[Z06] The roller Rocker advantage
Thread Starter
Burning Brakes
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
From: Virginia Beach Virginia
The roller Rocker advantage
So does anyone else think this way?
My 03 Z06 Has LG pros/ catted X pipe, Corsa extreem exhaust, blackwing CAI, comp cams spring upgrade and Harland sharp roller rockers, and it feels really fast, like 400RWHP. (I know but keep reading)
So I got to wondering if the HS's make any difference at all and saw an artical in Car Craft mag, of course this was not on a LS engine but it was good to see.
"First we ran the motor with a set of stock 1.5:1 stamped rockers with pivot-ball fulcrums, and averaged 389.9 hp and 407 lb-ft of torque at 6,000 rpm. With the baseline laid down, we moved on to a set of Comp Cams 1.5:1 roller rockers. At the same 6,000-rpm peak, we made 401.1 hp and 412.9 lb-ft of torque, a gain of 11.2 hp and 5.9 lb-ft of torque.
Read more: http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...#ixzz2AuRmG2iG
My 03 Z06 Has LG pros/ catted X pipe, Corsa extreem exhaust, blackwing CAI, comp cams spring upgrade and Harland sharp roller rockers, and it feels really fast, like 400RWHP. (I know but keep reading)
So I got to wondering if the HS's make any difference at all and saw an artical in Car Craft mag, of course this was not on a LS engine but it was good to see.
"First we ran the motor with a set of stock 1.5:1 stamped rockers with pivot-ball fulcrums, and averaged 389.9 hp and 407 lb-ft of torque at 6,000 rpm. With the baseline laid down, we moved on to a set of Comp Cams 1.5:1 roller rockers. At the same 6,000-rpm peak, we made 401.1 hp and 412.9 lb-ft of torque, a gain of 11.2 hp and 5.9 lb-ft of torque.
Read more: http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...#ixzz2AuRmG2iG
Last edited by deadcafe; Oct 31, 2012 at 05:43 PM.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,186
Likes: 2
From: Woodinville WA
The full roller rockers might make that much difference on an LS motor with a high lift cam where the rocker tip is not getting a good wipe pattern on the valve stem. The LS engines have a roller pivot but not tip.
The first gen motors were all stamped with no roller pivot so frictional losses were much higher and 10+hp gain was common going to full roller.
With stock cam on an LS motor going to a full roller rocker with same as stock ratio (1.7), you'd be lucky to gain 1hp.
The first gen motors were all stamped with no roller pivot so frictional losses were much higher and 10+hp gain was common going to full roller.
With stock cam on an LS motor going to a full roller rocker with same as stock ratio (1.7), you'd be lucky to gain 1hp.
Thread Starter
Burning Brakes
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
From: Virginia Beach Virginia
The full roller rockers might make that much difference on an LS motor with a high lift cam where the rocker tip is not getting a good wipe pattern on the valve stem. The LS engines have a roller pivot but not tip.
The first gen motors were all stamped with no roller pivot so frictional losses were much higher and 10+hp gain was common going to full roller.
With stock cam on an LS motor going to a full roller rocker with same as stock ratio (1.7), you'd be lucky to gain 1hp.
The first gen motors were all stamped with no roller pivot so frictional losses were much higher and 10+hp gain was common going to full roller.
With stock cam on an LS motor going to a full roller rocker with same as stock ratio (1.7), you'd be lucky to gain 1hp.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,955
Likes: 161
From: PNW
On an LS motor, roller rockers would only be reducing the friction between the top of the valve step and rocker arm. In the test you mentioned in post #1, they replaced none needle bearing rocker arms (ie, "stamped rockers with pivot-ball fulcrums") with the rollers, so the main friction reduction was at the main pivot point of the rocker arm, not at the tip of the rocker arm.
