4.3L V6 VS 4.3L V8-WHICH OTHER GUYS MAKES A BETTER BUILDER?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ต.ค. 2020
- V6 OR V8-WHICH 4.3L MAKES MORE POWER, HAS MORE SUPPORT? THE 4.3L V6 IS 3/4 OF A TYPICAL 350 SMALL BLOCK. IT WORKS WELL AND WAS USED IN MANY DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS, INCLUDING THE TURBO TYPHOON AND SYCLONE. THE L99 (BABY LT1) IS A 4.3L V8 USED TO POWER THE CAPRICE, SO ALL THE LT1 (AND SBC) BOLTS RIGHT ON (SOME IF IT). THE QUESTION IS, WHICH 4.3L WOULD YOU CHOOSE?
- ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
That brings me back to my GM wrenching days. I was working on a Caprice with a 4.3L V-8 and I went to the parts counter for my part. The parts manager asked me what engine it had. I said 4.3L V-8 and he argued with me. Said that GM don’t make a 4.3L V8, they must have pulled the V6 out and put in a V8. I told him they didn’t make a V6 in the 4th generation Caprice. He finally believed me when he looked it up.
Yep, the L99 4.3 V8 (94-96) was the replacement for the L03 TBI 305, which was the base motor in Caprice Sedans from 89 to 93
@@FirebirdCamaro1220 Was the 4.3 the v6 they used in the Astro Van? Can’t remember if it was 4.2 or 4.3 but either way, owned a couple and were great motors. Could rack the miles on em for sure!
@@fishsquishguy1833 Yes, it was used in the Astro/Safari, the S10/Sonoma&S15, the C/K 10 pickups, the C/K 1500 pickups, the G10/G1500 Chevy Van/GMC Vandura, the 1500 Chevy Express/GMC Savanna, the compact Chevy Blazer/GMC Jimmy/first gen and 2nd gen Olds Bravada, the Chevrolet Caprice (85-88), Chevrolet Impala (85), Chevrolet El Camino and Chevrolet Monte Carlo (85-88). It was made from 1985 (when it replaced the 229 v6) until 2013. It had TBI in the cars from 85-88 (the only years it was used in cars), and in trucks&vans, it had a 4bbl carb in 85&86, TBI from 87-95 and port fuel injection from 96-2013
@@fishsquishguy1833 and Ford had a 4.2, the Essex V6, which went into the F-150 and E-150 Vans (where it replaced the 300 Inline 6)
@@FirebirdCamaro1220 Thanks dude!
I’ve owned a couple, both in Astro’s and both had over 250K and ran well. I think the only problem I’ve seen was an occasional puff of burning oil on start up due to valve seals but not really an issue at all
I love the 302 vs 305 idea. Im sure the 302 will be alot more fun but im still excited as hell. You are a gem and the world is lucky to have you
The biggest difference would likely be with high rev combos. And a 307 would most likely have torque and horsepower curves in the middle of the other 2 since the bore and stroke is in the middle. But I'd bet it would be closer to the 302 since the difference in bore size is alot closer than the 305 to 307.
The 4.3 L99 was used in Caprice Sedans as a replacement for the L03 TBI 305, it had a power and fuel economy increase over that engine, 200hp for the L99, 170hp for the L03 305
While the LT1 350 was a replacement for the L05 TBI 350 for Caprice Wagons, Roadmasters, Fleetwoods and optional in the Caprice Sedan, base motor in the 93 Caprice Sedan was still the L03 TBI 305, which is what the L99 4.3 replaced
Straight 6 smoke both of them
@@beforeal580 nah. 302’s (Chevy that is) we’re high revving power monsters for their size. Easy to make over 400 horse with the right heads and cam. Straight 6’s are great, superb towing engines, very simple practically anyone can get into them and work on them with success. 305 is good and can make power but get ready to throw money at it. They make good torque with a longer stroke but will not breath above 5k.
U should do a video of the chevy 4.2 inline 6 versus 4.3 v6 let's see what happens
The amerabarra as they call it. The vortec 4.2 inline 6. Hmm.
He's mentioned the Vortec 4200 here and there, and has expressed interest in getting one on the dyno in one of his his junkyard search vids. I actually called it the amerabarra in a comment and he responded saying it's what he'd call it as well. This is definitely something that's been on the mental back burner for a bit, and one that I'm hoping to see soon because I'm planning on using one myself.
@@andrewstewart1464 These things are everywhere here in Louisiana. You can go to the junkyard, cover your eyes, throw your ratchet, and you'll hit a gmt360/370 with one of these 4200's. They also have the aluminum 5.3s.
@@WillThat they are definitely slept on, so now is the time to pick them up. You can even buy a running car for pretty cheap if you wait and get a bit of luck. Don't get me wrong, the LS is still the cheap junkyard king, but these are sometimes even cheaper and give an alternative layout challenge.
They will handle 5to 600 hp
I love V6's but the v8 all day. Smoother and sounds way better.
But smaller bore to make same displacement so will be slightly down on power at high rpm
Erm the LU3 is a V6 90 degree like the 350.
