[reefstar]

I read a lot of discussion about ppl wanting cams for their 3.5, but has anyone just put a 4.0L cam into the 3.5L. I haven’t found anyone that has posted any information about trying that. Does anyone have any information about that?

Thanks!!!

 

[reefstar]

I read a lot of discussion about ppl wanting cams for their 3.5, but has anyone just put a 4.0L cam into the 3.5L. I haven't found anyone that has posted any information about trying that. Does anyone have any information about that?

Thanks!!!

Seriously... 114 Views and no one has ever tried it?? Does anyone know why it wouldn't work?

It would be great to get the specs of both cams. I've read the 4.0L cam has a higher lift and duration.

 

[foxtail]

I know the rocker assembly for the 3.5 will fit the 4.0 says so in the specs. So I think it would...

 

[reefstar]

ok, I've got the 4.0L cams. I see no reason they are not direct swapable. I've also discussed making a cam with WebCamshafts. If anyone is interested I would recommend calling them or email. Talk specifically to Melissa. I've already got a quote from them, and I think with enough interest we can get reasonable pricing on them. I am not sure they are clear about how many 3.5L engines are out there.

Anyway, here is where I am at. Cat back SRT dual exhaust, (leaving resonators in for now). Adding 4.0L cams (unless Melissa contacts me due to interest in a 3.5 Cam build), short pipe exhaust headers by BFC (which I have already ceramicoatedI will port the intake, and match the plenum, and also check the exhaust port mate to the headers and correct as necessary. Looking for a larger Throttle body or I will port the OEM. I am also going to flip the intake and build a air box and bring air in through the hood in front of the driver and add a dummy port to match on the passenger side. I may take/create more space by moving the coolant reservoir forward to where the air box currently is.

i will also likely deck my heads to increase compression, but I'd like to find a way to keep the cam timing advanced.

also looking to replace the upper coolant hose with stainless polished, and I will have heads intake manifold, plenum, timing cover and housing all painted/powder coated.

should be fun! Any other ideas I'm missing?​

 

[tf34mech]

Using the head gaskets for the 4.0 will increase compression slightly maybe sparing you the expense of having the heads milled.

 

[4DoorMuscle]

Using the head gaskets for the 4.0 will increase compression slightly maybe sparing you the expense of having the heads milled.

Getting a set of heads surfaced is cheaper than a set of head gaskets.

 

[sojiaraggs9000]

Not to thread jack but what about if your wanting to just swap over the entire rotating center. What I'm wanting to do is swap an 08 Nitro 4.0L block, add Inertia big valve heads with 1.2v cams, ported lower intake and supercharger. I have both head gasket sets. would it be better to use the 4.0L gasket vs the 3.5l gasket? Also I think i remember something about a gasket needed to be milled anyways if do big valve heads??

 

[reefstar]

Not to thread jack but what about if your wanting to just swap over the entire rotating center. What I'm wanting to do is swap an 08 Nitro 4.0L block, add Inertia big valve heads with 1.2v cams, ported lower intake and supercharger. I have both head gasket sets. would it be better to use the 4.0L gasket vs the 3.5l gasket? Also I think i remember something about a gasket needed to be milled anyways if do big valve heads??

You have the 4.0L gaskets and the 3.5 L gaskets? If you do, what difference do you see?

 

[reefstar]

Using the head gaskets for the 4.0 will increase compression slightly maybe sparing you the expense of having the heads milled.

Why would the 4.0L Gasket increase compression over the 3.5? Is the 4.0L gasket thinner? Why would that be? I have the 3.5L heads and 4.0L heads right now, and I don't see any difference. (Although I havent look super close at them yet)

I've miked the 3.5 L cam. and the 4.0L cam. Direct fit, although I'm sending the 4.0L cams to have the journals polished before I install them. The lift onthe 4.0L cam is .015 larger on the intake, and .09 larger on the exhaust.

I'm trying to find the rocker ratio spec, and I'm getting conflicting information. I believe it's 1.6:1 but Inertia seems to indicate they are 1.7:1

If the ratio is 1.7 then the lift with the 4L cam will be .381" intake .306" exhaust. Or Inertia's information is incorrect, and their 1.1 cam is .372", not .408"

The exhaust port on the driver side rear cylinder was almost 1/4 off alignment. I'll be cleaning them up before reassembling also.

