A question from one of your previous posts. Is your largest SBC HR cam going to be the 231/239 cam? If so what is the lift, and .200 duration. Presently in my SBC406 I have the crane HR #119661, 230/238/112, .539/.557 lift and I was looking at stepping up approx another 6 degrees on both intake/exh. Please give me some comparisons/opinions to your HR camshafts vs the crane I have today. More info in my signature, the only change is now I have a 3400 rpm stall.

That cam, which should be the 70102, is 282/290 at .006", 231/239 at .050", 154/161 at .200", and .535"/.550" valve lift, 110 LSA.
I also have a 294/302 at .006", 243/251 at .050". 166/173 at .200". .560"/.565" valve lift, and also 110 LSA.
There are 3 LS1 cams, 4 BBCs with .550", .575", .600", and .625" valve lifts, 4 SBFs, and 2 340Cs. They will all, except for the LS1, be made in both OEM and retro styles.
All of these cams except the LS1s are at 59° hydraulic intensity( From .004" to .050", as per Harvey Crane...). The LS1s are at 57°.......
These VooDoo hydraulic rollers should act just like the VooDoo hydraulic cams, only withmore torque and BHP..... I was really impressed with the VooDoo 262 hydraulic roller vrs the 264 HR we tested against.....
We could make either a 290/294--239/243--.550/.560, or a 290/300--239/249--.550/.552, as a custom-made hydraulic roller.
Send me an E-Mail, as I have the virus fixed that was clogging my E-Mail.....

UDHarold

BTW, the 230/238 Crane I see in my Crane Cam Lobe Profile Catalog is 150/158 at .200". My 231/239 is 3° or 4° fatter at .200, plus 3° shorter in hydraulic intensity. Everything says you could tell the difference, even with only 1° difference at .050. The others are all just bigger.....