Best Value LS3 Swap?
08-31-2016, 01:44 PM
#1
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Best Value LS3 Swap? I am most likely going to swap an LS3 into my '79 Camaro, but I'm trying to figure out the most cost effective way for the power. Street only.
Ideally, I'd put in a 416, like the texas-speed 418, but shipped with accessories it's ~$17k.
A GM crate is $5880 or $7180 w/oil pan and ecu if they'd work. Then I could swap to some CNC heads and a cam. I don't get the extra cubic inches and internals aren't as nice, but it would be ~$10-11K cheaper, plus I could sell the heads. I'd still need some swap parts and accessories, but it still seems much, much cheaper than the prebuilt 418, unless I'm missing some expensive parts the texas-speed crate comes with vs the GM one?
Ideally, I'd put in a 416, like the texas-speed 418, but shipped with accessories it's ~$17k.
A GM crate is $5880 or $7180 w/oil pan and ecu if they'd work. Then I could swap to some CNC heads and a cam. I don't get the extra cubic inches and internals aren't as nice, but it would be ~$10-11K cheaper, plus I could sell the heads. I'd still need some swap parts and accessories, but it still seems much, much cheaper than the prebuilt 418, unless I'm missing some expensive parts the texas-speed crate comes with vs the GM one?
08-31-2016, 02:36 PM
#2
For street only why go through all the trouble of swapping parts. Buy a hot cammed LS3 drop it in and tear it up. 500 real horsepower on the street is amazing.
http://www.jegs.com/i/Chevrolet-Perf...1358K/10002/-1
http://www.jegs.com/i/Chevrolet-Perf...1358K/10002/-1
08-31-2016, 02:49 PM
#3
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just don't want to be disappointed. I daily a 400awhp Audi and would like it to be faster than that. I've driven a new mustang and was definitely disappointed in comparison. A new corvette felt more comparable in power, but it would be nice if it was a decent upgrade.
I have no problem throwing a cam and heads on either way, it just seemed like stepping up to a 416/418 was a big step up in money for a small performance increase and I wanted to make sure.
I'm going to have to go through all the trouble of the swap anyways with all of the drivetrain, fueling, electrical, etc, so swapping heads/cam is pretty easy in comparison anyways. What would save me a ton of trouble is just throwing a 500hp 383 in.
I have no problem throwing a cam and heads on either way, it just seemed like stepping up to a 416/418 was a big step up in money for a small performance increase and I wanted to make sure.
I'm going to have to go through all the trouble of the swap anyways with all of the drivetrain, fueling, electrical, etc, so swapping heads/cam is pretty easy in comparison anyways. What would save me a ton of trouble is just throwing a 500hp 383 in.
08-31-2016, 04:04 PM
#5
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is kind of tempting as well, though definitely not a drop in and I couldn't do the fab work. Even paying for plumbing would be cheaper. I'd prefer new, but a pulled 5.3 would definitely be cheapest.
I kind of wanted better throttle response with the N/A, but I'm used to it with the S4.
I kind of wanted better throttle response with the N/A, but I'm used to it with the S4.
08-31-2016, 04:13 PM
#6
TECH Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Springfield, MO
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel like one of the major benefits of the LS platform is the fact that they are so plentiful and handle so much power stock. When you spend $15k for an engine I don't see the benefit over say, a BBC. To each their own, I'm sure you will have a badass ride whichever way you end up going.
08-31-2016, 08:32 PM
#7
Turbo a $1000 mostly stock 5.3 longblock (build a next one on the side) make 500rwhp through a built auto and try to use a chassis that only weighs 3000~lbs, it will spend most of its time sideways.
When it lets go (30-50k miles) you install the built one you had on the side, turn up the boost slightly and now your in the 700rwhp club. If you built the trans correctly it should only take you a day to swap engines and back in business.
When it lets go (30-50k miles) you install the built one you had on the side, turn up the boost slightly and now your in the 700rwhp club. If you built the trans correctly it should only take you a day to swap engines and back in business.
