I think there the same diameter (sbc is .842) but the height may be a problem?. I'd have to mic the oil hole for sure but a set of old Speedpros with a horizontal link bar are every bit of 3" tall. Oil hole I bet is less than 1" up from axle (I have some in the shop I'll mic tomorrow if you have an LS to compare) I wonder if lifter spacing is issue, or what? The part numbers list specific for Gen II sbc, and another # specific for LS motors. <shrugs>
Jay Allen said the cam he designed for my Camino would be good to 7000+, but the spring pressures he wanted to get there were well over 400psi on the nose. I just don't see beating up on a hydraulic roller like that. If you need that kind of RPM just put a solid in it and be done with it. I know Shaun,, old dog syndrome!!
Most all SBC Hydraulic roller cams you find listed in the cam companies listings call a low rpm limit. i.e a comp XE with 300/306° advertised with a advertised range of 3200-6200 That's patethetic isn't it! A heck of a lot of duration for only 6200!
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CCA-12-444-8/
Evan ,, IMO... just depends on what your looking for. You can hit your 550 target EASILY with a hydraulic roller. And there is without a doubt a lot more to be had with a solid roller, more compression, MORE MORE MORE,,, BLA BLA BLA. With a good shaft rocker setup, and building the valve train light and durable, you can run a solid roller on the street (but I'd definately use a Morel / Isky lifter with HIPPO option). Just depends on what you willing to do/tolerate in the quest for power.
I know the AFR literature says the 220's will accept 'standard' sbc valve train components. (as do many large port heads) but ask around and youll find most use a shaft rocker system to build it 'right' . AFR, Dart and all will say 'accepts',, but talk to them and see what they 'recomend'. Your investing a lot, do it right the first time may kick the budgets a$$, but you know in the long run it's the smart money.
Again,, all just my 2¢