I have the 4.8 in a 02 4x4 auto all stock truck, what a sweetheart of an engine. Driven conservatively she will get 18mpg and has all the power I need for the loads I pull.
@@exploranator because that would literally cost more than my entire car and require custom fabrication. We are talking about a $200 motor in a $600 chassis (when I bought it, it’s worth a lot more now).
For some of us, budget constraints are a thing. The money saved on the transmission could buy a lot of other car parts. BTW, a V8 powered Porsche 944 sounds like a fun project! 👍
i think what we need now richard is a parts list for a 10 000 rpm stock bottom end junkyard ls hell even a built one , the next generation big bang engine , it would be good to see how hard we can rev a ls safely
Not really a question around me, 4.8L are a rare engine around me and 5.3L are getting stacked up like firewood with all the 4x4 1/2 tons rotting the frames out in the upper rust belt. My 6.0L lost a lot of metal off the outside during cleanup and a needle scalier was needed.
Which is why I'm seriously considering dropping 7k on a blueprint SBC 400 with 480 lb ft of torque peaking at 2500 rpms lol. I want my van to scoot without having to wait for it to go from put put to race car.
Debating bolting on the ss2/243’s I got yesterday. Or just wait until I find gen4 53 crank and rods. 100 lbs off the front is going to be pretty big too.
Suggestion: combine a completely high-RPM power adder to a completely low-RPM high-performance engine/cam combination (but not with dime-sized ports or valves, just valve TIMING.) See how far you can stretch the useful powerband on a car by camming for the bottom and having a power adder that brings up the top end. Try a variety of power adders: turbo and centrifugal. Size the headers for low RPM, but not excessively, like 1" primaries, which would be ridiculous. This means a lower static compression, as cylinder pressures at lower RPM would be excessive with a cam with very high lift BUT low-RPM emphasis with higher compression. This would also aid in staving off detonation from the power adder at higher RPM/boost. Goal: flat torque curve from 1000 RPM to 7000 or whatever redline you want. Also, to find out if one can tame a centrifugal supercharger by adding cam-aided torque at low RPM to make up for the high-RPM rush, and same to add low-RPM cam emphasis to wake the turbo up at a lower RPM at the expense of high-RPM sudden "power comes in with a bang at this RPM." The goal is not ultimate power, but to ascertain just how flat we can make the torque curve from start to finish. The same cam that really fills the cylinders at 1000 RPM will not allow the engine to breathe as well at 7000 RPM, and this is understood, but the same cam will also energize a turbo at a far lower RPM than will a "Pro Stock" cam. Various sizes of turbos can be tried to find the results of them with a super-low-RPM cam.
it Doesn’t work like that if You have components to try and get power at two different RPMs you end up with nothing anywhere essentially you could put a centrifugal on or use a programmable boost controller on a stock motor and get what you want
I have a 5.3l single s366 springs and Elgin 1838P. Which is a 216/220 114lsa. Everything about this setup says torque. It definitely is. Turbo lights up instantly and off boost is torquey. I have wondered what would happen if I slapped a big cam in there. Should shift the power band a little right? But with a fast spooling turbo still pretty torquey? This is with a 5spd
@@or-ian6973 interesting. Could you give me pointers on building a 5.3 with good low end torque for my van? I thought you can't cam your way out of displacement for torque on the low end. I can get a 4lxx transmission and 5.3 for cheap or drop 7k and get an sbc 400 that I know will deliver over 450 torque at 2-2.5k rpms.
@@dexterlecter7289 any small cam. The truck Norris cam doesn’t loose any low speed tq. If you’re going NA bump the compression up a bit. Small turbo works well too. With a heavy van the extra load on the turbo should produce power faster. I’m in a small truck.
Interesting to see how the 10% larger 5.3 was producing up to 20% more torque below 4000 rpm. Have to wonder if the other components (intake manifold, heads, etc.) are just better sized for the 5.3 as well.
@@richardholdener1727 Technically they are, we just don't have all the measurements or the equations they feed into ;) If you ever have a chance, please think about doing a video or live chat touching on the days when NASCAR was offset grinding each cam lobe to account for cam/crank twist at high rpm
I think your correct. The 5.3 takes better advantage of the cylinder head and intake flow, testing shows they can support more power then that. Ppl have argued with me 4.8 or 5.3 don't matter they're the same and that is incorrect. A healthy 5.3 makes more power all things being equal altho both are good motors.
