Generation III Internal Engine 1997-2006 LS1 | LS6
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Lifter surprise????

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-29-2005, 06:07 PM
  #1  
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
2scoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Lifter surprise????

GM offered two types of lifers in the LSX series motors, the first one was installed in the LS1 motors starting in 97 and ended in 2000. These lifters were a split/non-encapsulated type of lifter that most builders believed were not very durable for hig HP motors. The second type of lifter was a fully encapsulated type; meaning the roller was mostly surrounded by the lifter itself. These are considered the most durable and have been used in motors with high lift and HP figures well above 1200 HP.
So today I'm tearing apart my 2004 LS6 motor and guess what? It has the older type of lifter installed!!! WTF?? Anyone else have this issue?
This is my third LSX motor and the first one I've seen with this.
So now I'm thinking I have to purchase a set of new lifters...................
Old 01-03-2006, 11:36 AM
  #2  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
GuitsBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 6,249
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

I had the non encapsulated type in my 2002 motor. A few lifter rollers started breaking apart at 88K miles. I replaced them with the inexpensive melling lifters.
Old 01-03-2006, 06:44 PM
  #3  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (50)
 
oange ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,229
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts

Default

i've got non-capsulated in my 01
Old 01-03-2006, 07:31 PM
  #4  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (12)
 
Ravenous T\A's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Burleson/Ftw,Texas
Posts: 3,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

fully encapsulated type---got a part number on those?
Old 01-03-2006, 11:29 PM
  #5  
Launching!
 
krexken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: longview, tx
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Anyone know the weight difference between the two?
Old 01-04-2006, 11:38 AM
  #6  
On The Tree
 
Dipstick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Phoenix, Az
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This is what came out of my 2000. Is this encapsulated?

Old 01-04-2006, 11:39 AM
  #7  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
GuitsBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 6,249
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Dipstick
This is what came out of my 2000. Is this encapsulated?
Yes, it is.
Old 01-04-2006, 11:40 AM
  #8  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (50)
 
oange ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,229
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts

Default

wondering why they did that ? there seems to be no rhyme or reason unless it has to do with the location of where the motor was built
Old 01-04-2006, 11:59 AM
  #9  
11 Second Club
 
Rexx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Same here just finished taking my 2002 LS1 apart and it had the split/non-encapsulated type of lifter. The builder that I am working with told me that he sees this all the time. It is hit or miss as to which one you get.
Old 01-04-2006, 12:48 PM
  #10  
TECH Apprentice
 
TMar99Z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Platte City, MO
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I just tore apart my 99 ls1 and it had the encapsulated type lifter.
Old 01-04-2006, 01:52 PM
  #11  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (6)
 
scarbrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: MO
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

just took mine out of my 01 SS this morning and it has the non-encapsulated
Old 01-04-2006, 06:53 PM
  #12  
On The Tree
 
Dipstick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Phoenix, Az
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sounds like the non-encapsulated ones would be lighter. May be the newest design, although when I ordered, lifter - 17122490, from a local dealer, I got the encapsulated one for about $35.
Old 01-04-2006, 08:39 PM
  #13  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
GuitsBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 6,249
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

The melling lifters are an encapsulated design, and they run about 14 each at the local auto parts store, or 165 for the set of 16 through futral. From what I understand futral uses these even on their big hyd roller stroker motors, so I would think it would be a quality part. They look pretty good to me.

Last edited by GuitsBoy; 01-04-2006 at 08:50 PM.
Old 01-04-2006, 08:43 PM
  #14  
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
2scoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Youre right, the encapsulated lifter are pricey from GM. From a dealer expect to pay $35 plus as Dipstick stated. While the non-encapsulated type is indeed lighter is not what you want in a high HP LS motor. They are just not built to withstand the demands of high loads for a long period of time. If you cruise around town and have the occasional greeen light run, youre fine on a low mileage ride.
I would definetly go with the Mellings or other encapsulated types in any other ssituation.
Old 01-04-2006, 08:48 PM
  #15  
CBX
TECH Apprentice
 
CBX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by GuitsBoy
The melling lifters are an encapsulated design, and they run about 14 each at the local auto parts store, or 165 for the set of 16 through futral. From what I understand futral uses these even on their big hyd roller stroker motors, so I would think it would be a quality part. They pretty good to me.
That's what I went with.
Old 01-04-2006, 08:52 PM
  #16  
UNDER PRESSURE MOD
iTrader: (19)
 
The Alchemist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Doylestown PA
Posts: 10,813
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts

Default

So does anyone have a side by side pic showing the difference between the two?
Old 01-04-2006, 09:12 PM
  #17  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
transAm-98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA, Bay Area
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

i had encapsulated lifters in my 98
Old 01-04-2006, 09:47 PM
  #18  
Launching!
iTrader: (20)
 
Teutonic Speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Non-encapsulated on my 2001. Also one of them failed, or a spring was bad, not sure which yet.
Old 01-05-2006, 01:11 AM
  #19  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (6)
 
scarbrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: MO
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

this is the one i pulled out today






Old 01-05-2006, 06:34 AM
  #20  
Launching!
iTrader: (20)
 
Teutonic Speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by scarbrow
this is the one i pulled out today
Wow....and I thought my lifter failed.....yours looks about 5X worse than mine. Any other issues with your motor?

Scarbrow's pics show what the non-encapsulated version looks like.


Quick Reply: Lifter surprise????



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:45 PM.