Powell Machine Magnum 5.9 360 roller cam regrind video

-
That's cool. I knew the factory Magnum cams were small, but 186° / 195° at 0.050 is tiny! The 0.413 / 0.432 valve lift is actually a little more than I thought it would be, but still super small. And I'm surprised the LSA is 112°, I thought it would be 114° or more.

I have heard the 5.2 cams are a bit bigger than the 5.9 cams, and they varied a bit over the years. Maybe that was actually a 5.2 cam.
 
Good luck ever getting a cam from that guy. Sent him a core last year, said it would be a few weeks. After 3 months we bought a isky.
 
I have heard the 5.2 cams are a bit bigger than the 5.9 cams

I think that is an internet myth. Mopar published service manuals for awhile that had some of the LA 360 specs and weren't correct.

Another myth is that the 5.2 had bigger valves than the 5.9, for the same reason. No Magnum ever came with a 1.88 intake valve, they all used the same head and valves.
 
I watched that, and he said he could get about .480" lift out of a magnum cam. Delta cams got .575" from a stock magnum core for my son's magnum.
 
I think that is an internet myth. Mopar published service manuals for awhile that had some of the LA 360 specs and weren't correct.

Another myth is that the 5.2 had bigger valves than the 5.9, for the same reason. No Magnum ever came with a 1.88 intake valve, they all used the same head and valves.

It could be a myth, but I don't think so.

I know in 1994 the 5.2 had 220 hp at 4400 rpm and 300 ft-lbs at 3200 rpm. That same year the 5.9 had 230 hp at 4000 rpm and 330 ft-lbs at 3200 rpm. Everything else on those engines is the same (heads, intake, exhaust, etc). Based on that it seems like the 5.2 has a slightly hotter cam. Peak power RPM is higher and only 10 hp lower, which isn't really a lot when we're talking about a 42 cid difference. We need someone to send Powell a 5.2 cam for comparison!

I have never heard anyone say the 5.2 has bigger valves, but for sure that's totally false. I would agree that no Magnum ever had a 1.88 intake valve. They were 1.92.
 
I watched that, and he said he could get about .480" lift out of a magnum cam. Delta cams got .575" from a stock magnum core for my son's magnum.

it depends on the core used. Ken from OC wants specific truck cores if possible as they apparently have a bit more meat.
 
It could be a myth, but I don't think so.

I know in 1994 the 5.2 had 220 hp at 4400 rpm and 300 ft-lbs at 3200 rpm. That same year the 5.9 had 230 hp at 4000 rpm and 330 ft-lbs at 3200 rpm. Everything else on those engines is the same (heads, intake, exhaust, etc). Based on that it seems like the 5.2 has a slightly hotter cam. Peak power RPM is higher and only 10 hp lower, which isn't really a lot when we're talking about a 42 cid difference. We need someone to send Powell a 5.2 cam for comparison!

Here is what @YY1 posted for numbers.

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 had more lift than both the 5.2 and the published 5.9 numbers.

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.

If we assume the advertised duration is correct on the numbers from YY1, the 5.9 cam is a couple of degrees smaller on the intake but larger on the exhaust and my lift number say both are taller on the 5.9 cam.

Based on that, I don't believe the 5.2 cam is better. Frankly, I think both are so small it wouldn't make much difference either way.

I have never heard anyone say the 5.2 has bigger valves, but for sure that's totally false. I would agree that no Magnum ever had a 1.88 intake valve. They were 1.92.

I pissed off the guy that was making a business out of Magnum swaps years ago because I didn't agree with Magnums having a 1.88 valve.

Here is just one example - 5.9 Magnum exhaust/intake combo help
 
I know in 1994 the 5.2 had 220 hp at 4400 rpm and 300 ft-lbs at 3200 rpm. That same year the 5.9 had 230 hp at 4000 rpm and 330 ft-lbs at 3200 rpm. Everything else on those engines is the same (heads, intake, exhaust, etc). Based on that it seems like the 5.2 has a slightly hotter cam. Peak power RPM is higher and only 10 hp lower, which isn't really a lot when we're talking about a 42 cid difference.

It occurs to me that due to the smaller cubes of the 5.2, the cam/heads/exhaust be a better fit and might even be the better option between that and a complete stock 5.9. Put a cam in the 5.9 and it will be a different question, but I agree that the 5.2 might be a little more fun to an enthusiast based on the factory ratings.

It would be fun to see someone put a cam in a 5.2 and see how it compares to a 5.9. I remember a build years ago with a 318 they swapped Magnum heads onto and it seems like they got 400 hp. Not the first 318 build like that but one I don't think is online. Might have to try and dig it out.
 
-
Back
Top