I would guess the frictional losses were about the same and the displacement is 10% more just in my opinion that was so the parasitic loss makes up for the difference
@@johnsheetz6639 Could explain part of it. But the biggest frictional loss in a piston engine is the ring pack. And since the shorter stroke 4.8 moves those rings a shorter distance than the 5.3 they should have less parasitic loss. I suspect that air velocity through the ports is just a little too hampered on the 4.8 at lower rpms, which might hurt inertial filling of the cylinders, mixture motion, etc.
If you're going to boost the shit out of it, get a short stroke 4.8L, but for a street car/truck go with the 5.3L since torque is what makes it fun on the street and gets a heavy truck moving. Also seems like 5.3L are easier to find and cheaper from the junk yard. 5.3L can still take boost though and it really loves nitrous.
Would boost be the great equalizer? I would expect the same results based on past videos, but at that point maybe the lower torque would be better for actually getting traction LOL.
Does a shorter stroke shorten the time to reach desired rpm? Not overall rpm potential. Is having a light rotating assembly/flywheel what makes engine rpm accelerate quickly? For instance, a sport bike engine revs quickly and often times the rpm fall almost as quickly. Real snappy.
If the connecting rods and pistons are the exact same mass, a shorter stroke WILL require less power to go from one RPM to the next than will a longer-stroke engine, because the reciprocating assembly acts somewhat like a flywheel, as the energy expended to accelerate the piston and conrod from bottom dead center to kind of halfway up the cylinder will be recouped, mostly, upon the piston and connecting rod working to accelerate the crank from about halfway to top dead center. The energy required to accelerate the pistons and connecting rods is not lost. It is not discarded. It is merely stored in the part that is moving more quickly at that moment.
people tend to answer this question as though they are spinning the motor by had or with an external force-how quickly the motor revs is not solely dictated by stroke length-component weight (including valves, cam, etc...) compression, tune all play a part
Any performance desire must accept the fact that more stroke and bigger bore is always better. If your not racing weight per cubic in, then big is better.
I have yet to do a ls-anything swap....not sure if i'll get around to a ls swap but if I had a stock 4.8 or 5.3, I would use what RH used in this test, and I would be good to go. I would opt for a carb setup to save some big $$. Impressive power from stock motors, my 75 or 79 Monza would just love that! I would let others rack their brains trying to out power the next guy.
@@BastardX13 That would be a wild ride. When you start to put real power into Monza's, just like v8 VEGA'S, you, must do major chassis, drive-train, and suspension upgrades. There is no middle ground, like F-bodies, novas, a-bodies, no steps to build thru. There is virtually NOTHING available for H-BODIES, it's stock, custom pro street or all custom all out. Monza H-BODY owners, like me are crazy!
Hi Richard, can't get enough of these videos man! I've always wondered how much power those OOOOOLD SCHOOL carb'd intakes made. I know it can't beat the newer air gap stuff.... But I've always wondered, on an iron headed 289/302 with a good street cam, and a barrage of Edelbrock Street Master/Street Dominator and Torker/Torker II intakes, Offy dual planes, old Weiand stuff, and I'm pretty sure there's a Holley dual plane intake out there... just how much power do these choke out compared to a modern Air Gap RPM or even a Weiand Stealth? I remember back in 97 being 17 years old and rebuilding the stock carb in my 85 GT and also adding an Edelbrock Performer 289 dual plane to it thinking I gained a bunch of power! Did I, though???
I'm curious on your thoughts about putting one of these in a boat. I'm not looking for performance per say just a little more than my 1988 5.7 has that's rated at 266 hp. Keep in mind it's in a 30 foot cabin cruiser and my outdrive limits me to how much power I'm able to throw at it
Hey Richard, I love your videos. Is it possible to build an N/A junkyard 4.8 up in a way that could out-torque a junkyard 454 below 5000 rpm? Keep up the awesome content!
Yes but it will never give you the driving feel of a good 454 sitting at alight on idle and just flat stab the peddle you will have to build boost for a few seconds and by that time the 454 drove out of your life
Hey Richard whats your opinion on putting truck Norris in a 383 or 408 stroker? Too small of a cam for a big motor? Or would something like the btr stage 4 truck cam be better
Can you test vortech ysi vs ysi-b no other changes. Thing has been out forever with no one ever posting back to back same engine just cast wheel vs billet wheel difference
@@richardholdener1727 vortech says it worth 150hp and 4 psi. Never seen any results beside Brian Mitchell who was sponsored by them and he added a intercooler at the same to he added the billet wheel so not apples to apples. Would be nice to see the real results the way you do it.
