Water Pump top inlet versus Throttle body clearance

[CopperNick]

Last three digits for the head casting. Seem to recall it being 706, but would have to mosey on out to the shop to take a sneak peek. If memory serves and I recall my research correctly from the dark ages, the absolute best were supposedly the 243 's, with the 706's a close second. It is a cathedral port head and my LS-6 manifold is a correct match to it.

So, just to satisfy my own memory about it, I took a slow stroll out to the shop and put the lense of a flashlight on those numbers and, like I surmised, they were "706". It was sort of a while I'm out there moment so I popped the throttle body off and very gently and tenderly "adusted" the lower port nipple to move it away from the water pump body while still leaving room to get to the left lower TB mounting bolt. Took the same opportunity to slide a very large flat screwdriver blade under the port nipple for the crossover tube and ease it away from the intake, just enough to be able to ease a hose onto it, and no more.

Not 100% sure but with the old intake, the hose nipple on the crossover, if memory serves, was connected by a hose to the partner of the hose nipple on the bottom of the throttle body that I encouraged to share some space. Thinking it is part of some coolant transfer system that moves coolant through the bottom of the throttle body to heat the incoming air up for the cold times. That in mind the coolant came in from the one block fitting/tube, ran through a passage drilled in the bottom edge of the throttle body and exiting out the nipple locat4ed on the other side. From there to where????? Likely to a Tee fitting back into the heater hoses at some point elsewhere. (Me Speculating here)



Nick

 

[Built6spdMCSS]

Last three digits for the head casting. Seem to recall it being 706, but would have to mosey on out to the shop to take a sneak peek. If memory serves and I recall my research correctly from the dark ages, the absolute best were supposedly the 243 's, with the 706's a close second. It is a cathedral port head and my LS-6 manifold is a correct match to it.



Nick

243/799 are the top factory cathedral. 862/706 are the stock 5.3 head, smaller ports, hair smaller intake valve, but a nice small chamber. You have a 5.3l sitting there, RPO Code LM7.

 

[CopperNick]

I know. Prices for 243 castings are right up there with F-Body water pumps. The small chamber heads are easier to come by and mine came with the motor. Having it classified as an LM-7 is useful but as for it being a 5.3, that designation was listed on the bill of sale along with the vin for the vehicle that donated it.

Built, the end game here is not a street beast or a road warrior. My LS Orphan is my personal teaching tool and I am using it to teach me about the wonderful??? world of the LS. The thing with the small chamber heads is a little like the adage about lemons; only in my case I prefer lemon pie. The small chamber 706 may not breathe as well as its better known brother but for stoplight to stoplight and long range highway operations it offers what I am looking for. Any cam that this motor might ever receive is going to come from the RV ranks and possess typical RV specs; stock lift and longer duration. Most factory stock cams, exception here being the ZO-6 iterations, don't offer enough duration to even fill a small chamber head the way it ought to occur so even the mildest cam in the catalogue can offer benefits if matched correctly to its intended engine. Were a cam on the wish list, it would come with better springs and new push rods and rockers simply because all those items are wear parts and my version of mechanical paranoia would be right there and urging me to use better parts to go with the better bumpstick.

About the only thing I am on the lookout for right now is the barrel bodied, aka round, coil packs. Hearing stories that for stockers they put out better than their rectangular bodied counterparts. The only thing with the barrel bodies is whether or not they accept the same harness plug as their rectangular bodied counterparts. No budget for this so parts come and stay according to how much I have managed to scrape together.

About the whole story of my life.



Nick

 

[Built6spdMCSS]

The big white plugs are the same on the harness and all coil pack assemblies. Just get the rack of 4 on each side and they swap right in. They make more power that's dyno proven.

243 Heads on a stock 5.3l will lower compression, currently you're at 9.5:1.

LS6 Intake breathes about identical to the stock truck intake that was on that 5.3l, maybe a hair more up top in the bigger cubic inch stuff.