262 vs 265CID
@@derekmaxwell8164 not exactly, compare 2.02 x 6 vs 1.94 x 8. Maybe if afr made v6 heads it would be different😂
If they're the same displacement I honestly would pick a v6. They will be a smaller block and head and lighter. They're easier to swap. I actually like the sound of 90° flying arm v6s.
I like your 302 LT1 idea. My favorite junkyard crank swap is taking the crank out of a 307 to destroke a 350 into a 327.
When I was at WyoTech in Laramie, WY for tech school, I had a friend that owned and chassis dyno’ed a 97 Chevy Blazer 4WD daily driver. It made 135HP & 270lb-ft with all the emissions controls and complete factory setup. It consistently made this power over 5 Dyno runs with 280,000mi on the odometer without any hesitation.
the steel wheels on those trucks bend easy and after awhile the truck rides like absolute shit. Next time you ride in one with the stock steel wheels, notice this.
@@ryanmalinI would but, I’m long graduated from school and I never see those late 90’s blazers anymore. Not to mention when I did see them, most of them looked like the front ball joints were about to fail because the wheel was tilted in at the top and out at the bottom. Plus, I’m a Ford guy that used to work on many different makes and models of vehicles. I wouldn’t dare ride in a Ford Explorer or a Chevy Blazer because both were similar designs that both the engineers should’ve been castrated for making in the 1st place.
Neither vehicle were worth their weight in gold but, I saw the Dyno runs myself and helped the owner do the runs as he was my toolbox partner in school. We used to give each other hell about the standard Ford vs Chevy crap, however the little 4.3 V6 baby brother of the Chevy 350 did make substantially good power for “a little engine that could”. My argument was always “there’s no replacement for displacement” and that I’d never use anything less than a Ford V8 in any project except for the trade and true almost bulletproof Ford 300ci straight 6.
Man 270 tq at the wheel isnt bad at all considering
@@80sfordguy it's the upper a arm bushings that wear out and makes it ride like Grimace from the McDonald's playland.
@@jacobmarshall2503 yeah when my friend saw the numbers we were both jaw dropped, we figured maybe 180-220 at best. Them 4.3’s are Torque little things.
V8. id rather hear V8 sounds rather than V6 sounds if im going slow or fast.
#concurs
EXACTLY!
so all V8's have the same sound?
That's why I love my 99 expedition, slower than a 4-banger but such lovely noise.
Yup. Always go v8
Hey I had one of these L99's in a 96 caprice classic. Got it off my grandfather. I won a couple races and lost a few. I vote to keep it stock bottom end and put some boost to it. Maybe the TPI intake? With boost? BTW, love the channel Richard. You have my attention. Keep it up brother.
I'll keep the dyno warm
I remember looking at Caprice’s back in the day and would scoff at the baby LT1 in them. Looking forward to what you can do with this V8 Richard!!
I'm really looking forward to the 302 vs 305 battle.
You could get the B body caprice classic with either 4.3 V8 or an LT1
The extra 2 power pulses per crank rotation is a bigger deal than you may think.
No so much the extra power pulses but percentage of work done for piston travel efficiency, the most efficient is between flame propagation point to just after 90 deg so in a 6 cyl there is a greater efficiency loss due to expanding cylinder volume than 8 cyl, this seems to be a consistent trend when watch test engine data with pressure transducers, and the caviat is on pump gas, as with more exotic fuels combustion expansion characteristics offset cylinder volume increases due to their thermo chemical expansion properties such like the need to open exhaust valve early enough on nitro motors to allow cylinder pressure to drop enough to stop it trying to force pistons out the bottom, just some observations
It's 1 more power stroke per crankshaft revolution
@@alanvincent1615 Yes, correction, my bad. (-:
I think the torque is higher on the v6 due to larger piston diameter. I’d rather have a v8 any day of the week, just sounds better.
There's a couple of guys, father and son, named Ernie Neal, running the little V8 Caprice in Super Stock. It's pretty competitive.
I have a little 4.3 Vortec V6 on the engine stand now. It has been zero decked, has hypereutectic Speed Pro 350 four valve relief flat top pistons, it's been balanced, bored and honed with deck plates, the heads have been milled, pocket ported, and have a three angle valve job, with stainless valves, screw in studs, and adjustable 1.6:1 rockers. It also has a Crane 214/222/114 hydraulic roller cam, should be over 0.500" lift. The Vortec EFI intake may hurt HP, but I figure it will make 250+ for HP, and about 300 ft/lb for torque. If I build another, it might get small dome pistons, and a little more cam. They're great little engines, and at around 250/300, run strong and get great fuel economy. Honestly, it's probably a lot better than a V8 swap for anything but all out racing.
I built a 4.3 V6 Vortec. Waiting for the suspension upgrade before I dyno it. 280 .525 cam and full roller rockers and a 411 PCM swap to program and rebuilt heads with double springs and short through hydraulic lifters. Also upgraded the injectors and cut the skirt out of the intake valve if you know what I mean. Everything else is stock. I will let you know what it can do later. For now it sounds sweet!!
94-96 chev engine vin id - W is l99 and P is the 5.7 lt1 -think its the 9th w-weak P-powerful
W= Wish I had the LT1
8th digit is engine.
The W is the 4.3 vortec central port spider injection. Had it in my s10 Tahoe. It was nutty fast .
@@btnerual Then that's because they reused engine VIN codes between car lines.