I can't find the exact information I'm looking and I don't fully understand how to compare cams when looking at the numbers. I currently have an L33 in my truck and am looking for more torque for towing without sounding like a monster truck. Would I benefit from something like the BTR torque cam or is it too close to see a functional difference?
@@richardholdener1727 I appreciate the quick reply! Do you have a video on it? My main concerns are how it sounds at idle and if there be a functional difference between it and the stock L33 cam. Not knowing much on the topic makes this hunt a bit unnerving. Thanks again.
I guess need to search Richard to see if you have compared all the other LS based engines this way. Usually the large displacement of the engine it will create more torque & horsepower. ✌
This comment doesn’t have anything to do with the video except being about an LS. I recently did a DOD delete/cam swap on my g8 gt with the l76 motor. I used steel plugs to block the oil passages in the valley and used the stock valley cover. I did remove all the solenoids from it before reinstalling it (not really sure why but I figured I didn’t need them anymore) after re assembling the motor I’ve only got 16psi of oil pressure at start. Am I bleeding oil out of the valley cover without having the solenoids on there?
@@richardholdener1727 I suppose the solenoids held oil back and the empty holes where they were would just be leaking now. I just went ahead and ordered a block off plate as well and I’ll swap that on and see what it does
The 4.8 in a vehicle 3500 pounds or less with a 3000+ stall converter and 3.73-4.10 gears would be decent but if your talking a 4500-5500 pound truck or SUV the 5.3 is a better choice with the 3.62 stroke crankshaft vs the 3.25 stroke in the 4.8 and a 3.90 stroke crankshaft in a 5.3 will wake-up low speed torque tremendously from idle to 5000rpm needing less converter and gearing and be much more peppy below 4000rpm and move a heavy vehicle with much less strain than a cammed 5.3 or 4.8 will bet a sloppy stage 2 cam with a 3.90 stroke crankshaft in a 5.3 would make gobs of torque from 2500-5000rpm
86 Z28 305ci Q-Jet Auto, 305 is cooked wanna step up to an LS with a single turbo, is there any certain LS I should look for? I've been told 4.8 likes boost more then the 6.0??? This will be my first turbo build so any info helps.
As popular as the Elgin cams have become I would really like to see a comparison between the 1839/1840 on a basically stock 4.8/5.3/6.0 N/A and boosted. Not asking for much, right? 🤣
I would like to know? Is this really worth it, Or should I move on a buy the Holley sniper? AFR Small Block Chevy Titon 2-Piece Composite Intake Manifolds, Composite Plastic 2-Piece Intake Manifold Offers Convenience AFR developed a patented process and design for a 2-piece composite plastic intake manifold that reduces weight and increases power. These manifolds run up to 30° cooler than an aluminum manifold and weigh 9 to 11 pounds less (varies by model). The 2-piece design allows center runners to be removed without touching the distributor or losing coolant. Features Cast-in nitrous bosses Dual distributor hold-downs Intake bolt compression limiters Carburetor vibration reduced 5% Modular design with interchangeable runners 15+ horsepower and torque (more than competing units) 30° cooler and 9-11 pounds lighter than aluminum manifolds Includes distributor bolts and 12-point intake bolts and washers Viton rubber gaskets and O-ring distributor seal for leak-free operation! I would like to know Is this durable! and will it hold up to ignition and nitrous back fires, Sure would like to know! Before I waste more money! Keep up the great work Richard.
I have a l33 5.3 with two gt3582 turbos. It has a Tick Flow stage 1 can with 216/220 int /exh .560 lift int and exh 114 lobe sep. The car is about 3200 pounds and has a 354 gear in it. It run good and it is a street car. I have a stock torgue converter and 700r4 trans. But you know how it is I want more . Do you think a Tick Flow stage 2 cam with 220/224 duration 575 lift and 112 lobe sep. Do you think the change in cam be worth any more power.
Some of the fastest street cars are running 4.8 with ZR1 cams and turbo and making some 800 horsepower I kind of figured they want the 4.8 so it won't have so much low in torque that it has less traction and then again I don't know if they're lying
Guess it depends on how you drive and what you drive. A 4.8 in a lightweight S13 or Fox Body as a canyon/drift motor is totally doable. I'm not running under 2500 RPM and I can run a higher redline. An aluminum 5.3 would be better than either.
4.8's honestly do fine in trucks they just need to have a 4.10 gear at the minimum and I actually do get pretty decent fuel mileage with mine too, but I'd take a 383 or 408 stroker anyway and if 4.10's are too high of an rpm on the highway a gear vendors will fix that
@@chrishansen7004 Well if it's a big truck I'll just go 6.0 liter. In a CJ7 mud buggy a 4.8 would work. We've got a 4.8 in a van at work and it's fine. It does 70 without too much trouble.
