Rectangle port heads on 5.3?
You would seriously put a 245cc head,on a 5.3? Esp with 3.740 worth of valves on a 3.780 bore?...that would be totally overkill and probably run and drive like a farm tractor.
Thread Starter
TECH Apprentice
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 365
Likes: 1
I'm defiantly going to go with either the 243's or the other cathedral casting that's really popular and get them CNC'd. As far as intake the ported LS2 looks like a nice budget friendly option but I'm curious about the BBK, Holey, and Professional products intakes. They aren't that expensive at all and look pretty sweet. I'm really looking to trade as much low end for top end as possible with the cam swap. The car can't come close to using all it's low end stock let alone with a big cam and heads.
Anyone got a lot of info on those intakes?
Anyone got a lot of info on those intakes?
Alot of people will try to sway you away from those holley/bbk and Pro Products intakes because they are cast alum and they get their girl parts in a bind about heat soak.
Honestly they are all nice pieces though. The holley and the bbk are the same piece. The Pro products is the only one to offer the port openings in an 85 and 96mm. The Holley and Pro Products offer their intakes in polished for also.
Go with what you like. Peace of mind is worth more than the most expensive intake.
What application is this going into?
Honestly they are all nice pieces though. The holley and the bbk are the same piece. The Pro products is the only one to offer the port openings in an 85 and 96mm. The Holley and Pro Products offer their intakes in polished for also.
Go with what you like. Peace of mind is worth more than the most expensive intake.
What application is this going into?
Thread Starter
TECH Apprentice
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 365
Likes: 1
So then would the 96 pro products be the best option for max top end power? I guess heat soak is a viable concern, but can't be a major issue or the intakes wouldn't exist as aluminum. Engineers at Holley are smarter than that.
Im thinking about just going with a used LS2 and 90mm and having both ported down the road. Now I need to figure out a better MAF and cool fuel rails that fit and I'm set there.
This is for The 2006 Impala SS pictured in my Sig. It's wrong wheel drive. It is a great highway sleeper even stockish, and handles decent after throwing some parts at it. I'm really happy with it for a daily driver but the drivetrain will come out when the trans blows soon so why not get some more power
Im thinking about just going with a used LS2 and 90mm and having both ported down the road. Now I need to figure out a better MAF and cool fuel rails that fit and I'm set there.
This is for The 2006 Impala SS pictured in my Sig. It's wrong wheel drive. It is a great highway sleeper even stockish, and handles decent after throwing some parts at it. I'm really happy with it for a daily driver but the drivetrain will come out when the trans blows soon so why not get some more power
the problem you will need to worry about first is the oil pressure sending unit that is in the way of all these intakes. The FWD LS intakes are completely special to them. You have to do some massaging on anything else, or remote mount or move your sending unit to make these other intakes work. That is step 1.
I believe the maf is good enough for now on those.
doug thorley headers would be one of the first mods I did to the LS4 engines.
I believe the maf is good enough for now on those.
doug thorley headers would be one of the first mods I did to the LS4 engines.
Thread Starter
TECH Apprentice
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 365
Likes: 1
So now were down to TFS 5.3 vs ported 243.
What's the other GM casting that good to start with? I think they come off of the 5.3 aluminum H.O. Motors, 7 something? What's the difference in that head vs the 243? Looking for max top end power.
You are talking about the 799 heads. They are nearly identical to the 243s. Basically interchangeable. And you must mean TEA not TFS. TFS has some really really good heads, that would work well, but they are pricey yes. TEA has all sorts of combos that would be killer for you. But I think you are running a 799 head anyway or a 243, do not remember which came on the LS4. So it would be like CNCing your heads.
but for any other intake, you still have to address that oil pressure sending unit issue.
but for any other intake, you still have to address that oil pressure sending unit issue.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Topdon ONE vs. Artidiag 800 BT2: Which is the Diagnostic Tablet For You?
Pouria Savadkouei
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo Thread Starter
TECH Apprentice
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 365
Likes: 1
the problem you will need to worry about first is the oil pressure sending unit that is in the way of all these intakes. The FWD LS intakes are completely special to them. You have to do some massaging on anything else, or remote mount or move your sending unit to make these other intakes work. That is step 1.
