If you are saying that you heard the 5.2 cam is actually bigger than the 5.9 cam, I think you might have been mislead.
Be careful with the published cam specs on the magnums. The info wasn’t updated very well and as an example the 5.9 shows the old 360 valve sizes even though the heads are the same as the 5.2. So, I wouldn’t trust the cam specs.
Here is what
@YY1 posted for numbers
here.
5.2 Magnum Hydraulic Roller 432/432 251/264 113CL
5.9 Magnum Hydraulic Roller 410/417 249/269 109CL
Here are the numbers I got from having a 2000 Ram 5.9 cam run through the Cam Doctor at Bullet Cams:
Duration @ 0.050: I/E 189*/194*
Lobe separation angle: 111*
Lift @ cam: I/E 0.273"/0.278"
Valve lift w/ 1.6 rockers: I/E 0.437”/0.445”
Not sure on the advertised duration numbers, but my 5.9 cam has more lift than both the 5.2 and the published 5.9 numbers.
My theory is, the service manuals were updated in '92 to reflect the new for that MY 5.2, but the 360 was still the same and was left unchanged. Then for '93 when the '5.9 was released, someone thought the service manuals had already been updated and so most or all of the 5.9 data was left over from the 360 LA. Just a theory, but pretty sure the cam and cylinder head info is wrong for the 5.9 motors.
One interesting point that YY1 made someplace (as I recall) is that the published valve lift numbers for the 5.9 match the cam lift numbers from my cam if you use a 1.5 rocker ratio. So it is possible that info like that was just done wrong, but the rest of it is correct. No sure, just pointing it out.