How about a high-fuel-mileage super-huge-motor that only turns 2000 RPM? (would require a very low ratio rear end, but, hey, the specific fuel consumption would be low.) Also, the more slowly one turns the crank, etc, the more completely energy can be extracted from the combustion, and the less energy is required to fill the cylinders.
This is basically the point of a diesel. They found in the early days of diesels that without boost they are gutless, and with a gas engine it ends up with way too much heat to deal with, and lots of broken parts trying to make peak cylinder pressure that low in RPMs
If its for circle track and the smaller engine weighs less then I'll take that. If I'm towing I want the bigger more lazy motor. If I'm drag racing it depends on the avg hp/kg which could go either way. To this day and age its shocking the number of people that don't understand what power is, "ill take a 500hp motor making 600lbft for towing over one that makes 550hp and only 500lb ft". As if engines are bolted directly to the wheels and we don't have a gearbox or final drive and only torque at the motor matters.
4.8 and 5.3 weight roughly the same. Except for the l33, the only difference between the iron block engines is crank, con rod's and pistons. The blocks say 4.8/5.3 for a reason. (Edited for spelling)
Yeah but the gas mileage is ridiculous compared against the 2…….honestly you can’t go wrong with a flat top 5.3……although I pulled mine and put a bored over.030 lq9 in its place then put a lsa supercharger on less than a year later just cause I wanted more power than my cts-v
I have the 4.8 in a 02 4x4 auto all stock truck, what a sweetheart of an engine. Driven conservatively she will get 18mpg and has all the power I need for the loads I pull.
Now just imagine a 4.8l in something smaller like a gbody 😂
This Holdener dude never quits!
And we reap the benefits.
I wouldn’t say the Truck Noris cam lost power, it just didn’t produce as much power . That being said … another entertaining video with info .
Can't wait to see a test on the newer 4.3.
The 4.8 will be easier on the transmission, if that's a concern. But aside from that, I think the 5.3 would be preferable.
One of the reasons I chose my for my 944, I am running a pretty fragile stock NA transmission.
@@TrackDayMaker Why not just chuck a TR 6070 behind that motor?
@@exploranator because that would literally cost more than my entire car and require custom fabrication. We are talking about a $200 motor in a $600 chassis (when I bought it, it’s worth a lot more now).
For some of us, budget constraints are a thing. The money saved on the transmission could buy a lot of other car parts.
BTW, a V8 powered Porsche 944 sounds like a fun project! 👍
Have both. Prefer the 5.3 for sure.
I’ve been watching you forever! You should do a LS biggggg cam high RPM shoot out!!! Slap a massive heads cam (to the limit) and rev it out!!!!
see 8000 rpm destroke video
@@richardholdener1727 I’m talking…. See what the limits are on how big a cam and see if you can throw some heads on there and make some power?
i think what we need now richard is a parts list for a 10 000 rpm stock bottom end junkyard ls hell even a built one , the next generation big bang engine , it would be good to see how hard we can rev a ls safely
th-cam.com/video/seqHncXqUN4/w-d-xo.html
It seems that the valves being controlled is the big issue.
Not really a question around me, 4.8L are a rare engine around me and 5.3L are getting stacked up like firewood with all the 4x4 1/2 tons rotting the frames out in the upper rust belt. My 6.0L lost a lot of metal off the outside during cleanup and a needle scalier was needed.
I've an old 1985 C10. A stock or TruckNoris 4.8 would be perfect for my needs.
Perfect. I'm contemplating a LS swap into my Nissan Patrol Y61.
Definitely like to see the ss1 cam in a l33 I've got a gen iv 5.3/706s/tbss/shorty headers and it's decent but not enough for the heavy crew cab
Which is why I'm seriously considering dropping 7k on a blueprint SBC 400 with 480 lb ft of torque peaking at 2500 rpms lol. I want my van to scoot without having to wait for it to go from put put to race car.
I think a 4.8 in a Vega would be cool, and I'm not even a Chevy guy
A stick shift coyote pinto would be awesome as well! I love small car V8 builds. Probably get 30 miles a gallon as well.
Dude whether your a chevy guy or not you have to admit chevy motors are good motors shit I'm a dodge guy
Debating bolting on the ss2/243’s I got yesterday. Or just wait until I find gen4 53 crank and rods. 100 lbs off the front is going to be pretty big too.
