LS2 Engine Variants, Which do I choose?
 

Title states it, the LS2 and even LS3 engines have engines that are similar but used in trucks. I have a 2010 Camaro with an LS3 and the bottom end seems tired, instead of rebuilding I have been looking at LS2 style engine like in the attached picture. I am going boosted also and am shooting for the 600WHP range with a LS9 cam. Which of the LS2 variants would work best, OR is an LS3 variant a better choice? Only thing is I can snap an LFA or LZ1(LS2) engine for like 3k versus a L92(LS3) which are selling for over 4k.
Thanks ahead for the help and advice, I look forward to your opinions!

PS: I will be new to being boosted and I noticed some of the LS2 variants have mid 10:1 CR, would this suite me better for boost?

PPS: Heads don;t matter to me as I will be using my CNC Ported LS3 heads my current engine has on with BTR dual springs and CHE Rocker bushings!
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/ls1tech...394d0ab73e.jpg

Save the Money and grab one of the engines you found for 3K...

0.2L in engine displacement makes almost no noticeable change in power at low power levels (IE street cars/ engines under 1500 HP).

Considering 0.2L for $1,000.00 is a bit expensive verses the alternative.

I just picked up a LFA engine core for about $500.00 ...It only had mildly worn camshaft bearings wrong with it.

Now it is a super cheap foundation for my 6.6L (403") engine. I stripped it completely and only kept the cylinder block and main caps.

What fuel do you plan on using?

If using 85% ethanol or higher, or possibly methanol also at a high percentage... You can force plenty of boost into the engine with your planned 10.0:1 to 11.0:1 compression ratio.

I have gone that route many a time.

My plan is some M1 methanol from VP fuels, a 10.5:1 to 11.0:1 compression ratio and a minimum of 15.00 PSI of boost.

It is in the Thread: "Mystery 6.0L core" in this same forum section...

I figured the same thing that I wouldn't notice any power difference between a 6.0 and 6.2L. I guess I should have phrased the question as, is the 6.0 Aluminum block weaker than the 6.2 Block? From what I have read at lower power levels like I am shooting for I shouldn't have to worry, and the rest of the part (pistons, rods, crank) are pretty much the same between the 2.
I'll take a look at your thread also. Thanks for the info.

The 6.2L cylinder blocks are "Supposed to be" a better casting... However I do not find any evidence to substantiate that in real life...

The only cylinder blocks that I have found some improvements with would be the LS9 and LSA blocks. They IMO are not worth the extra $$$.

If you want to spend $ and can spend $ look to the aftermarket.

I'm currently not worried about making big power so I don't need a LSA or LS9 block. I have even had a few people claim the LS2 style blocks are better than the LS3 blocks because of thicker cylinder walls. Not sure how true that is, I only have a few years of experience with LS engines.

It is simple, LS2 cylinder blocks (6.0L) have a 4.0000" bore and LS3 cylinder blocks (6.2L) have a 4.0650" bore.

So... the LS3 cylinders will be 0.0650" larger (thinner) than the LS2 cylinders.

This all comes down to whether or not the cylinders can be cleaned up/ honed/ bored during a rebuild.

After building hundreds of these engines I have seen NO real world difference in longevity between the LS2 and LS3 cylinders.

I have not come across any over heating issues or punch through a cylinder as of yet.

I prefer to try and obtain the largest bore cylinder blocks that I can for other reasons... (unshrouding valves, keeping the bore to stroke ratio from becoming "under square", and to try and squeeze out a few extra cubic inches in completing a bore and stroke).

I still would jump on the 6.0 cylinder block and save the $1,000.00

Hopefully you plan on going with a turbocharger...

A turbocharger is far less abusive on the Factory engine castings than a supercharger or nitrous would be.

I regularly set up factory castings (excluding LS7) with forced induction and see 1,000.00 to 1,200.00 rear wheel horse power through a turbocharger.

Where as when using a supercharger or nitrous... I see failures (primarily main cap movement and cylinder block distortion) well below the same power levels.

Technically if you are only shooting for 600rwhp you are wasting your $ going boosted IMO. You can achieve that with a stroker setup.

What do you mean the bottom end "seems tired?" Have you done a leak down test... does it consume oil? LS engines are pretty strong and last for a long time....

If you have the $.... you can get a new LS9 block from Summit for $1900 shipped. They are finish honed to 4.065" bore... so theoretically you just buy pistons.... rods and could reuse your crank. They have billet main caps, piston squirters, a better grade aluminum, 12mm head bolts.... That would a nice foundation for 1000rwhp :)

I really DO NOT recommend building a normally aspirated 6.0L to achieve the 600.00 rear wheel horse power goal. As just stated a stroke increase to 4.00" would help build torque. However is does not help to spin the engine to your power goal.
The stroke increase is not conducive to the engine being able to turning higher RPM...

750.00 or more horse power at the crankshaft will not be the easiest task in a street driven vehicle...
Easier through a manual transmission and a relatively "small" rear differential (IE 8.20" or 8.50" Ten-Bolt... Which will not be very reliable)

At the stock displacement, the engine is going to require a fair amount more compression and some relatively high RPM to achieve the power goal.
Valvetrain to support 7,500 and higher RPM gets to be quite expensive... O, and NO 93 Octane pump gasoline will suffice for the needed compression.

With RPM over 7,500, the engine really should have a dry sump oiling system (Gerotor oil pumps do not flow well at high speeds)...
LS engines with a 1:1 gerotor crank driven oil pump lose a significant amount of oil volume and pressure spinning that fast).

I simply do not see a street driven vehicle with this type of engine configuration lasting long or having to require substantial maintenance.
I would go the turbocharge route with the stock displacement... Easier to accomplish, more fun to drive, cheaper (if you buy from one of the Turbo companies that the guy from the Sloppy mechanics website) and more fun to drive.

I would not bother performing a cylinder leak down test unless the engine burns a fair amount of oil. The test would help to indicate worn piston rings/ pistons/ valve seals/ valve guides/ leaking head gaskets. NONE of which will cause a loss of oil pressure.

While the LS9 cylinder block is very nice (the nicest of the productions blocks) it is not worth the $$$ over another cheaper 6.0L cylinder block... Especially for a Horse power goal as low as yours.
Also sadly the LS9 does not have any type of "billet" main caps... It does however have improved main caps comprised of Forged steel, instead of the nodular iron main caps on the other production blocks.

GNX7,

Dude, your cars sound amazing!

You are a very fortunate man with great taste! :-)