Doubt it. That's Comp's "one baby-step above stock" cam offering. 252° is its advertised duration. Its duration at 0.050" is 215°. But I still don't recommend it.
Well, it is a bird in the hand. But it looks like this one, (264° advertised duration). I don't think it's what I'd want to use on a turbo motor—its lobe separation looks kinda close to me; you don't wanna be blowing your boost through the cylinder and out the exhaust pipe while both valves are open. But that's just general principle; I've not built a turbo slant motor, so I'm not the right guy to make a specific cam recommendation for one.
Oil passages not drilled to line up with oil-in and oil-out holes in the rearmost cam bearing. See here (and while you're at it, see here)
It's not necessarily something that can be seen by just picking up a cam and eyeballing the worm gear. Sometimes (as described in the last post of this thread) but sometimes not. Best insurance seems to be avoiding the faulty-cam-blank gamble altogether, and instead sending a known-good original cam to Oregon Cam (or another camshaft house) for regrind to your specs or theirs of your choosing
My application is a "race car" only, and as such, is never driven in traffic. That allows me to get away with all sorts of things that would never work on the street.... primarily because this engine never sees much accrued mileage or hours of operation. I can ride herd on lots of things that would give me problems, for sure, if I drove this vehicle like a daily-driver.
Having said that, the cam's distributor drive gear will get examined frequently, as will the top-end lubrication, and if a problem becomes evident, I will, as a stop-gap measure, probably just pour a pint or so, of oil onto the rocker arms and shaft, so things don't get too dry. This motor only runs for a few minutes at a time.... and at that, only six or eight times a year.
And, because it's a turbo motor, I have taken the coward's way out, and run a locked-plate in my distributor... there is no spark advance "curve" because the distributor has no advance mechanism, nor does it have a vacuum advance system. It's an old "Lean Burn" unit and is adjusted to 18 degrees advance on the crank. It starts immediately, has no "run-on" after it is shut off and so far, doesn't detonate. Set it and forget it.
I may be leaving some "horsepower on the table" with this setup, but if I am, I don't believe it's much. It pulls 3,000 pounds through the eighth-mile at 91 mph, and that, according to the Wallace calculator, requires about 360 horsepower. That is utilizing 15 pounds of boost. I plan to increase the boost to 20, then 25 pounds, which should allow for significant performance increases, down the road.
My engine is a carbon-copy (virtual clone) of two successful turbocharged, carbureted 225's and has benefitted GREATLY from input from two FABO members, Tom Wolfe and Ryan Peterson who built those engines. Each of their engines makes a little over 500 horsepower, and they both have made my efforts to duplicate their achievements, just a "money-see;monkey do" activity on my part. If my car doesn't run as well as theirs, it won't be their fault.... it will be due to my ham-handed efforts at making all this work right.
Here's Ryan's '66 Valiant....
I am a newbie at this, but I can tell you this: I am a big fan of forced induction on the slant six because 1. It responds so VERY well to boost, to the extent of making it a whole lot faster than it has any right to be, and 2. Its incredibly strong architecture, probably due to its heritage relative to aluminum... it is almost like a Diesel in that respect, and can withstand boost levels that would make scrap-iron out of most other motors. My friend, Ryan told me that he has run as much as 37 pounds (no typo) on his 225 with no apparent damage.
It's not cheap and it's not easy, but, I am convinced that pulling a slant six out of Grannie's Duster, when she's gone, and replacing it with a V8 is a BIG mistake! Turbo the slant motor; it'll probably be faster!