[Cliff R]

"I wasn't the least bit impressed with the 6.0 HD set-up anyplace. "

Which is it?"

I don't know anyone in these parts that likes the older 6.0's, gas guzzlers and low on power (torque) so they have to spin 5000rpm's every time you come to a decent grade if you have much in tow behind it.

I've not run into anyone to date in these parts that likes the older 6.0's. They all say the same thing, gas guzzlers and low on power (torque).

Different story with the new stuff, so GM has obviously made some changes for the better in the last couple of years. I haven't had the opportunity to drive a 2018 or newer 2500 with the big LS engine but hearing lots of good things about them. This thread is basically about LS engines so just pointing out my experience with them, which is limited to only driving one older 6.0 and my 2018 5.3.

Most of my experience with trucks is diesels and I've owned just about all the "good ones" made prior to 2008. I'm with old-pinion-head on that deal, give me a 12 valve 5.9 Cummins in a HD older Dodge, manual transmission and Dana 80 rear. I had one and still regret selling it......Cliff

[i82much]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

"I wasn't the least bit impressed with the 6.0 HD set-up anyplace. "

Which is it?"

I don't know anyone in these parts that likes the older 6.0's, gas guzzlers and low on power (torque) so they have to spin 5000rpm's every time you come to a decent grade if you have much in tow behind it.

I've not run into anyone to date in these parts that likes the older 6.0's. They all say the same thing, gas guzzlers and low on power (torque).

Different story with the new stuff, so GM has obviously made some changes for the better in the last couple of years. I haven't had the opportunity to drive a 2018 or newer 2500 with the big LS engine but hearing lots of good things about them. This thread is basically about LS engines so just pointing out my experience with them, which is limited to only driving one older 6.0 and my 2018 5.3.

Most of my experience with trucks is diesels and I've owned just about all the "good ones" made prior to 2008. I'm with old-pinion-head on that deal, give me a 12 valve 5.9 Cummins in a HD older Dodge, manual transmission and Dana 80 rear. I had one and still regret selling it......Cliff

I have a 2016 6.0 truck with the 6 speed. Obviously the six speed and variable valve timing help quite a bit over the old 4 speed, but here's the thing - I think you can rev the piss out of an LS engine for years under heavy loads and they will take the beating.

Guys that grew up on old cars like myself find it REALLY hard to beat on an engine like that, but here's the thing. With all the improvements in engine management and cooling on a newer truck, not to mention the durability improvements inherent in the LS hardware, you can do it. Might never be something you get used to, might annoy you to no end, and certainly isn't going to win any fuel economy competitions, but you can drag a 10,000 lb trailer uphill at 5000 RPM with an LQ4/4l80 for years and never hurt a thing.

Even with the 6 speed and variable valve timing, my truck doesn't exactly set your hair on fire. But it will do anything I ask of it without hurting the truck, and I don't anticipate towing more than 6000 lbs or so in the mountains anyway. A Duramax or Cummins is a hell of a lot better, but also a lot more expensive. I got my truck for 35k and got 30k for a Jeep Wrangler that I traded in, so I basically put 5k on my credit card and walked out with a new truck. In my case, sticking with a gas engine meant I didn't have a truck payment. There isn't an engine on the planet better than that feeling!

[Cliff R]

"Obviously the six speed and variable valve timing help quite a bit over the old 4 speed, but here's the thing - I think you can rev the piss out of an LS engine for years under heavy loads and they will take the beating."

I believe that as I've never known anyone to "toss" a rod out of the block or put a piston in the oil pan. I just hate seeing something rev so high on a hard pull, but hey, maybe that's what they are supposed to do. For sure I "proof" tested the one I drove to Florida and back.....Cliff

[Will]

Originally Posted by pastry_chef

Looking at similar to 400 engine size, this LS is at 580 HP. I think the Pontiac would fall 60 to 70 HP short on its best day. No way will 224 @ .050 cut it.

https://www.texas-speed.com/p-3573-t...y-package.aspx

To what do you attribute the extra power?

Trying to understand how two engines of similar displacement can make such different power levels.

I know heads/intake are where the power's at, as stated before. Do the LS heads really work that much better? How much does the intake contribute to this?

[i82much]

Originally Posted by Will

To what do you attribute the extra power?

Trying to understand how two engines of similar displacement can make such different power levels.

I know heads/intake are where the power's at, as stated before. Do the LS heads really work that much better? How much does the intake contribute to this?