Excellent video! Very informative. I'm glad you didn't get hung up on cylinder count and immediately dismiss the V6 like most people do. I love the 4.3 V6 in my Silverado, so I'd probably chose it for a truck application since it has such great low rpm torque. I'd probably go with the V8 if I were putting it in a car due to the presumably better high rpm power, and much larger aftermarket support.
I put speed pro flat tops in a 267 with a summit cam kit 272 /282 I think about 480 lift. I ported and milled the heads at a machine shop .030. performer EPS. 500 EDELBROCK CARB. HEI ignition. MSD 6al. Long tubes. I had a 73 Pontiac Ventura that came with a straight six. Three on the tree. I removed the 6 installed the V8 with zoom clutch new pressure plate and throw out bearing. I was VERY IMPRESSED with the POWER this combo had! Tires chirped easily ! Great acceleration! It turned high rpms easily. Loved this car!
Put together an '85 4.3 v6 (two piece rear seal and flat tappets) put '84 229/3.8L heads on it, cut them out for 1.94/1.50 valves, deshrouded the chambers, put Dave Vizard 5 angle seats on them, was running a SERDI Seat & Guide Center for a living at the time so why not!?, a Lunati Street Master cam #33504 in it with roller rockers and topped it off with a marine GM spread bore intake with a Qjet on top, Astro van headers and 40 Series Flowmasters for exhaust, it was in a CJ5, supposed to put out 230HP and 330 TQ?, it would make that CJ SCOOOOOT!!!!
Also have a 262 V8 out of a Nova, I remember if you held it wide open and dropped it in drive it would give about half a revolution of the rear tires, in the gravel?
Hello Steve this is John Paul Schafer I was just curious do you still have your 262 RPO LV1 Chevy V8 out of your Nova if you could reply at appreciate that had one did a lot with it the one I had was
From a 75 monza 4spd I now have
Several 267s RPO L39
My brother owns the business
MARLIN CRAWLR
In Fresno Ca
like to chat with you
Haha my first car had a lean burn 318 and it would only spin a tire when it was snowing.
V6, the little engine that could. Towed my 21’ day cruiser with a BBC , with my now ex’s 2003 Safari from Thousand Oaks to Parker AZ. Thing never slowed down and there are a couple good grades to pull. Always like the under dog in the battle.
Sorry bout that man. 😐
Tow my 8000 lb bobcat on trailer with all tools with my 4.3 Vortec in my 1500 express van.
No problems
A lot of people slept on the 4.3 V6. Those engines had great torque with a 700 trans or 4L60 behind it. My '88 GMC S15 upset many V8's from red light to red light.
I've got a '91 S10 with a 5spd manual and 3.08 rear gears, but I was surprised when I towed a trailer from Utah to Arizona (9 hours) that the truck didn't even seem to feel it, even up hills. The only thing was on a very long and very steep uphill (~6 miles) the temps started to get very warm but the engine still had the power.
@@matthewmccollum9750 I pulled several vehicles, by chain or strap, on the Interstate and didn't even noticed the weight behind me.
crazy that this guy just makes videos on a lot of engines out there and pushes them to make safe big horsepower love this guy watches him 2v vids and got myself a 03 2v
Had a 1991 K1500 with the 4.3 V6. Good mileage but slooooow as can be. So I did some upgrades. First I took off the TBI, raised the injector pods and installed 5.7 injectors. Then I made the pressure regulator adjustable. After that I ported the body of the throttle body and shaved off the top of the venturis for better flow. Finally, I bolted it back onto the intake with an aluminum spacer. Then, I installed a better distributor module with a better spark curve.
I probably added a whole 5hp. But you could totally feel it, lol
I like the idea of a 5.0L big bore small stroke. That way, like you said, you can use any performance SBC head and the added benefit of running a 6 inch rod. I wanted to do this in my Supercharged 1991 Formula when the stock 5.0L TPI crank snapped. Ultimately I went to a 383CI.
I believe they both will have their own perks. Depending on what engine bay space you have would lean toward each engine. I had LT1 cars in the past. I had a 94 S10 SS with 100 shot of N.O.S. that 4.3L loved the spray!
I had a 95 Caprice with the L99. I put a cold air intake on it and a Borla exhaust. Making it breath better provided more than adequate power and great fuel economy.
Built a 5.0 stroker Chevy 4.3 V6 back in 2014 for my 2nd Gen 4runner. Pulled 220hp in 3rd gear on a chassis dino with 35inch tires, 4.10 gears, 5speed. Truck is pretty heavy with steel bumpers and exo skeleton cage. Engine has some big balls for a V6. Revs to 6,700 no problem. 1990 non balance shaft block bored 60 over, 4 bolt mains, Scat 3.875 split pin billet crank, H beam rods, forged pistons, Brodex-10 aluminum heads, Edelbrock TBI intake with 454 TBI unit. The torque is unbelievable for a V6. It's been extremely reliable so far with no problems. It runs like a powerful 350 V8.
I remember back in the '90s GM Performance Parts offered a 4.5 liter V6 short block that was rated at 300hp/300 torque. It was designed for the V6 guys that wanted more power but didn't want to do a V8 swap. It used the stock MPI intake manifold and injectors and came with a new chip for the ECU. I've tried to find info on it recently but couldn't find anything. Never actually seen one.
