1.6 rockers on a 460. Why?

A guy in our club bought a Maverick with a 460 in it for the track. Car runs 10.30's @ 128mph but was laying over on the big end bad. He decided to change valve springs so he pulled off the valve covers and the engine had 1.6 Harland Sharp rockers with push rods that are .025 longer then stock. He used a lobe checker and the cam is just what the cam card said. He also got a set of springs from Comp. to match the cam which are 325lb seat pressure. The springs in the heads now have 160lb of seat pressure. The heads are Dove-C with Manley valves but he is still researching the number on the valve, because he is afraid the valve won't handle the seat pressure. Why would a engine builder set up the top end this way? Am I missing something or did they throw something together so they had a complete car and figured it was his headache. Piston to valve clearance, he said, is .180. Educate me please!

I can't and won't speak for the original builder, but it does sound like he was either using up some stuff he had laying around or made do with some way off parts for some reason known only to him. It could have been what the customer had, or simply that the customer said "I have this amount of $$$, what can I have", and that is what the builder could do with the budget, even though it was not right. Any way you slice it, there are a lot of things that need to be checked and fitted going back together this time.

Lower rocker ratios usually = less stress on the valve train. If the lift and duration you need will work out with lower ratios no reason it won't work if you already have the parts.

Plus sometimes some motors with incorrect cam timing respond to rocker ratio changes, it's a quick way to change cam specs.

But the current idea for race engines is more ratio = faster valve action and more lift, which is desireable with modern cylinder heads and valvejobs.

also can be for valve to piston clearance , if you go to 1.73 ratio-- check it