What engine would you build for a Ramcharger?
- Thread starter gliderider06
- Start date
-
Back in the late nineties when I was "truck crazy", there was a person with a lengthy web page on all things 70's and 80's Dodge 4X4 and off road. He had an early eighties W150 with a 440 and was pulling down 14 MPG while running 36 inch GroundHawgs. So a lot of things are doable, but I was about to mention something like Sireland67's post, it's a shame that things like usable mid eighties Volkswagon Diesels are not available like they once were, I could stand to drive a Golf for 62 MPG highway mileage. Know a guy that used to hobby around with those, seen it done.
Wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
best mileage is going to be with a FI 360 Magnum
then the 318
then the 360
It takes the same amount of power to drive the truck down the road but for several reasons the 360 does not do as well as the 318
maybe if the 360 had the 318 heads or late 360 heads and pistons to give some quench, good compression and cam to match it could do better than a lower compression 318- have to think about that one but Aj has given the comparisons
318 can be better with the right compression- pistons are the problem
I had a ls one in a 28 ft motorhome- amazing motor so much better than the 454 with in a Winnebago
then the 318
then the 360
It takes the same amount of power to drive the truck down the road but for several reasons the 360 does not do as well as the 318
maybe if the 360 had the 318 heads or late 360 heads and pistons to give some quench, good compression and cam to match it could do better than a lower compression 318- have to think about that one but Aj has given the comparisons
318 can be better with the right compression- pistons are the problem
I had a ls one in a 28 ft motorhome- amazing motor so much better than the 454 with in a Winnebago
Well, Delaware is mostly flat in my area and im at sea level. Each way to work is about 43 miles and nearly 30 of them is all highway. Truck never sees 65mph. I do have a Performer that I can use as well if the SP2P is not optimal with either motor. I know a fella that has an EGR performer that I may be able to convince him to trade me for my non EGR performer. I do have a set of magnum manifolds, but that would require me to rework my exhaust since they are rear dump vs. my center dump truck manifolds. (I'm not opposed at all to swapping them in the future)
The 360 has standard dished pistons. I can't measure how far down the hole they are since they are already out of the block. The 318 is still together and I can measure how far they are in the hole. IIRC, they sit up pretty high for a 318. Neither block will need to be bored, so I was planning on honing and new rings and bearings in them.
I really don't have much of a plan for cams. I have the stock roller 318 cam and a FT 360 cam. If I went with the 360, Mayne a Crowler 260 Bajabeast grind or similar. The roller cam either stock or calling Jim at Racer Brown for something. Just don't know which one to build.
I like the Crower idea. Those are good grinds. And I like the 360 for this because of the weight. It will take too much of the 318's *** IMO and mileage will be just as bad as the 360. So use the 360 and benefit from the extra torque of the longer arm and bigger bore.
Wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
WE have a crower expert on the site - ask him
Baja Beast is an oldie but goodie but Crower has a full line of much better lobes
The 318 roller is going to give you the most mileage and reasonable lift for its short duration
to get more lift from a HFT you have to go more duration
Baja Beast is an oldie but goodie but Crower has a full line of much better lobes
The 318 roller is going to give you the most mileage and reasonable lift for its short duration
to get more lift from a HFT you have to go more duration
Here we go again. Man just let people pick what they want. The guy already has an idea of what he wants. Millions of builds were done with slow ramps and old school tech and people were and are still happy with them. Give it a rest already.
In the absence of a 5.9 Magnum I would go with the 5.2 Magnum over and LA 360.
To start with the Magnums have less internal drawers when making power.
They have better Pistons with low tention lighter rings.
They have better flowing heads with bigger valves and smaller combustion Chambers.
They of course are using a roller cam with the 5.2 having more lift than the 5.9.
A lighter rotating assembly.
With better valve springs and the heads drilled for the la intake and the ports cleaned up I believe the 5.2 is a better choice than the la 360. Jmhotihv
To start with the Magnums have less internal drawers when making power.
They have better Pistons with low tention lighter rings.
They have better flowing heads with bigger valves and smaller combustion Chambers.
They of course are using a roller cam with the 5.2 having more lift than the 5.9.
A lighter rotating assembly.
