Does this prove David Vizard's 128 lsa formula ?

I see. But Hughes seems to still be a little different. Also I the formula works for @.050 lift too, which I checked with the cam specs from Comp Cams. So since Hughes only lists their timings @.050, I did a check and cam up with a duration number that does not fall in between the stated duration spec.

112 lsa + (-6÷2)×2=230. The duration spec is 216/220 for the cam. At first I thought it was the negative overplap throwing the math off, but the math checked out fine on another cam from Comp.

Maybe Hughes is doing something different? That is how they feel their "real Chrysler" cam should be? Maybe I got something wrong?

I'm scratching my head, lol.
Maybe their lobes are asymmetrical ? That might have an effect, seems like this equation is just doubling the overlap side of the lobes assuming the other side is identical.