LS VS Oldschool

[vanrah]

Greetings Guys; This is one of the most entertaining strings I have contributed to. Every one of you guys have some info to add to the great data base of Hot Roding. So My turn to add .03 cents worth. Please keep in mind I own and drive the 9C1 Brown Brick & a 2005 GuTOo LS2. I just returned from G.O.N.E. (G 8/Gto Onwers iNternational Event) this past weekend and made 5 passes at Cordova drag way with my ol'e work car (GuTOo).
So that you all understand were my ol’e full (pushed out most of my hair), dried up brain is. After the war I took auto engines courses and worked in a very well equipped (Quickway, Storm Valcan, Stewart Warner, Berco & Bridge Port) machine shop until the fall of 71. Back to school for machine tool and ended up as a design draftsman. I was there when we did the powered metal rod cracking tooling, the mid 90s LT-1 dress tooling that was 50% canceled because the LS was on the way. I also worked on the LS rod side grinder tooling and the Jeep 4.0L tooling. It was on the Jeep assignment that I asked the GM guys why they were making a new push rod engine. Because I had just finished working on Ford’s hollow OHC tooling. They told me that they “fixed all the SBC short comings” and that’s all I got out of them. Then this year I had wrote a letter to Comp Cams about some wear I didn’t like and the VP calls me, he’s 61 yrs and we hit it off on he phone pretty good. I should mention how great of a company they are; buy their stuff they stand behind it. After 5 or 6 calls over 3 - 4 hours on the phone this is what I learned! LS engines don’t oil the upper end as well as the old SBC (the king of oiling). The cam ramps even in a stock LS are way faster than old engines that had lots of ZINC in the oil. And that is one reason that old engines lasted if the weren’t spun up with after market cams. Look very close (1979 Malibu 9C1 for sale) at the picture of my main caps and oil pump. Note that the pick up is brazed to the bottom of the pump, the oil is 2” from the gear and the gear is 3’ from the rear main bearing. On a LS engine the oil is 15” form the pump and 15” back to the rear main. Did I make my point? The LS also has some other oiling issues, now add an after market cam with extremely fast cam ramps and unbelievable surface loads and the POOR street oil we have with nearly NO Zinc. The result is a lot of roller lifter cam lobe failures (per the VP @ Comp)! Randy_W said “One guys longevity isn't that good of a marker”. After what I learned from the Comp Cams VP I disagree with you. If you hot rod (after market cam + RPM) a LS engine use oil with Zinc in it. I know that the zinc will destroy the cats & sensors, but just consider them wear parts. Way better than having a cam lifter go away and dumping a bunch of hard little pieces of metal into your engine! Bob Jr.
PS; Blue Knight, I plan no going to Byron on the 5th of Oct & I challenge you to a race for a ROOT beer, NO Juice just motor and I'll put root beer on my shopping list.

 

[jetsetw31]

I remember hearing about those oiling problems of the LS. But it was mostly Holden engines. GM built LSs having those issues were rare. Or not mentioned much. :shock:

 

[jdietschweiler]

Blue Knight, I plan no going to Byron on the 5th of Oct & I challenge you to a race for a ROOT beer, NO Juice just motor and I'll put root beer on my shopping list.

Man your picky, no juice just ROOT beer? Barley or wheat roots? I would love to but I work weekends and need the rest of my time for hunting. (im spent too much time on the car and have not been practicing with the bow)

 

[vanrah]

Mr B Knight & guys; Every Wednesday night on Oakley road Ben Graf has a car guy together & everyone is welcome. Kurt may have mentioned it to you. If you're free stop by, I plan to be their tonight with the Brown Brick and he has root beer in the frig. When GM hot rods a LS engine they often go dry sump! Soon I plan to post some of the positive things I've learned about the LS series engines. But I will most likely be re-posting stuff that most already know. Please keep in mind that all engines are JUST air pumps, it's the heads that make the difference. later Bob Jr.

 

[Randy_W]

The oiling issues were largely in the first run of LS engines, very little problem after '99 and frankly not much before that. If anyone wants to believe 60 year old tech and materials are better, please enjoy.