I believe the maf is good enough for now on those.
doug thorley headers would be one of the first mods I did to the LS4 engines.
I believe the maf is good enough for now on those.
doug thorley headers would be one of the first mods I did to the LS4 engines.
The DT headers are a possibility, but not 100% going to work with my new drivetrain. So I may have custom headers made when I do the rest of the exhaust. After talking to DT. I'm dealing with exhaust last, after it s all in the car.
I'd like a bigger MAF if I can get one to take advantage of the other mods.
Thread Starter
TECH Apprentice
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 365
Likes: 1
You are talking about the 799 heads. They are nearly identical to the 243s. Basically interchangeable. And you must mean TEA not TFS. TFS has some really really good heads, that would work well, but they are pricey yes. TEA has all sorts of combos that would be killer for you. But I think you are running a 799 head anyway or a 243, do not remember which came on the LS4. So it would be like CNCing your heads.
but for any other intake, you still have to address that oil pressure sending unit issue.
but for any other intake, you still have to address that oil pressure sending unit issue.
Thanks for all the help man.
Um, the LS4 blocks are alot diff from the rest of the LS blocks. The starter bolts to the trans IIRC and its that way for a reason. I am not sure how the LS2 block would work well in the car, but you will still have the problem of the oil sending unit being right at the back of the engine on top of the valley plate and in the way of the intake, since it is on backwards. I know katech makes a kit, but I thought it was still a problem with the intake needing to be clearanced a bit. Putting an LS2 block in the car would make the starter on the back of the engine. I am sure it will take alot of money to make all this happen.
And not sure your 4spd TCM will talk to the 6 speed trans at all. Is this something commonly done in the FWD world? I am very familiar with the v6 fwd but not so much exp 100% on the V8 stuff. I know some about them, but not all. Unless you can just swap the TCM from the 2 and hopefully the will communicate. That would be interesting.
And not sure your 4spd TCM will talk to the 6 speed trans at all. Is this something commonly done in the FWD world? I am very familiar with the v6 fwd but not so much exp 100% on the V8 stuff. I know some about them, but not all. Unless you can just swap the TCM from the 2 and hopefully the will communicate. That would be interesting.
Thread Starter
TECH Apprentice
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 365
Likes: 1
It hasn't been done that I know of yet because of programming, but an engineer at power train contro, solutions is putting the LS2/6T75 combo in a fiereo so I'm not worried about that. Kits to put the trans in the car and mount the starter have already been prototyped so no issue there. And the engine will fit using the LS4 crand and accessory drive, it's no different in size there. And the new trans has a built in TCM like the 6Lxx so the stocker will go away. Didn't realize about the OPSU on the RWD blocks, that's a problem to solve now for sure. Will the same kit that fixes the LS4 most likely fix the RWD blocks? I'd imagine so.
I've seen turbo vette's with intake on backwards
I've seen turbo vette's with intake on backwards
Not sure how all that will work, but good luck. I am sure it will be an adventure. And yes, that same kit should work for the RWD blocks too since its the valley cover that houses the unit and not the block. They have that boss in the same place as the LS4 valley cover does I believe.
Teching In
Joined: Jul 2024
Posts: 12
Likes: 2
undersquare is both where all the torque and the efficiency are.
unless youre building a high RPM road coarse type thing, my opinion has always been to max out your stroke for displacement before you start hogging it out, presuming we are gonna drive it on the street...
how does the Mast small bore ls3 head breath on a 350 or 383 stroker with a whole *** LSA party hat on top?
Teching In
Joined: Jul 2024
Posts: 12
Likes: 2
sorry for the necromancy but if I started my own thread youd all claim I didnt search.
cant have it both ways.
posting stupid questions on the end of 6yo good threads ensures nobody can say I didn't ******* search. how else are we *here*
so *thread hijack* now we are talking about strokers with forced induction...
is a small bore square port head with it NOW? or should I get some classy hunnit dolla block off plates from the scamazon man???