Been messing with the LS stuff since 2006.. know a couple things. 🙂

The Cammed 6.0l LQ4 in my SS, LS2 243 Heads on it raised the compression to 10.5:1. LS6 Intake on it. It makes power. 🤘

If you look close, the round coil packs are on it.

.

 

[CopperNick]

The present plan is to keep the 706's and stay at 9.5/1; 91 is about the highest octane available at the pumps locally unless you buy the better stuff by the 45 gal drum. 9.5 can tolerate 87 octane. Doing a swap out for the 243's was never on the table, around here they are about half as common as finding a F-Body in a local salvage yard. As I pointed out previously, any plans for this motor will have MILD street as a heading. That objective is behind my thinking and what would drive my choice of parts.

The LS-6 intake swap was as much for clearance under the hood as it was for anything else. Given what I believ to be a set of shorter delivery tubes, as opposed to what the stock manifold displayed, I am personally thinking that -6 will be a little more efficient in delivering air to the combustion chamber; faster delivery with less loss of velocity on the way. That potential is what drove my decision to explore the R-V cams in the catalogue. I can't do much with the stock valve train without hitting its limits fairly quickly. But I can feed a larger amount of air to the combustion chamber if the valves stay open a degree or few longer. As for the fuel delivery, I am not using whatever the stock injectors that came with motor were, I have a set of USCAR EV6's that came with the intake as well as the correct adaptors to mate them to the LM-7 engine harness. I agree that a dedicated specific harness would be simpler to install and plug in but that is $$$ which brings me back to budgets again.

Project Regress, on the other hand, already has a cam and related components waiting to be plugged in. Once the engine is primed, timed, started, and the timing tweaked as necessary, and it is allowed to warm up and cool down a few times to see what shape it is in, the plan is to pull the front off and do a cam swap. This is still down the road a bit as I am still dealing with door skins, only this time it is the passenger side.

But, since you did offer, what would be interesting to me is a couple of detail shots of the front of your motor, showing which brackets you used for your alternator, power steering pump, and A/C? The Alternator and Power steering are two most essential subsystems that I would need to create. Also thinking from the picture above that you did not use either the Sierra pump or an F-body for your swap.

As for the A/C, that is something of a luxury. As far as the Monte goes the cabin and engine bay infrastructure for it is still installed. The heater side of the circuits works quite well, the compressor had already been decommissioned and removed by the time the car came to me, even most of the associated engine bracketry was been tossed.

The S-10 still has its A/C and it works just fine. In a swap involving it, the plan would be to lift the compressor off its brackets and just set it aside unmolested or disconnected.



Nick

 

[Built6spdMCSS]

LS Fbody stuff in my SS, some people were spacing that water pump to work with truck setup.

View attachment 206445

This post here, LS Fbody Accessories, no AC, my SS is heat-only.

LS6 Intake, LS6 Fuel Rails, LS6 Injectors, that is what I would do, and did.

 

[CopperNick]

Agree, that is what I have as well. Excellent picture, thanks for sharing. The close up gives me a better idea of where all those hoses ought to go. Only question here at this point is the idler assembly you used on the passengers side above the thermostat housing. appears to be the stock item that bolts to the water pump?

No A/C. Well they do consume HP to run. and plumbing them can a PITA to assemble. My own Monte is heat only as well, but in its case that occurred because of a previous owner who probably suffered a refrigerant leak and elected to just remove the belt rather than pay the shop rate to get the system repaired.

Since summers around here can get brutal in terms of heat/humidity, I'd love to do a raid on a PIck a Part and score the various brackets and components for the A/C but would probably go with a Sanden compressor instead of a stocker, even if a yard find could be located and still worked.

Thanks for all your comments and input.



Nick





Nick

 

[Built6spdMCSS]

If you zoom in, the tensioner is bolted to the water pump

 

[CopperNick]

Yeah, got the zoom to work and was able to save an enhanced version of the pic that showed the bracket more clearly.



Nick