Torque! Rocket power vs LS power

[ck80]

Yeah, I was attacked for exactly those reasons in this thread🙄. You guys just really seem angry I haven't been impressed by the LS. Mike picked at me in thread and I responded back with my experience of STOCK, truck LS engines and why I really don't want one in anything. This thread was created in an angry response to my response🤷‍♂️. It is the factory ratings, very inflated feeling that make me a harsh critic. Same with the 4L60E, they fail often and people more intelligent and more experienced won't bother with them because of their issues. One of the ones I cooked was towing, next to nothing in the lacking low end torque 5.3 LS work truck. The Olds engines I run were rated at 160 hp from the factory, it can only go up from there. You do realize why most of my posts lately have been about my Challenger? Because I drove it nearly Everyday, 4 hours a day to almost see my Wife die. It is a great car, has what a lot modern vehicles lack, style. What motor am I building? Of course, it is an Olds 350. I have finally run out of cheap, good running motors. How many good running original LS will there be when they turn 45? You guys let this go, I will too. It has been a great distraction from real life FYI. And no everything I do is far from perfect. I seem to cling to the not so strong from the factory 2004R, it just has nearly perfect ratios and size. No cutting and hacking and expensive drive shaft mods needed for a 700R4/4L60E or 4L80E need. I just need to pony up $1000 US, spend a lot of time to make an honest performance transmission out of one. Maybe I have been annoying lately, I am a little off right now.

You know, the same engine can have more, or less, value and usability depending what you put it in.

Me? I hate LS engines on principle, and, in practice. Jegs sent me an lsx 525 crate motor off an ebay order in the early teens... maybe 2014 or 2015? I ordered a $900 gm crate base 350. I happily told them I accepted the good they tendered as substitution, and never heard back from them. Then I sold it to a guy for $600 off msrp.

To talk about the use of a 6.0 in its original truck application, well, it's not the best option gm used and used truck prices will bear that out.

Look at the dmax, 8.1l, and 6.0 truck prices. If you don't like that, look at 2500 series burb and yukon prices. 2500s are rare all around. A 6.0 truck sells for about 1/4 the price of an 8.1l and I'd implore you to test drive one of each, with identical 3.73 or 4.10 gears and a heavily loaded trailer behind. You will see a difference.

The 6.0 to the truck was the 3.8 in the gbody. It would get you there, but you always ask why they did it when there were so many better options on the shelf.

Just like you stick that 3.8 in a kaiser jeep product or a monza and you're alot happier with it than in your 3800# gbody. And you turbo that 3.8 and you're in heaven.

But to say the 6.0 truck motor was great at what it did... well, there's a reason even in this used car market you can buy running trucks with them under $3000 when a clapped out dmax or 8.1 goes 4x the price.

 

[olds307 and 403]

Your right holes were poked in that comparison, big time. He uses the Holley Terminator for all his tests. So it is not a stock tune. That other guy is a joke, we all laughed at his attempt on an Olds 350. Unfortunately Cutlassefi dyno posts are hard to find, most were erased due to attacks from Vortecpro on Classic Olds. Mark has really been wasting his time on the little loved Olds 350 bringing new parts for it. He has made good power with my favorite old, outdated junk. I will spend some time to try and find the dyno graphs. Most unfortunately have been stroker builds that I can find.

 

[olds307 and 403]

Christian, I hope you don’t think that I was angry. I’ll admit my post was certainly directed towards you though. It gets tiring to hear about LS engines and how they suck at producing torque when it is not true. It seems you do so every chance you get. If I didn’t know better it would indicate an inferiority complex and your need to defend your decision to build an Olds 350. I’m glad you are keeping your car all Oldsmobile and like many others on this forum, I enjoy your build posts. You and I are more alike than you would think. Everyone has to make their own decisions in life. Whether that is spiritually or what engine to build. As you may know, I have had several Oldsmobile engines in my car and was in process of building a fuel injected 455 until I realized I could get a better bang for the buck and better performance going with modern LS power. I have zero regrets. To each his own though. It’s your car. Do with it as you see fit.

I understand for the EFI reason. A good aftermarket Sequential for an Olds V8 is insane, 4 grand😳. Guys who carb their LS, well no comment.

 

[ck80]

The purpose of this thread was to look at some data to disprove the low torque claim that Christian continues to make. Plain and simple. If it was true everybody would agree. This has been going on for years….

If you want to prove, or disprove, the claims you need a scientific approach.

You need a KNOWN history known stock motor not from a salvage yard.

You need to do a dyno pull starting around 1500rpm. Who pulls off from 3000 rpm at every light sign? How much time does anyone idle around or drive at 5000rpm? Most driving occurs around 1200-3000rpm including speeding up.

You need to have a known engine build with exact specs of parts used and brands.

Then you need to do the pulls on the same dyno, same day, same temps and procedure (engines cold, engines hot, whatever).

Then, using true side by side data you make a comparison. And even then, you need a series of correction factors for different degrees of parasitic losses (they won't have same driveline right?) And to reduce proportionally the outputs for the size of the engines you used. An Olds 455 loses a percent of what it makes compared to a 6.0l... but a 6.0l loses credit against a 350. So on so forth.

