subject about covers it... so, anyone used them? Whatcha think?

I've looked around the 'net a bunch, and most people report liking them, but that's mostly Mopar, Poncho, and f#rd motors...

I'm looking at putting them on a 350 SBC, ported 882's, headers, etc.
Compression will be 9:1 or 9.5:1 (either flattops or .1" domes)
and a 224/234@.05, 112LSA cam with 1.6 rockers.

 

I used them a long time ago on a 350 w/230 duration cam (crane blazer) and they worked great. Idle was fine and it had good low end torque, even with a stock conveter. Not very noisy either. I've never used them on a modern cam with the steeper ramps in use these days, so don't know about compatibility with those. But the cheaper cams used by Summit and others tend to have old style ramps.

 

They work. Years ago my brother-in-law used them on his '79 Z28 with a high duration cam of some sort. And lots of engine work. It helped idle it good. Only needed for high duration cams. First time he took it out on the highway and floored it. The windshield cracked right down the middle when the car torqued/twisted under a nice load. Nice build job on the engine, huh. Later>>>>>>>>

 

well, sounds like I'll be using them. My compression is going to be pretty low (76cc heads ) so they'll be on a moderate (not wild) cam...

Just curious - I've never read anyone really having an issue with Rhoads lifters. Why don't more people use them? Cost?

 

You will have very little lope at idel with the roads lifter. Some people like that. Also I had a 278/290 duration crane cam in my '80Z with flat tops and felt they were not necessary. I did have to drill a small hole through the front two butterflys in my carb to get a nice idel. Had just the right lope for me in a everyday driver. My brother in laws with a larger cam had less lope than mine since he had the roads lifters. With the cam you want to run (224/234) they should be a good choice IMO. And I'd say go with the 9.5:1 too. Later>>>>>>