 

[sojiaraggs9000]

Why would the 4.0L Gasket increase compression over the 3.5? Is the 4.0L gasket thinner? Why would that be? I have the 3.5L heads and 4.0L heads right now, and I don't see any difference. (Although I havent look super close at them yet)

I've miked the 3.5 L cam. and the 4.0L cam. Direct fit, although I'm sending the 4.0L cams to have the journals polished before I install them. The lift on the 4.0L cam is .015 larger on the intake, and .09 larger on the exhaust.

I'm trying to find the rocker ratio spec, and I'm getting conflicting information. I believe it's 1.6:1 but Inertia seems to indicate they are 1.7:1

If the ratio is 1.7 then the lift with the 4L cam will be .381" intake .306" exhaust. Or Inertia's information is incorrect, and their 1.1 cam is .372", not .408"

The exhaust port on the driver side rear cylinder was almost 1/4 off alignment. I'll be cleaning them up before reassembling also.

Yeah to be honest there isn't much information readily available. From what I've found out myself is the heads and cams that are installed in the 2008 Dodge Nitro 4.0l reman engine I have sitting in this crate appear to be the same. The gasket kit that came with it shows 4.0l on the bag but has individually labels parts inside. The head gaskets for the 4.0l are installed on the reman already but the 3.5l ones that are in the package show 1.49mm. Only gasket I seen that didn't seem to match up was the upper intake manifolds gasket had some placement marks that the 3.5l doesn't have. Im not sure if there is any differences but visually the heads look the same.... Cams do fit without any issues. Im going with Big Valve Heads and 1.2v cams. SO I am currently waiting on my performance heads to come in or Id just use the 4.0l heads and cams. Cams wise I have the spec sheet right here:

1.2V Advertised Cam Specs VS Messured at .05 Durration VS STOCK

Intake: Duration 264° Lift .403; Exhaust Duration: 271° Lift .322
VS
Intake Duration: 209° Lift: .244; Exhaust Duration: 216° Lift: .195
VS
Exhaust Duration: 238°; Exhaust Duration: 252°

Also here is some information that in Crower Cam card

Part Number: F22234
Engine Application: 3.5L Chrysler
Grind Number: HANSEN
Grind Ratio :1.65 IN/EX

Not sure if that helps at all.

 

[tf34mech]

The P/N's are 4892180AA and 4892181AA for the 2007 and up Pacifica. The 3.5 gaskets are 1.78 and the 4.0 are 1.50 mm.

 

[sojiaraggs9000]

The P/N's are 4892180AA and 4892181AA for the 2007 and up Pacifica. The 3.5 gaskets are 1.78 and the 4.0 are 1.50 mm.

I just measured the 2008 Dodge Nitro 4.0L gaskets and they show 1.49 mm and I checked the ones off MY 2008 Chrysler 3.5L and they currently show 1.43 mm.

 

[reefstar]

I just measured the 2008 Dodge Nitro 4.0L gaskets and they show 1.49 mm and I checked the ones off MY 2008 Chrysler 3.5L and they currently show 1.43 mm.

I don't know why I'm not getting response notifications from the forum, argh!

Anyway, so you're saying the 3.5L gaskets are thinner? That would make more sense to me. Not sure why they would increase displacement and then use a gasket to increase compression. I would think the difference would be a vendor change?

I'm going with the 4.0 L cams because I'm not looking to build a 1/4 mile car. I anticipate the 4.0L cams with the advanced timing will bring in the lower RPM power band, which is where the 300 tranny likes to run anyway with lower shift points. Plus once the VIR opens the top end kicks in pretty good.

Ive noticed the 300 resists down shifting in some circumstances, and I want to see
if I can work with that, without needing to reprogram the tranny.

Does anyone know of an EGR delete module for the CEL?

 

[sojiaraggs9000]

Well as far as 2008 I’m saying the 4.0 and 3.5l both use the 1.5mm gaskets. The 4.0L out of the box showed 1.49mm I could have pressed a little hate tho so it’s a 1.5mm. And the ones I measured off the 3.5l are
used and smashed... they measured 1.43 which again is a 1.5mm. According to the above part number the 2005-07 used a 1.78mm. Which would make since the Gen1 engine was carried over from the LH platforms but they had iron heads and Eagle intakes. Prowlers, Avengers, 300m you know. That’s why you see some 3.5l with metal valve covers.

 

[tf34mech]

I did get the measurement from an Intrepid forum from a post about building up a 4.0 stroker in a Gen II intrepid.