Then, you can get into arguing cost per CI when you buy everything you need to install your Olds engine in the cutlass vs an LS swap at retail prices not counting 'well I own my own machine shop' or 'the boss let's me make my own custom parts.'

Otherwise we can save a bunch of time and everyone can go outside, face into the wind, whip em out and relieve themselves because the 'data' really doesn't mean anything, we can all manufacture a case to say what we want it to.

 

[84 W40]

Your right holes were poked in that comparison, big time. He uses the Holley Terminator for all his tests. So it is not a stock tune. That other guy is a joke, we all laughed at his attempt on an Olds 350. Unfortunately Cutlassefi dyno posts are hard to find, most were erased due to attacks from Vortecpro on Classic Olds. Mark has really been wasting his time on the little loved Olds 350 bringing new parts for it. He has made good power with my favorite old, outdated junk. I will spend some time to try and find the dyno graphs. Most unfortunately have been stroker builds that I can find.

is this about the video?

 

[olds307 and 403]

is this about the video?

Absolutely.

 

[L92 OLDS]

If you want to prove, or disprove, the claims you need a scientific approach.

You need a KNOWN history known stock motor not from a salvage yard.

You need to do a dyno pull starting around 1500rpm. Who pulls off from 3000 rpm at every light sign? How much time does anyone idle around or drive at 5000rpm? Most driving occurs around 1200-3000rpm including speeding up.

You need to have a known engine build with exact specs of parts used and brands.

Then you need to do the pulls on the same dyno, same day, same temps and procedure (engines cold, engines hot, whatever).

Then, using true side by side data you make a comparison. And even then, you need a series of correction factors for different degrees of parasitic losses (they won't have same driveline right?) And to reduce proportionally the outputs for the size of the engines you used. An Olds 455 loses a percent of what it makes compared to a 6.0l... but a 6.0l loses credit against a 350. So on so forth.

Then, you can get into arguing cost per CI when you buy everything you need to install your Olds engine in the cutlass vs an LS swap at retail prices not counting 'well I own my own machine shop' or 'the boss let's me make my own custom parts.'

Otherwise we can save a bunch of time and everyone can go outside, face into the wind, whip em out and relieve themselves because the 'data' really doesn't mean anything, we can all manufacture a case to say what we want it to.

Wow, long winded as usual but I’ll try to respond in a few short paragraphs. Have you ever heard of “be bright be brief be gone?” It’s a requirement for engineering graduates. I understand scientific approach as I am an engineer by trade. I realize the comparison is flawed. If anything, the comparison was in favor of the Oldsmobile since it was modified with performance parts. There there’s no doubt that the Oldsmobile numbers are higher than a stock 350 would be.

I welcome your effort to find a scientific, unflawed study proving how inadequate LS engines are in producing low-end torque.
Let’s find a dyno chart showing a stock Olds 350 vs. an LS1 350. Since the statement was made that all LS engines in GM trucks lack torque we should also look at the 5.3, 6.0 and 6.2 engines.

 

[joesregalproject]

Plus this thread does show how each engine fanbase gets prissy when their favorite motor is insulted

My favorite engine is the Hyundai Gamma engine. It is inherently better than every other engine ever produced in every respect and everyone who disagrees can go fck themselves. Gamma swap everything.

 

[motorheadmike]

Wow, long winded as usual but I’ll try to respond in a few short paragraphs. Have you ever heard of “be bright be brief be gone?” It’s a requirement for engineering graduates. I understand scientific approach as I am an engineer by trade. I realize the comparison is flawed. If anything, the comparison was in favor of the Oldsmobile since it was modified with performance parts. There there’s no doubt that the Oldsmobile numbers are higher than a stock 350 would be.

I welcome your effort to find a scientific, unflawed study proving how inadequate LS engines are in producing low-end torque.
Let’s find a dyno chart showing a stock Olds 350 vs. an LS1 350. Since the statement was made at all LS engines in GM trucks lack torque we should also look at the 5.3, 6.0 and 6.2 engines.

In the Army we run on the 3Bs for talking to senior officers too: Be Brief. Be Good. Be Gone.

The literal one thing any BOP engine has going for it over the LS/LT/Coyote/Gen III HEMI: Nostalgia.

I talked briefly to an elderly disabled chap at the cruise night last night (he was driving an 80s Parisienne) and he started rambling on about the 267 in it. And the Mercury 250-something in his highschool car. And that 40s Cadillac over yonder and how they were the hot ticket back in the day to go fast. I nodded and smiled politely for as long as Tatiana would let me.

But, in the back of my head all I kept thinking was: Am I going to sound like this in 20-25 years prattling on to some Cyber Punk kid about my 717hp Hellcat with a manual transmission and turbo/supercharged/nitrous LSes with him/her/them/insert weird *ss pronoun here trying not to roll their eyes next to their flux capacitor powered hover car that goes 0-60 in half a second?

Probably.

Nostalgia is king.

 

[olds307 and 403]

Gamma it is!