Thanks!
-----Original Message-----
From: S800Racer@aol.com <S800Racer@aol.com>
To: PaceCars@aol.com <PaceCars@aol.com>; owner-vintage-race@autox.team.net
<owner-vintage-race@autox.team.net>; vintage-race@autox.team.net
<vintage-race@autox.team.net>
Date: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: Roller rocker posting for fellow racer
>
>In a message dated 1/20/99 12:07:39 AM, PaceCars@aol.com wrote:
>
><<Roller rockers are not a performance advantage for A series motors. What
>roller rockers do is give you longer valve guide life, due to less side
thrust
>on the valves. Roller rockers are noticeably heavier than non-rollers, so
if
>you want to run high revs, non-rollers are probably superior.>>
>-- that may be true IF there are no other changes to the motor. As I
>understand it (and I am no expert on BMC motors) the roller rockers allow
the
>use of other parts which can greatly enhance performance.
>
> <<Many of the fast guys in SCCA run non-rollers (Comptune sells his own
>version of non-rollers) due to less valve train mass. >>
>-- and how often do these "fast guys" rebuild the motor. I've heard they
run
>such radical specifications and high rpm that they install new crank
bearings
>every other session. I suppose if someone in vintage wanted to do that
with a
>non-roller motor and vintage legal parts (whatever that means these days),
I
>could not complain. I also would not envy anyone doing 3 or 4 engine
rebuilds
>every weekend as part of normal maintenance!
>
> Sorry, I will not be convinced that roller rockers do not improve
performance
>by allowing higher rpm and more aggressive cams and other performance
parts.
>
> Cheers, Doug Meis
> (Of course it's easy for me bitch about roller rockers when I've got
overhead
>cams AND a roller crankshaft)
>
|