TBIThrottle Body Injection discussion and questions. L03/CFI tech and other performance enhancements.
Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!
At the time I didn't do any shopping around to see what was out there. I bought a Goodwrench L05 for $1800 from the dealer. Then I found out that the GM 330 hp crate engine is ~$2200. Not bad for out of the box 330 hp.
Please don't get the LO5. You're buying an engine with the worst heads and cam GM has ever made. The cam is cheap to change....the heads are not. Pick something else.
Any block will be the same. I'd go with a post 85 block for the once piece rear seal. L05's are a waste of time, because of the heads and cam. The LT1's used reverse cooled heads, something to keep in mind. GM goodwrench, ahhh it's ok I guess. Still I would try and obtain any post 85 block and put some decent heads on it.
i want the gm crate 330 but i dont have that much money to spend on an engine. i have $1500 right now. so i was thinking of getting the LO5 or the goodwrench 350. but i have a 69 block at my work. SDPC sells a rotating assembly for $1100 so then i would just need heads.
__________________ L03 has blown all its seals and gaskets. Refuse to rebuilt it,
In desperate need of a solid (and affordable) 350
P.S.
I have zexen torsel posi and lt4 cam for sale.
Originally posted by Tom 400 CFI Please don't get the LO5. You're buying an engine with the worst heads and cam GM has ever made. The cam is cheap to change....the heads are not. Pick something else.
Maybe so, but the L05 is years better than the Goodwrench. The "cheapie 350" is 8.5:1 compression, a tiny flat tappet cam, and a 2-piece seal. The heads on it arent any better than the L05 heads, probably worse. Its made for 85 and older cars for daily drivers only, not for performance.
At least with the L05 engine you have a newer roller cam block made for 87+ cars. You can throw in an LT1 cam or similar pretty easily. And its got a much better 9.3:1 compression.
I dont think GM makes an L98 replacement engine anymore. You cant use an LT1 block unless you convert to the whole LT1 engine setup. And the 330 HP HO engine uses the Vortec heads, so you'll need a new intake manifold.
__________________ Chronologically challenged. But still kicking!
'90 Trans Am
355 w/E-tec 200's W/SDPC intake, SLP runners, Crower cam, 1.6 rockers, 52mm TB,
1 3/4" coated headers, 12-bolt 3.73's
Dual cats, 3" cat back, Tremec 6 spd.(T-56)
If it Slips, Drips or Funny Shifts...time for a T-56....
ET: 12.632 @ 108.69
Dyno: 373 RWHP, 410 RWTQ
Being "over the hill" is much better than being under it!
im thinking im just gonna go ahead and get the LO5. how much power does it have stock and how much with a new cam. any suggestions on cam choice. how much will the heads support. i think im just gonna get the LO5 and change the cam. then later on get some heads with 1.6 roller rockers
Originally posted by Dyno Don The heads on it arent any better than the L05 heads, probably worse. Its made for 85 and older cars for daily drivers only, not for performance.
And the LO5 IS for performance?! LOL!
BTW I never said to get the "cheepie 350" I said, if you will READ my post "Please don't get the LO5....Pick something else." But yes, the heads on the "cheepie 350" are better than LO5 heads. LO5 heads are swirl port heads, and are the worst flowing, lowest power building head available.
TDK, Expect NO MORE than 250 hp out of an LO5 long block -even WITH a cam. Stock, they are an embarrasing 190 hp. Even if you do get the 8.5:1 compression 350, it will still make more power than a roller cammed, 9.0:1 comp LO5, because of the lousy L05 heads.
Originally posted by Chuck! Id stay away from the $1200 gm 350. My buddy Chris got it and its kind a pile.
I have that engine. Not bad for 1200 dollars but like said it does have issues. Lots of torque but it lacks high end power. Its other weak points are the flat tappet cam and two peice seal, along witht he 993 heads.
__________________ Nothing can be accomplished without passion… unless there’s money involved.
Originally posted by Tom 400 CFI And the LO5 IS for performance?! LOL!
