Fitting more lairy cams will reduce the torque at low RPM. There's always a compromise with changing just cams as you are effectively moving the range of revs over which the engine breathes effectively. I'm sure someone who's got 3.0 cams in a 2.5 will be along to quantify this. May not be worth worrying about with a relatively modest cam change. Need to know if there's a similar spec. difference between 2.6 and 3.2 though.
Porting heads, fitting bigger valves, etc. tends to be more effective at high RPM, in conjunction with cam changes because that's the area where restrictions in gas flow start to become significant. Low RPM tends to suffer again because gas velocity reduces and the engine burns less efficiently.
If it's mid range torque you want the best solution is probably more cubes - i.e. a 3.2 :-/
However, upping the compression would also help and, given that you are on LPG that might be an interesting option. If the pistons are flat on all these engines the differences are in the combuston chamber volume. You just need to do the sums for each engine and see what'd work. Formula Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_ratioMaybe a set of 2.5 heads would be a good option if they could be made to fit? Not sure if they'd make a significant difference - did the 2.5 have higher compression than the 2.6 or was it just the 3.0 / 3.2 that differed in this respect?
Sorting out the exhaust with a proper pair of tubular manifolds with the primaries tuned would also make an improvement in torque, I reckon. I hope somebody tries it one day 8-)
Kevin