Software dyno predictions are very useful but they are not precise,
a few component changes can noticeably effect the predicted results
and that may not reflect reality, in some cases.
factors like headers better head flow than the data shows
roller rockers and an efficient exhaust can boost power far higher than the software shows it might
https://www.compcams.com/xr270hr
heres a link to some dyno info that's very misleading,
of the comp cams web site
in that its from a 9.25:1 compression 350
any 400 should easily produce about 15% more power than a similar 350,
but other factors can change the results far more.
the comp web site prediction makes the cam DORIAN selected look far less than impressive.
with a set of restrictive heads and an intake that both restrict potential power.
this obviously will produce different results from DORIANS 400 with its different components.
thats a bit like the dyno graph RICK produced in that theres always factors like head flow,
exhaust flow restriction, ignition advance, fuel/air ratio etc.
that will change the true results from the software prediction.
and while RICKS software shows the CRANE 119661 produces less power and torque than the CROWER 00471,
that was only true in my corvettes 383 ABOVE about 4700 rpm
as I tested both those cams in my corvette the crane 119661 had a noticeably smoother power curve up to about 4000 rpm,
than the CROWER cam, and both easily produce abundant wheel spin at the least provocation,
but I went with the crane cam as it was noticeably easier to drive in traffic where you spend 90% of your time with the engine spinning under 3500 rpm in my case