Trending Topics
08-31-2016, 11:43 PM
#8
Turbo a $1000 mostly stock 5.3 longblock (build a next one on the side) make 500rwhp through a built auto and try to use a chassis that only weighs 3000~lbs, it will spend most of its time sideways.
When it lets go (30-50k miles) you install the built one you had on the side, turn up the boost slightly and now your in the 700rwhp club. If you built the trans correctly it should only take you a day to swap engines and back in business.
When it lets go (30-50k miles) you install the built one you had on the side, turn up the boost slightly and now your in the 700rwhp club. If you built the trans correctly it should only take you a day to swap engines and back in business.
ALL.
DAY.
LONG!!
Seriously, with the absolutely STUPID power numbers that people are putting down these days with stock long-blocks, it gets kind of tough to see the justification for $10k+ strokers... I mean, I'm sure that there are use cases for which that's the correct answer - but for the "average Joe", it's a bit more difficult to justify dropping the coin...
09-01-2016, 09:10 AM
#9
There are costs associated with a turbo build if the "Average Joe" cannot weld and fabricate their own system. 60+ hours of labor and material can get into the thousands very quickly. Then add in a nice turbo and supporting fuel system and any heralded savings with a junkyard block are out the window.
Let's also not forget about time and costs associated with utilizing a junkyard motor now and replacing it in 30,000 miles with another motor.
Many would prefer a well designed and proven NA set up that is easy to install over a cobbled together assembly of junkyard parts. They may also be going for an overall look and choose parts that may cost more to achieve.
Let's also not forget about time and costs associated with utilizing a junkyard motor now and replacing it in 30,000 miles with another motor.
Many would prefer a well designed and proven NA set up that is easy to install over a cobbled together assembly of junkyard parts. They may also be going for an overall look and choose parts that may cost more to achieve.
09-01-2016, 10:10 AM
#10
Restricted User
There are enough cheap turbo hotsides out there that fabrication can be kept at an absolute minimum and still make a budget. Something will fit.
If I had the budget you did, I would go a completely different direction, but it comes down to experience. My $4000 setup makes more power than any stock displacement N/A LS engine. For that reason I can't fathom spending $17k to make less power, especially when my cheap setup is extremely tame on the streets compared to a larger cube N/A engine.. which is the reason I'm able to drive mine daily.
If I had the budget you did, I would go a completely different direction, but it comes down to experience. My $4000 setup makes more power than any stock displacement N/A LS engine. For that reason I can't fathom spending $17k to make less power, especially when my cheap setup is extremely tame on the streets compared to a larger cube N/A engine.. which is the reason I'm able to drive mine daily.
09-01-2016, 11:47 AM
#12
There are costs associated with a turbo build if the "Average Joe" cannot weld and fabricate their own system. 60+ hours of labor and material can get into the thousands very quickly. Then add in a nice turbo and supporting fuel system and any heralded savings with a junkyard block are out the window.
Let's also not forget about time and costs associated with utilizing a junkyard motor now and replacing it in 30,000 miles with another motor.
Many would prefer a well designed and proven NA set up that is easy to install over a cobbled together assembly of junkyard parts. They may also be going for an overall look and choose parts that may cost more to achieve.
Let's also not forget about time and costs associated with utilizing a junkyard motor now and replacing it in 30,000 miles with another motor.
Many would prefer a well designed and proven NA set up that is easy to install over a cobbled together assembly of junkyard parts. They may also be going for an overall look and choose parts that may cost more to achieve.
1. the fuel system is a necessity with any high power car, not just turbo cars, you do it right regardless of what you have
2. 20 years ago we solved the "expensive fuel system problem" the solution is to use twin in-tank cheap pumps, 1 runs the other just for boost, cut a hatch if you need one for quick access and $200 feeds 700rwhp done.
