I appears that the timing of the exhaust lobe is very important during the cam installation process since the closing event is the dominent factor in residual cylinder/chamber pressure. The intake opening will fall where it is based in LSA. Of course, this all depends on the cam itself.
For a cam with a very wide LSA, ensuring the exh lobe closing event is where the cam specs is supposed to be appears to be less critical.
Compression ratio also appears to have a positive affect on the cylinder filling.
Not much, but it does help.
All else being equal, it appears that an 8.3:1 vs a 9.1:1 compression engine will gain a theoretical 3CID with a -2deg crank rotation difference in presure equalization.
Very apparent how cam timing will make or break the performance.
Interesting is the benefit of a larger bore diameter as well in reducing required crank rotation before pressure equalization.
Like I said, it is an interesting model.
I thought about a larger turbine housing to get BP down but it would only make the HP peaker. For a track car it would be acceptable, but it would not be fun to drive on the street. I will need to run some numbers with the BP you are seeing. Interesting for sure . . . . .
If this is true i should pick up some up top since the cam is 218/224@110 and i had it advanced 2*. It will be 4* retarded from where i had it previously. It should be obvious since the engine is making lot of power and a few % gain or loss will be 20-25hp. All the more reason to 4 bolt the combo from the beginning if you want to make a lot of power and not be so concerned with the cam profile. You could run more intake duration relative to LSA and increase the driveability without hurting power. Fwiw my engine is 9.3:1