Does this prove David Vizard's 128 lsa formula ?

Bewy said
Yes, 128 was for SBC engines. What DV said that it worked well for other parallel valve heads & was better than guessing....

Much to much is being made of this by people trying to second guess what DV said or meant, rather than looking at the history of where 128 came from.
128 was the result of the cam selection software developed by DV [ & I believe Stan Weiss was involved ] & that he sells.
128 was designed to stop folks ringing a cam company & having the phone jockey look at the computer screen..& recommend a cam with a wide LSA.......that they have in stock....
You might call 128 an educated guess rather a wild guess.....
Sig Erson was another pioneer, ahead of the curve; he & DV worked together at some point & SE was a proponent of tight LSA...way back in the 1970s....

From Erson....

View attachment 1716213337

If he said it was for ball park guesstimation etc.. Thats one thing but He and everyone plays it up that it's gonna put you up there with the 1 percent of builders. I'm not even saying there's no merit to it just that those dyno graph to me didn't show really any proof that the formula works over say just picking to run tighter lsa.

Plus those dyno shootouts aren't a real test against or for, cause to do it right you first have to run a DV calculated cam and the other cams would all have the same overlap. But what those test are generally showing the tighter the lsa the more torque I'm sure if you kept going tighter the gains would be less and less and probably at some point start losing, but what was shown that tighter than what probably would of been recommended still gained and you'd have to run pretty wide to lose a big chunk of torque.

Is running a 110 lsa compared to 106-109 really setting you that far off the mark, is running a 106-109 gonna put you in the 1.40 lbs-ft club doubt it. Not say don't run tighter than 110 but act like you just gave up 50tq hasn't been proven yet.