Ok 392 Cam In 5.7 Or Not?

[345_CHLNGR 9]

Mine wasn't right at first either... 4 tunes later I am thinking it is close.

[rdrdr90 38]

Tune is fine, me thinks the belt is slipping.

[345_CHLNGR 9]

Need better tensioner or a coated SC Pulley?

[rdrdr90 38]

I have the Dayco, cheap anodized pulley needs coating.....I hope.

Sorry J....back to you getting this cam. Just do it!!

[345_CHLNGR 9]

X2... Do it

[Speedy 275]

AJ did say that just recently he is able to do all tables like in the pre 2011 cars.

Good News, Good News, Good News!

I bet that's it. I forgot the later models were still waiting on some tables to be available in CMR. Opening up new tables REALLY makes the tuning better.

Sean, I'm really surprised you'd have belt slip with a 3.2 pulley when I don't have any with a 2.6. You should pick up about 30-35RWHP with 2 more pounds of boost easily.

Do you have logs I can look at? I can tell for sure in there.

So back to the cam question...is the parts list I posted all needed? I may skip the timing set and just re-use mine. What about the bolts? Are they one time use or ?

53022243AF Sprocket - is it needed?

53022316AC Timing Chain - don't need?

53022315AD Timing guide - don't need?

53022317AC Sprocket - is it needed?

53022115AH Tensioner - is it needed?

6102430AA Bolt - is it needed or re-use current?

6509174AA Bolt - is it needed or re-use current?

Anyone got the P/N for the front cover gasket? Any other gaskets needed? or seals?

[rdrdr90 38]

I'll send you the parts list used for mine got a couple of bolt and coned washers listed with part#'s.

Sent you an e-mail illustrating the slippage.

[Speedy 275]

I don't recall an e-mail showing any slippage Sean. In a data log you'll see the boost curve look funny if there's slip. That's the best way to know. Just go out and whack it in third and run a log. You could also put a green HD belt on there but I ran the regular one up to 12psi no problem. You could also have the pulley cross cut.

EDIT:

Just got your e-mail...

[Hemituner 97]

Personally I wouldn't do it in your case. The cam you need is really larger than the 6.4 cam. If it were me thats what I would go for. Ask Mike what he is comfortable tuning and rock on!

Hope this helps

A.J.

[rdrdr90 38]

^^^^^perhaps someone knows of better options coming.....soon?

[HemiSam 194]

Sean - I only ran a cheap anodized pulley....ever and never had belt slip. If the belt length is correct, you should be good to 14psi+ with a 17% OD and your combo.

60-80 rwhp...

J needs to torture himself for a good while before a modification. It's part of the process

HS

[dodgetime 12]

just happen to have a couple numbers - 5139933AB timing cover gasket, 53021585AD crank seal

third reusage on those seals and probably would have been fine, but I always fend off Murphy when I can

[RT_6Speed 75]

2. Results have been mixed. We've seen some folks actually lose power with this mod and track times are all over the place. It would be nice to see consistent repeatable results. ...

I was all in but waited for 3 people I knew that were doing it to see the results for myself. One lost a minor amount of power that could have been due to differences in temps between the before and after dynos, another saw little change either way, and the last one didn't do a before and after dyno but did an after at a dyno day with several other 5.7's. His was the lowest HP and TQ of all of the other 5.7's running on the same dyno that day.

I've read about all the gains but from personal observation just haven't seen it. Until I do I'll pass.

[Guest Daparrothead]

Sean - I only ran a cheap anodized pulley....ever and never had belt slip. If the belt length is correct, you should be good to 14psi+ with a 17% OD and your combo.

60-80 rwhp...

J needs to torture himself for a good while before a modification. It's part of the process

HS

The belt length may be the issue, I had the belt slip problem on mine with the 2.8 pulley with the stock damper. I couldn't find a belt that would put the tensioner about mid travel and ended up making the new lower idler pulley to get the belt tension right. Haven't had any problems since, making 8.5 psi .

[TimeWaitsFNM 16]

I wish I had requested a before dyno myself but I had so much done at once. I am curious if my numbers would have been better without the cam swap.

[Speedy 275]

There are so many variables on the different installs to date it's hard to know what's what. Brian at SNL has been about the only person to show consistent results at 60RWHP on NA 5.7s with minor bolt ons like cat back and CAI, but some folks don't think the 60RWHP is possible. I have no idea.

The folks that lost HP had the limiter installed so that may have been a mistake. My pistons have valve reliefs so I'm not gonna run a limiter if I go this route.

I'd love to have a larger cam, but I'm honestly not up for a lot of drama getting it to run right. We haven't seen anyone that got the big VVT cams installed ranting and raving about them, just a couple of 100RWHP dyno sheets and then they disappear. I heard one of the cars was sold shortly after install, but that was 2nd or 3rd hand info so who knows.

I'm interested to see how 345s car does on Wednesday. If it's making over 500RWHP we may be on to something.

[CruzKing 140]

I will be watching with "eyes wide".

around Sept 6 i'll let you 5.7 NA cars know what improvements a 6.4 cam does for a 5.7..

[Goehner 270]

Waste of time and money, would be awesome if every 5.7 turd did this, the average times will be slower.

[345_CHLNGR 9]

Waste of time and money, would be awesome if every 5.7 turd did this, the average times will be slower.

Hmm... OK

[BlackVoodoo 22]

It would probably be a decent blower cam, I don't know how much it would help on a N/A application. The reason I'm going non-VVT is the cam limitations and lack of support for VVT engines.

[CruzKing 140]

It would probably be a decent blower cam, I don't know how much it would help on a N/A application. The reason I'm going non-VVT is the cam limitations and lack of support for VVT engines.

damn jack, I hope your wrong there....

[rdrdr90 38]

It is all in the tune apparently.

[Guest Daparrothead]

It would probably be a decent blower cam, I don't know how much it would help on a N/A application. The reason I'm going non-VVT is the cam limitations and lack of support for VVT engines.

^^^ I'm fully convinced you are going the right direction Suh.

damn jack, I hope your wrong there....

Damn Greg, Just crack open that moldy wallet of yours and put a blower on the car already!

[CruzKing 140]

wallet has its own issues, also I just like to go better/faster a little at a time. gives me something to look forward to every year. i'm a thinkin I will be at the blower stage when I hit 73 years old. so just stay tuned.

[Guest Daparrothead]

You would be money way ahead to just put the blower on the car and forget about the cam.