I don't know anything about Texas Speed but based on the quoted horsepower numbers I wonder if maybe Bruce Fulper works there?

[i82much]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

"Obviously the six speed and variable valve timing help quite a bit over the old 4 speed, but here's the thing - I think you can rev the piss out of an LS engine for years under heavy loads and they will take the beating."

I believe that as I've never known anyone to "toss" a rod out of the block or put a piston in the oil pan. I just hate seeing something rev so high on a hard pull, but hey, maybe that's what they are supposed to do. For sure I "proof" tested the one I drove to Florida and back.....Cliff

I think they have to! if you are pulling a big load with a 360 inch naturally aspirated engine, mechanical advantage is your only hope and the only way to get mechanical advantage is to increase the engine speed.

A 3.5 Ecoboost could handle those same loads with ease at a much lower RPM. Whether it would live as long as an iron block 6.0? That's probably a whole separate pissing match we could have right here right now!

[autobahn]

Maybe I should put a Coyote in my TA if the LS is SO bad, To me LS1 and LS2 came in the 04-06 in the PONTIAC GTO. the PONTIAC G8 ,there fore a Pontiac engine or logic isn't allowed in this thread

[darbikrash]

As to the original question about Pontiacs compared to modern LS/LT motors, I think if you asked a powertrain engineer he would mention power density and BSFC as useful metrics. Much as I love Pontiac power, you can't argue with the science. I get the nostalgia , but 50 year old ICE technology has no chance against the new stuff in these categories.

[pastry_chef]

Originally Posted by Will

Do the LS heads really work that much better?

Yes, they work better.
Tom Nelson comments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsmbbuSq9m0
At 1:05 - they make a lot of power.

Tom's pump gas 427 LS is 680HP. The 441 LS is 700 HP / 620 TQ
http://www.nelsonracingengines.com/p..._427lsx_na.pdf

Street-able 600 HP is common with smaller LS 408 to 416 cubes.

https://www.mastmotorsports.com/prod...e-engine-605hp

http://www.turnkeyenginesupply.com/t...-crate-engine/

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by i82much

A 3.5 Ecoboost could handle those same loads with ease at a much lower RPM. Whether it would live as long as an iron block 6.0? That's probably a whole separate pissing match we could have right here right now!

Might want to watch the videos about the Ford Testing that was done on ONE ENGINE over a period of time. I was involved personally with this ECOBOOST project in Research. The info below is NOT ADVERTISING, it is facts.
Do not think the iron block 6.0 liter engine would be in the same shape as the ecoboost engine personally. Info below.

F-150 EcoBoost Test Engine

A production 3.5L EcoBoost V6 engine, #448AA, was randomly selected from the assembly line at Ford’s Cleveland engine plant. This engine had no idea it was in store for 163k miles of brutal endurance testing.

#448AA was Shipped to dynamometer cell 36B in Ford’s Dearborn, MI engine lab and run for 300 hours, this engine’s first experience was a rapid simulation of 150,000 customer miles, including thermal-shock runs in which the engine was cooled to -20F and then heated to +235F, repeatedly.

The engine was shipped to Ford’s Kansas City truck plant where it was installed in an F-150 4X4 Super-Crew. After assembly the truck was driven to Nygaard Timber in Astoria, Oregon, where it dragged a total of 110,000 pounds of logs across the ground (requiring all 420 ft-lb TQ)

Next they drove the truck to Miami Speedway, and hooked it up to a 2-car open trailer carrying two NASCAR Ford Fusions (a total of 11,300 pounds) and run continuously around the oval track for 24 hours (average speed: 82 mph, distance covered: 1,607 miles)

After this they took the truck to Davis Dam in Arizona, where it beat out the 5.3-liter Chevy Silverado V-8 AND the Ram 5.7-liter Hemi V-8 each pulling 9,000 pounds up a 6 percent grade in an uphill towing contest.

The 3.5-liter twin-turbo EcoBoost engine was removed and then installed in a 7,100-pound F-150 Baja race truck. After 1,200 miles of practice they raced the truck 1060 miles in the SCORE Baja 1000, the toughest off-road race in North America, finishing 1st overall in the Stock Engine class.

The truck’s owner said the engine’s fuel economy was so good compared with his previous V8 he skipped 2 planned fuel stops during the grueling trip from Ensenada to La Paz.

After winning in Baja they sent the engine back to dynamometer cell 36B and dyno-tested one final time. It generated 364HP and 420ft-lb TQ, only one horsepower less than its HP rating and exactly Ford’s given torque rating.

