yossarian19

I'm doing homework and coming up with ideas, thought I'd run this one past some experienced builders.
How dumb would it be to take a 4.8 engine, hone the cylinders, re-ring it and put 5.3 rods & a 4" crank under it?
The goal is not horsepower but off-idle torque.
I think this recipe gets to ~360 CI and, with the factory cam (or an RV of some variety) it should make more off-idle torque than a 6.0 swap with the benefit of new rings & bearings, too.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

This is a BADLY misguided plan.

KCS

iTrader: (20)

The pistons would stick up about .200" above the deck of the block, so the top ring probably wouldn't even be in the cylinder. Needless to say, it wouldn't work.

yossarian19

Glad I asked.
I'm confused (obviously). I'd thought the stroker engines were using a 6.125" rod, common to the LS1 and 5.3? Where did I go wrong, and which rod would I want?

EDIT: Pistons.
Do the 4.8 flat-tops have a different wrist pin height than the 5.3's?

5FOX3

Ive been thinking of doing this with my L33 which is currently torn apart. You would need to just get a stroker kit....or do your math right and buy parts separately but id just give someone a call. And then there going to tell you just to get a 6.0 anyways I bet. From what I remember the 4.8/5.3 pistons are the same. Difference is the 4.8 crank and longer rods to accommodate the shorter stroke.

redtan

iTrader: (5)

It's not the rods, it's the pistons. You want pistons made for a 4" stroke crank which is usually shorter so that it doesn't jump out the hole like the stock one would.

yossarian19

Got it.
Thanks for the help.

Paul.Kaos

im real sick of the ham fisted meatheads who immediately hate on anyone doing anything smallbore

undersquare motors make better off throttle torque

they are also the most efficient.

since you cant put a ******* 5" crank in the LS that pretty well means the only path to undersquare is s 4" crank under small bores...

im essentially trying to build exactly the same thing as this guy. 5.3 truck block, sawed off ls7 crank, ls7 rods, custom pistons, shaved 862 heads with a 2.0 valve shoved in there with ls7 lifters, ls6 springs, brass trunions, and a BTR cam...

how is this any dumber than a 383 besides being more so what a 383 is.

yall dont think 5.9l is enough when everybody with a bone stock junkyard LQ4 thinks putting a cam in it equals racecar or whatever the big bore cult is on about???

G Atsma

Are you done???

Biebs

Everyone wants the 7000rpm max hp # dyno queens.

nobody is looking for a low revving torque monster.

Biebs

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3...ne-production/


“Its final iteration was launched in 2010 with the Mulsanne, Bentley's top offering. Rated at 507 horsepower and 752 lb-ft of torque, it delivered the "effortless wave of torque for which Bentley is renowned"”

Its low-revving, ultra-silent operation felt like nothing else on the road, its characteristics perhaps closer to a diesel than a gasoline engine but without any of the rumble.

Full Power

Mainifold Pressure is cheaper than custom rotating assembly(s)

grinder11

iTrader: (1)

N/A sucks, and FI blows. I like it either way!!

Che70velle

iTrader: (6)

Got a laugh out of this….thanks.

bobcratch

this thread is incomplete without a picture of a sawed off LS7 crank - can anybody deliver?

1FastBrick

iTrader: (16)

It's top secret...

But I did find this in another thread.

G Atsma

A $20 lathe job.....

Che70velle

iTrader: (6)

You misspelled $200. Nobody does anything for $20 anymore. Those days are gone. Super simple job though with the right tools.

the_merv

iTrader: (88)

I just want to know what junkyard has an LQ4 without the Rods hanging out of it.

Considering that the majority of Heads out there for that small bore are cathedral and they work better for port velocity than volume, you have to have RPM's to get that velocity.

Someone had a small bore rectangular port head if I remember right.

G Atsma

Yeah, I was being hopefully facetious... LOL!