BTW I never said to get the "cheepie 350" I said, if you will READ my post "Please don't get the LO5....Pick something else." But yes, the heads on the "cheepie 350" are better than LO5 heads. LO5 heads are swirl port heads, and are the worst flowing, lowest power building head available.
TDK, Expect NO MORE than 250 hp out of an LO5 long block -even WITH a cam. Stock, they are an embarrasing 190 hp. Even if you do get the 8.5:1 compression 350, it will still make more power than a roller cammed, 9.0:1 comp LO5, because of the lousy L05 heads.
I beg to differ with you. On my TPI car, it went from 210 RWHP to 250 RWHP just by pocket porting those swirl port heads and the TPI lower intake. And it went 13.70 @ 100 MPH.
And I would stay away from the LT4 HOT cam with a TBI setup. Its way too big and the computer is way too finicky to like it. I had enough trouble trying to tune a 383 with a ZZ4 cam.
this gets my vote . youll need the tpi system , harness and odds and ends , but i think you should save up a little more and this would be your best bet
Seeing that we both live in california, and both have to pass CA smog, the L05 is a good choice and the route that i will be going next summer. Before it goes into my car though, it will be getting a 96 LT1 cam ($35 from ebay), Edelbrock TBI intake, possibly some head porting & polishing and will be bolted to some my current TES headers and a Hooker cat back. So for under $2000 i think im getting a pretty solid engine that should be a big improvement over the stock L03 and still pass smog without a problem.
Originally posted by Dyno Don On my TPI car, it went from 210 RWHP to 250 RWHP just by pocket porting those swirl port heads and the TPI lower intake.
A TPI doesn't have swirl port heads, partner.
Again, the swirl port heads are WAY more hurtful to performance POTENTIAL than the minimal difference in compression ratio.
TDK, Why don't you just find a low mi Vortec engine out of a wrecked truck ('96 or newer)? Then you get your roller cam, one piece rear main, good compression ratio AND good heads -all for the price of a GOOD set of new aluminum heads!
Headers, exhaust and good induction will get you 300 hp on that engine.
I got the caprice replacement engine. The 9C1. It was $1400 from Pace GM parts....warranty. 9.6 to 1 compression, Has LT1 rods, crank, hypeutic pistons, and an L98 cam. The heads are crapy swirl ports though. The motor puts our 205-220 HP (i've heard both). Right now w/ just a few bolt ons i'm running mid 14s. So dont even consider the LO5, cause this motor has a better cam that's why it makes a good bit more power than the LO5) and a better bottom end....all for the same price. if you wanna know exact details about the internals and such, lemme know
alright, so how straight forward would a vortec truck engine swap be for a 3rd gen? what other parts would you need? what did the vortec 350's put out for hp in the trucks anyway?
The swap of the long block would be a piece of cake; remove your engine, swap all components (using a Vortec specific intake) and install the vortec engine. Everything bolts on.
The '96 - '99 Vortec 350 in trucks is rated at 255 hp. I can tell you (because I own one) that I think this is under rated -I think it has over 255 hp. I think this only because my truck ('96 vortec 350 5speed 4x4) will SMOKE my friends similar trucks with similar power ratings. Esspecially when towing. This is totally stock, breathing through very restrictive exhaust manifolds, and a terrible muffler. I feel strongly that shorty headsers and a flowmaster muffler would put the truck close to 300 hp. That's with the stock cam, intake, right down to the air cleaner. It is a very good engine, IMO. Plus I get OVER 20 mpg -in a fullsized 4x4 truck! How would this engine do in a relatively light, aerodynamic third gen?
The same Vortec long block with a Vortec intake, 454 TB and manifolds is offered as standard equipment power for most boat manufacturers. This basic, cheap package makes 310 hp.
Last edited by Tom 400 CFI; 09-06-2002 at 07:13 PM.
