cam/Rocker specs

[turbocamino1]

Did a search and came across this >"Actually if you caculated the valve lift with a stock rocker you would find they come in around 1.47-1.48 . So going to a true 1.55 would be an
advantage"
Dan Strezo DLS Engine Development. Makes me ask how much less lift that equates to...in say my 204/214?

 

[bison]

Did a search and came across this >"Actually if you caculated the valve lift with a stock rocker you would find they come in around 1.47-1.48 . So going to a true 1.55 would be an
advantage"
Dan Strezo DLS Engine Development. Makes me ask how much less lift that equates to...in say my 204/214?

Take the net measured lift and subtract it from the advertised lift.

 

[RmvBfrFlght]

Did a search and came across this >"Actually if you caculated the valve lift with a stock rocker you would find they come in around 1.47-1.48 . So going to a true 1.55 would be an
advantage"
Dan Strezo DLS Engine Development. Makes me ask how much less lift that equates to...in say my 204/214?

Get the advertised lobe lift from the cam card and multiply it by the rocker ratio. Say it is 0.300":

.3 * 1.55 = 0.465" lift at the valve
.3 * 1.47 = 0.441" lift at the valve

Or 0.023" less lift

RemoveBeforeFlight

 

[turbocamino1]

Get the advertised lobe lift from the cam card and multiply it by the rocker ratio. Say it is 0.300":

.3 * 1.55 = 0.465" lift at the valve
.3 * 1.47 = 0.441" lift at the valve

Or 0.023" less lift

RemoveBeforeFlight

thanks guys...my high school math was off some... thats more than i thought...sounds like alot. kinda sucks.