Yes, agreed. The OP mentioned the rollers he chose increased lift, i.e. had an increased ratio over stock (likely 1.60 vs 1.50 which is typical). I was wondering if the increased lift afforded by these particular rockers caused an interference issue.
S & S parts manual quotes roller rocker conversion increases ratio from standard 1.76 to 1.80.
Since all alternative S & S cams are non-interference with standard rockers, including the high performance 618 (0.618" lift) there would be some leeway with lower lift cams.
As an example the 569 cam (next one down in terms of lift and valve duration) would give 0.582" lift with roller conversion so would maintain non-interference.
Last edited by Richard Wood; 20/04/1808:11 AM.
Richard
2018 Roadster 3.7 1966 Land Rover S2a 88 2024 Royal Enfield Guerrilla 450 1945 Guzzi Airone
Wanting to put back the reconditioned distribution casing that goes with the polished motor a piece of the cam shaft is to stay in the nut by unscrewing, I had replace the cam shafts last year with the oil pump, the first game replace because a cam shaft was damaged by a needle bearing damage, as I have no left low cam shaft I put a set of camshaft 569, I cross my fingers so that it does not there is more problem before Albert Ball more I still have in stock that trees cam 618 in advance for the engine 132cub in transsexual version, the 569 are not made to make driving grandfather or city on the road it makes you want to titillate the accelerator pedal the tone and engine response is different past 3000 rpm, I hesitated to put back the old rear camshaft of the original rear cylinder which was still in good condition because the engine should be about 90,000 km.
there was a start of worrying traces on the rear exhaust cam shaft from the needle bearing (broken cam shaft), all the material was one year old (can be problem heat treatment?).
I have stage 2 cams (type 569) and it drives like it did formerly except it pulls a lot harder from 3,000 rpms on. Deceleration feels about the same as stock.
