Steve Bryant

iTrader: (1)

I'm planning to build a 408 Iron Block for my truck (already have the block and some parts). From time to time, I read about strokers and oil consumption. I've done a search here and at performancetrucks.net and there are a few comments on this issue. Some folks say strokers are inherently prone to consume oil and others say theirs works fine. The stock LS1 series in general seems prone to burn some oil when run hard a lot. If I tow my trailer a couple thousand miles, I'll need to add a quart in my LQ4 as it is. Also, when doing a lot of tuning for power enrichment at high MAP's I'll use a quart in a thousand miles.

Here are my questions.

1. Do you think that strokers are really prone to consume more oil than an engine with the stock 3.662" stroke?

2. Do you think that the consumption issues relate to the way the engine is prepared or component selection (honing, low tension rings, short compression height pistons).

3. Do you think that high consumption is related to the way the engine is broken in?

4. Do you think that high consumption is related to the way that stroker engines are driven (***** to the wall a lot of the time)?

5. Do you think that the whole thing is blown out of proportion?

6. What do you think?

Thanks in advance,

Steve

MAC4264

1. yes
2. yes short compression height
3. no
4. no
5. no
6. I just built a 402 using a Iron 6.0l block (460/460 broke). The piston comes to far out the bottom of the block (60% of the skirt length)and causes the piston to rock very badly. Mine used a quart of oil every 100 miles. Now the motor is a 366. I have had nothing but bad luck as well with the short skirt piston with the oil ring groove into the wrist pin. I have used them on LT1 applications as well and I'm fed up and going on to smaller better things. I thought this build would be no big deal cause it seemed as if everyone was doing it. The real truth is there is not as many running as have been sold. When I came to LS1 tech it seemed as if everyone had a resleeved motor as well and now know one even talks of it anymore. I built one of these motors as well and now I feel like a dumb *** for selling because it worked for me. It seems like there is always that one or two guys who have zero trouble maybe time has not caught up to them. Besides 3.62 stroke is enough for 6500 and below.

Steve Bryant

iTrader: (1)

MAC4264,
Thanks for your insight on this. I appreciate it very much.

Does any one else have some thoughts on the subject?

Steve

Steve Bryant

iTrader: (1)

I moved this question over to the Advanced Performance Forum to see if more folks over there have some thoughts https://ls1tech.com/forums/showpost....20&postcount=1.

If you have comments, please post to the linked Thread.

Steve

strokedls1

iTrader: (1)

I know diamond was doing some oil holes in their pistons a little while back that were too small and caused a lot of oil consumption. I had some oil problems before I went back and blocked off the pcv system in place of valve cover breathers, and used some thread sealer on the intake rocker bolts. Now it is not that much of an issue. The short compression height will lead to more oil usage. Lots of factors that may cause oil issues so hard to say how much stroke is a culprit. I would never use low tension rings on an ls1, because it causes oil consumption problems.