Im sure alot of folks would love to see a Ly5 build with the D.O.D. delete amd what its potential is. I would.
So what your saying is even if my 408 sucks, it will still be pretty dang good!
Truck noris cam in the biggest engine possible everyday!
Suggestion: combine a completely high-RPM power adder to a completely low-RPM high-performance engine/cam combination (but not with dime-sized ports or valves, just valve TIMING.)
See how far you can stretch the useful powerband on a car by camming for the bottom and having a power adder that brings up the top end. Try a variety of power adders: turbo and centrifugal. Size the headers for low RPM, but not excessively, like 1" primaries, which would be ridiculous.
This means a lower static compression, as cylinder pressures at lower RPM would be excessive with a cam with very high lift BUT low-RPM emphasis with higher compression. This would also aid in staving off detonation from the power adder at higher RPM/boost.
Goal: flat torque curve from 1000 RPM to 7000 or whatever redline you want.
Also, to find out if one can tame a centrifugal supercharger by adding cam-aided torque at low RPM to make up for the high-RPM rush, and same to add low-RPM cam emphasis to wake the turbo up at a lower RPM at the expense of high-RPM sudden "power comes in with a bang at this RPM."
The goal is not ultimate power, but to ascertain just how flat we can make the torque curve from start to finish. The same cam that really fills the cylinders at 1000 RPM will not allow the engine to breathe as well at 7000 RPM, and this is understood, but the same cam will also energize a turbo at a far lower RPM than will a "Pro Stock" cam.
Various sizes of turbos can be tried to find the results of them with a super-low-RPM cam.
it Doesn’t work like that if You have components to try and get power at two different RPMs you end up with nothing anywhere essentially you could put a centrifugal on or use a programmable boost controller on a stock motor and get what you want
Already been done with no electronic boost controller, by Porsche on the type 912 motor for Can Am.
I have a 5.3l single s366 springs and Elgin 1838P. Which is a 216/220 114lsa. Everything about this setup says torque. It definitely is. Turbo lights up instantly and off boost is torquey. I have wondered what would happen if I slapped a big cam in there. Should shift the power band a little right? But with a fast spooling turbo still pretty torquey? This is with a 5spd
@@or-ian6973 interesting. Could you give me pointers on building a 5.3 with good low end torque for my van? I thought you can't cam your way out of displacement for torque on the low end. I can get a 4lxx transmission and 5.3 for cheap or drop 7k and get an sbc 400 that I know will deliver over 450 torque at 2-2.5k rpms.
@@dexterlecter7289 any small cam. The truck Norris cam doesn’t loose any low speed tq. If you’re going NA bump the compression up a bit. Small turbo works well too. With a heavy van the extra load on the turbo should produce power faster. I’m in a small truck.
Interesting to see how the 10% larger 5.3 was producing up to 20% more torque below 4000 rpm. Have to wonder if the other components (intake manifold, heads, etc.) are just better sized for the 5.3 as well.
if only engines were just math
@@richardholdener1727 Technically they are, we just don't have all the measurements or the equations they feed into ;) If you ever have a chance, please think about doing a video or live chat touching on the days when NASCAR was offset grinding each cam lobe to account for cam/crank twist at high rpm
I think your correct. The 5.3 takes better advantage of the cylinder head and intake flow, testing shows they can support more power then that.
Ppl have argued with me 4.8 or 5.3 don't matter they're the same and that is incorrect. A healthy 5.3 makes more power all things being equal altho both are good motors.
I would guess the frictional losses were about the same and the displacement is 10% more just in my opinion that was so the parasitic loss makes up for the difference
@@johnsheetz6639 Could explain part of it. But the biggest frictional loss in a piston engine is the ring pack. And since the shorter stroke 4.8 moves those rings a shorter distance than the 5.3 they should have less parasitic loss. I suspect that air velocity through the ports is just a little too hampered on the 4.8 at lower rpms, which might hurt inertial filling of the cylinders, mixture motion, etc.
If you're going to boost the shit out of it, get a short stroke 4.8L, but for a street car/truck go with the 5.3L since torque is what makes it fun on the street and gets a heavy truck moving. Also seems like 5.3L are easier to find and cheaper from the junk yard. 5.3L can still take boost though and it really loves nitrous.
Would boost be the great equalizer? I would expect the same results based on past videos, but at that point maybe the lower torque would be better for actually getting traction LOL.