Lastly, for the final episode of the F-150 EcoBoost torture test, Ford Motor Co did a complete engine tear-down and inspection of engine #448AA (never been serviced or previously inspected) in front of thousands at the 2011 North American International Auto Show in Detroit, Michigan.

The engine parts were laid out on three huge tables so that when the tear-down was complete, the engineers and the audience could take a closer look.

https://www.full-race.com/articles/what-is-ecoboost/

Tom V.

ps Everyone is allowed an OPINION. ONE FACT IS WORTH 10,000 OPINIONS.
FACT: The engine was designed to win Le Mans, a 24 hr endurance race. Doing the stuff above was a piece of cake.

[Scott65]

Tom the EcoBoost is impressive for sure. How do you think it would fair if one were to double to triple its power output using the stock block, crank/ rods, heads. That's where the LS intrigues me as a viable alternative. The proven ability to stay together at multiples of power it was used for in passenger vehicles. They can be grenaded, especially if the tune up isn't right. I planned my 455 to be under 650 horsepower due to seeing enough blocks split. Picking up a block from the junkyard that people successfully make 1000 horsepower with has a certain allure...

[JLMounce]

One of the big reasons the truck blocks are so robust is because the LS was designed first as an aluminum block. One of the reasons it has a fully skirted main with cross bolted caps.

Instead of redesigning the block for iron, they simply poured the originally designed casts as iron. Makes those particular blocks really overkill for passenger vehicle stuff.

[Scott65]

Yeah, being a Pontiac guy, the block design of LS engines is what really grabbed my attention early on. The heads were impressive too.

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by Scott65

Tom the EcoBoost is impressive for sure. How do you think it would fair if one were to double to triple its power output using the stock block, crank/ rods, heads. That's where the LS intrigues me as a viable alternative. The proven ability to stay together at multiples of power it was used for in passenger vehicles. They can be grenaded, especially if the tune up isn't right. I planned my 455 to be under 650 horsepower due to seeing enough blocks split. Picking up a block from the junkyard that people successfully make 1000 horsepower with has a certain allure...

When the people first came to me about designing an engine to win Le Mans,
I told them making a 1000 HP will be the easy part. You need to make the engine survive with that 1000 hp capability, that will be the hard part.

(At the time Palbykin was making basically 1600 hp with a factory 400 block. (4 times the HP of the 406 cid stock block).

The Ecoboost is 3.5L or 313 cid.

313 cid times 4 hp would be 252 more horsepower vs the 1000 hp that they wanted.

So really the Palbykin Pontiac engine with a stock 400 block with mods was making more hp than the race engine specifically designed to win Le Mans.

And they designed and built a stronger engine vs Palbylin's engine which lasted over 3 years on the track.

So car #68, the one I am next to in the photo, and driven by Sébastien Bourdais (FRA), Joey Hand (US) and Dirk Müller (GER) crossed the finish line at Le Mans at three o'clock on Sunday, as the overall GT winner of the 2016 Le Mans 24 Hours. Joey abused the crap out of that engine. He drove like Ken Miles in 1966.

So an aftermarket Pontiac Block at 4 hp per cid is not a big stretch with boost.
And a small gas engine with boost in a truck can live a very long time with proper maint and no driver abuse if designed properly. The LS engine has a nice design. We have enough GOOD parts to make a good Pontiac boost engine last a long time. Richard (from Canada) being a good example of that.

Tom V.

[Scott65]

I agree that we have things available now. Cost is still very lopsided comparatively speaking. But for those that can afford the aftermarket blocks, they are a blessing to have.

[242177P]

Originally Posted by autobahn

Maybe I should put a Coyote in my TA if the LS is SO bad, To me LS1 and LS2 came in the 04-06 in the PONTIAC GTO. the PONTIAC G8 ,there fore a Pontiac engine or logic isn't allowed in this thread

You could say the exact same same thing about the Chevy 305.

LS swappers use "Pontiac did it" all the time, but Pontiac Motor Division never did. In the corporate era, the only place I've seen PMD badges was the third gen Firebird seats. I tend to snicker when I see LS swapped cars wearing Rally II wheels, because they invariably use the centers with lucite PMD logos. They should have used ones with GM inserts instead. I've seen plenty of plastic LS engine covers with GTO on them, but not one yet that says PMD. Why is that?

Justifying an LS swap is kinda like explaining a joke which nobody laughed at.