This is cool but I’m still waiting for the turbo 3800
Buick already did that. They called it the Grand National.
Justin Keckhaver I’m waiting on him to do that
Maybe compare the gm vs dodge 3800
I have a 1997 Chevy S10 ZR2 With a 4.3 vortex 6 cylinder freshly rebuilt. that I turned it into a mud truck. How does one go about getting more horsepower without sinking a bunch of money into it. Any ideas will be very helpful.
@@scottjones6608 cheap ebay turbo that shit
Yes. I built a warmed up, 1976 262 4.3L Chevy V8 in 1989. I used stock pistons w/moly rings, polished stock crank and stock bore block. I had multiple head, cam, intake and carb combos through the years. Combo 1: Crane Fireball II 290 cam, Edelbrock Performer intake, Holley 600 spread-bore vacuum secondary carb, Accel HEI with curve kit, ported 882 1.94 heads with performance springs sporting Moroso black crinkle covers and stock exhaust manifolds with duals, mated to a TH350 w/ a Boss Hog 2800 RPM stall converter in a 2600 lb car running stock highway gears on 10.5 in tires. It ran a shameful but extremely consistent 16 second 1/4 mile... Combo 2: Same stock block, crank and pistons with stock, but ported smaller 1.70 58cc chambered heads with performance springs, Comp Cams 268 cam, Holley “X-Type” equal-length runner intake, Accel HEI w/ curve kit, Holley 650 square-bore double-pumper, Hooker equal-length competition headers with 15 in collectors and an H-pipe, a 150 HP single plate under-carb NOS kit, electric fuel pump, and an short-shaft aluminum water pump mated to the same trans and chassis combo from above. This tamer setup, though, ran a much better 12.76 at 118 in the quarter spraying it at rollout. Would you believe I still have the engine in the barn? There were many other combos with this same block through the years, but these were my first (worst) and last (best) combos.
And to the doubters, yes, the crappy smogged-out 882 casting 1.94-sized valve heads WILL clear the small bore of the 1975-1980 262ci 4.3L V8 SBC without notching. They may not clear a 305 ci block deck, but they will the 262. Who’da guessed?
As well, I’ve had a couple 350 ci SBCs and a 383 stroker SBC in that same car over the years too. The car was a 1979 Pontiac Sunbird that originally came with a 2.5L Iron Duke 4 cylinder mated to a 4-speed stick. The Iron Duke blew a timing gear within the first two weeks I owned it. I began the V8 transformation immediately.
@@NorthernChev That intake valve had to be really close to the cylinder wall. Hardly any flow with there. Been looking for a 262 v8 for a fuel economy build.small cam 2psp intake ported exhaust with larger exhaust valve. Rollor rockers,450 Holley ecomizer,deck and square the block and head for close to 9 to 1 compression.long tube headers 1.5 primery pipe.
@@joed5472 Although cam technology has come a long way in the last 20 years, I will say the Comp Cams 268 I ended with in my last 262 build was a fantastic cam. Lots of low and mid-range grunt to help the small displacement. And vacuum secondaries are a must. Good luck!
@@joed5472 And coincidentally, yes, the small 58cc-chambered, stock, 1.7/1.5 heads out-powered the larger valved, larger chambered 882 casting 1.94 heads that I tried. I can get more RPM out of the 882s, at the sacrifice of low end grunt that the smaller chambered stock heads had. But, with that small of displacement I found that the larger 268 grind camshaft helped out my mid and higher end, and helped compensate for the smaller heads. The smaller, stock heads had 58 cc chambers that raised the compression ratio above the 882s. Albeit, to only 8.5:1.
Get a GM Holden 253ci 4.2L,
Or a 308ci also 304ci all interchange most parts.
They were made here in Australia though.
253ci 4.2L
3.625" bore
3.062" stroke
5.625" rod length
304ci and 308ci Engines had 4.000" bore
I would build the v6. I own a lv3 and love it. Also everyone builds v8's. I want to be different and love the challenge of the v6 build. I think ~450 hp out of a lv3 is fairly easy to do
You and I are very alike. I bought a 98 durango because no one else was really paying attention to the 318.
@MassCityMadman my Durango chewed up some rod barrings
@MassCityMadman ooof. I really wanted to turn the Durango into a track monster that has 180 headers and revs to 7500rpm
@MassCityMadman I have to put it on the back burner for now
I've always wanted to put the l99 crankshaft into a lt1 block. Cammed up for high rpms in a light vehicle. Very interested in seeing how that combination runs. My choice between the 4.3 liter v6-v8 would definitely be the v8 because I think it #1 would sound way better exhaust wise. #2 like you said it most likely can be easier to make power with because of more aftermarket support. #3 also like you said not everyone knows about them and it would be fun to trip people up with one. #4 I think it would also respond well to boost.
I had a straight axle swapped s10 with the 262 small block that had a cam ,intake ,carb. It ran great ,revved to the moon. It didn't have any trouble spinning 42s.
I love my 4.3 in my 01 blazer 4x4 5 speed with 280xxx have hurt feeling in it plenty of times. The five speed makes these motors feel awesome. 👍
I installed a 262 in my friend's Buick Regal, it performed well and boosted the mpg from 17 to 21 mpg.
