Torque! Rocket power vs LS power

L92 OLDS

Comic Book Super Hero
Mar 30, 2012
2,680
113
West Michigan
For those of you that rag on LS engines and say they lack torque. 🤣 Enjoy this data comparing a “built” Olds 350 rocket vs. a stock junkyard LS 6.0 liter from a GM truck. Disparaging comments regarding LS engines and their lack of torque continue to be thrown out there without data to back it up so here is the real data.

First up; Freshly rebuilt and properly broken in Olds Rocket 350 with performance camshaft, increased compression, head work and large diameter long tube headers.
Impressive numbers for 1950’s technology. A fair apples to apples comparison would be to use a stock engine but I’m afraid the Olds numbers would be pathetic.
Note the torque is decreasing as RPM increases. Maximum torque is 425 @ 4300 RPM. The dotted line is a performer intake.
1631738703854.jpeg


Next: Junkyard LS 6.0 with (blue) zero modifications and unknown miles. Stock exhaust manifolds and stock intake. (Red) a small BTR cam was swapped. Stock torque is relatively flat with a peak of 455 @ 4400 RPM. Torque rolls off at higher RPM than the Olds. This is not a VVT engine. Performance mods would significantly increase torque and HP. This curve is for a stock 6.0. Hardly fair to compare to a built Olds Rocket 350
1631739381741.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Oct 14, 2008
7,540
113
Melville,Saskatchewan
I will get Cutlassefi's dyno mule Olds 358 dyno sheet, identical bottom end parts to my build, ported iron 7A heads. It was 434 hp and 464 ft/lbs, around 9.6 to 1. The Performer is a glorified stock intake for the SBO, the RPM is much better. The 5.3 and 6L LS still suck, suck, suck, suck, suck in trucks. Get me a blind fold, stick me in one and tell me it is a Ford. Then we can bad mouth Ford's😉.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

motorheadmike

Geezer
Nov 18, 2009
7,607
113
Ottawa, Ontario Canada
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

ck80

Comic Book Super Hero
Feb 18, 2014
2,904
113
So let's see if I understand...

First we're taking a larger displacement LS motor, 6.0l vs 5.7l.

Second, we don't know the actual build of the 5 7 as far as cam specs, carb, tuning, intake type, etc.

Third, the 6.0L was developed for HD truck line usage, specifically with a cam profile and ecm tune designed for towing/torque being a truck motor.

Fourth. We're told it's a junkyard motor with no known history (or we would know miles) but it's guaranteed to be 100% stock on a stock tube? How if the history is unknown? Trucks are among the most tuned most modified power trains out there.

But, we're expected for it to be indicative of the ls being all of a sudden something different? I don't buy it. I could also take a bigger displacement olds built for torque and find an anemic smaller displacement ls. Flip the tables, and make the counter argument, right?

This doesn't appear to prove anything IMO.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Agree
Reactions: 7 users

Northernregal

Sloppy McRodbender
Supporting Member
Oct 24, 2017
2,378
113
Red Deer AB
I will get Cutlassefi's dyno mule Olds 358 dyno sheet, identical bottom end parts to my build, ported iron 7A heads. It was 434 hp and 464 ft/lbs, around 9.6 to 1. The Performer is a glorified stock intake for the SBO, the RPM is much better. The 5.3 and 6L LS still suck, suck, suck, suck, suck in trucks. Get me a blind fold, stick me in one and tell me it is a Ford. Then we can bad mouth Ford's😉.
Please do. I'd love to see what a built $6000 olds motor could do to a $400 junkyard queen with 300k km on it and a $400 summit shelf cam.
Which one? Or am I still an Ontari-dope?
Sorry Mike. It'll be some time before you get your suspender privileges.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 6 users

L92 OLDS

Comic Book Super Hero
Thread starter
Mar 30, 2012
2,680
113
West Michigan
So let's see if I understand...

First we're taking a larger displacement LS motor, 6.0l vs 5.7l.

Second, we don't know the actual build of the 5 7 as far as cam specs, carb, tuning, intake type, etc.

Third, the 6.0L was developed for HD truck line usage, specifically with a cam profile and ecm tune designed for towing/torque being a truck motor.

Fourth. We're told it's a junkyard motor with no known history (or we would know miles) but it's guaranteed to be 100% stock on a stock tube? How if the history is unknown? Trucks are among the most tuned most modified power trains out there.

But, we're expected for it to be indicative of the ls being all of a sudden something different? I don't buy it. I could also take a bigger displacement olds built for torque and find an anemic smaller displacement ls. Flip the tables, and make the counter argument, right?

This doesn't appear to prove anything IMO.
If you prefer, go find a dyno of a stock Olds 350 (suck) vs a stock 5.3/6.0. The rocket engines were also developed for torque needed to move heavy cars.

or the awe inspiring Cutlassefi $12K engine vs a built 5.3 or 6.0. Remember, the standing comment is that all GM trucks lack torque so that opens it up to a 6.2

Do you really think 50+ year old technology is better than the LS platform? Common, you know better than that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Oct 14, 2008
7,540
113
Melville,Saskatchewan
Why is everyone so bent out of shape that the LS isn't perfect? Maybe it is the non VVT motors that suck for trucks? Sorry that my personal experience isn't good enough🤷‍♂️. Here is basically my motor with slightly more aggressive flat tappet for duration but less lift than my roller. Good enough for me. Oh and you are $5,500 high carb to pan for a iron head motor.

350 gas block bored to 4.100
Square decked to 9.315
Align honed with ARP bolts
N crank, .010/.020
Stock Rods
QF Slayer 750 carb
RPM intake, untouched
Erson TQ40 cam (what else right!)
7a heads with 2.00/1.62 valves, very minor bowl cleanup.
Dividers welded, crossovers filled
Mahle 10cc piston, 9.4:1 compression
Cloyes 9 keyway double row chain set
Stock Pan
Stock pump with purple spring
Valvoline VR1 10W-30
Run on 89 octane
416.3 hp @ 5800 and 418.2 TQ @ 4500
Erson-Cam-Card-Icon.jpg

Project 350 dyno sheets-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user
Oct 14, 2008
7,540
113
Melville,Saskatchewan
Almost every dyno starts at 3000 rpm. I have just been disappointed driving these trucks for work over the years. I am not tempted to own one, especially the 4L60E years. I expected more from both 2011 trucks, not really better than the earlier ones. Honestly a 5.7 Hemi in a 3/4 ton preformed just as well as this 6L in a 3/4. Apparently a 6.2 is the truck to get, too bad very few are equipped with them. The rest are a dog fest. Again, not talking about the 2014 and up direct injection motors, way better.
 

GBodyForum is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. Amazon, the Amazon logo, AmazonSupply, and the AmazonSupply logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.

Please support GBodyForum Sponsors

Classic Truck ConsolesDixie Restoration DepotMike's MontesP-S-TSouthside Machine PerformanceUMI Performance

ContactAdmin@GBodyForum.comfor info on becoming a sponsor