Harold,

How much does the power peak RPM change between the different 285-288 SRs you have? The cam list from your site has them at different LSA's. So it was impossible to even guess.

The .630, .660, .680, .710 lift cams?

How much HP difference is there between them?

How much spring do they take?

How much more power than a 288/296F10 would they make?

Scott,

Starting at the last question 1st.....
In the early 80s, Peter Guild, of ProMotor Engineering, ran a series of dyno tests involving the SB288/296R6, which he was using as a baseline cam in his 355 mule engine. This is where we got the initial info on where my cams liked to be for max power. We went from 0° advance(106° ICL) to 6.5° advance(99.5° ICL), and saw power increase about 10 BHP at 7200, and 4 BHP at 7600, and gain about 20-25 ftlbs at 5200. This has been backed up by 20 years of testing on other dynos, etc.
One of the tests Peter ran involved substituting the SB288/296F5 for the SB288/296R6, along with correct lifters and springs. Both cams are 288/296 at .020, 255/263 at .050. The numbers at .200 tell the story, 166/173 for the solid, 176/183 for the roller, and valve lift was .540/.556 for the solid, .626/.626 for the roller.
The roller made 60 more BHP, 576 vrs 516, and 30 ftlbs more torque, 470 vrs 440. All this was with ported Turbo heads and the 750/Victor Jr combo.

In a 10:1 468, the BB290/300R10 with .630/.630 valve lift makes 610 BHP at 6400.
The BB287/295R10 should make at least 625 around 6500. Both of these cams are good daily drivers, with the 290/300 having finished the 24 Hours of LeMans in 2 Camaros. The 287/295 has made many 250 mile round-trips.....
The 286/296R, .685/.680, and the 288/296R, .710/.710, are brothers, with the identical opening and closing ramps, etc, up to .065" lobe lift. This means they will have identical valve train dynamics, other than the obvious .030" difference in valve lift.
They are real race cams that will handle most street driving chores. I do not think I would take either one on a 2000 mile trip, until I had slowly assured myself of their reliability. That's why I have the lower-lift cams......
You've got me thinking about doing a lower-lift family, around .643" gross valve lift, and .625" net lift, .018" valve lash......
The main thing to remember is that reliability and power are opposites----Whatever we do for power reduces the reliability, and whatever we do for reliability reduces the power......

UDHarold

Thanks Harold, that helped my decision.
Now to just get the money...