 

[reefstar]

Well as far as 2008 I'm saying the 4.0 and 3.5l both use the 1.5mm gaskets. The 4.0L out of the box showed 1.49mm I could have pressed a little hate tho so it's a 1.5mm. And the ones I measured off the 3.5l are
used and smashed... they measured 1.43 which again is a 1.5mm. According to the above part number the 2005-07 used a 1.78mm. Which would make since the Gen1 engine was carried over from the LH platforms but they had iron heads and Eagle intakes. Prowlers, Avengers, 300m you know. That's why you see some 3.5l with metal valve covers.

OK, so all Gasket thickness aside, who can calculate how much the head would need to be milled down to move the timing belt 1 tooth, so that milling the head wouldn't retard the timing. Then the question would be if it would cause interference at all.

Any math guys out there.

 

[sojiaraggs9000]

Found some specs on the Intrepid form.

4593616aa,4593618aa are cams, 4792580ac,4792025ab are sprockets.

4.0L
Camshaft
Bore Diameter 43.038-43.059 mm 1.6944-1.6953 in.
Diametrical Clearance 0.078-0.12 mm 0.003-0.0047 in.
Diametrical Clearance (MAX) 0.15 mm 0.0059 in.
Bearing Journal Diameter 42.939-42.960 mm 1.6905-1.6913 in.
End Play 0.05-0.51 mm 0.002-0.020 in.

VALVE TIMING-INTAKE VALVE
DESCRIPTION SPECIFICATIONS (CRANKSHAFT DEGREES)
Opens 4° BTDC (A) - 1° ATDC (B)
Closes (ABDC) 60° (A) - 65° (B)
Duration 244°
Centerline 118° (A) - 123° (B)

VALVE TIMING-EXHAUST VALVE
DESCRIPTION SPECIFICATIONS (CRANKSHAFT DEGREES)
Opens (BBDC) 61°
Closes (ATDC) 21°
Duration 262°
Centerline 110°

3.5L
Camshaft
Bore Diameter 43.038-43.059 mm
(1.6944-1.6952 in.)
Bearing Journal Diameter 42.939-42.960 mm
(1.6905-1.6913 in.)
Diametrical Clearance 0.078-0.12 mm
(0.003-0.0047 in.)
-(Max.) 0.15 mm
(0.0059 in.)
End Play 0.11-0.35 mm
(0.004-0.014 in.)
Valve Timing-Intake Valve
Opens (ATDC) 3°
Closes (ABDC) 61°
Duration 238°
Centerline 122°
Valve Timing-Exhaust Valve
Opens (BBDC) 56°
Closes (ATDC) 16°
Duration 252°
Centerline 112°
Valve Overlap 13°

 

[sojiaraggs9000]

Seen this too it's an Upper intake spacer. I wonder if it would do anything for our 3.5Ls.

Group Buy Intake Manifold spacers $40.00 + actual shipping. DEADLINE 11/11/19 For Ordering CLOSED - Page 4 - Chrysler 300M Enthusiasts Club

 

[reefstar]

Seen this too it's an Upper intake spacer. I wonder if it would do anything for our 3.5Ls.

Group Buy Intake Manifold spacers $40.00 + actual shipping. DEADLINE 11/11/19 For Ordering CLOSED - Page 4 - Chrysler 300M Enthusiasts Club

im not sure. People have played with the throttle body spacers. What I've read (so far) has been not too impressive. The reason I am skeptical is because the 3.5 already has Variable Intake Runners with post manifold fuel injection. So essentially it would not have the same results as it does on a standard intake manifold with the air/fuel mixture running through it. Im not sure the benefits would be dramatic. But I'd love to see some comments once ppl get them installed.

still not getting notifications from the forum, so I have to keep remembering to check in to see responses.

 

[sojiaraggs9000]

im not sure. People have played with the throttle body spacers. What I've read (so far) has been not too impressive. The reason I am skeptical is because the 3.5 already has Variable Intake Runners with post manifold fuel injection. So essentially it would not have the same results as it does on a standard intake manifold with the air/fuel mixture running through it. Im not sure the benefits would be dramatic. But I'd love to see some comments once ppl get them installed.

still not getting notifications from the forum, so I have to keep remembering to check in to see responses.

Intake spacer not throttle body spacer. But yeah I agree. According to the same post... they lost 2 rwhp but gained around 28 rwtq.