@John Hughes that's the vehicle it came from. Good little Mill.
The 90* bank angle of the 4.3 V6 requires a split crank pin for balancing, making a weak spot in the crank. Therefore, I would choose the 4.3 V8.
It would be pretty hard to make enough power with the V-6 to break the crank.
I have 209,000 mile original Chevy Astro 4.3l with the balance shaft, still runs like a top and powerful. Only headaches were intake manifold internal/external leak onto exhaust manifolds and stubborn spark issues. Now it's all fixed with no issues for 12,000 miles. Rear mount turbo would work nicely with this.
Thank you so much for doing this I’ve been wanting someone to do a 4.3 v8 build for so long
Had the 4.3 V8 in our 1980 Oldmobile Cutlass Supreme. It was unbelievably reliable and went through my parents, and two kids that beat the crap out of it.
I have a 80 cutlass with a 4.3l v8 sitting in my garage. My mom bought it new. Still runs great!!
That is a different engine. L99 is a Gen 2 engine.
@@drsethsr Yes..and thank you captain obvious
You surely could beat the tar out of it.
I was in the vehicle when we held it in first gear, floored until we got sick of hearing it anymore. Believe me if you like, but with 2.29 gears we almost cleared the 85 mph speedo in 1st gear. Crazy RPM, never died. Not fast, durable though.
I have a 81 Malibu. The emissions tag says 4.4 liter, also called the 267. It's a gutless pussbag of an engine. The only benefit is that it's a small block and is easily replaced by a decent engine. Have to watch out for the th200 and then the 7.5 inch rear end if you increase output.
WOW 😳 you outdid yourself with this one...I remember the 4.3 v6 more than the 4.3 v8 🤔👍💪...
Thank you for this video. I have actually wanted to see this comparison for a while.
I always loved the L99, great engine. Had one in a caprice.
DZ302 Was like voodoo when I was growing up , lol One of the quickest Camaro ever in the hey day
The 4.3 V8 definitely, I've never seen a build on one. It should handle boost like a champ.
I have a set of 96+ vortec 4.3 heads I had fully ported with 2.00/1.57 valves and they flow 266 intake and 192 exhaust both at .600 lift. The porting and valve job were done by Elliot Port Works in Dallas.
I had a 75 monza with the 262. I put an Edelbrock intake and quadrajet and dual exhaust. Wasn’t a powerhouse but it did run high 14s over 90mph in the qt mile in the light car. What a fun little car and still got around 20 mpg which back in 1983 was really good. Sold it to a friend who put it in his 1/2Ton truck and drove it forever. That thing was indestructible.
The different lengths of the two engines could be more useful to some people. The V6 should give more room for front mounted boost and a bigger intercooler.
Man I haven't heard anything about a 4.3 v8 in years!!!
My current daily driver is a 2000 GMC Jimmy with the last generation of the original 4.3 V-6. And while it's held back by being in a luxobarge 4×4 four door SUV, it makes more than enough torque to get with the program. Power Nation built a hopped up version that made over 250 hp and almost 300 lb ft of torque naturally aspirated.
I had a 1980 Olds Cutlass with the 4 3 V8. It didn't have tire shredding power but it had plenty to move the car and it was smooth and got good mileage.
Oooh ooh ooh!!! Buick 215! Maybe a future other guys on the Buick/Rover V8 ... of you find one.
My friends dad is a Buick fan. He has several 215's laying around. All aluminum. Has one in an old 4wd willy's truck.
@@marcmo7138
Does he still have this engines???
I need one.
Completely forgot about the 4.3 v8. Great video!
Hey Rich, you should do a big block with a 409 crank. 409's had a 3.5" stoke. I heard about this years ago when Reher Morrison did this in Pro Stock. A .030" over 396 would be the same as a 400" block with a 350 crank.
400 block with 3.48 crank is a 372-377 (depending on bore)
@@farrellvaughan4472 Actually the original Reher Morrison big block pro stock engine used a 3.25" stroke 348 crank along with a 4.210 bore for 362 cubic inches that could really breathe.
I had a Chevy Monza in the early 80s with the 4.3. It did have a Q-jet 4 bbl and A/T, it wasn't too bad in that light of a car.
Good video
My first car was a 75 monza , 262 4spd. De smogged, duels, eddy streetmaster single plan ( small fairly long runners , for velocity) and a 450 mech secondary spreadbore, 4 inch open element. Got the buid idea from a magazine.... They emphasized low end torque and not over carburetoring. Really woke up the car. Had a very loud induction Whaaaa, that would make Richard proud!
iv been intrigued by building a 4.3L v6 smaller package would lend itself to swaps better and less weight on the nose. could be interesting with a small lightweight car. but as you were talking about the lack of aftermarket makes it a bit tougher.
But when LS kits are available for Miatas and Nissan 240s and....
350 parts fit, 350 supercharger/procharger/turbochargers, connecting rods, pistons,piston rings, bearings, rear main, balancer work...
@@shadowopsairman1583 yeah but no aluminum heads also turbo's and prochargers would offset the point of trying to build a lighter weight powerplant.
This freakin rules! Thank you!
