most of your money back. I know I did.

But it seems that doing heads only on stock cam you can run stock rockers no problem and when you are ready for the cam, do rockers then at the same time.

I've never done anything that way. I always did everything at once so it was done one time only. It may take alittle longer and have more down time but its worth it IMO.

joelster

My 350 with the big XFI468 cam uses Comp Magnum roller tip rockers 1.6 ratio. I've never had a problem, and have never reset the lash since the initial install. They've seen near 7k countless times. They are a very beefy rocker for a stamped steel piece.