Critter, I agree. That's the reason 1.65 rockers were used back in the day when cam profiles were weak and computers weren't available to set up programs with cam designs.
Yesterdays cam grinds are todays RV and truck towing profiles. LOL.
Springs have also contributed to better cam profiles.
Example: Put a 1.6 rocker on an RV style cam for a 350 chevy and 9 times out of 10 it will slow down. Why the heads, etc flow with the grind and combo.
Put a 1.65 rocker on the Pontiac and it usually picks up........ why the port profile is weak and can use the help. faster ramps allow more charge into the chamber. I have stated this before 15 years ago. There is no bowl to hold the next charge, so ya fake the head into believing it's bigger then it is.
I like the Comp XE cams with the faster ramps and still use the 1.5 rocker as the lift is built right in.
Yes, I like 'some' of the hyd roller profiles.
I got one in my 76 500cu.in IA motor and works great. Sorta a good compromise between a roller and a hyd cam. I'm making the same power at a lot lower rpm then I did with a huge solid roller.
Why do you think hyd roller cams came about?
I remember when they first hit the market, a lot of weak RV type of grinds for daily useage. period. Times change and so do cams.
Are they for everyone. No.
If you pick up 1 to 2 tenths would you spend the difference for the upgrade....... your call.
What's is reasonable to spend for one is expensive to another for the gain. That's just the way it is.
And with the limited profiles available in a hyd roller, there isn't always a good choice.
Application and what ya want, determine if it's the right choice in cams.
Trying to compare a hyd roller to a hyd cam with Rhoades lifters and 1.65 rockers can't be done. To different theories.
But is a hyd roller stronger then a basic hyd cam with the same duration, C.L. and L.S. I feel Yes.