Search results for query: *

Heck I got a 318 magnum test mule icould throw in

Indy does bowl work for $150 a head add $150 a head into a good 3 angle valve job from them. Or just get magnum heads and a good valve job. IMHO those are the best options for a 318. For a budget head. You would have to go with a step top piston with 360 heads. And that's fine other than adding...

I agree ... for a 318 use the old 302 castings 1.88 valves or so and some good pocket porting/bowl blending pretty hard to beat. Now when the magnum heads came out they are a out of the box performance head for a 318 and probably the best out of the box 318 head. And without a doubt the best...

Yeah I think it would be a good experiment on a 318. Get some factory magnum heads. Indy will bowl blend and port match for $250 per head then add $150 per head for a valve job. At that point it's sitting around $800 for the pair then add a couple hundred for springs and retainers. So $1000...

But then again on a 318 your only going to spin to 5,500 I'm not sure you are going to see that big of a peak hp difference either

For street nasty the stock heads. The large port heads will loose throttle response and hp per second when going from 1/4 throttle to 1/2 or 3/4 throttle. The big port big valve heads yeah max numbers at wide open throttle. Drag race. Really hard to beat factory heads for street nasty. But you...

I think the cam might be a little small and gears to low for 10.90. The 380 crate motors put 3,200-3,300 pound a-bodies into the 11.80-11.90 consistently and some 11.50. With no spray add nos and maybe drop a second?

Budget heads either magnum or speedmaster. Pretty easy to get 300hp out of the 318 magnum. The la is going to need some work to up the compression with the speedmaster heads I think maybe 9.5:1 minimum to keep the heat in the chambers. Years ago there was a article in mopar action believe it...

I believe the factory 5.9 magnum is 9.1 compression. The factory 380hp crate motor used a production line engine originally. 288/292 advertised duration 230/234 @.050 .501/.513 lift for the cam . Factory dyno tested at 380hp with a 650cfm carb with a 750 carb they were over 400hp. That was...

On the early a-bodies isn't the center link the same for /6 and v8. The 2 66 darts I had the v8 and /6 were the same

I agree. There is alot of power hidden in those magnum 5.2 and 5.9 motors. I wish he would test it with a 52mm throttle body! 380hp crate motor was dynoed with a 650cfm carb from the factory and listed as 380hp. Put a 750 or 780 carb on them and they gain over 20hp. All the factory dyno...

Yeah but that's a 5.9 and he isn't running the factory j-tech he's running holley efi. A 5.2 is going to be different. Move those rpm ranges up and vacuum down. Doesn't make any difference to me have fun doing it

Well I do know lol This one will with stock computer. Maybe the hpt210 will without throwing codes if your not worried about codes go larger. The factory j-tech controllers will support alot but you will be hitting the Rev limiter before taking full advantage of the cam. Those are the options...

Or one of these if you really wanted to start getting serious lol

I think this hipotek grind would be a better option and can be ground on different lsa and a more chrysler lobed then the 262 comp grind that is more chevy lobed. Just my opinion

Original r/t cam was a 109 centerline the r/t 2 cam was listed as a 119 centerline but is actually a 114 centerline installed at 110

I'm thinking after you get them camshaft in your converter won't be stalling that high. Could be wrong. But converters stall higher the more torque they get and you will be loosing some torque down there. I always wondered what would happen if some built a 52mm to that had the torque step in...

Should have stated I was running factory stock kegger and bored 52mm throttle body

So the 216/224 @.050 comp you have listed is very similar to the cam I ran in my 5.2 dakota. Not trying to be a know it all but I have ran that combination. I had 3.92 gears hooker super comp long tubes tuned for a 5.2 dakota and weighed 3,650 regular cab 2wd long box. With stock converter it...

The guy hughes has listed on their site is reasonable. $250 for a tune and think he will do a follow up retune for free.

:lol: Yep lol

Well if Mopar still had the r/t cam or if crane wouldn't have went out of business that cam worked good for stock computers. Hughes claims to have a 5.2 cam that works with stock computers also

I agree stock tune is like 5,200 Rev limiter so to wild of a cam won't see full potential. Then the fuel and timing curves. Fuel can somewhat be compensated for with injectors and fuel pressure. Timing crank sensor adjustment. But the actual curves are still the same. I would do gears and a...

Long tubes aren't legal in California lol. So just as well get a cam and a computer tune. Your ram probably still weighs 4,000lbs maybe just drop a 5.9 in it

On a 5.2 ram I think that gears and a mild converter. Would add more performance than a cam and stock ecu. Then like you stated adjust the crank sensor for more advance and reset sync even with stock cam a +2 or +3 sync would work

And here is some reference on factory mopar performance grinds. Notice the rt 2 cam said it required a mopar performance ecu or computer upgrades. With the stock Rev limiter at around 5,000 rpm I would personally stick with something in the 210 and under range for lift at .050. Now ebay...

I have ran a similar cam as the one you listed. Similar in all specs. In a 95 dakota 2wd. And in a 5.2 it didn't start making power until above 2,000 rpm closer to 2,500. I ran a mopar performance computer without issues but that was a obd1 ecu. Guess it depends on what your wanting the ram to...

Does anyone still make a small chamber aluminum head around 58cc that keeps the compression up on a basically stock 318? I think edelbrok did years ago and mopar performance. Probably the same head. With what's available it looks like a complete tear down and piston swap. Including all of the...

So was the big bolt pattern the only option on a-bodies and 8.25?

Hmmmm