Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum banner

Performance mods for 600hp?

1500 Views 28 Replies 6 Participants Last post by  Hollerboy24
Well I finally made an account here since ive been finding answers to most my questions the past few years.

I know there will be at least one of y’all telling me to search for it but its just not there soo here we go yall

Ive put together a fresh build sheet for my 585-615hp goal (with help from many reputable sources) and im hoping im onto something here as i plan to build my truck by the end of next month

Heres the list and please feel free to tell me what you think about it and if there’s something you would change. I do want strong hp and the ability to occasionally tow moderately with defueling on the box. I will be expecting boost lag but i know how to properly tune and operate the skinny pedal on the right to make the most out of the setup safely

ARP 2000 Head studs

SB Street DD Clutch (550-650 organic/ceramic hybrid)
SB ADJ Clutch Assembly
Quadzilla Tuner w I-Quad
Quadzilla fuel pressure sensor
FASS 165 Lift pump
Beans Diesel Sump
Fluidampr
Valve cover Gasket
BD SXE 364.5/80mm .80AR turbo w hx40 downpipe
BANKS High Ram
Short Throw Shifter Kit
Turbo Tuber Boost Controller
ALLOYWORKS Radiator w/ dual fans (old ones busted)
AFE BladeRunner intercooler w piping
Stainless Diesel exhaust manifold
Hamilton 188/200 cam
Hamilton #103 Springs, Extreme duty rods
Hamilton 1.45” tappets
F1 Mach 6 220 hp injectors or Mach 7 240s (looking for input on which would be the best) yes i know they can smoke like a traeger but i honestly dont care as long as egts are in check
Killer dowel pin/ crank- cover seal kit

Thanks in advance. Sorry for the lengthy post
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

· Premium Member
Lower carbon footprint than electric/new vehicles
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
Mach 6's will do it, 7's will be clean too. You will however really want to have compounds to reach your hp and expesicially tow. The 188/220 cam is not really ideal for a VP44 powerband. The 184/215(can't remember exactly the specs on that one) or ideally the 178/208 is better for the rpm range the VP44 will make run and make power. Honestly I would save the cam and do compounds 62/65/14 over 75/87/1.10 T6, more bang for the buck and you will want it with the manual where you loose boost each shift.
 

· Premium Member
Lower carbon footprint than electric/new vehicles
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
The dual fans you actually have less cfm flow than the stock fan. I would save on not getting the intercooler, intake horn and get a coolant bypass instead. Popping the rear plug or let alone one in the head is the last thing you want to happen.
 

· Premium Member
Lower carbon footprint than electric/new vehicles
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
Okay I see. I'm pretty sure the mishimoto intercooler is cheaper than the afe but had a lifetime warranty. They have an aluminum radiator also. I would look into them. That's the route I'm going when that time comes. The coolant bypasses slow coolant to flow from the rear of the block or head straight to the radiator to help keep them running cooler since the inlet and outlet of coolant for the engine in in the front so the rear runs hotter. I like the fleece coolant bypass the most as it pulls coolant from further back than any of the other bypasses.
 

· Premium Member
Lower carbon footprint than electric/new vehicles
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
Yes I was mainly saying it for the money to put the money towards compounds. I went with the Pusher 3.5" intake horn with the matching 3.5" passenger and driver's side intercooler piping(stock is 3") and it looks great but it only aided in spool up and minorly. Yeah I agree boots are a b***h to change. Yes the stainless diesel coolant bypass uses one of the fittings for the heater core I think.
 

· Premium Member
Lower carbon footprint than electric/new vehicles
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
If I was going to run a big single one a VP44 I would look into a K29 but with a housing custom machined for it as the 17cm² housing is a bit large. Basically an ats aurora 5000. A bit better turbine wheel for a higher hp hot street VP44. The only thing is how heavy do you tow? The cams are nice but you want to be careful, I have head of a few people being disappointed with the 188/220 cams on a street truck as they took a hit in low rpm velocity due to the large duration combined with the lift. It's just an overkill size on a VP truck. I like the No Limit MFG cams as the lift and duration is more conservative.
 

· Premium Member
Lower carbon footprint than electric/new vehicles
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
Depends on the cam how it changes you rpm band. The 188/220 moves it up a lot. It will enable greater airflow but you can have too much of a good thing hurting low lift port velocity. I've heard of it quite a few times over the years. On a VP truck it's just not needed but if you want to stay small. That's true the sxe line is difficult on to beat for the price and simplicity of install. P-pumping is good but on a truck that works hard I would stick with the dynamic timing of the VP. Unless you find a reasonably priced engine which is hard to come by nowadays and they're almost always either a 160 or 175 horse. I would just want to go to a 180 pump if going for performance on a p-pump conversion. If you have to buy everything it can run between 3-4k for the conversation kit, pump, and benching which is always recommended.
 

· Premium Member
Lower carbon footprint than electric/new vehicles
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
A 178/208 is still better flowing than the stock cam above 3k rpm, it just gives up power compared to the larger cams above 2600rpm. Honestly the cams were really made to optimize these engine for competition use where they're operating at rpm's well above redline so in those applications they will benefit greatly. They figured what worked for that and then they figured out what worked for a street engine but there's not as much benefit really. Your turbo selection will make a much larger difference there and much more to gain if done right. I think doing larger cams are a good idea if people can swing them, but for a street application they should be kept small to aid in spool up and if you want more top end run a larger turbo. Speaking of which you may want to go with a .83AR T4 housing since you're buying the stainless manifold. They flow a good amount of air. They have a wastegated version which is what I would go with 64.5/80 but for you goals I would run a 66/80 and then you could run the non wastegated version.
 

· Premium Member
Lower carbon footprint than electric/new vehicles
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
Yea the 1st gen 12 valves had non wastegated turbos I'm pretty sure. The wastegated are to keep from overspending or alleviate drive pressure. A turbo that's on the smaller side for a setup you want a wastegate, a turbo that's large you can get away without one. The stainless manifold doesn't have an external get flange on them. I was just saying that since you're buying a manifold I would go with a T4 then you can run a .83AR T4 housing the right way instead of a T3-T4 spacer plate. The 66 will reach you goal easier but spool a bit slower. The 64.5 will be the opposite.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top