[vicgto]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

I've posted our experiences with those rockers many times. From the moment we put them in service (used several sets early on) they start to grind up the rollers where the pins go thru them.

On my own engine I had a few with as much as .018-.019" clearance by the time I figured out where all the metal on the magnetic drain plug was coming from.

Removed them from several other engines we had them in and same thing, found heavy wear at the pins.

I replaced mine with Crower Enduro rockers and no more issues.........

Cliff, I believe you had a similar set up to mine with the OF Hydraulic roller cam and Crower Solid roller lifters with lash at .006". I'm wondering if this combination is putting more load on the valvetrain due to insufficient clearance ramp, what are your thoughts?

I ended up going with 1.6 Crower Enduro rockers. I was planning on going with Harland Sharp but I did not want the additional lift from the HS 1.65 (which are closer to 1.7) as I currently only have about .060" retainer to guide clearance with the 1.65 PRW rocker. Also I I don't want to work the valve train any harder and I'm not sure that exta .020" -.025 valve lift would help my SD ported 295 KRE heads (Daves data sheet stops at .550" with 299 cfm and I'm not sure how much better they are above that).

I had an interesting conversation with Scott form Butler Performance who I ended up purchasing from. I don't know the accuracy of his statements but he said Crower, Harland Sharp, Scorpian and most other US made rockers are bigger than the advertised ratio (e.g. 1.65 is actually closer to 1.7). He said he was told by one of the manufactures this is done to overcome losses due to flexing of components during operation so you end up with advertised ratio, not sure how true it is but that's what he said. He also said the off shore stuff (e.g. PRW) are much closer to advertised ratio.

Anyway I hope I don't get anymore surprises with these rockers.