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

The oiling issues were largely in the first run of LS engines, very little problem after '99 and frankly not much before that. If anyone wants to believe 60 year old tech and materials are better, please enjoy.

Going with that logic, why bother driving a 35 year old body and chassis design that is as rigid as a wet noodle and never designed or intended to withstand more than 400 HP without deforming, twisting, cracking, and breaking? Face it even a Gbody with a LS7 in it is still inferior to any modern car that came with a LS in it from the factory. If you dislike old tech so much then just stop messing around with Gbodies since they are like Model Ts compared to modern unibody designs. Everything about these cars are old and dated designs and jamming in a more modern engine is simply a band aid akin to installing a modern microprocessor into a 1960s computer bank. If you feel this way you may be better off getting into newer cars since everything in them is better. Better brakes, better safety, better comfort, better handling, better paint, better emissions, etc. So the question really is updating an outdated car model to modern standards vs just buying a more modern car that already has the desired improvements stock.


All we did is point out how some of your comments about SBCs and older motors and tech were plain wrong. No one said LS motors don't have any advantages, just that some of the disadvantages you stated for SBCs were false or that LS's are not really that much better in some areas over SBCs such as longevity. BTW, high silicon iron that is used in the LS cylinder sleeves has been around alot longer than 60 years. The j* imports were using it in the 1970s with their engines lasting to 250-300K forcing GM and other US makers to raise the silicon content in their blocks to compete. That is why 1980s and 90s SBC blocks wear longer. The LS is an excellent factory motor, but its engineering is based off a lot of the things that have been around in the Gen1 SBC aftermarket for years and years.

theres no magical potion thats added to LS cylinder head castings.
no mysterical unexplainable reasons why it makes the power it does, its just good engineering. and that SAME engineering can be found in the GEN1 SBC aftermaket.


At this point it seems the hotrodding lobby is devolving into keeping up with the Joneses. Maybe hotrodding has always been that way?

 

[L92 OLDS]

its just good engineering. and that SAME engineering can be found in the GEN1 SBC aftermaket.

You have some good points regarding the structural rigidity and overall driving characteristics of a G body compared to a new car but how did this thread become an arguement specific to the early SBC? Adam (the original poster) has an Oldsmobile and the thread is about old school tech vs LS. The LS motor is a corporate engine for GM used in several platforms bears very little resemblance to its predesessor, the LT1 and the earlier SBC. It is far superior to any GM V8 ever built.

 

[Randy_W]

The oiling issues were largely in the first run of LS engines, very little problem after '99 and frankly not much before that. If anyone wants to believe 60 year old tech and materials are better, please enjoy.

Going with that logic, why bother driving a 35 year old body and chassis design that is as rigid as a wet noodle and never designed or intended to withstand more than 400 HP without deforming, twisting, cracking, and breaking? Face it even a Gbody with a LS7 in it is still inferior to any modern car that came with a LS in it from the factory. If you dislike old tech so much then just stop messing around with Gbodies since they are like Model Ts compared to modern unibody designs. Everything about these cars are old and dated designs and jamming in a more modern engine is simply a band aid akin to installing a modern microprocessor into a 1960s computer bank. If you feel this way you may be better off getting into newer cars since everything in them is better. Better brakes, better safety, better comfort, better handling, better paint, better emissions, etc. So the question really is updating an outdated car model to modern standards vs just buying a more modern car that already has the desired improvements stock.


All we did is point out how some of your comments about SBCs and older motors and tech were plain wrong. No one said LS motors don't have any advantages, just that some of the disadvantages you stated for SBCs were false or that LS's are not really that much better in some areas over SBCs such as longevity. BTW, high silicon iron that is used in the LS cylinder sleeves has been around alot longer than 60 years. The j* imports were using it in the 1970s with their engines lasting to 250-300K forcing GM and other US makers to raise the silicon content in their blocks to compete. That is why 1980s and 90s SBC blocks wear longer. The LS is an excellent factory motor, but its engineering is based off a lot of the things that have been around in the Gen1 SBC aftermarket for years and years.

theres no magical potion thats added to LS cylinder head castings.
no mysterical unexplainable reasons why it makes the power it does, its just good engineering. and that SAME engineering can be found in the GEN1 SBC aftermaket.


