Roller LA cam into Magnum?

[gagembassett]

Have a guy that's curious if the roller cam from my 92 360 LA will go into his magnum engine. The cam from mine is also a roller. Have zero experience with swapping stock cams from LA to magnum so figured I'd double check. I wouldn't see why it would work.

 

[Professor Fate]

Absolutely. It's the best way to get a mechanical fuel pump onto a Magnum, once you get an LA timing cover on it.
It's actually a nice mild upgrade for the Magnum, as the LA cam specs are based on a 1.5:1 rocker ratio, and the Magnum uses 1.6:1.
Truth be known, the 318 roller cam is a bit hotter than the 360 cam, and makes a nice street cam for the 5.9, or 5.2 for that matter (okay, the cat's out of the bag, now I won't be able to get any cheap 318 roller cams anymore... ).

 

[gagembassett]

Right, and I knew the 5.2 cams were slightly better but thank you I appreciate it! I'll save 5.2 cams for you since you helped out

 

[DNasty777]

I thought the difference in cams was between p-car cams out of roller LAs rather than 5.2 vs 5.9 mag. At least I think that’s what Ken @ Oregon Cams was explaining to me.

 

[Professor Fate]

I thought the difference in cams was between p-car cams out of roller LAs rather than 5.2 vs 5.9 mag. At least I think that’s what Ken @ Oregon Cams was explaining to me.

Yes, that's what I said. The 318 roller was slightly hotter than the 360 roller, and translates into a mild upgrade when installed in a Magnum.

 

[JDMopar]

Will the 92 LA roller cam be a long snout cam, or will it be a short snout cam like a Magnum since a 92 LA would have been throttle body injected? If it's a short snout, a fuel pump eccentric won't work without the Hughes adapter.

 

[gagembassett]

Will the 92 LA roller cam be a long snout cam, or will it be a short snout cam like a Magnum since a 92 LA would have been throttle body injected? If it's a short snout, a fuel pump eccentric won't work without the Hughes adapter.

I would figure long snout but I can find out in the next day or so and send a picture to this thread

 

[Professor Fate]

Will the 92 LA roller cam be a long snout cam, or will it be a short snout cam like a Magnum since a 92 LA would have been throttle body injected? If it's a short snout, a fuel pump eccentric won't work without the Hughes adapter.

The roller LA cams are all long snout, even the TBI engines.

 

[DionR]

Right, and I knew the 5.2 cams were slightly better but thank you I appreciate it! I'll save 5.2 cams for you since you helped out

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.

 

[YY1]

Yes, finding LA roller and Mag cam info was not at all easy.

 

[Professor Fate]

Shepard has most of those factory cam specs in his small block book.

 

[dusmon]

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.

So what you say is a 360 like 1999 has a different cam that advertised by most on the net. I have a stock 1999 360 mag 4x4 that I think is a little doggie runs nice but not enough towing torque. I believe I have the .432 lift cam in that motor. do you have or know of some specs for my truck? {3.55 gears auto 30 inch tires.} Thanks

 

[gagembassett]

So what you say is a 360 like 1999 has a different cam that advertised by most on the net. I have a stock 1999 360 mag 4x4 that I think is a little doggie runs nice but not enough towing torque. I believe I have the .432 lift cam in that motor. do you have or know of some specs for my truck? {3.55 gears auto 30 inch tires.} Thanks

So you put a 5.2 cam in? If it feels doggy you probably need to look further than just going with a cam

 

[lemondana]

I thought the Roller cam LA and the Magnum had different oiling holes in the cam itself since they don't oil the same. Look in a Comp Cam book or a Lunati book and the Roller cam LA cam and the Magnum cams have different part numbers, So-I don't think they are interchangeable. Tell me if I'm wrong.

 

[Bobzilla]

I thought the Roller cam LA and the Magnum had different oiling holes in the cam itself since they don't oil the same. Look in a Comp Cam book or a Lunati book and the Roller cam LA cam and the Magnum cams have different part numbers, So-I don't think they are interchangeable. Tell me if I'm wrong.

LA camshaft and cam bearings have oiling holes to send oil up to the rocker shafts to oil the rocker arms.
Most Magnum camshaft and cam bearings do not have the oiling holes because they oil the rocker arms through the lifters and pushrods.
You can put an LA cam into a Magnum engine and it won’t cause any oiling issues.

 

[dusmon]

So you put a 5.2 cam in? If it feels doggy you probably need to look further than just going with a cam

Put new fuel pump in. that helped. Only thing not checked is the tune. As I don't have a way to do that. 25 year old ignition. No dodge dealer has the tools anymore. I did get the injectors phased and that was good. Get 17mpg, runs nice.