Here I am

Single Turbo Towing Upgrade 04.5 HO

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

High Iron on oil analysis

parasitic battery draw

Status
Not open for further replies.
Will a HTT 62/65/12 significantly lower my EGT's with my hot juice?



If your towing on HOT then probably not a significant change. If your towing on 1-2 then probably. A Smarty will lower it more than a turbo thou, at least from what I have researched.
 
I stopped by the BD booth at SEMA and saw their new Super B that is configured as a direct replacement for the stock Third Gen turbo. Very nice.
 
I have heard them talk about it in a few posts. Do you know what size it is?

I am hoping something like a 62/68/12 or 62/68/14.
 
I stopped by the BD booth at SEMA and saw their new Super B that is configured as a direct replacement for the stock Third Gen turbo. Very nice.



As in direct replacement, did you mean it no longer requires the adapter to fit the stock elbow? I have one on my truck, it works great, but I had to shorten the engine pipe by about 1-1/2" so I didn't run out of travel on the pipe hangers.



On a similar subject, does (did) the 305 engine use the same camshaft as the later 325 engine?
 
the 62/65/12 or a 62/65/13 ss with a hi tec ss manifold with blankets on the manifold and exhaust turbo housing is the best. the blankets make it spool like a 12. you need to scrap the afe junk and go back to stock with the origional box and tube with a psm kit and the new mopar filter.
 
I have read about too many issues with a ss housing, I think its best just to go with a cast housing, they flow plenty. 12 if you tow at low rpms, and 14 if you tow at upper. Blankets are a great idea, and I plan to run them on my HE351VE swap.

If you get a PSM cool hose you need to get a TAG, or you promote turbulence in your intake air, and lose performance.
 
No they don't, profile is considerably different and the flow characteristics are not the same.



The part number is the same, which doesn't mean they didn't just update the profile, but all the cam mfgr's I spoke with said that all the ones they have looked at 03-07 are the same grid.
 
The part number is the same, which doesn't mean they didn't just update the profile, but all the cam mfgr's I spoke with said that all the ones they have looked at 03-07 are the same grid.



Part number really means nothing because they get superceded all the time. The Dodge part number is the same all the way back to 03 now because the older profile is not available so they appear to be the same.



I have a hard time with supposed statements from cam grinders that the profile is the same. They are not the same. The LSA is different, lift at . 050 is different, crank angle timing is different. This is the heart of a cam profile and the effect the grind has on the engine performance.



From a purely technical point this statement is false. From a functional aspect its just as invalid. Whne you change the basis of the profile you change the way the engine functions across the rpm band.



I think there are way too many misconceptions about what was said and what was heard. Sorry, but that the only thing that makes sense when I hear this statement.
 
I have never compared them, but I have been told by several people who are "camologists" and they claim they are the same cam.

Not saying its accurate, just what I have been told.

Do you have LSA, lift, etc?
 
Last edited:
I have never compared them, but I have been told by several people who are "camologists" and they claim they are the same cam.



Not saying its accurate, just what I have been told.



Do you have LSA, lift, etc?



I thought I saved the link to the specs for 24V, early CR, and late CR cams and now I can't find it. #@$%! Its in a thread on cams somerhwer and don't remember which one.



What I do remember is there are differences across all 3 in those specific areas which are key. What gets overlooked is while they may be comparable they are not equivalent, and that is what needs clarified.



In the naturally aspirated world that profile makes all the difference, in a pressurized world the lines blur considerably. What you can get away with on a turbo charged engine will cause a naturally aspirated one to choke and fail.



The LSA only is noticeably different between a 305 and a 325 engine to implement the in-cylinder EGR, thats a given as that has been published mutlitple times. DonM psted way back when the 325's came out the valve opening\closing degrees changed to compensate.



Two key points in a cam profile are noticeably different and yet somebody claims they are the same? :confused: Sorry, I can't buy into that. We KNOW the cams are different in how they perform because of real world experience changing them and seeing\feeling the differences. If there were no differences then there would be no reason to buy a Colt or Hamilton cam becuas ethey are lying to us about the differences.



See where I am going here? How can they claim their product is so much better if there is no difference between the profiles? Why does everybody thta wants the performance back and rid of the emissions crap want either a 305 or 24V profile cam? Something just does NOT add up with the discrepencies. :)
 
This is the data I have in my notes.



Stock 2nd Generation 12V 1994-1998. 5

INT. 159° 0. 235

EXH. 204° 0. 263

LSA 102. 0°



Stock 2nd Generation 24V 1998. 5-2002

INT. 159° 0. 235

EXH. 206° 0. 297

LSA 107. 5°



Stock 24V C. R. 2003-2007

INT. 163° 0. 237

EXH. 191° 0. 299

LSA 98. 5°





I would be curious how it looks compared to what you have, if you can find it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top