At this point it seems the hotrodding lobby is devolving into keeping up with the Joneses. Maybe hotrodding has always been that way?

First, don't be an *ss. I swapped an LT1 into my '67 Impala SS because I love the character and style and feel of the car, but I wanted modern power, dependability fuel mileage and drive ability. I mess with G-bodies because I damn well please. I did the first LT1 swap that I ever saw or heard of in the mid 90's, the Jones' had little effect on me. I did it with self engineered pieces and a good programmer being patient. Keeping up with Billy Bob was never my goal, doing it before him was. But now that they are simple, easy and cheap virtually anyone can do it. I'm not saying you gotaa do it, I'm probably going to run my 428 Pontiac in this Cutlass, because it's cool and I don't plan to drive it that far. With my '67 I went to the Turkey Run in Daytona twice, the Dream Cruise on Woodward 3 times and numerous trips around the eastern half of the country, I got 24-26 mpg with my LT1/4L60E saving me a ton of money, it started and ran in the cold, heat and rain, idled on 20 degree mornings, etc... Why would I have wanted to fight the 327/powerglide combo trying to do that?
I never said there was any magic in newer engines, I said they were the culmination of 60+ years of R&D. I was alive when the first SBC was sold, I've seen it all come and go. I remember when a '62 Super Duty 421 was the ultimate engine, by '67-68 Pontiac had heads that would flow rings around those old heads. Times change, there's nothing wrong with using and loving old tech, I certainly do. But there's nothing wrong with admitting things have improved, either.

 

[olds307 and 403]

I agree on these cars being totally outdated. My Cutlass can beat my Challenger SE in a straight line race. Start taking corners and my car is like a grain truck in comparision, no contest at all. Many do hate the styling of the new Camaro, just ugly and wrong and the bubble butt on the fourth gen Firebird ruins it. On chevies it doesn't matter, not a fan of gm's cheap cars anyways. Olds, Pontiac and Buick purest would be pissed with an LS under the hood.

 

[Clone TIE Pilot]

The oiling issues were largely in the first run of LS engines, very little problem after '99 and frankly not much before that. If anyone wants to believe 60 year old tech and materials are better, please enjoy.

Going with that logic, why bother driving a 35 year old body and chassis design that is as rigid as a wet noodle and never designed or intended to withstand more than 400 HP without deforming, twisting, cracking, and breaking? Face it even a Gbody with a LS7 in it is still inferior to any modern car that came with a LS in it from the factory. If you dislike old tech so much then just stop messing around with Gbodies since they are like Model Ts compared to modern unibody designs. Everything about these cars are old and dated designs and jamming in a more modern engine is simply a band aid akin to installing a modern microprocessor into a 1960s computer bank. If you feel this way you may be better off getting into newer cars since everything in them is better. Better brakes, better safety, better comfort, better handling, better paint, better emissions, etc. So the question really is updating an outdated car model to modern standards vs just buying a more modern car that already has the desired improvements stock.


All we did is point out how some of your comments about SBCs and older motors and tech were plain wrong. No one said LS motors don't have any advantages, just that some of the disadvantages you stated for SBCs were false or that LS's are not really that much better in some areas over SBCs such as longevity. BTW, high silicon iron that is used in the LS cylinder sleeves has been around alot longer than 60 years. The j* imports were using it in the 1970s with their engines lasting to 250-300K forcing GM and other US makers to raise the silicon content in their blocks to compete. That is why 1980s and 90s SBC blocks wear longer. The LS is an excellent factory motor, but its engineering is based off a lot of the things that have been around in the Gen1 SBC aftermarket for years and years.

theres no magical potion thats added to LS cylinder head castings.
no mysterical unexplainable reasons why it makes the power it does, its just good engineering. and that SAME engineering can be found in the GEN1 SBC aftermaket.


At this point it seems the hotrodding lobby is devolving into keeping up with the Joneses. Maybe hotrodding has always been that way?

