Turk,
I understand the realities of valve train better than you do, as your post #22 exposes the reality.
The lobes I quoted were using the Ford 875 lifter. They have less total lift & less area under the curve than lobes designed for the Chrys 904 lifter & are not on the ragged edge. So the valve train with the quoted lobes will have an easier life than lobes designed for a 904 lifter.
To further educate you, here are two examples, UltraDyne lobes:
One is the 875 lobe I quoted in post #5. 272 @ 050, 602 valve lift.
The UD lobes for 904 lifters stop at 263 @ 050, so I will use '263' for the comparison.
The equivalent 875 lobe, 263 @ 050 has 0.590" lift. The 904 lobe has 3* more duration at 0.200" lift [ 181* ] than the 875 lobe & 0.597" lift.
It has more area under the curve.
As for lobe lift & valve control, the UD sol lifter lobes go as high as 0.635" lift with 1.5 rockers or 0.720" with 1.7 rockers.
Using your 'logic', nobody would run roller cams with their extra lift & faster acceleration rates because of valve train stability issues.