I know the 4l60e is garbage and when I asked around to find out if I could get it built everyone acted like it wasn't possible and that I should just upgrade to a 4l80e instead.
5.3 performance???
- Thread starter Bustedknuckles
- Start date
This Falco guy is on his 3rd or 4th turbo Silverado build, this one makes 1000+ and will hang with, if not beat out super cars like a ZR1 with a nitro shot
@50sec
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T7rjqr7V2hk
The supra in this video is straight up raw, disgustingly fast
Check out 1320video...
@50sec
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T7rjqr7V2hk
The supra in this video is straight up raw, disgustingly fast
Check out 1320video...
This Falco guy is on his 3rd or 4th turbo Silverado build, this one makes 1000+ and will hang if not beat out super cars like a ZR1 with a nitro shot
@50sec
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T7rjqr7V2hk
Check out 1320video...
That trucks pretty sick. I was just watching that video the other day. Makes me really miss my ls cars.
One day I'll build another one. Until now I need to focus on finishing my dmax build.
Well, I'm wrapping up my dmax build, I had a vw golf R I was also building, but as my recent string of (un)luck would have it....
The R got clipped by a semi coming down the pass sideways....the entire road was a sheet of ice, there wasn't a thing I could do to avoid it...he wasn't chained up....the R got totaled out...
So, I'm in the market for something...not sure what, but I'm sure it's gonna be a GM product of some sort, probably with an LS engine of some designation.
06-09 Caddy CTS-V
Pontiac G8 GT or GXP
2wd Silverado
SS silverado
SS trailblazer
A single cab 4x4 LBZ...???
Still not sure.
I'm looking for something "3 member, family friendly" and V-8 powered that offers a platform with potential for tweaking and tuning, anyone one of the above mentioned will work, but I'm leaning toward a gas powered silverado next, my wife doesn't want another diesel at all, ever :rofl:
I know for a fact that the only difference between the 4.8 and 5.3 is the bore, a 4.8L can be taken all the way to 5.7, so can the 5.3L, creating an iron block vette motor, only it's capable of withstanding more boost than the aluminum block...:thumb: and then I think most if not all the LS1/LS2 stuff will work for the build.
Like I said, the bore is the defining element for the amount of displacement between the 4.8/5.3 they use the same crank and rods...it's been a few years since I was playing around with LS stuff, but I'm pretty sure you can bolt on LS1 vette heads once the blocks been bored over and even use a LS1 Z06 cam, with the right tuning that will surpass your 400hp goals with ease.
Lunati and comp make some pretty trick cams for the LS stuff, weisco pistons, JE pistons, Arais, MAHLE, any one of them would suffice, up you can even run a stroker kit wit a full 4" throw iirc???
I saw mention of using the 243 heads, but iirc, the bore on the 243 heads is 4.125 and while they can be used with a 4.05 bore or somethin, you have to pay special attention to the quench, piston wall to valve clearance and CR cuz the volume of the 243 heads is like 63cc iirc, and the standard heads used for those engines was a 72cc combustion chamber, also I think the valve angle is different too, 23* vs 15* but I can't remember
also the cathedral port heads can be ported out to match the flow of the stock square port heads, and even more so than the stock square port heads move, AND cathedral port heads flow better down low, producing more tq down low, which is beneficial for a vehicle as heavy as a truck, usually this detrimental to the top end, but if you can afford to send the heads out to somewhere like T.E.A (total engine airflow) you won't be disappointed
http://www.totalengineairflow.com/cnc-ported-cylinder-heads/gm/ls1ls2
Really, the sky is the limit! Build it for more than your current goals and go for it later with a turbo set up
WRONG!!!! So many things wrong with this post, 3.78" not your 4.whatever bore is the same 4.8 runs flat tops, very few 5.3 run them. ONLY DIFFERENCE is crank shafts so there for all too end parts are interchangable... 243 heads polished are skme if the best heads going for the ls and are amazing in boosted applications.
Last edited:
3.78 in bore blocks (1999–2007)
The 4.8 L and the 5.3 L are smaller truck versions of the LS1 and were designed to replace the 305 and the 350 in trucks. Both the 4.8 L and the 5.3 L share the same engine block, heads (upper end) and as they share architecture, parts interchange freely between these engines and other variants in the LS family.
The 4.8 L and the 5.3 L are smaller truck versions of the LS1 and were designed to replace the 305 and the 350 in trucks. Both the 4.8 L and the 5.3 L share the same engine block, heads (upper end) and as they share architecture, parts interchange freely between these engines and other variants in the LS family.