First, don't be an *ss. I swapped an LT1 into my '67 Impala SS because I love the character and style and feel of the car, but I wanted modern power, dependability fuel mileage and drive ability. I mess with G-bodies because I damn well please. I did the first LT1 swap that I ever saw or heard of in the mid 90's, the Jones' had little effect on me. I did it with self engineered pieces and a good programmer being patient. Keeping up with Billy Bob was never my goal, doing it before him was. But now that they are simple, easy and cheap virtually anyone can do it. I'm not saying you gotaa do it, I'm probably going to run my 428 Pontiac in this Cutlass, because it's cool and I don't plan to drive it that far. With my '67 I went to the Turkey Run in Daytona twice, the Dream Cruise on Woodward 3 times and numerous trips around the eastern half of the country, I got 24-26 mpg with my LT1/4L60E saving me a ton of money, it started and ran in the cold, heat and rain, idled on 20 degree mornings, etc... Why would I have wanted to fight the 327/powerglide combo trying to do that?
I never said there was any magic in newer engines, I said they were the culmination of 60+ years of R&D. I was alive when the first SBC was sold, I've seen it all come and go. I remember when a '62 Super Duty 421 was the ultimate engine, by '67-68 Pontiac had heads that would flow rings around those old heads. Times change, there's nothing wrong with using and loving old tech, I certainly do. But there's nothing wrong with admitting things have improved, either.

I wasn't being an *ss and please don't degrade this into name calling Randy, it doesn't help your argument, just stating the cold truth. The style, character, and feel are just pure nostalgia.Though I agree newer cars are ugly but that is only opinion and taste which has no effect on power or performance in any way. As much as I like Gbodies, they were not intended to be sports cars, and are not built that way. Despite being ugly to me, modern cars are built so much better than anything from the 80s. Even the Gbody frame is pretty thin, and when I changed out my body bushings I could wiggle the frame rails all around willy nilly by one hand with ease. Look up a guy named MAP on MCSS.com, he can point out what a soft platform G bodies are, they were built for comfort, not performance. With this platform we have several things that are in need of attention but the 800 lb gorilla in the room is the front suspension geometry. It`s lousy and backward in pretty much every way possible not just by modern standards but even by 1950s standards. The camber curves are completely backward, the roll center is absurdly low and wildly unstable, it has epic amounts of bump steer. It`s just bad. You could spend big bucks on the new more rigid aftermarket Gbody frames that really improves handling and come with LS mounts. But by the time you spend all that money on a aftermarket frame and suspension, LS swap, brake and handling upgrade, you could buy a new car that will still out perform the Gbody anyway or any other older car probably for cheaper.

LS swaps maybe are easier now than they were due to greater aftermarket support, but they still aren't cheap, simple, or all that easy if you need to do a legal swap. There are some illegal shortcuts one can do with an LS swap to save money and labor but that is not an option for everyone. The tech is completely different and you pretty much are changing the car from pre OBD to more complex OBD2 and really changing the car's classic character. You pretty much have to change everything out for a LS, mounts, crossmember, exhaust, etc. That is besides having to relearn everything to be able to work on and tune a LS motor or rely more on hiring outside professionals to do alot more of the work for you.

My old 1986 carbed SBC starts right up and idles fine in the heat, cold, rain, and I can't tell any difference between it's drive ability vs more modern EFI cars. Other than weaker brakes and handling than modern stuff it's not any harder to drive engine wise. Heck even my old 1946 tractor still starts right up on the first crank in the heat, cold, rain, snow, etc and idles fine and has no problem driving a 5 foot wide mower deck though 6 foot tall weeds. My point was simply that the LS is not as superior to the gen 1 block as you would like to believe it is. LS add ons cost more, not to mention the initial cost of installing it into your older car. The only reason the LS produces so much power in stock form is they all came from the factory with good parts. The stock cam's have .500 lift on them for crying out loud. The fact is if you put good parts in a gen 1 block you can make great hp just like an LS, and saying that you can't is false. Go to your local track and see how many people are running great times and making great power with "old" blocks. This entire arguement that an LS can do so many things that a gen 1 block can't is completely untrue. Same thing goes for the LT1. It's just a gen 1 block with reverse cooling and optispark that was only put there to fit under the cowl. Otherwise they are basically the same as a Gen 1.