Ed Zachery. SAME as the factory setup in fact.
I won’t be doing the swap until I am ready to rebuild, but I will be doing it eventually.
Ok. So I just got done looking at comp retrofit kit that contains spider and requires drilling and tapping to install. This looks similar to the factory setup and it seems that failures on this type of setup were from not allowing enough room for drainback upon install.
This setup is all of $50 plus the cost of your hydraulic rollers which for factory style non link bar which this retrofit kit is designed to let you use, come in at a whopping $150-$200 depending on who you get them from.
You can’t install factory roller lifters into a flat face block! You have to use lifters they supply in a kit. The O.D land and oil commutation holes are at a different location (height) due to the roller lifter being taller into the shorter bore designed for the flat face lifter. I have a side by side picture comparing the two, but can’t locate it. I pointed this out to Bob before in another thread sometime ago we had a discussion about it.
Here it is… stock roller lifter on the left and link bar lifter on the right which will be the same as a lifter they would supply in a kit. Notice the difference in the oil communication oil location and O.D land. Everything is lower on the lifter on the right to function correctly in a flat face block.
Better to find out now then the hard way… 
So, with an OEM style lifter, if one wanted to be successful, using a Reduced Base Circle (RBC) camshaft - and the amount of lift it has - would be important, right?
P.S. What’s a “flat face block”?
So, with an OEM style lifter, if one wanted to be successful, using a Reduced Base Circle (RBC) camshaft - and the amount of lift it has - would be important, right?
Yes, but I think you will find once you start adding up all the cost for the specialty parts. The $800 drop in link bar lifters aren’t so expensive after all.
P.S. What’s a “flat face block”? A block that originally used flat face lifters vs. the later generation that uses roller lifters. The oil gallery location is at a different height relative to the camshaft base circle.
If your doing a complete rebuilt anyways. Build a new generation roller block motor as you have time and keep enjoying the current engine until you have it built and do the swap. Less Cougar down time that way and just as cost effective in the end 
Alright. Now I’m getting a third side of the picture. Screw it. I’ll stay flat tappet, add zinc at every oil change, break in new cams (have been breaking them in for thirty years now so it’s not like I’m not used to it), and have my entire valve train for the cost of a decent set of rollers. Not like I’m going to the track and winning money w/mine.
So from everything I just fried my retinas reading, on a non roller block you either do the spyder retrofit with factory style rollers and a small base circle cam, or link bar rollers and you can go with a normal base circle roller.
But seeing the pics of the oil hole and the diff between the two, it seems to me that a link bar setup is kind of a compromise made for guys who want to run a roller in a non roller block. From the last and final pics and statements that’s what I am getting from the whole thing. Have also read about some pretty substantial experiences with link bar type failures, I’ll either build a roller block, or stay flat tappet.
Speaking for myself and my engine preference, there is no “roller block” option with a Cleveland! I have link bar lifters and a RBC cam in the 408 (could have been a standard base circle cam though, long story). 0.626" lift, no troubles of any kind. Up until this engine I always ran flat tappet cams. I will never go back to flat tappet. My recollection is that my Callies (Morel) hydraulic link bar lifters were no more than $400. Granted, they are “street” lifters but their upper RPM limit is perfect for that usage.
For those that still prefer to stay with flat tappet cams, I have quite a few bottles of ZDDPlus additive I’d sell!
Have also read about some pretty substantial experiences with link bar type failures, I’ll either build a roller block, or stay flat tappet.
90% of link bar lifter failures are from engine builders/people installing them in the wrong way. It still boggles my mind that professional engine builders are doing this 
Always install link bar lifters with the bar up towards the camshaft. Do not install them down facing the cylinder head. When you install them down you run the risk of the bar coming into contact with the push tube when it goes on lift. Especially on 351c or Boss 302 with candid valve geometry. I see it happening also on Windsor engine depending on the cyl head used and camshaft profile. See Bryan Friend on Facebook just before Tulsa 50th show on a 302w. Motor went 200 mile and the bars broke and lifters rotate due to the engine builder installing the link bars down
The link bars are stronger then any other form of anti rotation device used. OEM in production want to do it cheat as possible without failures.
Even my son knows to install them up.
I’ll trust your opinion on the Callies stuff. I have used their crankshafts with great success. Also, I know you not only do street driving (which can be just as hard on parts but in a very different way) but also flog the crap out of your cat given the opportunity. A lot of this discussion has given me food for thought on the tall deck build I’m gonna do on my wife’s engine.
I just checked with John Callies site and they listed Lunati as one of their dealers. Just checked Lunati site and the sbf/cleveland set is listed at $394 so you were right about cost the high rpm set is $920.
Yes, as I recall, the set I got were labeled Lunati but had a Callies instruction sheet inside. Further, I recall that the Callies sheet referenced Morel! So that is where I am coming from with my comments.
All the above are our lifters rebranded 