you should be able to view all my images on photobucket directly (
R-3350's Library | Photobucket) i think they are only blocking 3rd party hosting (for now). as for the roller conversion i have thought of it for a while even modeled some geometries in my FEA package. i ended up concluding the benefit is not worth the effort of redesigning the entire valve train. the later 617 rockers with the TC faces solved a lot of the cam wear issues and as for the friction losses in the contact faces its not enough to be a real issue. as for cam ramp geometry improvement with the rollers the main issue then becomes the ability of the engine to appreciate a much larger cam as the port geometries are so woefully inadequate even with reworking im not sure we need an aggressive cam or more accurately could actually use one to its full potential. i am working on developing a new cam and while its a bit more than stock i doubt it will be to aggressive im looking at a bit more lift to work with the port work i did but not much more duration as the power band of the 617 is pretty close to optimal for the engine architecture. if you could destroke a 617 and bore it out a bit then maybe you could go a lot bigger but otherwise its not worth it.
for anyone interested the stock cam is around 190-220* advertized (its hard to say as the rocker face radius plays into the cam timing and lift). and lift is around .310" the rocker ratio is somewhere in the region of 1.05:1. so all in all quite mild