I had a 1975 Chevy Mazda with a 262 V8 factory motor and I put a intake in four barrel on the stock cam and it ran great
I haven’t built either, but I understand that the 4.3 V6 can be built into a reliable 8,000 rpm buzz bomb. One of my future engine builds will be a 4.3 V8 using a roller 305 block and the L99 crank and rods, Trick Flow heads, ‘94 - ‘96 LT1 camshaft, performer intake, and probably a 500 cfm Carter carb. I’m expecting ~ 230 hp and a solid 25 mpg. This is for a Jag XJ12 that I already have a 1974 350 in, I just want a traditional looking SBC that delivers great mpgs with acceptable power.
That is correct, no opti-spark. The 305 roller cam block Is like a conventional SBC - all I’m doing is using the L99 crankshaft and connecting rods. It will actually have similar power to the V12 that was originally in the Jag - but is more than 300 lbs lighter! The current 350 in my Jag was installed in 1993, this car has always been about comfort and handling to me rather than being a hot rod.
The L99 head does have a smaller 1.84" intake valve, and it also has a much smaller 45-48cc chamber. You could put an aluminum LT1 head on it, but you'll gain 7-10cc in chamber size. This could be offset with milling, but I believe the aluminum LT1 heads can only get cut down to about 51cc. The port sizes seem to be identical to the LT1 heads, and the combustion chamber is heart-shaped. The intake manifold and camshaft are identical to what was used in the B-Body LT1s.
I have one of these little guys sitting on a dolly in the corner of my garage. I'd like to eventually put it in something light that doesn't need a ton of power to get moving.
Could you mill that much off the heads and the intake still fit? And what would it do for PTV clearance moving the combustion chamber that close to the piston?
@@chesspiece81 You would only be knocking off about 4-7cc. The machine shop will correct on the intake side for proper fitment. Adequate PTV will ultimately depend on the camshaft specs.
As a person who likes reliability, the v6 makes more sense. There is just less to go wrong for the given displacement. With the v8 your not just adding more cylinders, you're adding more valves, more springs, just more everything. Not to mention the package as a whole will run far hotter than the v6. So ultimately I can see the V6 being more flexible than the v8...
Good points, I agree as well as in the case for engine swaps it is a smaller package over all
I have a 4.3L V6 with Vortec heads that was built for my Typhoon. It's bored .030, gasket matched heads with stainless steel valves, custom ground Comp Cams camshaft (.513/.513 on a 115 LSA) & Edelbrock 2114 intake. It made 276hp/306lb-ft on an engine dyno thru stock n/a manifold and Y-pipe & am untuned 850cfm carb that was just used to dyno it. It does have Eagle H-beam rods & Mahle forged pistons too.
I had a 75 Chevy Monza spider 2+2 with the 4.3l 262.
I put a 750 Holley carburetor Edelbrock intake.
I was surprising quite a few people off of the line.
4.3 v8 never heard of her!
265 CID
Lexus makes one and way better than any Chevy engine.
Yeah that Lexus v8 is nice
The first Chevy small block was 265 ci. The L99 was not a popular version, but honestly why would you use it unless you wanted a really high revving combo. I could imagine a twin turbo 265ci in a light car doing work.
@TimothyReidUpNorth907 oh shut up!! I own an SC430 with 340,000 miles that still runs like new. Scotty hates Lexus V8s. He's an idiot.
in short 8 people can move a piano easier than 6 people. lol
Not if it’s six big dudes vs 8 skinny runts.
Yeah number of cylinders doesnt always mean more leverage with more cylinders.
@@ReidHenderson it does mean worse fuel economy though, as a V8 has more moving parts and rotating mass than a V6 of the same displacement
@@KuntryBoyCitySlick Or if there just isn't room for eight people in the space the piano has to move through. V6 vs V8, V6 vs inline 6, there are always trade-offs, and videos like this are worthwhile to understand what the advantages of each are and how they are achieved so we can decide which benefits are worth which costs for a particular application.
Valid point🤔
You may be the first person I know to actually discuss the original 265, or the 262. This was a very historically informative video for people that don't know about these various motors. Good job.
thnx-history is good stuff
The LV3 has been swapped into a Grand National and running e85 with 7-9 psi of boost it makes some very nice power. Unfortunately no aftermarket support exist for the LV3, the port inject intake runner and upper intake had to be cut down from LS parts. With the way things are going there won't be any aftermarket support for a v6, even though the block is as strong as the TA Performance for a Turbo Regal, because everyone wants a LS or LT or run 100psi in an I4. The LV3 is a strong motor and it would be cool to be able to update a Syclone or Typhoon with dead engines and slap an LV3 with a turbo would bring these guys back to life. The latest LV3 are like LT1 heads, they will out flow Buick Motor Sports Stage 2 heads with the LV3 ported.
I've built many 4.3 V6 engines. A great power adder I experimented with, with great results, was using 350 flat top pistons when building them. I want to do another one utilizing the newer 3.62 stroke crank in the 4inch bore older block. Not sure I can even do that yet. Might have to just cut a crank to stroke it. If I do, it will be a 3.75 stroke if the block will accommodate.😎✌️
I don't think the Gen V V6 crank will fit in the old 4.3 V6 block. For one thing, the new engine has bigger main bearings.