🤣😂🤣
also how is some kid tryna hop up the impala his granny gave him at 16yo with big boy LS parts the PRIME SEARCH RESULT for small bore square port heads?
anywho
cant have it both ways.
posting stupid questions on the end of 6yo good threads ensures nobody can say I didn't ******* search. how else are we *here*
so *thread hijack* now we are talking about strokers with forced induction...
is a small bore square port head with it NOW? or should I get some classy hunnit dolla block off plates from the scamazon man???
🤣😂🤣
also how is some kid tryna hop up the impala his granny gave him at 16yo with big boy LS parts the PRIME SEARCH RESULT for small bore square port heads?
anywho
Last edited by Paul.Kaos; Jul 22, 2024 at 11:23 AM.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 22,306
Likes: 3,621
From: Central Cal.
Why get all defensive when you're the only one until now to reply to a 12 year old thread?
Nobody's hijacking anything here.
A 6.2 crank is the same stroke (3.622") as the 5.3 and all other LS cranks EXCEPT for the 4.8 and LS7 cranks.
Truth is, a 5.3 doesn't really need rectangular heads whether NA or supercharged/turbocharged.
This is why small bore rectangular heads are a relatively rare item.
Those engines that can best use rectangulars already have enough bore to handle the valve spacing of the OEM versions.
Nobody's hijacking anything here.
A 6.2 crank is the same stroke (3.622") as the 5.3 and all other LS cranks EXCEPT for the 4.8 and LS7 cranks.
Truth is, a 5.3 doesn't really need rectangular heads whether NA or supercharged/turbocharged.
This is why small bore rectangular heads are a relatively rare item.
Those engines that can best use rectangulars already have enough bore to handle the valve spacing of the OEM versions.
Why get all defensive when you're the only one until now to reply to a 12 year old thread?
Nobody's hijacking anything here.
A 6.2 crank is the same stroke (3.622") as the 5.3 and all other LS cranks EXCEPT for the 4.8 and LS7 cranks.
Truth is, a 5.3 doesn't really need rectangular heads whether NA or supercharged/turbocharged.
This is why small bore rectangular heads are a relatively rare item.
Those engines that can best use rectangulars already have enough bore to handle the valve spacing of the OEM versions.
Nobody's hijacking anything here.
A 6.2 crank is the same stroke (3.622") as the 5.3 and all other LS cranks EXCEPT for the 4.8 and LS7 cranks.
Truth is, a 5.3 doesn't really need rectangular heads whether NA or supercharged/turbocharged.
This is why small bore rectangular heads are a relatively rare item.
Those engines that can best use rectangulars already have enough bore to handle the valve spacing of the OEM versions.
Honestly, My ideal (well sort of a pipe dream engine) engine build would be a 6.0 or 6.2 block with a 4.8 crank and 6.2 heads...ported and a not so big cam but something that will allow it to pull to about 8000rpm with a turbo is what i'd like to build. Little down on low end tq but really pulls good up top. kinda like the new 5.0 engines. except without the multi cam and oil pump problems.
I think he got mad at himself about 4 minutes later?
Honestly, My ideal (well sort of a pipe dream engine) engine build would be a 6.0 or 6.2 block with a 4.8 crank and 6.2 heads...ported and a not so big cam but something that will allow it to pull to about 8000rpm with a turbo is what i'd like to build. Little down on low end tq but really pulls good up top. kinda like the new 5.0 engines. except without the multi cam and oil pump problems.
Honestly, My ideal (well sort of a pipe dream engine) engine build would be a 6.0 or 6.2 block with a 4.8 crank and 6.2 heads...ported and a not so big cam but something that will allow it to pull to about 8000rpm with a turbo is what i'd like to build. Little down on low end tq but really pulls good up top. kinda like the new 5.0 engines. except without the multi cam and oil pump problems.
valvetrain is what will limit you, not the stroke. Why not have a full 6.2 or 416 and still turn 8k? Granted the 416 will need some really good heads to have the top end pull you’d like, both options would still be that much more ahead.
1) easier on parts, particularly drivetrain
2) easier to put the power on the ground with the small tires and fender wells that I have to work with.