3. Exhaust plumbing, tubing and accessories only need to be created/purchased once for the lifetime of the vehicle/person. Do it right the first time, coat it/wrap it and keep it forever. It should not be associated with the cost of power or the engine since these are hard parts that typically never go bad (unless you melt it somehow from carelessness)
4. Mileage before pullouts go bad is up to the owner. You can make 800 for a couple months or 500 for quite a long many years from a stock engine. If you are savvy vehicle enthusiast, you do things to make the in/out process easy (tube fronts, V-bands, etc)
5. NA is the thing of the past. It works the engine harder to be at a higher RPM with atmospheric pressure, boost is actually a more longevity option, when considering power/power (power vs power of NA vs Boost). Just because you can turn up the boost and make more power to pop a stock engine shouldn't be a reason NOT to go turbo, just use common sense with the output. Its like saying "boost makes too much power so its not a good option" LOL what are you thinking? jokes?
09-01-2016, 11:53 AM
#13
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, I want to do something the right way initially. I'm sure I could learn to weld something together that would physically work, but it would be far from optimal. If I could find a way to fit it all under the hood too.
I looked hard into a procharger, which seems like much easier plumbing, but then you're making so much power you can't put it down on the street anyways and it's a waste. And the costs associated with labor to fab a system and increased fueling needs add a lot to the cost, as said earlier, if you do it the right way and don't do it yourself.
I would rather not use a junkyard block either, I have the budget and would rather spend more for a new crate if anything.
I looked hard into a procharger, which seems like much easier plumbing, but then you're making so much power you can't put it down on the street anyways and it's a waste. And the costs associated with labor to fab a system and increased fueling needs add a lot to the cost, as said earlier, if you do it the right way and don't do it yourself.
I would rather not use a junkyard block either, I have the budget and would rather spend more for a new crate if anything.
09-01-2016, 12:14 PM
#14
Restricted User
If you have the money and don't plan on doing any of the labor, then just pick what you want and have someone build it for you. Bang for the buck is out the window at that point so forced induction likely is too.
09-01-2016, 12:40 PM
#15
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, no, the only labor I wouldn't do is the turbo setup. I'm going to do the rest of the swap.
I don't want to waste money either, though. I'm going to guess at 700whp you couldn't go WOT throttle at any legal speed, which would be a waste of money too for a street car.
I was leaning toward FI initially, since my last couple cars have been turbos, but traction limitations being RWD have turned me away.
I don't want to waste money either, though. I'm going to guess at 700whp you couldn't go WOT throttle at any legal speed, which would be a waste of money too for a street car.
I was leaning toward FI initially, since my last couple cars have been turbos, but traction limitations being RWD have turned me away.
09-01-2016, 12:56 PM
#16
Restricted User
Technically, with a 416 stroker you can't go WOT at any legal speed either. The difference is, power with a turbo is adjustable, quieter than N/A, and you'll have better fuel economy.
There are tons of turbo hot sides available. I got one from KB Racing made for a newer Silverado, and it fit my Nova just fine. I ended up rebuilding the crossover after hitting some logs in the road, but what Kyle sent me worked great until then. $900 got me a manifold and full crossover with wastegate tube. Installation was easier than trying to squeeze on a set of headers.
Trust me, there are things out there designed for other vehicles that will fit just fine.
There are tons of turbo hot sides available. I got one from KB Racing made for a newer Silverado, and it fit my Nova just fine. I ended up rebuilding the crossover after hitting some logs in the road, but what Kyle sent me worked great until then. $900 got me a manifold and full crossover with wastegate tube. Installation was easier than trying to squeeze on a set of headers.
Trust me, there are things out there designed for other vehicles that will fit just fine.
09-01-2016, 01:37 PM
#17
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I could find a hot side that would work that someone's used on a 2nd gen Camaro before, that does make it a lot more tempting, actually. Thanks.
If I do boost, I would probably just want to start with forged internals. What engine/block should I go with? I'd like aluminium for the weight savings if possible.
If I do boost, I would probably just want to start with forged internals. What engine/block should I go with? I'd like aluminium for the weight savings if possible.
09-01-2016, 02:42 PM
#19
Have to be realistic and practical.
1. the fuel system is a necessity with any high power car, not just turbo cars, you do it right regardless of what you have
2. 20 years ago we solved the "expensive fuel system problem" the solution is to use twin in-tank cheap pumps, 1 runs the other just for boost, cut a hatch if you need one for quick access and $200 feeds 700rwhp done.
