best bang 4 buck 5.3
10-14-2017, 11:12 PM
#21
Restricted User
10-14-2017, 11:46 PM
#22
TECH Senior Member
Another know-it-all newbie.....
10-15-2017, 07:33 AM
#23
Teching In
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-15-2017, 10:59 AM
#25
TECH Senior Member
Sounds like more attitude than knowledge.....
10-16-2017, 01:52 AM
#28
You must not be to knowledgeable about the HP differences between the Generations and different years of the 5.3. So let me explain a little. A 2017 Silverado uses a Gen5 EcoTec3 5.3 which puts out 355-Hp at the crank on 91-Octane. 100% stock L83 with quality 91 octane will make 307 rwhp, and on E85 it will make 321 rwhp (Lingenfelter did a stock Dyno on a 2014 1500).
There is a thread somewhere on one of these forums sites with a 2016 with proven good quality Longtubes, Intake kit, Catback, ran a E85/91 Blend, and a tune and made either 360+ or 380+ rwhp. You throw a cam in there, that puts you over 400 rwhp.
This thread was made years before the Gen5 motors were even known about, plus this is the Gen3 5.3 section. This is when a Stock Gen3 5.3 on 91 octane made around 230 rwhp. That is a 70-75 rwhp difference between the engine they are talking about to the engine you are trying to compare in the 2017.
Heck, I have a Gen4 LMG 5.3. Which stock, made 315-Hp/338-Tq at the flywheel, and 259-Hp/285-Tq at the rear wheels. Even the Gen4 5.3 engines are 40-Hp behind the Gen5's. I last dyno'd, at the beginning of the year, at 363-Hp/352-Tq at the wheels, which we figured that was roughly 445-Hp/435-Tq at the crank.
This is a full bolt-on, Cam'd, and Ported/Milled heads, Gen4 5.3. Now I did use a smaller cam, but the largest cam that would work with the stock converter, not affect my low-end at all, and not affect my towing (I tow 7,000 lbs often). It is a smaller 212/218 .553/.553 113+2 LSA Cam, and I could of used a TSP 228R (which doesn't start to make power til 4,700 rpm) which would of given me another 10 rwhp and would put me pretty close to 380 rwhp, but I would of lost my ability to use a stock converter, lost my ability to tow very well because any low-end under 3,000-3,200 rpm is now gone, and trying to daily it would be really fun.
So, the Gen5 EcoTec3 L83 5.3 has on average a 70-Hp advantage over the Gen3 5.3, which is the engine this post was about, about you are trying to compare the two saying everyone should have a 380+ rwhp Gen3 LM7 5.3 because a Gen5 can do it with just bolt-ons.
You should go build a Full Bolt On N/A Gen3 LM7 5.3 with 380+ rwhp, through a 4L60E in a Full Size Silverado, and use it as your daily driver, because achieving a 380+ rwhp Gen5 5.3 is very doable.
There is a thread somewhere on one of these forums sites with a 2016 with proven good quality Longtubes, Intake kit, Catback, ran a E85/91 Blend, and a tune and made either 360+ or 380+ rwhp. You throw a cam in there, that puts you over 400 rwhp.
This thread was made years before the Gen5 motors were even known about, plus this is the Gen3 5.3 section. This is when a Stock Gen3 5.3 on 91 octane made around 230 rwhp. That is a 70-75 rwhp difference between the engine they are talking about to the engine you are trying to compare in the 2017.
Heck, I have a Gen4 LMG 5.3. Which stock, made 315-Hp/338-Tq at the flywheel, and 259-Hp/285-Tq at the rear wheels. Even the Gen4 5.3 engines are 40-Hp behind the Gen5's. I last dyno'd, at the beginning of the year, at 363-Hp/352-Tq at the wheels, which we figured that was roughly 445-Hp/435-Tq at the crank.
This is a full bolt-on, Cam'd, and Ported/Milled heads, Gen4 5.3. Now I did use a smaller cam, but the largest cam that would work with the stock converter, not affect my low-end at all, and not affect my towing (I tow 7,000 lbs often). It is a smaller 212/218 .553/.553 113+2 LSA Cam, and I could of used a TSP 228R (which doesn't start to make power til 4,700 rpm) which would of given me another 10 rwhp and would put me pretty close to 380 rwhp, but I would of lost my ability to use a stock converter, lost my ability to tow very well because any low-end under 3,000-3,200 rpm is now gone, and trying to daily it would be really fun.
So, the Gen5 EcoTec3 L83 5.3 has on average a 70-Hp advantage over the Gen3 5.3, which is the engine this post was about, about you are trying to compare the two saying everyone should have a 380+ rwhp Gen3 LM7 5.3 because a Gen5 can do it with just bolt-ons.
You should go build a Full Bolt On N/A Gen3 LM7 5.3 with 380+ rwhp, through a 4L60E in a Full Size Silverado, and use it as your daily driver, because achieving a 380+ rwhp Gen5 5.3 is very doable.
Last edited by 07NBSChevy; 10-16-2017 at 10:14 PM.