I had no idea the 4.3l V8s existed.
Id take the 8 over the 6 any day. They are better balanced without stupid balance shafts and you can make all sorts of weird frankenmotors with them.
Cant wait for the stroker vs destroker shootout!
Imagine the V8 with a balancer shaft in it. It would be so smooth you’d think it was an electric engine lol.
The "baby" LT1 was designed primarily for fuel economy CAFE standards. Combine that with OD transmission and highway gears and you superb economy in a full sized sedan. Not a lot of power, but they balanced almost perfectly and were designed to run very very smooth. So, they are perfect for a highway cruiser. An engine that you cant tell is there that passes hella lotta gas stations while you cruise in comfort with the AC on without a care in the world during a long road trip. This is what they did best.
A lot of people don’t understand that everybody doesn’t want a hot rod from the factory.
I've always wanted to see a built up 260 Olds/Pontiac. lots of people ho and hum about "it's not possible", "not worth your time", and "expensive for the little power you'll make" but if power and price was the only thing everyone cared about nobody would build flathead v8s!
We talked about this in facebook a few months ago! I have a 1975 Nova LN with the 262ci. 4.3l and after seeing this vid, I'm thinking about doing something with the intake and cam to see if i can get past that weak 110 hp!
Even though the 262 is a tiny bore engine, (but still bigger than the 267 bore) I'd love to see one done with a cam, ported heads, the rest of the usual stuff and see how it does. There can't be many 262 V8s left at all. I've never seen one for sale in the last several years. Only seen one in a car in the early 90s.
262
3.671" bore x 3.1" stroke
267
3.5" bore x 3.48" stroke
V-8 built to high-revving 302, please!
I drive an l99 caprice every day. It may not be a sports car but it moves right along and is the quietest running v8 i have ever seen. And its smooth. Very nice car to drive.
Please keep us posted on the changes you make, i may be inspired to soup up my l99!
will do
You hit the nail on the head with the head flow vs number of cylinder theory. I thought that immediately. I’d love to see what you can get this thing to make N/A
Elephant in the room: split-throw crank on a 90-degree v6. Weaker than non-split crank as found on a 90-degree v8, and the degree of split trades strength for less “odd-firingness”. Plus has more residual imbalance. Just not a good setup for performance.
Shit splits and splat spots..
@@montgomeryhifiandreview5528 the Buick 3800 is (IMO) a better engine. One parameter that the designers vary in a 90-degree v6 is how many degrees of split the pins have. Less split = stronger at the expense of a less even firing pattern. The early 3800s had no split and maximum odd-firing. I don’t know for sure, but the later ones may have still had fewer degrees of split than the 4.3.
Well the v8 should have a higher VE but the smal bore inhibits flow. The v6 bigger bore and valves interesting comparison.
I would always pick v8 over v6 sounds so much better
I'm glad the L99 4.3 is finally getting some love. I had a 95 Caprice L99 for a while, got a couple videos of it on my channel, i loved that car, averaged 18.5 MPG with a lead foot lol. I also had a 79 Malibu with the 267, it was definitly lack-luster as far as performance, but it was a great cruiser and damn reliable. I've also owned many 4.3L V6's, awesome little motors. my first car in fact was a 1994 GMC Jimmy with the 4.3L CPI Vortec, 200hp/260ft-lbs. thing ran great, smoked a 97 F150 4.6 with it lol. The parts-swapping idea between the L99/LT1 is gonna be awesome, ill be waiting for those videos for sure!
Really want to see a big bang on the LV3 4.3 v6. I suspect with rings gaped for boost you'll/we'll see 800+hp. Watched all your vids and always look forward to whatever you do next! Thanks!
Seen a video of the twin torque storm on the 4.3 V6 and it put down just under 1200 HP..
I have been waiting for this!
I ported a set of marene heads and they did pretty well
The 262, 265, the 267. In the gen 0 family. I helped a guy swap out a 267 out of a '78 or '79 Camaro and put in a long block 350 target mater back in the late 80's or early 90's. the one with the 350 stroke. Bolted all the 267 accessories up to it and he drove the 7 hours back to Edmonton that same weekend. no problem. I've driven a V6 powered Safari van ( aka mini van ) as a work vehicle. Our '94 Caprice is powered by the gen 2 4.3L Its a strong little motor. If I remember right, Chevrolets goal for the 4.3 gen2 ( baby LT ) was 1 Horse per cube and the publication I read about it that they more than achieved their goal. BEFORE anyone pounces on me for using the "gen 0" nomenclature, I point out that I am using Chevrolets own designations in their 2017 GMPP catalogue, they define the gen 0 as the 2 piece rear main seal and the gen 1 as the 1 piece rear main seal ( their own crate motors )
the 4.3L was rated at 200 hp-misses the 1 hp per cube by a fair margin, right?
I would chose the V8. 8 ports with 1.84" valves are almost certainly going to flow better than 6 ports with 1.94" valves. If cams are swapped the L99 will handily stomp the V6 at higher RPM.
Flow isn’t everything. Bore and stroke have even more to do with the recipe
big bore pulls more air in on account of the surface area, and the engine is lighter.
@@frigglebiscuit7484 Valve curtain area is more important and the 8 slightly-smaller valves have more.
