5.3 aluminum block bored to 347
06-16-2017, 05:47 AM
#1
10 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
5.3 aluminum block bored to 347 Any issues with a 5.3 aluminum block bored to a 347 with boost? Power goal is 700 to 800 rwhp. I'm wanting to stick with a 347 and reuse my top end for budget reasons. Also want to stick with aluminum if possible for weight.
I know the stock cranks are good at the power level, but considering the power will be achieved with a procharger putting additional stress on the crank should I go with a budget forged crank like a K1 as well?
I know the stock cranks are good at the power level, but considering the power will be achieved with a procharger putting additional stress on the crank should I go with a budget forged crank like a K1 as well?
06-16-2017, 07:41 AM
#2
From what I have seen over the years the 5.3 seem to have the same OD as the 5.7 sleeve so I don't see why not. I'd probably save a bit for rebuilds and stop short of 5.7, but if you are using old pistons, etc I get it. I wouldn't worry about the stock crank at that level either even with the procharger.
06-16-2017, 01:27 PM
#4
I wouldnt bore it. The LS1 (basically what you will have after boring it to a 346 if i'm not mistaken) have issues with cracking the sleeves around that power level. The fastest stock block LS engines have the 5.3 bore size. I would stick with that and throw a set of wiseco pistons in....you will be rock solid at 800rwhp
06-16-2017, 01:30 PM
#5
10 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
As far as budget it looks like the best option or an iron 370. I don't want to add the weight if it's not needed.
06-16-2017, 01:33 PM
#6
10 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
I wouldnt bore it. The LS1 (basically what you will have after boring it to a 346 if i'm not mistaken) have issues with cracking the sleeves around that power level. The fastest stock block LS engines have the 5.3 bore size. I would stick with that and throw a set of wiseco pistons in....you will be rock solid at 800rwhp
06-16-2017, 01:51 PM
#7
Everyone does it including myself. I really dont like the fact that there is a step at the cylinder bore...this reduces flow and shrowds the valves....but people make big power with that setup.
Remember the newer trucks with 5.3's had 243 and 799 heads on them from the factory.
Remember the newer trucks with 5.3's had 243 and 799 heads on them from the factory.
Trending Topics
06-19-2017, 06:08 AM
#11
9 Second Club
I do find it so funny...that people are scared to do this and that because it might make their car feel like a turd down low, off boost etc etc....
yet everyone is so eager to jump on the 4.8, 5.3 band wagon and think they're so superb.
In an all out race application absolutely the smaller motors seem to hang together perhaps a little better.
But for moderate use, street use etc....I just cant see the sense in going so small, other than for a budget junkyard build.
But to do to the expense of getting a 5.3 block, then paying for machining work to bore etc, just buy an LS2 or similar block ?
How much if any are people actually saving ?
yet everyone is so eager to jump on the 4.8, 5.3 band wagon and think they're so superb.
In an all out race application absolutely the smaller motors seem to hang together perhaps a little better.
But for moderate use, street use etc....I just cant see the sense in going so small, other than for a budget junkyard build.
But to do to the expense of getting a 5.3 block, then paying for machining work to bore etc, just buy an LS2 or similar block ?
How much if any are people actually saving ?
Last edited by stevieturbo; 06-19-2017 at 06:43 AM.
06-19-2017, 06:33 AM
#12
I do find it so funny...that people are scared to do this and that because it might make their car feel like a turd down low, off boost etc etc....
yet everyone is so eager to jump on the 4.8, 5.3 band wagon and think they're so superb.
In an all out race application absolutely the smaller motors seem to hang together perhaps a little better.
But for moderate use, street use etc....I just cant see the sense in going so small, other than for a budget junkyard build.
But to do to the expense of getting a 5.3 block, then paying for machining work to bore etc, just buy an LS2 or similar block ?
yet everyone is so eager to jump on the 4.8, 5.3 band wagon and think they're so superb.
In an all out race application absolutely the smaller motors seem to hang together perhaps a little better.
But for moderate use, street use etc....I just cant see the sense in going so small, other than for a budget junkyard build.
But to do to the expense of getting a 5.3 block, then paying for machining work to bore etc, just buy an LS2 or similar block ?
06-19-2017, 06:45 AM
#13
9 Second Club
The 4.8 and 5.3 pulled around 4500+ lbs trucks just fine for normal driving. In fact my old 5.3 z71 was faster from a roll than some modded mustangs so its not a turd by any stretch. They will drive just fine in 2500-4000lbs cars especially with better converters or cams or complete top ends.
A loss of 700-1000cc's will have a hell of a bigger impact on performance, torque etc off boost than 1 CR point ever will.
06-19-2017, 06:58 AM
#14
10 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Keep in mind this is for a procharger so the torque curve looks much different than a turbo.
I was was looking at dyno sheets the other day and found a procharged 402 and a forged stock cube ls2 procharged. Both were over 800 rwhp, but at 3500 rpm the 402 made about 60 more ft lbs of torque. In a race with the right stall and gear that might not make much difference, but playing around on the street I'm sure it would.
