Roller Rockers in Stock

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Todd Hoven

And some of those guys are the guys that bitch when there car isn't fast. They don't work on them and they want rules changed so it is easier for them to compete with the guys that put in double the effort and money. If you take the time to learn and work hard you can build a combo to run fast for less, but if you know nothing and don't want to learn then you are going nowhere.

Yep...I totally agree!!!

[Dwight Southerland]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

Jeff, Holroyd's rockers are STOCK GM, the studs and adjusters are similar in material to the ARP rocker studs.

However, allowing roller rockers will absolutely bring about serious unintended consequences, for the reasons I outlined earlier.

Alan -

Your argument on the basis of logic whows a bias toward yourself, as well as most of the arguments presented here. Just because "Holroyd's rockers" are available from GM doesn't mean anything; GM is more capable of producing high quality race parts than aftermarket suppliers (more budget, bigger staff, bigger economic base to absorb R&D costs and a product that will make no profit.) Before the new rule revision, you BBC racers enjoyed an advantage of being able to cross breed some factory race parts that were never specified as even replacement parts for the engine combinations you are racing. So it is with most engine combinations, especially when you get into the higher classes that require engines that produce enough power and RPM to exceed the capability of OEM, assembly line specified parts. Allowing roller rocker arms at this point willl make so little difference in the playing field (unless you are afraid of some of the engine combinations mentioned that use shaft rockers) and will provide a way to eliminate breakage for you and everybody else.

It's the open valve spring rule and the elimination of requiring stock duration that is killing the budget for stock cars, not roller rocker arms or big push rods. If you had to retain stock valve spring pressure, rocker arm breakage is not a big issue, and there would be no 8000 RPM+ engines.

[Alan Roehrich]

Dwight, we both know full well that the rockers Clark Holroyd sells are plain old stock rockers originally designed for truck engines, during a period where Chevrolet didn't have much interest in racing, and certainly not big block engines in drag racing, at least outside of Pro Stock. Clark Holroyd just has studs and adjusters made anyway, he just happened to see the rockers on a replacement engine, and thought "hey, I could use bigger studs with those". GM didn't design a "race piece" and then sit back and wait for Clark Holroyd or someone else to "discover" them.

No, a lot of the 396, 427, and 454 engines did not come with 7/16" pushrods and guideplates.

I agree, the open valve spring rule is what has caused this. We cannot "unring the bell", they'll never go back. The duration rule didn't cause this, because the shorter duration you're allowed the more you try to accelerate the lifter within the duration allowed. If you had the open valvespring rule without the open duration rule, it'd be even worse than it is.

The roller rocker rule is just another step towards a slippery slope, and it will make the playing field even less level than it is now. And where do we stop?

I have a friend that makes roller rockers, if the rule comes in, I can always have him make me a few sets that use 9/16" studs and be right back to where we are, because we aren't breaking rockers. But then I go from a $65 set of rockers to a $400+ set of rockers. And again, where does it end? Bigger lifters for all? Roller lifters for all? No lift rule?

[Bill Grubbs]

Enough of this. Everyone here aspired to race stock, no one held a gun to your heads, everyone knew what they were getting into, and chose a car based on that.

If you want to run roller lifters, roller rockers, dry sump oil systems; if you think your engine has to much factored horsepower; if your car has too long, or too short of a wheelbase; if you think your car carries too much, or too little weight; if your car doesn’t have a hood scoop and you think it should; if you car does not have traction control and you think it should; if your car needs wider tires to be consistent; if your car did not come with aluminum cylinder heads but the factory thought about them, or you think they should have put them on, or at least thought about putting them on; then I have some great money saving suggestions.

First, in light of today’s fuel prices then do not race. The car will be extremely consistent. Also, I can guarantee if the engine is never turned over your valve train/rods/block/oil pump/ will not, and can not break. Bearings won’t spin, distributor gears won’t tear up, and (I know I’ll take a hit from the engine builders on this next one) the freshen job on the engine can be put off from 100-400 runs to every 4-5 years. Ultimate reliability, consistency, and cost savings in on package, and you can talk about how fast and consistent you car is (or would have been).

Second, if you HAVE to race, then race a local bracket race. Just think how much fun it would be, and the cost savings; no accepted rod or piston list, any head, any trans manual or automatic, heck, you can run pump gas or bio-diesel if you wanted. Plus, you will save huge amounts on hotel/motel bills, tow vehicle fuel. You won’t even need a motorhome since most bracket races are one day events. The big advantage is there are very little rules (meaning if you want roller rockers your competitor won’t care, he may even sell you his old set to help you get started).

