Just wondering how the old UD/Lunati 288/296H10 BBC cam compares to the new Lunati Voodoo 276/284?
The durations and lift numbers are similiar at .050 231/239 .550/.575 for the old cam vs. 233/241 .554/.572 for the new one.
Anyone got a guess?
Harold?

bump

For one thing, one is an advertised 288'er and the other is a 276'er!!

I would think the smaller cam would be torquier(Sp?), but ask Harold for sure..

pdq67

SILVERSS454/pdq67,

Actually, their seat durations are measured at different heights. I can tell you that the VooDoo series contacts the valve moving faster than the UD series, AT THE SAME HEIGHT....
It also shuts a little faster, too. Everything says it should make better power, although we did not dyno test the VooDoo vs the UD series.
Very few cams are being sold under the UD banner anymore. All I sell have the name LUNATI on them. Whether or not to take out a good UD to put in a VooDoo, it depends on what you mean to accomplish. If you want a size or half-size larger or smaller, then do it.
I have not been known for going backwards in cam design.....

UDHarold

There, you got it from Harold, himself.

Thanks for popping in.

pdq67

Thanks Harold.
I was just curious.

Will be installing this exact cam in next few weeks. Will post on it then.

In addition to a healthy power increase over the LS-6 profile, hope it also has a nice "lick"... :cool:

Two Lane - looking forward to that post :eek:

I realize that companies need to develop and market new products to stay in business, but what would be great for the consumer is standardization. The industry adopted the .050 standard years ago, however, seat timing is still not standardized. Some companies provide .004 while others use .006 (at least for hydraulics, solids apear to have their own set of rules).

The prior example of the UD vs VooDoo is a good example.