Now one that is a bigger jump in cubic inches than we are talking about here, but I do agree with Stevie here. If it was a turbo I may feel differently.
Looking at texas speed they build a nice 332 with a 5.3 block. Comparing its price to an ls2 built short block with the same quality components including their ls2 conversion package to make it work in my ls1 car it's about $1000 more. That's a small price to pay for about 32 more cubic inches.
The 370 built with a gen 3 iron block is a good option as well if I didn't care about the extra weight. All of those will work fine with a D1x and my ls1 top end.
I was was looking at dyno sheets the other day and found a procharged 402 and a forged stock cube ls2 procharged. Both were over 800 rwhp, but at 3500 rpm the 402 made about 60 more ft lbs of torque. In a race with the right stall and gear that might not make much difference, but playing around on the street I'm sure it would.
Now one that is a bigger jump in cubic inches than we are talking about here, but I do agree with Stevie here. If it was a turbo I may feel differently.
Looking at texas speed they build a nice 332 with a 5.3 block. Comparing its price to an ls2 built short block with the same quality components including their ls2 conversion package to make it work in my ls1 car it's about $1000 more. That's a small price to pay for about 32 more cubic inches.
The 370 built with a gen 3 iron block is a good option as well if I didn't care about the extra weight. All of those will work fine with a D1x and my ls1 top end.
06-19-2017, 05:53 PM
#15
Keep in mind this is for a procharger so the torque curve looks much different than a turbo.
I was was looking at dyno sheets the other day and found a procharged 402 and a forged stock cube ls2 procharged. Both were over 800 rwhp, but at 3500 rpm the 402 made about 60 more ft lbs of torque. In a race with the right stall and gear that might not make much difference, but playing around on the street I'm sure it would.
Now one that is a bigger jump in cubic inches than we are talking about here, but I do agree with Stevie here. If it was a turbo I may feel differently.
Looking at texas speed they build a nice 332 with a 5.3 block. Comparing its price to an ls2 built short block with the same quality components including their ls2 conversion package to make it work in my ls1 car it's about $1000 more. That's a small price to pay for about 32 more cubic inches.
The 370 built with a gen 3 iron block is a good option as well if I didn't care about the extra weight. All of those will work fine with a D1x and my ls1 top end.
I was was looking at dyno sheets the other day and found a procharged 402 and a forged stock cube ls2 procharged. Both were over 800 rwhp, but at 3500 rpm the 402 made about 60 more ft lbs of torque. In a race with the right stall and gear that might not make much difference, but playing around on the street I'm sure it would.
Now one that is a bigger jump in cubic inches than we are talking about here, but I do agree with Stevie here. If it was a turbo I may feel differently.
Looking at texas speed they build a nice 332 with a 5.3 block. Comparing its price to an ls2 built short block with the same quality components including their ls2 conversion package to make it work in my ls1 car it's about $1000 more. That's a small price to pay for about 32 more cubic inches.
The 370 built with a gen 3 iron block is a good option as well if I didn't care about the extra weight. All of those will work fine with a D1x and my ls1 top end.
06-19-2017, 07:05 PM
#17
10 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
I don't like the idea of dropping compression either but I have indirect access to E85 and built my fuel system around it.
If it were my car I would do a copy of this build or at least a pistons and rods LS3 with the same blower. 900whp on E85 and 14lbs while retaining everything. And not having the annoying procharger sounds is a win in my book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxWGyuXSoWk
If it were my car I would do a copy of this build or at least a pistons and rods LS3 with the same blower. 900whp on E85 and 14lbs while retaining everything. And not having the annoying procharger sounds is a win in my book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxWGyuXSoWk
A 364 piston and rod LS2 block with 241 heads ls6 intake and something like a speed inc SC3 cam with the D1x around 15 psi on E85 should reach that goal of 700 rwhp no problem. That power level will allow me to stick with a level 6 4l60e built by RPM or FLT and the IRS suspension with drive shaft shop parts and a built differential.
That's my plan to fit in my budget and reach my goals. I'd like to have better heads so if my budget increases that would be the first thing I'd add.
06-20-2017, 11:07 AM
#19
FormerVendor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Santa Ana, CA. USA
Posts: 2,157
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
GEN-IV 5.3 Bore Hi BC, as you may note, not much information about Wall Thickness.
THIS IS YOUR QUESTION !
I ask if this is a GEN-IV AL block ?
The GEN-IV AL blocks that I have had Sonic Tested are thick.
MY choice is 98mm + .005" for an easy STEEL ring fitment.
This choice will also allow for a "fresh-up" at .00?" stages WITHOUT a scrap block.
You should fit Steel Main Caps as there is a chance at 1000 HP (engine) for breakage.
Lance
THIS IS YOUR QUESTION !
I ask if this is a GEN-IV AL block ?
The GEN-IV AL blocks that I have had Sonic Tested are thick.
MY choice is 98mm + .005" for an easy STEEL ring fitment.
This choice will also allow for a "fresh-up" at .00?" stages WITHOUT a scrap block.
You should fit Steel Main Caps as there is a chance at 1000 HP (engine) for breakage.
Lance