3. Exhaust plumbing, tubing and accessories only need to be created/purchased once for the lifetime of the vehicle/person. Do it right the first time, coat it/wrap it and keep it forever. It should not be associated with the cost of power or the engine since these are hard parts that typically never go bad (unless you melt it somehow from carelessness)
4. Mileage before pullouts go bad is up to the owner. You can make 800 for a couple months or 500 for quite a long many years from a stock engine. If you are savvy vehicle enthusiast, you do things to make the in/out process easy (tube fronts, V-bands, etc)
5. NA is the thing of the past. It works the engine harder to be at a higher RPM with atmospheric pressure, boost is actually a more longevity option, when considering power/power (power vs power of NA vs Boost). Just because you can turn up the boost and make more power to pop a stock engine shouldn't be a reason NOT to go turbo, just use common sense with the output. Its like saying "boost makes too much power so its not a good option" LOL what are you thinking? jokes?
1. the fuel system is a necessity with any high power car, not just turbo cars, you do it right regardless of what you have
2. 20 years ago we solved the "expensive fuel system problem" the solution is to use twin in-tank cheap pumps, 1 runs the other just for boost, cut a hatch if you need one for quick access and $200 feeds 700rwhp done.
3. Exhaust plumbing, tubing and accessories only need to be created/purchased once for the lifetime of the vehicle/person. Do it right the first time, coat it/wrap it and keep it forever. It should not be associated with the cost of power or the engine since these are hard parts that typically never go bad (unless you melt it somehow from carelessness)
4. Mileage before pullouts go bad is up to the owner. You can make 800 for a couple months or 500 for quite a long many years from a stock engine. If you are savvy vehicle enthusiast, you do things to make the in/out process easy (tube fronts, V-bands, etc)
5. NA is the thing of the past. It works the engine harder to be at a higher RPM with atmospheric pressure, boost is actually a more longevity option, when considering power/power (power vs power of NA vs Boost). Just because you can turn up the boost and make more power to pop a stock engine shouldn't be a reason NOT to go turbo, just use common sense with the output. Its like saying "boost makes too much power so its not a good option" LOL what are you thinking? jokes?
My apologies, I think my original point has been missed.
The OP has already stated he doesn't want to go the turbo route, nor can he fabricate it himself. Although he seems to be changing his mind >
09-01-2016, 02:58 PM
#20
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (14)
I just don't want to be disappointed. I daily a 400awhp Audi and would like it to be faster than that. I've driven a new mustang and was definitely disappointed in comparison. A new corvette felt more comparable in power, but it would be nice if it was a decent upgrade.
I have no problem throwing a cam and heads on either way, it just seemed like stepping up to a 416/418 was a big step up in money for a small performance increase and I wanted to make sure.
I'm going to have to go through all the trouble of the swap anyways with all of the drivetrain, fueling, electrical, etc, so swapping heads/cam is pretty easy in comparison anyways. What would save me a ton of trouble is just throwing a 500hp 383 in.
I have no problem throwing a cam and heads on either way, it just seemed like stepping up to a 416/418 was a big step up in money for a small performance increase and I wanted to make sure.
I'm going to have to go through all the trouble of the swap anyways with all of the drivetrain, fueling, electrical, etc, so swapping heads/cam is pretty easy in comparison anyways. What would save me a ton of trouble is just throwing a 500hp 383 in.
depending on what type of engine is in the audi though 400hp from AWD, and 500hp RW is gonna feel different. Audi typically doesnt do large cube builds for their cars. they usually do v6 turbo's except on their larger sedans and the R8 if i remember correctly. 400 turbo power from a small displacement engine and 500 hp from a large cube v8 are gonna feel completely different to you. The instant torque from a big cube stroker build is something to experience. I doubt a 500 HP ls3 will disappoint in comparison to the audi. Plus there is the weight difference. Hopefully the above makes sense to you. build in my sig is a street car