Does a shorter stroke shorten the time to reach desired rpm? Not overall rpm potential. Is having a light rotating assembly/flywheel what makes engine rpm accelerate quickly? For instance, a sport bike engine revs quickly and often times the rpm fall almost as quickly. Real snappy.
If the connecting rods and pistons are the exact same mass, a shorter stroke WILL require less power to go from one RPM to the next than will a longer-stroke engine, because the reciprocating assembly acts somewhat like a flywheel, as the energy expended to accelerate the piston and conrod from bottom dead center to kind of halfway up the cylinder will be recouped, mostly, upon the piston and connecting rod working to accelerate the crank from about halfway to top dead center.
The energy required to accelerate the pistons and connecting rods is not lost. It is not discarded. It is merely stored in the part that is moving more quickly at that moment.
people tend to answer this question as though they are spinning the motor by had or with an external force-how quickly the motor revs is not solely dictated by stroke length-component weight (including valves, cam, etc...) compression, tune all play a part
Does peak torque on 5.3 usually hangout around the same rpm In ur testing? It just don't seem to change alot. Not the number but the rpm range.
the peak rpm where the motor makes torque does change with cams, intakes etc...
Any performance desire must accept the fact that more stroke and bigger bore is always better. If your not racing weight per cubic in, then big is better.
I have yet to do a ls-anything swap....not sure if i'll get around to a ls swap but if I had a stock 4.8 or 5.3, I would use what RH used in this test, and I would be good to go. I would opt for a carb setup to save some big $$. Impressive power from stock motors, my 75 or 79 Monza would just love that! I would let others rack their brains trying to out power the next guy.
Turbo, nitrous, 5 speed, 7000rpm, 4.10 geared Monza would be cool.
@@BastardX13 That would be a wild ride. When you start to put real power into Monza's, just like v8 VEGA'S, you, must do major chassis, drive-train, and suspension upgrades. There is no middle ground, like F-bodies, novas, a-bodies, no steps to build thru. There is virtually NOTHING available for H-BODIES, it's stock, custom pro street or all custom all out. Monza H-BODY owners, like me are crazy!
Hi Richard, can't get enough of these videos man! I've always wondered how much power those OOOOOLD SCHOOL carb'd intakes made. I know it can't beat the newer air gap stuff.... But I've always wondered, on an iron headed 289/302 with a good street cam, and a barrage of Edelbrock Street Master/Street Dominator and Torker/Torker II intakes, Offy dual planes, old Weiand stuff, and I'm pretty sure there's a Holley dual plane intake out there... just how much power do these choke out compared to a modern Air Gap RPM or even a Weiand Stealth?
I remember back in 97 being 17 years old and rebuilding the stock carb in my 85 GT and also adding an Edelbrock Performer 289 dual plane to it thinking I gained a bunch of power! Did I, though???
Hey Richard run a 6.8 ford v10 there stupid cheap maybe slap a turbo on one ? See if you can break it ????
I'm curious on your thoughts about putting one of these in a boat. I'm not looking for performance per say just a little more than my 1988 5.7 has that's rated at 266 hp. Keep in mind it's in a 30 foot cabin cruiser and my outdrive limits me to how much power I'm able to throw at it
Hey Richard, I love your videos. Is it possible to build an N/A junkyard 4.8 up in a way that could out-torque a junkyard 454 below 5000 rpm? Keep up the awesome content!
with boost
Yes but it will never give you the driving feel of a good 454 sitting at alight on idle and just flat stab the peddle you will have to build boost for a few seconds and by that time the 454 drove out of your life
This was meant to say N/A vs N/A, my mistake
@@nicholassilvestri1804 stroke the 4.8 out to a 383 and put a mild cam in it and you could get close
No replacement for displacement
I think boost is a pretty good replacement.
@@zacha1408 LOL
Still waiting for that David vizard cam test.
If I could I would like to see a video on measuring push rods on a 6.0
that is up
@@richardholdener1727 thank you much
Hi Richard, enjoy your info videos. I have a question on boring an aluminum ls gen 4 siamese 5.3 to 5.7. cant seem to find any videos on this.
yes it can be done
Hey Richard whats your opinion on putting truck Norris in a 383 or 408 stroker? Too small of a cam for a big motor? Or would something like the btr stage 4 truck cam be better
what are you trying to accomplish?
@@richardholdener1727 I'm thinking of throwing together a very torquey NA daily driver truck
Can you test vortech ysi vs ysi-b no other changes. Thing has been out forever with no one ever posting back to back same engine just cast wheel vs billet wheel difference
I'm sure they have tested it
@@richardholdener1727 vortech says it worth 150hp and 4 psi. Never seen any results beside Brian Mitchell who was sponsored by them and he added a intercooler at the same to he added the billet wheel so not apples to apples. Would be nice to see the real results the way you do it.
