Rocker arm recommendations?

IQ,
Totally agree with your test. But just as the ratio changes on the p'rod side, it also changes on the valve side because the rocker is in a new starting position when you change the prod length. The ratio is not constant on the prod side...or the valve side.
Smokey said it, & I quoted him because he was & is correct.
This [ the ratio change on both the prod & valve side ] was comprehensively demonstrated with the drawings accompanying the Crane quick lift rockers. Article appeared in Circle Track magazine Jan 06.
With a rocker arm, both the prod cup [ or ball ], and the roller tip on the valve side swing through arcs. The drawing shows A & A1 for the prod side, B & B1 for the valve side. A & B are the at rest, or starting positions; A1 & B1 are the actual positions as the rocker starts lifting the valve. A1 & B1 are longer than A & B.....& that is because the ratio changes on each side.
The text describes it:
"The relative change of A1 to A is much greater than B1 to B; therefore the rocker ratio decreases as the valve opens. This is due to the low position of the pushrod seat with respect to the low position of the prod seat with respect to the centre of rocker body rotation."

The amount of ratio change & where it occurs in the lift cycle is going to depend on the individual rocker design & geometry. This is what D. Vizard was demonstrating in his rocker tests; he tested 24 types of rocker.
You can test 100 Billion rockers, and if they are improperly designed, you will get skewed results. Remember GIGO? Garbage in, garbage out.

Look at the video link Yellow Rose posted in the Racers Forum. Reid Rockers also confirms what I have been saying. Of course he probably doesn't carry enough credibility compared to the deities of Yunick and Vizard. He only has NHRA Fuel and Alcohol championships, but probably not as many as Smokey or DV.

Rocker arm webinar | For A Bodies Only Mopar Forum

It appears that you read a lot. That's a good thing, but you also have to be able to think critically. There is a lot of incorrect information in print, and a lot of experiments and compromises related to this subject. If you want to make an argument, use your own logic and make your case. I am always willing to learn something new, but quoting years old printed information doesn't show any real thought on your part, and doesn't tell me anything I haven't already heard and analyzed. It seems you are more interested in "being" right, than "knowing" right.