Originally posted by ir0cz I got the caprice replacement engine. The 9C1. It was $1400 from Pace GM parts....warranty. 9.6 to 1 compression, Has LT1 rods, crank, hypeutic pistons, and an L98 cam. The heads are crapy swirl ports though. The motor puts our 205-220 HP (i've heard both). Right now w/ just a few bolt ons i'm running mid 14s. So dont even consider the LO5, cause this motor has a better cam that's why it makes a good bit more power than the LO5) and a better bottom end....all for the same price. ....
A Caprice 9C1 replacement engine is the LO5. The cam used in the 9C1 version of the LO5 is the same cam used in the L98. I have been told (by a GM parts guy) that the long block for the L98 and the long block for the Caprice 9C1 are, or were, the same GM pn for 85-88 IIRC (and that's why I once said that the iron heads on either block were the same for Fcar L98 and Bcar LO5).
The LO5 engine came in (at least) three flavors.
First 1991-1993 in Buick and Olds Bcars, and 1993 Caprice LTZ, all rated at 180 fwhp. The cam used in these engines was mild, and I think the same as used in the LO3 if memory serves;
Second were the higher-rated police 9C1 versions of the LO5, rated at 190, 195 and 205 fwhp for 1989-90, 1991, and 1992-1993 respectively. These are the engines that got the L98 cam.
Third were the light truck (Tahoe, Surburban) LO5s and they were rated at 210 hp in their last year (1995). I don't know what cam & injectors they got, but they probably had better exhausts than the cars so they could have used the milder cam and still reached the same power rating.
Your replacement engine would have been a 205 fwhp version so long as you used injectors, fuel pressure and ECM on-par with the 92-93 Caprice LO5 9C1. Your exhaust is probably a lot better than the one GM used behind any of the LO5s, so you probably have somewhere in the 215-225 hp area, as is.
Kevin Moore (posts on ThirdGen TBI) has a factory L05 engine in his '93 Caprice 9C1 (9C1=police model) and with only exhaust and intake mods, he has run 15.70 @ 85.2 mph in 4400 lbs race trim. So it's not hard to imagine that a 3600 lb, narrower, shorter and more aerodynamic Fcar would run a second quicker with the same engine & mods.
Another '93 LO5 Caprice 9C1 owner, in Oregon, added 94-96 LT1 exhaust manifolds & dual exh to his car, along with a swap to dual elec fans (deleting the mech fan). With only those changes he's run 15.50 @ 87+. In neither of these Caprice LO5 9C1 cases has the fuel pressure been optimized, nor has the stock fuel pump been changed. Acceleration simulations (on a computer) of these cars, with 4400 lbs wgt, show that they need 225-230 fwhp and 320+ ftlbs to be able to run those ETs and trap speeds. 225-230 hp and 320+ ftlbs are close to specs of a stock L98 TPI Fcar engine (with 230-245 fwhp and 320-340 ftlbs), so again, mid-14s is what you should expect with no other changes for mild mods on an L05 9C1 in an Fcar, because the Bcar is roughly a second slower.
And I believe there is more to be had in the 93 9C1 cars mentioned above, and likewise in yours (even with the poor heads). So the LO5 crate choice isn't that bad, especially in a cost-sense for the near term. And nothing that bolt-on L98, or L31 (or other) iron or aluminum heads can't fix.
Originally posted by Tom 400 CFI A TPI doesn't have swirl port heads, partner.
Again, the swirl port heads are WAY more hurtful to performance POTENTIAL than the minimal difference in compression ratio.
TDK, Why don't you just find a low mi Vortec engine out of a wrecked truck ('96 or newer)? Then you get your roller cam, one piece rear main, good compression ratio AND good heads -all for the price of a GOOD set of new aluminum heads!
Headers, exhaust and good induction will get you 300 hp on that engine.
No kidding... His engine started life as a 305 TBI. Then he replaced it with a 350 TPI, with those swirl-port heads, ported by himself.