Read the post, I was referring to the bore size after being bored over to a 5.7L
And ported cathedral heads work well with boost too....
:thumb:
And btw, the cranks are identical, the bore is the only thing different...
Read the post, I was referring to the bore size after being bored over to a 5.7L
And ported cathedral heads work well with boost too....
:thumb:
And btw, the cranks are identical, the bore is the only thing different...
You are wrong again. The 4.8 has a shorter stroke and a longer rod. The 5.3 has a longer stroke shorter rod. Same bore size between the two.
You beat me to it. I swear they had different rods.
You can interchange almost every part between the gen 3&4 motors besides the ls7. It had different head bolt and intake bolt patterns.
I believe it was also considered a big block.
Read the post, I was referring to the bore size after being bored over to a 5.7L
And ported cathedral heads work well with boost too....
:thumb:
And btw, the cranks are identical, the bore is the only thing different...
Wtf... If you bored a 5.3 or a 4.8 to 5.7 your bore would be the same because the 4.8 and 5.3 are the same damn bore to begin with!!! What are you not understanding? 3.78" bore for 4.8 and 3.78" bore for the 5.3 the blocks are even cast with 4.8/5.3 on the block!!! ONLY DIFFERNECE IS THE STROKE!!!!!
You better check your facts if you think the crank is the same also, a simple interweb search will make you see how wrong you are. I thought you claimed you had experience with ls engines?? Luckily parts interchangabity can make even know nothings get lucky with throwing parts at an engine.
I have had myself confused on my ls project here in the last few months by listening to a guy who spouts off like you who has no knowledge or expierence to back it up which caused me alot of head aches on the ls truck in my sig. Its ok to be wrong we all are from time to time, but damn it man admit it and move on
Last edited:
I wasnt aware the ls7 didnt share head bolt layout, and intake patern. The guy i baught my polished 243 heads from and ls6 intake and valve train claims he was going to run an ls7 top end on an ls3. Id be interested to know if it is possible or not.
And i swear if someone pipes up and says the only block and ls7 can share heads with is an gen II lt engine im lobbying for a ban
Last edited:
Love reading up on this, my last truck was a black rcsb 5.3 lt truck. Miss it every time I see one. After this build is done I will own another but a 4.8 boosted to the sky. It's really hard to take some ignorance and misleadings in a few posts. Luckily they get lined out quickly
I'll see if I can find a picture but the ls7 is not interchangeable with any of the other motors.
A few years back I had a guy ask me to look up the head bolt pattern of a 5.3 and ls7 to see if he could swap heads. That's when I found that out. I'm pretty sure (but don't hold me to it until I find the picture) that the ls7 heads have an extra bolt per cylinder on the outside of the motor too. like the lsx blocks do for more clamping force.
Alright so after a quick search this is what I came up with. I guess I'm right and wrong.
Yes the ls7 heads have 4 extra bolts on the outside of the heads but they can be bolted to an ls3. Only problem is the 6.2l is a 4.060 bore and the ls7 heads are for a 4.100 bore. So to make hem fit you would need to bore out the block. Then you'd need new pistons with valve reliefs due to the valves being bigger. Sounds like more of a hassle than it's worth.
Here's picture of the ls7 head. You can see the extra bolt hole per cylinder that sticks out on the exhaust side. Which all the other ls based heads don't have.
Yes the ls7 heads have 4 extra bolts on the outside of the heads but they can be bolted to an ls3. Only problem is the 6.2l is a 4.060 bore and the ls7 heads are for a 4.100 bore. So to make hem fit you would need to bore out the block. Then you'd need new pistons with valve reliefs due to the valves being bigger. Sounds like more of a hassle than it's worth.
Here's picture of the ls7 head. You can see the extra bolt hole per cylinder that sticks out on the exhaust side. Which all the other ls based heads don't have.
Attachments
I see, this guy was running a hone on the stock bore but aims he hould "fly" cut the tops of the cylinder bores for the valves to clear, unsure on this also as i would think there may even be piston to valve clearance issues. I think im gonna see him this weekend and i will try and figure this out.
Yeah it seems like there would be an issue with PTV clearance. When I ran ls3 heads on my ls2 I know I was cutting it close with the heads and block being slightly decked and running a bigger cam.
It's crazy how it's so easy to get info an ls performance but when it comes to the Dmaxs everything is a secret and so damn expensive.
The torque is so addicting though