Monzared

Just figured I’d ask some experts there opinions of what they think the best LS ever is

v8monstermiata

LS3 or LS7.

SlowTBSS

Best in terms of what? Power, reliability, strength, fuel economy?

Me personally looking at every aspect, Gen IV 5.3.

NC01TA

Too subjective. Opinions will be over the place, from the earliest LS1 to the latest variant, and all for different reasons. There is no wrong answer.

wannafbody

iTrader: (2)

Not the valve dropping LS7

v8monstermiata

You float valves and **** happens.

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

LS3 was the peak IMO; the DI versions are overly complex for not a whole lot of additional potential.

RevGTO

iTrader: (12)

Agree - love it in my G8. So much torque.

LS1 TJ

I've done LS1, LS6 and LS3 swaps into various hot rods with great results. Engine and trans control wise the 24 tooth reluctor wheel LS engines needs one ECM for the engine and trans. The later 58 tooth reluctor LS engines need two ECM's for engine and trans control if you are running an auto.
A 2000ish 6.0 iron block with a stroker kit and LS3 heads is a good combo that doesn't break the bank. My one of my current hot rods is a 98 Wrangler with a rebuilt LS6/4L60E combo and has been bullet proof for 15 years.
My current project is a 80 Camaro with a 2012 L92/4L60E combo. The L92 is dressed to look like a LS3. I just got it tuned and it runs great.
Really depends on your budget and goals with your project. I am believer in build it once. Don't band aid stuff.

pdxmotorhead

I really like my L33, compact, lightweight, vanilla motor , gets great mileage in my jeep and with a exterior package off a express van (intake, injectors coils etc, front mounting stuff... ) It ran first crank with the default 5.3 tune on my Holley Terminator Max.

Factory rebuilt (ATK via Jegs..) < 3500 for the long block. The L33 gets a Specific Truck cam that pulls right off idle (625 RPM) to 5500, I have the redline set there..

NOt saying its the best, but it is a tidy package.

slothman

the LS29 of course. Not yet 30.
OP that question is more loaded than a baked potato.

Sebambam

agreed, to add on Gen3/4 hybrid ( gn3 with Gen4 internals
reliable and efficent in stock form
great for a performance build in NA or boosted
Dime in a doozen = cheap

wannafbody

iTrader: (2)

I never got the point of the 5.3. It's the same size block as the 5.7 so why the smaller bore? What does the small bore accomplish?

Utinator

Fuel efficiency, lower emissions.

Scarebird

Very happy with my Gen V 5.3; DOD delete and LT1 cam hooked to a TKX.

LS3 EROD was quite good but a bit thirsty.

Spamfritter

iTrader: (1)

I don't think it accomplishes anything. The popularity of the 5.3L LSx variants comes down to abundance and low cost. There are arguments to be made over the strength of the iron blocks versus the aluminum for boosted applications but I think its primarily about the low cost and ubiquity of these engines. The 5.3's make similar power and essentially perform like the 5.7's, so they make good replacement engines if you are on a budget. As far as I know, the 5.7L aluminum block LS1 only came in the Corvette, Camaro, Firebird/Trans Am and the 2004 GTO. The latter almost doesn't count given their insanely low production numbers for that year.

While technically there, I doubt the difference is noticeable. Furthermore, is that really a priority for these swaps? I seriously doubt it.

Utinator

In a performance application, there is no benefit to using a 5.3 vs a 5.7. For that matter, even the 6.2 is the same stroke and same block as a 5.3. The only difference is the bore size. There is no performance benefit to using a smaller bore.

GM uses the smaller bore to accomplish better fuel efficiency and EPA compliance. That's the view point I was referring to. If I were doing a swap, I would absolutely get the biggest bore I could find and afford, unless it's an LS7. You can have the LS7. I'll take a 5.3 over an LS7 any day.

Scarebird

Some engine architectures seem to have a sweet spot; ie. Ford 302, Chevrolet 327, Pontiac 366 etc. that defy explanation to us not drivetrain engineers. An algorithm of valve size, chamber shape, bore, stroke, etc.

To me the 5.3, especially in Gen V format is one of those. The 5.7 is indeed more powerful, but at a cost disproportionate to the size difference. It would be interesting to see GM's rationale for dropping the 5.7. 6.0 and 4.8.

Che70velle

iTrader: (6)

Fun fact…I have a van fleet for my electrical business. My 4.8 vans average 13 mpg’s. My 6.0 vans average 15 mpg’s. We bought the 4.8 vans for fuel mileage. Lol!!

Kawboom

I think you may have some drivers with some heavy right feet...