I can't find the exact information I'm looking and I don't fully understand how to compare cams when looking at the numbers. I currently have an L33 in my truck and am looking for more torque for towing without sounding like a monster truck. Would I benefit from something like the BTR torque cam or is it too close to see a functional difference?
I HAVE A LOW BUCK TRUCK CAM FOR $179 THAT WOULD WORK WELL
@@richardholdener1727 I appreciate the quick reply! Do you have a video on it? My main concerns are how it sounds at idle and if there be a functional difference between it and the stock L33 cam. Not knowing much on the topic makes this hunt a bit unnerving. Thanks again.
Do you have any videos of an ls turning 10k? I would like to hear that!
only 8500
I guess need to search Richard to see if you have compared all the other LS based engines this way. Usually the large displacement of the engine it will create more torque & horsepower. ✌
Idk if I missed it but stock head with stock springs ?
not stock springs
Torque always wins!
I like the LM7 5.3 most , more torque , can you swap cams without pull te heads off ?
Yes. You just have to use dowels to hold the lifters up so they don't fall down in the motor
@@mikeday8826 or flip the engine over. Guess it just depends if it’s in the vehicle.
@@mcfero1 yeah I was assuming he was taking about doing it in the vehicle
This comment doesn’t have anything to do with the video except being about an LS. I recently did a DOD delete/cam swap on my g8 gt with the l76 motor. I used steel plugs to block the oil passages in the valley and used the stock valley cover. I did remove all the solenoids from it before reinstalling it (not really sure why but I figured I didn’t need them anymore) after re assembling the motor I’ve only got 16psi of oil pressure at start. Am I bleeding oil out of the valley cover without having the solenoids on there?
did you seal all of them?
@@richardholdener1727 what do you mean? They were a press fit into the holes
@@richardholdener1727 I suppose the solenoids held oil back and the empty holes where they were would just be leaking now. I just went ahead and ordered a block off plate as well and I’ll swap that on and see what it does
Can you turn a 4.8 ls into a 5.3 ls
yes-change crank and rods
The 4.8 in a vehicle 3500 pounds or less with a 3000+ stall converter and 3.73-4.10 gears would be decent but if your talking a 4500-5500 pound truck or SUV the 5.3 is a better choice with the 3.62 stroke crankshaft vs the 3.25 stroke in the 4.8 and a 3.90 stroke crankshaft in a 5.3 will wake-up low speed torque tremendously from idle to 5000rpm needing less converter and gearing and be much more peppy below 4000rpm and move a heavy vehicle with much less strain than a cammed 5.3 or 4.8 will bet a sloppy stage 2 cam with a
3.90 stroke crankshaft in a 5.3 would make gobs of torque from 2500-5000rpm
86 Z28 305ci Q-Jet Auto, 305 is cooked wanna step up to an LS with a single turbo, is there any certain LS I should look for? I've been told 4.8 likes boost more then the 6.0??? This will be my first turbo build so any info helps.
A BOOSTED 6.0L MAKES MORE THAN A BOOSTED 4.8l
Right on
As popular as the Elgin cams have become I would really like to see a comparison between the 1839/1840 on a basically stock 4.8/5.3/6.0 N/A and boosted. Not asking for much, right? 🤣
I would like to know? Is this really worth it, Or should I move on a buy the Holley sniper? AFR Small Block Chevy Titon 2-Piece Composite Intake Manifolds,
Composite Plastic 2-Piece Intake Manifold Offers Convenience
AFR developed a patented process and design for a 2-piece composite plastic intake manifold that reduces weight and increases power. These manifolds run up to 30° cooler than an aluminum manifold and weigh 9 to 11 pounds less (varies by model). The 2-piece design allows center runners to be removed without touching the distributor or losing coolant.
Features
Cast-in nitrous bosses
Dual distributor hold-downs
Intake bolt compression limiters
Carburetor vibration reduced 5%
Modular design with interchangeable runners
15+ horsepower and torque (more than competing units)
30° cooler and 9-11 pounds lighter than aluminum manifolds
Includes distributor bolts and 12-point intake bolts and washers
Viton rubber gaskets and O-ring distributor seal for leak-free operation! I would like to know Is this durable! and will it hold up to ignition and nitrous back fires, Sure would like to know! Before I waste more money! Keep up the great work Richard.