10-16-2017, 10:40 AM
#29
Restricted User
Nobody was making 1400 HP on stock bottom ends and running 7s back then, either, but nobody is digging up 10 year old threads where people said it couldn't be done just to call them idiots.
You just made yourself look like a clown.
10-16-2017, 11:59 AM
#30
TECH Senior Member
Mr. Permafrost gotta chill; not sure what he's proving talking smack as he is...
10-17-2017, 12:55 PM
#31
Teching In
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You must not be to knowledgeable about the HP differences between the Generations and different years of the 5.3. So let me explain a little. A 2017 Silverado uses a Gen5 EcoTec3 5.3 which puts out 355-Hp at the crank on 91-Octane. 100% stock L83 with quality 91 octane will make 307 rwhp, and on E85 it will make 321 rwhp (Lingenfelter did a stock Dyno on a 2014 1500).
I
There is a thread somewhere on one of these forums sites with a 2016 with proven good quality Longtubes, Intake kit, Catback, ran a E85/91 Blend, and a tune and made either 360+ or 380+ rwhp. You throw a cam in there, that puts you over 400 rwhp.
This thread was made years before the Gen5 motors were even known about, plus this is the Gen3 5.3 section. This is when a Stock Gen3 5.3 on 91 octane made around 230 rwhp. That is a 70-75 rwhp difference between the engine they are talking about to the engine you are trying to compare in the 2017.
Heck, I have a Gen4 LMG 5.3. Which stock, made 315-Hp/338-Tq at the flywheel, and 259-Hp/285-Tq at the rear wheels. Even the Gen4 5.3 engines are 40-Hp behind the Gen5's. I last dyno'd, at the beginning of the year, at 363-Hp/352-Tq at the wheels, which we figured that was roughly 445-Hp/435-Tq at the crank.
This is a full bolt-on, Cam'd, and Ported/Milled heads, Gen4 5.3. Now I did use a smaller cam, but the largest cam that would work with the stock converter, not affect my low-end at all, and not affect my towing (I tow 7,000 lbs often). It is a smaller 212/218 .553/.553 113+2 LSA Cam, and I could of used a TSP 228R (which doesn't start to make power til 4,700 rpm) which would of given me another 10 rwhp and would put me pretty close to 380 rwhp, but I would of lost my ability to use a stock converter, lost my ability to tow very well because any low-end under 3,000-3,200 rpm is now gone, and trying to daily it would be really fun.
So, the Gen5 EcoTec3 L83 5.3 has on average a 70-Hp advantage over the Gen3 5.3, which is the engine this post was about, about you are trying to compare the two saying everyone should have a 380+ rwhp Gen3 LM7 5.3 because a Gen5 can do it with just bolt-ons.
You should go build a Full Bolt On N/A Gen3 LM7 5.3 with 380+ rwhp, through a 4L60E in a Full Size Silverado, and use it as your daily driver, because achieving a 380+ rwhp Gen5 5.3 is very doable.
I
There is a thread somewhere on one of these forums sites with a 2016 with proven good quality Longtubes, Intake kit, Catback, ran a E85/91 Blend, and a tune and made either 360+ or 380+ rwhp. You throw a cam in there, that puts you over 400 rwhp.
This thread was made years before the Gen5 motors were even known about, plus this is the Gen3 5.3 section. This is when a Stock Gen3 5.3 on 91 octane made around 230 rwhp. That is a 70-75 rwhp difference between the engine they are talking about to the engine you are trying to compare in the 2017.
Heck, I have a Gen4 LMG 5.3. Which stock, made 315-Hp/338-Tq at the flywheel, and 259-Hp/285-Tq at the rear wheels. Even the Gen4 5.3 engines are 40-Hp behind the Gen5's. I last dyno'd, at the beginning of the year, at 363-Hp/352-Tq at the wheels, which we figured that was roughly 445-Hp/435-Tq at the crank.
This is a full bolt-on, Cam'd, and Ported/Milled heads, Gen4 5.3. Now I did use a smaller cam, but the largest cam that would work with the stock converter, not affect my low-end at all, and not affect my towing (I tow 7,000 lbs often). It is a smaller 212/218 .553/.553 113+2 LSA Cam, and I could of used a TSP 228R (which doesn't start to make power til 4,700 rpm) which would of given me another 10 rwhp and would put me pretty close to 380 rwhp, but I would of lost my ability to use a stock converter, lost my ability to tow very well because any low-end under 3,000-3,200 rpm is now gone, and trying to daily it would be really fun.
So, the Gen5 EcoTec3 L83 5.3 has on average a 70-Hp advantage over the Gen3 5.3, which is the engine this post was about, about you are trying to compare the two saying everyone should have a 380+ rwhp Gen3 LM7 5.3 because a Gen5 can do it with just bolt-ons.
You should go build a Full Bolt On N/A Gen3 LM7 5.3 with 380+ rwhp, through a 4L60E in a Full Size Silverado, and use it as your daily driver, because achieving a 380+ rwhp Gen5 5.3 is very doable.