Third, continue racing stock, and save money where you can to get the car/engine/transmission you really want. We started racing in the "Street" class at Emerald Coast Dragway and save for three months to buy a no frills AutoMeter tach for the car, then much later a Play back tach. The car originally had a ten bolt, sloppy turbo 350, and a weak throughly thrashed slapped together (by the previous owner) SBC 350. It took us a long time and the help of a lot of friends and family to get where we are today (Bob and Bobby Lundholm, Jimmy Parker, Woodro, Arnold Greene, Paul Forte, Lee Tuttle, DJ Raiser, Tim Sloan, and many manufacturers...the list goes on). This group has been instumental in guiding our efforts and kept us from wasting money (well I am hard headed and did waste some money, but not as much as I would have). We started with a plan (worked from the back of the car forward), and have kept to it. It has taken ten years to reach where we are now. Friends and family what more can be said.

Everyone chose to build a car for different reasons, money, engine size, class factor, class size, uniqueness, and even the cool factor. But a Trabent will never fit into A, B, or C, much less F, G, or H, even with roller rockers, superchargers, or roll bar/cages, you will have to change cars. Racing costs money. The old adage is still true today, “How fast can I go? – How big is your wallet.” Rule changes cost everyone money even if it is as easy as removing the button from the steering wheel.

Stop the rule changes!

[Alan Roehrich]

One more question. Who are we going to get to police the trick custom roller rockers that have the pushrod cup and the roller tip moved around in relation to the fulcrum? Got any idea what kind of games you can play by altering that relationship? Do those of you campaigning for roller rockers realize that rocker arms are NOT constant ratio?

Okay, so that was more than one question. And yes, I know that NHRA can easily check for maximum lift. But how often do you see them do that? Besides, it's not more maximum lift you get by playing with the relationship between the pushrod cup, the fulcrum, and the roller tip. It's the ratio on either side of maximum lift. You can radically alter the lift curve. It's easy for the shaft rocker guys to experiment with and play with, just shim the stands, or shorten or lengthen the pushrod, and then plot the lift curve again. Go ahead, see what happens.

Oh yeah, how many sets of trick rockers do you want to buy, and how many trick cams do you want to try to take advantage of them? Think about THAT before you decide how much cheaper and easier you think roller rockers will make things.

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Alan Roehrich

It's easy for the shaft rocker guys to experiment with and play with, just shim the stands, or shorten or lengthen the pushrod, and then plot the lift curve again. Go ahead, see what happens.

Alan...the Ford and Mopar guys have been doing this for years with the ductile iron adjustable rockers. Also, it is legal to shim the stands, lengthen/shorten psuhrods or use adjustable pushrods.

Trick cams? There are many already using the larger core cams, needle/roller cam bearings and switched firing orders.

[Dwight Southerland]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

Allowing roller rocker arms at this point willl make so little difference in the playing field . . . and will provide a way to eliminate breakage for you and everybody else.

Again, Alan, my point. I'm not arguing for or against, just stating a fact. Some will spend more money, some will not spend more. Some will gain an advantage, some will not. Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

Gosh, if we allow aftermarket rocker arms, everybody could have 9/16" studs. (or 1" studs!)

(If you don't see the satire in that last satement, don't respond.)

[SSDiv6]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

Gosh, if we allow aftermarket rocker arms, everybody could have 9/16" studs. (or 1" studs!)

(If you don't see the satire in that last satement, don't respond.)

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by SSDiv6

Alan...the Ford and Mopar guys have been doing this for years with the ductile iron adjustable rockers. Also, it is legal to shim the stands, lengthen/shorten psuhrods or use adjustable pushrods.

Trick cams? There are many already using the larger core cams, needle/roller cam bearings and switched firing orders.

Believe me, I know that already. Yes, it is legal. I'm not arguing that point at all.

I know about the big core cams, trick bearings, and firing order swaps. I'm not arguing that point either. That's not what I mean by trick cams.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

Again, Alan, my point. I'm not arguing for or against, just stating a fact. Some will spend more money, some will not spend more. Some will gain an advantage, some will not. Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

Gosh, if we allow aftermarket rocker arms, everybody could have 9/16" studs. (or 1" studs!)

(If you don't see the satire in that last satement, don't respond.)

I understand your point Dwight, and yes, I see the satire.

I'm just not convinced that roller rockers will be good for the class. With the options it opens up, I think it will hurt those people who don't have an unlimited budget, and those who build their own engines and don't have the knowledge or resources to take advantage of those options. I do not agree that allowing roller rockers won't change things a great deal. If it wasn't going to bring about considerable change, no one would ask for them.

There's a lot of smoke and mirrors involved, you're right about that.

If nothing else, this has been a great discussion, with plenty of good points, and few, if any, personal attacks. I may or may not agree with what has been posted, but I do respect and appreciate the majority of it, and I can see where it is coming from. Regardless of what happens, I hope the discussion at least helped more people see more of what goes on. I've had my say, and I will now respectfully bow out of the discussion.