With better valve springs and the heads drilled for the la intake and the ports cleaned up I believe the 5.2 is a better choice than the la 360. Jmhotihv
Meh.......better heads is splittin hairs. I think he'd be happy with either though. It's just if he chooses the 318 because "he thinks" it might get a little better mileage, it ain't happenin. lol
The 5.2 is a better choice than the la318.
Last edited:
Now I go along 100% with that. But only for ONE reason. Because the Magnum is becoming more readily available.
j par
Well-hung Member
that would be the reason that I would go at the Magnum be on it being a better motor is it's going to take this truck into the future. As in if he switches to Magnum things will remain easy to find...
I thought about using that 5.9 magnum I have, but the cost involved in making it useable for the Ramcharger outweighs the benefits, I think. I have good useable LA 318 and 360, so that takes the magnum off the table for me.the thought of magnum headed LA is intriguing, but not worth the hassle or added cost for this truck.
Well, I'll argue about the Magnums being "better" but they are more plentiful now.
dusted
Well-Known Member
Use what you have. That’s the best KISS solution. Everyone has an opinion and unlimited checkbook when it’s not there money.
It doesn’t seem like you hear the same durability stories about the magnum engines like you do about the LA engines. I like the overall direction of the 360 with the modded 302 heads with a performer and the 260 beast cam. It’s a proven combination for a truck engine that is stone axe reliable and with proper tuning can meet the overall goals very well.
I did get out to the garage and pulled a head off the 318 for giggles. I measured .040 down the hole, with feeler gauges and straight edge.
I was wrong on the cam. It is a 250 baja beast. Smaller than the 260, but probabally still good if I go with the 360.
I was wrong on the cam. It is a 250 baja beast. Smaller than the 260, but probabally still good if I go with the 360.
should pull hard , we did a small cam in this 340 with great driver results . pulls hard from idle up to 5k .
MopaR&D
Nerd Member
Lots of '90s Ram trucks and Jeep Grand Cherokees still driving around with 200k+ miles around here (truck land) and they all have Magnums. I've also heard of Grand Cherokees going 300k miles with the 5.2L. You probably don't hear about the durability as much because the LA was produced for much longer and came in cars, trucks, boats, everything while the Magnums were only in trucks and SUVs and for only about 10 years.
The Ram 2500 I pulled my 5.9 short block out of looked like it had run over a land mine in a muddy field but the cylinder bores still had cross-hatching with no wear ridge. I replaced the rod bearings because the upper shells had some copper showing but didn't touch anything else, now it's running in my Duster like a champ. Burns no oil and basically runs like a new engine.
Wish I could have seen what the mileage was on that truck but the dash was totally ripped apart and the odometers are digital on those anyway.
I like that cam very much for the 360 in your Ramcharger. It should have a very stout bottom end pull.
AJ/FormS
68 Formua-S fastback clone 367/A833/GVod/3.55s
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2014
- Messages
- 24,900
- Reaction score
- 12,255
did anybody say BB or stroker?
Wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
He wants some mileage AJ
Lets ask the Crower poster but Crower measures at .005 so a 250 Crower is more like a 255 Crane or a 245 Comp (depending on how the ramps goes to 000 from .005)
Crower is getting more area under the curve than say the short Crane or Cam Dynamics or any of the short duration rebuilder cams
should be a decent mileage cam
actually use that cam if good and doing HFT
in a redoo think solid
no seat timing given but here's the data on a comp 250 (which is more duration than a Crower 250 but good enough to start with
432 250 206 117 XE 5440 XE250H 600-4800 19 51 16 64
so if we convert to .004 the Intake close is going to be under 50 ABDC
Lets ask the Crower poster but Crower measures at .005 so a 250 Crower is more like a 255 Crane or a 245 Comp (depending on how the ramps goes to 000 from .005)
Crower is getting more area under the curve than say the short Crane or Cam Dynamics or any of the short duration rebuilder cams
should be a decent mileage cam
actually use that cam if good and doing HFT
in a redoo think solid
no seat timing given but here's the data on a comp 250 (which is more duration than a Crower 250 but good enough to start with
432 250 206 117 XE 5440 XE250H 600-4800 19 51 16 64
so if we convert to .004 the Intake close is going to be under 50 ABDC
I was going off of the list you gave. Options were:
- '88 LA 318
- '76 LA 360
- 5.9 needing everything and sounding like this would be the least route you wanted to go.
The 88 LA 318 is a roller motor. It would be my choice.
-