@@redram5150 Flow IS everything. There is a reason that math can tell you EVERY time how much power an engine will make, based on head flow. Put the same heads on two engines with differing bores and strokes, and the average power will be very close to the same.
That v6 is the most torque heavy gas dyno I've ever seen. Its an NPI motor, on Torque!
I'm not a GM guy. But your videos are so awesome. I'm a Ford guy.. and have a 5.0 ranger.. thank you for the content, and most of all thanks for the build sheets, the suggestions, and inspiration. Keep doing what you do engine man.
happy to help
Had a gmc sonoma,94, had a 2.8 V6. Lots of torque, stock all the way. SLE package, 5 spd, with cruise control, map lights on rear view mirror, and buckets with console.
We had a 253 ci V8 here in Australia (Holden). They were quite common.
I remember Street Machine magazine built one for 344hp back in the day.
Did anyone talk about the weight and physical size difference? That could make a difference depending on what you're putting it in.
Not much
There's a bloke with his thinking cap on... Was thinking the same... Interesting to see differents in weight.... Power to weight ratio always makes a difference.
The V6 would be lighter. That L99 is probably an anchor, seeing as how it has so much extra metal in the block because of that tiny bore. The 4.3 v6 is essentially just 3/4 of a 350.
Hi Richard I love the baby V8s Down under we had 253CI units in the 70s then GM did 308CI versions then walkinshaw? I think developed even port spaced FI heads.I used the late stock standard heads on a 060 overbore 253 with 240 deg intake duration cam, harrop manifold, headers etc and got 377 hp @7200 Did have to notch the bores to fit the big valve heads on the small bore .Valve shrouding who cares it worked great.
You brought a wonderful information It indicates the depth of your thinking I have been searching for this information for a long time And you are the specialist who answered it Go on, my friend ... your mentality liked me I hope you will talk about the V6 diesel engines that are suitable as replacements for the Astro van 4.3 engines 95 Octane Gasoline Thank you for your reaction😇👍
A thing to consider with v6 vs v8 is weight and size of the lump you're working with. How much displacement and how much horsepower can you get relative to the penalty you pay with extra weight and increased inertia etc. I'm not talking about just the weight of the engine block and cylinder heads here but when you start putting power adders to it. How much more power does the v8 need to make before the difference in weight, the weight distribution and whatever is accounted for with how much the v6 can make at its maximum capability.
That's why V-8s are going the way of the Dodo. My buddy had a Ford Contour in H.S. It had a 5 spd manual, and DOHC 3.5 liter v-6. After some bolt ons it made 192 hp and 300ft of torque. He beat every 5point slow that he ever raced, and got the better of stock z-28s pretty consistently. People would be furious.
Ironically, he now drives a mustang 5.0. It the coyote with a tune. So it has some power.
I drive a Honda Pilot. Lol
Those contours were pretty cool, too bad they broke down all the time and parts became near impossible to find.
Looking forward to this I have a 4.3 v6 and I wanna build it
I daily a 4.3 s10. Been a monster. Ported heads, mild choppy cam, an intake 1inch spacer, aswell as a TB 1inch spacer, stainless steel headers, high flow cats, no muffler 2.5in exhaust.
Its a very stout v6 for sure. I run a 295/60 series rubber in the rear to keep it planted.
For being a v6, its got good torque, and steady power.
I am a fan of the v6 for sure! 👍
Looks pretty good on the v6 curve. I dynoed my 96 blazer and with a hypertech and free flowing exhaust it made 170hp at 4400 and 225tq at 3200, but that's as low as the could dyno in 3rd without it down shifting
20 mpg in my loaded 1500 express van 4.3 300 k miles still going
Same in my chevy g10! Everyone is under this myth the 4.3 get worse mpg than a 350. Bs. They have smaller injectors and 2 less pistons how on earth would they get worse mileage. I just did a 423 mile trip straight on 21 gallons and still had fuel when I got home. 7 hours of driving. Love the 4.3 nice lil workhorses
@@fvgc454ss yes indeed cheap to fix also.
350 Cubic inch/ 4 speed in a monza back in the day, very quick car
The only factory 350 applications in Monza's were 75 models, and only in California, and was saddled with a shitty 2bbl carb and tuned to just 120hp. The 305 2bbl replaced it the next year
@@FirebirdCamaro1220 Wow 120hp from a 350😂
4.2L Inline 6.
Ferrari did the v12 for primary and secondary balance. Also smoother with a pulse every 60 degrees.
I love the 4.3 V6 Chevy, and I am a Ford man.
Gumby Performance has been running a 4.3 V6 with a supercharger for years in his Luv truck KILL'n it in the 1/8th.
Like a 4-71 right?
Personally if I could get them within 10 hp of each other I'd go v6 to get better engine set back and weight off of the nose. But having played with a 4.3 v6 I know its starting out handicapped. But if you want to stay fuel injected find the marine intake manifold. They dont have the internal injection block, they have external rails and injectors
I have an all stock 1997 Chevy Cheyenne 1500 v6 and it has 286,000 miles on it have had no problems with it and it still runs amazing
V-8 all day... The availability of performance parts is huge and cheap for the V-8, and next to nil or EXPENSIVE for the V-6.