[Bryan Jensen]

Would it be difficult to take one of the new GTO engines and put it in my 67?

[Bryan Jensen]

Would it be difficult to take one of the new GTO engines and put it in my 67?

[Mr. P-Body]

If you are, or have access to, an electronics guru and a fabricator, it wouldn't be TOO difficult. You'll need all the correct electronics to make the fuel and spark systems work. There is no provision in LS1 for a distributor, and no intakes for carbs. The intake could be fabricated with little problem. I suppose you could adapt a crank trigger system.
Now for the $64 question: "Why?" A 400 makes more power and is cheaper to build (LS1 is no bargain!). I would guess fuel efficiency and weight are the rationale?
Don't misunderstand. I REALLY like LS1. Cool engine! But it's no Pontiac when it comes to power output, at least at the milder levels. In a heavy car, I would think it a bit shy on torque.

[Bryan Jensen]

The question is...why not?

Besides, a car can only be enjoyed if you can afford the gas to drive it . Premium gas here is 2.65. Pretty pricey to go on an enjoyable cruise.

Besides, why not do something different?

[olblue]

I was thinking the same thing but did a cosmetic makeover while I tried to decide which fuel injected V-8 to install. Meanwhile the 05 GTO will be sporting a more Goatlike 6 liter 400 HP LS2.

I still am leaning towards a Ramjet crate motor since that 350 runs around 400 lb. ft. of torque from down around 1800 RPMs. It's packaged to slide right in with a computer the size of a cigarette pack.

[Mr. P-Body]

While reading Engine Master this week, I found an article on an intake/carb combo that is designed to "down grade" (used that only for the lack of a better way to say it) LS engines to a carb. I'll get the part numbers for you.

An 8:1 compression 400P would still make more usable power... AND run on 87 octane!

[David Holmberg]

The already have an intake for a carb that comes with the computer and program to work. But, WHY? If I were going to use an LS1 motor I'd just use the factory FI.

My bone stock SS Convertible went 13.4 @ 104 at 3800 lbs. A "Mild" 400 wouldn't be too mild to do the same. A 455 would be another story though. The SS and the Trans Am that replaced it both need 93 octane for performance runs; the computer will pull timing for 87/89 driving.

Personally I'd like to see a 400/455 in your 67, but understand that it's your car and the LS1/2/6 is a great motor.

If you want cheap, go with a crate SBC, for hi tech the LS1. But I'd still go the original path.

Unless you get a deal on a LSX motor, they are not cheap...

[Mr. P-Body]

David, you must be refering to a crate engine. I have yet to see one. I like the idea, though.

On another subject, as a moderator, would you please e-mail me. I have a couple of log-on issues and can't use the old e-mail address. Your system won't let me in to make a change to the bio.

Jim
cvms@cstone.net

[David Holmberg]

They do have a crate LS1/6 motor but that start in the $5+ K area. For the cheap version I was referring to the $1500 old style 350 pckg.
Link to the LS1 crate motor.
http://www.sdpc2000.com/catalog/123/...ch-Engines.htm



Incoming on the issues.

[David Holmberg]

Here is a link to the Carb version of the LS1 intake...

http://www.sdpc2000.com/catalog/3541...1-Manifold.htm

[Turbo Indian]

casper electronics most likly makes a wire harness for the LS engine.
http://www.casperselectronics.com/
I know he makes harness for the Buick Grand Nationals, with or without the emmisions BS.

[Bryan Jensen]

Holy moses, I didn't even realize this thread was still ongoing!!

As an update, I came to my senses and located a 67 YS code 400 that's going into my 67, because I decided I'm going the "stock original" route with my rebuild. I seriously thought about going the resto-rod route, but then I decdied molesting a cool car like a GTO was wrong. When I got my car it had a 76 Pon. 400 egr motor, and I didn't want to deal with that.

To make my new motor more driveable I had the shop that's rebuilding it lower the compression down to 8:9:1. I can run it on the California premium gas we have, and not have to pay 100 bucks in gas every time I want to drive to Santa Monica, etc. Other than that the motor is stock specs.

It would be neat to see if anybody decides to do that though,

[elefantrider]

Out of all the possible engine swaps available, the LS1/LS6/LS2-types are probably the only ones i would consider putting in my car. I'm beginning to think more about it after reading more on these engines and seeing the asking prices for used pontiac cranks and blocks.

Anyone try figuring out what it would cost to build the same specification (all alum, trick block, coil on plug, composite FI manifold) with a pontiac engine and expect it to last 100K + miles, with no leaks, oiling problems, etc?

GM spent millions developing and racing different versions of this engine.

I think these new motors are in an entirely different league and are a bargain for a street car that is used often, all things considered.

[455HOGT37]

Does anyone know if the LS-1 heads swap onto the 5.3 truck engine family?

[RandyW]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 455HOGT37:
Does anyone know if the LS-1 heads swap onto the 5.3 truck engine family? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes the will, but watch for CR difference as some have different size combustion chambers.

[bmpmdf]

I have been told that there is also oil return issues with the 5.3 truck engine/alum. head swap, but it is easily taken care of. Also the intakes are different, so you might need to check on that. For me as long as there are Pontiac engines, that is what my old Pontiacs will get. Now if I was fixing a newer GP or Grand Am and making it a streetible rwd, then the ls1 would maybe get consideration. But knowing me, and as the slap gm deserves, I'd still put a true Pontiac V8 in it.

[David Holmberg]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 455HOGT37:
Does anyone know if the LS-1 heads swap onto the 5.3 truck engine family? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, the 5.3, 5.7 and 6.0 heads all interchange. Just like the real Pontiac heads only the CC's are different. On a stock motor there are no issues, but with a larger cam and 5.3 heads you need to check for PTV issues. In your case you will drop some compression. You also need to make sure you get the correct valve cover bolt pattern, center or outside.

We commonly use ported 5.3 heads on 5.7 motors, and 6.0 heads on boosted combos.

They all flow close to each other, but the LS6 head and intake flow better than the others.

[455HOGT37]

Well I'm just tossing ideas around, but the loose plan is that the 5.3 in my Yukon will someday end up in my 68 ElCo, and if I purchase a 2004 Holden, it may get the LS6 heads and cam. I will have a set of brand new LS1 heads and cam laying around... Might as well throw them on the 5.3 someday for a "free" upgrade. Of course I will look to stroke the 5.3 to 6.0 at that time also (if possible).

[67rs6spd]

well guys check the (feb) HOT ROD mag.Ls6 with only a cam change,running the edelbrock intake and 850 carb made over 500 hp/tq.So why not

[David Holmberg]

With a 455, 500/500 is not hard at all on an engine dyno.

Power output is not a good reason to go away from a traditional Pontiac Motor. There are several good reasons, but power output is not one of them.