UPDATE: I talked with the dude at Comp Cams and he had some interesting things to say about reverse splits and turbo cam technology.

He said that reverse splits are old school. They were mainly made as a remedy for in-efficient turbo's and turbo systems. In fact Comp doesn't do them anymore unless the customer specifically requests it. Interesting.... He said their rule of thumb for sizing a cam for a turbo engine is to size it for a NA setup and subtract 10-12 degrees duration. That means an even or slight split with the LSA around 112-114 for my application. I was concerned about the rpm band of the 216/220 cam too, but he said it'll pull to 67-6900 due to the turbo extending the power band.

I think they're from the "let the boost do the work" school. I don't know if that or the reverse split is correct as both theories make very good sense to me.

With the reverse split, you aim to eliminate reversion by reducing the ex. duration which also in affect reduces the amount of exhaust gas that's available to spin the turbine. Nothing is free.

With an even or "regular" split their would be more exhaust gas available to spin the turbine, but at the same time more overlap which will increase the chances of reversion and bleeding off boost. Nothing is free.

This is all with LSA aside, as that could be used to tailor the overlap of each, which is now the way I'm leaning toward. I'm now more confused about "which cam" than ever. At least the stock cam doesn't sound as good any more.

I'm soooo tired of cam choices being about trade offs and compramises. I wish somebody would've just bought my senior design project.