The problem with the Vortec engine is the heads have the different intake pattern, and they dont have EGR. Easily overcome but something you have to watch out for.
Why are we arguing about this? This guy just wants a decent 350 engine for his TBI car, not for an all-out race car. The L05 is a modern roller-cam engine that will work great, and not have any issues with the computer or emissions.
Originally posted by Kevin91Z No kidding... His engine started life as a 305 TBI. Then he replaced it with a 350 TPI, with those swirl-port heads, ported by himself.
And I would know that because......
So he took the 305 Swirl port heads and put them on a TPI 350 (an engien that came w/L98 heads) ??? That's hard to believe but that's what your above quote implies.
That does clarify his combo somewhat though. I'm not trying to argue, I would just NEVER spend over $1000 on a swirl port headed engine -it is guarenteeing future money expenditure, OR a low performance ceiling.
I would do the used Vortec engine or something like I did. Since I'm all about bank for the buck (like many people here), Spending 12-1500 on an LO5 to run 14's just so I can spent 700-1000 more on heads so I can then run 13's doesnt' work, in my book. I spent ~$1500 on my engine (including buying the engine) and I run low 13's. BUT if I were going to do it over again, I would definitely go the Vortec route for a number of reasons.
__________________ CFI, T/A is Gone
Camaro Z28 is gone now too
C6 Corvette in the garage!
Originally posted by Tom 400 CFI And I would know that because......
So he took the 305 Swirl port heads and put them on a TPI 350 (an engien that came w/L98 heads) ??? That's hard to believe but that's what your above quote implies.
That does clarify his combo somewhat though. I'm not trying to argue, I would just NEVER spend over $1000 on a swirl port headed engine -it is guarenteeing future money expenditure, OR a low performance ceiling.
I thought my dad's and my adventures with engine building was common knowledge on this site, but I guess with so many members its hard to remember everyone.
My dad used an L05 long block with a TPI intake to replace his 305 TBI engine in his 92 RS. The 350 TBI heads (swirl-port) were mild ported by him, as well as the stock TPI intake. He had them flowed, and they went from about 170 on the intake to about 196, and the exhaust went from 140 to about 186. That doesnt sound like too crappy of numbers for a mild street-engine.
Using a TBI intake guarentees a low-performance ceiling, so why bother with high-doller and high-flow parts? It does you no good to use 500 HP parts when your engine is going to make 300 HP.
Originally posted by TKD89RS how much power would a Lo5 have with a LT1 cam and heads
DO NOT get th LO5 and then swap out the cam...not only will you STILL be slow, but swapping the cam will cancel out your warranty. So then you'll have a slow car w/ no warrany. I'm telling you...look into the engine that i have....WAY better than the LO5 you're talking bout
Originally posted by ir0cz DO NOT get th LO5 and then swap out the cam...not only will you STILL be slow, but swapping the cam will cancel out your warranty. So then you'll have a slow car w/ no warrany. I'm telling you...look into the engine that i have....WAY better than the LO5 you're talking bout
What's the part number for your engine? Can't find it on Pace's site.
__________________ '85 SC Camaro (daily driver) originally LG4, now Goodwrench L05 (350)
SLP 1 3/4" headers, Hooker Cat-Back, CarSound High-Flow Cat, 14" open element air cleaner, 14"x4" K&N air filter, CC rods and B hanger, Performer intake (3706), Holley Red electric fuel pump, Accel Brute Thunder ignition coil, Accel ignition control module, MSD SuperConductor 8.5mm plug wires, Pro-Built TransGo kit, 2100 stall converter, Eibach Pro-Kit springs, new strut mounts, KYB GR2 struts, B.F. Goodrich g-force KDWS tires, IROC wheels, PST Polygraphite Front End Kit, ASCD Big Block hood, ZZ4 chip.
Best 1/4 E.T. 15.3@89
Added since last track time: Spohn LCA relocation brackets, Global West steering brace, rear sway bar, ZZ4 chip, 1" phenolic 4-hole spacer, new strut mounts, GR2 struts, Pro-Built TransGo kit, and 2100 stall converter.