I don't think they make those intakes any more
Hows the vacuum with the SS2 cam?
NOT GREAT ON A 4.8L
@@richardholdener1727 i got an L33, still think im going LS9 cam because its in a ranger and I don’t need the low end torque.
I have a l33 5.3 with two gt3582 turbos. It has a Tick Flow stage 1 can with 216/220 int /exh .560 lift int and exh 114 lobe sep. The car is about 3200 pounds and has a 354 gear in it. It run good and it is a street car. I have a stock torgue converter and 700r4 trans. But you know how it is I want more . Do you think a Tick Flow stage 2 cam with 220/224 duration 575 lift and 112 lobe sep. Do you think the change in cam be worth any more power.
the turbos and boost level determine the power
Mo Powa BABY!!!
I'll take whichever one is cheaper.
Some of the fastest street cars are running 4.8 with ZR1 cams and turbo and making some 800 horsepower I kind of figured they want the 4.8 so it won't have so much low in torque that it has less traction and then again I don't know if they're lying
the LS9 cam is a terrible cam choice-and 800 hp is just getting started
i'll take the torque over the rpm, i actually drive my cars all the time
That's why I like big block strokers
Guess it depends on how you drive and what you drive. A 4.8 in a lightweight S13 or Fox Body as a canyon/drift motor is totally doable. I'm not running under 2500 RPM and I can run a higher redline. An aluminum 5.3 would be better than either.
4.8's honestly do fine in trucks they just need to have a 4.10 gear at the minimum and I actually do get pretty decent fuel mileage with mine too, but I'd take a 383 or 408 stroker anyway and if 4.10's are too high of an rpm on the highway a gear vendors will fix that
@@chrishansen7004 Well if it's a big truck I'll just go 6.0 liter. In a CJ7 mud buggy a 4.8 would work. We've got a 4.8 in a van at work and it's fine. It does 70 without too much trouble.
@@ahoneyman my 4.8 wants to go above 80 with 35x12.5
How about a high-fuel-mileage super-huge-motor that only turns 2000 RPM? (would require a very low ratio rear end, but, hey, the specific fuel consumption would be low.)
Also, the more slowly one turns the crank, etc, the more completely energy can be extracted from the combustion, and the less energy is required to fill the cylinders.
This is basically the point of a diesel. They found in the early days of diesels that without boost they are gutless, and with a gas engine it ends up with way too much heat to deal with, and lots of broken parts trying to make peak cylinder pressure that low in RPMs
I think a ls7 would be the ticket 😊
5.3 for me
it rhymes
@@richardholdener1727 I'm the first squirrel rap star
The jegs cut of the ss2 cam comes new in box in an actual bag and much better condition than the Elgin ones
the bigger engine is a double edged sword to get rpm you need an even bigger cam than small engine so valve control is harder to maintain
For short bursts, titanium valve springs!
At least the 4.8 has a good size bore so you can use these good cylinder heads, not like a 283, or especially a 305.
I think it has less to do with bore size (4.8's 3.78" Vs 305's 3.736") and more to do with the stock heads being better between those two generations.
@@d-phoenix2198 yeah the LS are all smallish bore, but those cyl heads now...
More cubic inches makes more power
If its for circle track and the smaller engine weighs less then I'll take that.
If I'm towing I want the bigger more lazy motor.
If I'm drag racing it depends on the avg hp/kg which could go either way.
To this day and age its shocking the number of people that don't understand what power is, "ill take a 500hp motor making 600lbft for towing over one that makes 550hp and only 500lb ft".
As if engines are bolted directly to the wheels and we don't have a gearbox or final drive and only torque at the motor matters.
4.8 and 5.3 weight roughly the same. Except for the l33, the only difference between the iron block engines is crank, con rod's and pistons. The blocks say 4.8/5.3 for a reason. (Edited for spelling)
Bruce Lee fought Chuck Norris in "The Way of the Dragon"
More cubes will make more power Period...
If you really want to wake up a 4.8, put 5.3 Crank, Rods and Pistons in it!
😂😅😅
I'll never buy anything from Jegs again.
Personally I blame squirrels
If you are trying to decide between the 4.8 and the 5.3, then the correct answer is 6.0. lol
Yeah but the gas mileage is ridiculous compared against the 2…….honestly you can’t go wrong with a flat top 5.3……although I pulled mine and put a bored over.030 lq9 in its place then put a lsa supercharger on less than a year later just cause I wanted more power than my cts-v
Any LS rather it be 4.8 or 7.0 anything in between will be better than a traditional small or even a smoggy big block