[hgerhardt]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

......SNIP

The Ecoboost is 3.5L or 313 cid.

313 cid times 4 hp would be 252 more horsepower vs the 1000 hp that they wanted.

So really the Palbykin Pontiac engine with a stock 400 block with mods was making more hp than the race engine specifically designed to win Le Mans. SNIP

.......

3.5L is only 213 cid. And 213 cid * 4HP is 852. But, Palbykin's drag race engine would most likely not have survived LeMans!

[Cliff R]

Very impressive results for the Ford Ecoboost 3.5 for sure Tom. Nice to have results from someone who was there vs opinions and second hand info for sure.

I'm curious how many head bolts it uses per cylinder. The Pontiac uses 10 per head only which doesn't provide the clamping force for the head gaskets as other V-8 designs using 17 bolts.

WAY back when I dabbled with boost got my ars handed to me with both the 302 Ford and Buick V-6 when we tried to put a lot of boost on them (4 bolts per cylinder). Of course the tune is the key to success but every single time we were off just a tad we either breached a head gasket or put a piston or two in the oil pan! We ALWAYS hoped for a breached head gasket vs the latter issue. I'm going clear back to the later 1980's when those vehicles were popular (Buick GN's and Mustang GT's). We actually put the 302 powered later 1980's Mustang deep into the 9's over 150mph. Of course we only got to make ONE run per outing as they tossed us out on our ear for not having all the correct safety equipment in place. The owner didn't care as the car was built for street racing when pretty big money was on the line, and spanked some pretty strong running set-ups with it, giving us more funds to exploit the turbo set-up. Anyhow, getting more off topic but had a lot of fun back in those days.

I have three friends who have the V-6 Eco-Boost in later model Fords. Two are 1/2 ton trucks and one in a full size SUV, Excursion maybe? They are all logging excellent fuel economy and one of them tows loads you've pretty much reserve for the big diesel rigs.

The only negative I'll put up here is that both the F-150 owners have experienced ECM related issues and have had their trucks in the shop several times for the techs to deal with. They eventually sorted it all out, and one of my friends still raves about that truck and it's efficiency, towing capabilities, etc when we start drinking Bourbon and telling lies at get-togethers.......LOL......Cliff

[P@blo]

Originally Posted by 242177P

You could say the exact same same thing about the Chevy 305.

LS swappers use "Pontiac did it" all the time, but Pontiac Motor Division never did. In the corporate era, the only place I've seen PMD badges was the third gen Firebird seats. I tend to snicker when I see LS swapped cars wearing Rally II wheels, because they invariably use the centers with lucite PMD logos. They should have used ones with GM inserts instead. I've seen plenty of plastic LS engine covers with GTO on them, but not one yet that says PMD. Why is that?

Justifying an LS swap is kinda like explaining a joke which nobody laughed at.

No guilt or flak for swapping to corporate transmissions seems to follow solid logic. Like it was mentioned, a 2016 V6 Camaro can run a 13.6 quarter mile in stock form. Some perspective here says the 1969 GTO ram air IV runs a 13.2 and a 1974 SD455 firebird runs a 13.9. I won't even mention the modern GM V8 ET's...

We are talking automobiles aren't we? Either way if one were to boost an LS engine forget about a traditional Pontiac keeping up. Sure you could come close but you will be spend a lot more money and will still come up short in many areas.

There will never be a day that I put a certain engine in my car so other people are happy or worry what others think because that's just silly. That and lifting your nose as LS swaps is very childish behavior.

[77 Canamman]

You couldn't give me an Egoboost. I have a few personal experiences with them, and they are not flattering. Two of them had stretched timing chains, and the other had terrible smoking issues related to the turbo seals and intercooler-all under 30k miles. When they are new and under warranty, they might be ok, and produce good power, but they are not for me.

As much as the 6.0 Vortec has been derided here, they are a better performer than the 6.4 Hemi. Now that's a flaming turd of an engine.

My 2017 5.3 L83 LT1 series GEN V/6L80 has been stellar in both power and economy. I have performed a tune, upgraded the exhaust and intake systems, and added the 6.2 intake and TB. Nothing like 23-24 MPG's on a trip at 75-80 mph, and low 14 sec quarter mile times in a close to 6000 pound truck. Towing the Bandit nets 13 MPG on the road. I like the 6.2, but the 8 speed tranny is not as refined as the 6, and you can't tune that trans. With that said, I would NEVER put it in a vintage Pontiac.