Originally posted by TKD89RS i thought u have the LO5
It's similar to an LO5 in the fact that it's a 350 TBI setup (although i'm now running TPI), but it has better cam, and a WAY better bottom end, which was important to me because I know that i'll be changing the heads, cam and all, putting out serious power, so i need a strong bottom end. In the Pace Parts description, it says that with a cam change it'll put out over 300 HP. They raised the price, it's now $100 more than it was when i bought it. A
Part #12513151
I noticed in the pic that is has old style valve covers....disreguard that...it's an 87 to present motor. guess they took a pic of any motor.
Originally posted by ir0cz I got the caprice replacement engine. The 9C1. It was $1400 from Pace GM parts....warranty. 9.6 to 1 compression, Has LT1 rods, crank, hypeutic pistons, and an L98 cam. The heads are crapy swirl ports though. The motor puts our 205-220 HP (i've heard both). Right now w/ just a few bolt ons i'm running mid 14s. So dont even consider the LO5, cause this motor has a better cam that's why it makes a good bit more power than the LO5) and a better bottom end....all for the same price. if you wanna know exact details about the internals and such, lemme know
Where did you get the details for all that? I got the same part number. What other mods do you have on your car that put you in the 14's?
Originally posted by flyway190 Where did you get the details for all that? I got the same part number. What other mods do you have on your car that put you in the 14's?
In the cataloug (SP?), website, and the phone tech. The website told me what kind of internals it had (nodular cast crank, hypuetic pistons, LT1/LT4 rods, and that it would make over 300HP w/ a cam swap. The gm tech told me that it had an L98 cam and swirl port heads. I dont have many mods....TPI instead of TBI, air foil, K&N filters, air box gutted, AFPR, headers, no cat, flowmaster, 3.73 gear.
I like my LO5 ya maybe it isnt making the most power for a 5.7 but im still happy with it. everyone is talking how this is such a bad engine to have but i noticed a good diffrence. maybe not a big one but still not a bad deal for the price. 30k later and im still happy. I chose living in cali it looks the same as the lo3 as long as u dont check the numbers on the back.
Originally posted by kdrolt A Caprice 9C1 replacement engine is the LO5. The cam used in the 9C1 version of the LO5 is the same cam used in the L98. I have been told (by a GM parts guy) that the long block for the L98 and the long block for the Caprice 9C1 are, or were, the same GM pn for 85-88 IIRC (and that's why I once said that the iron heads on either block were the same for Fcar L98 and Bcar LO5).
The LO5 engine came in (at least) three flavors.
First 1991-1993 in Buick and Olds Bcars, and 1993 Caprice LTZ, all rated at 180 fwhp. The cam used in these engines was mild, and I think the same as used in the LO3 if memory serves;
Second were the higher-rated police 9C1 versions of the LO5, rated at 190, 195 and 205 fwhp for 1989-90, 1991, and 1992-1993 respectively. These are the engines that got the L98 cam.
Third were the light truck (Tahoe, Surburban) LO5s and they were rated at 210 hp in their last year (1995). I don't know what cam & injectors they got, but they probably had better exhausts than the cars so they could have used the milder cam and still reached the same power rating.
Your replacement engine would have been a 205 fwhp version so long as you used injectors, fuel pressure and ECM on-par with the 92-93 Caprice LO5 9C1. Your exhaust is probably a lot better than the one GM used behind any of the LO5s, so you probably have somewhere in the 215-225 hp area, as is.
Kevin Moore (posts on ThirdGen TBI) has a factory L05 engine in his '93 Caprice 9C1 (9C1=police model) and with only exhaust and intake mods, he has run 15.70 @ 85.2 mph in 4400 lbs race trim. So it's not hard to imagine that a 3600 lb, narrower, shorter and more aerodynamic Fcar would run a second quicker with the same engine & mods.
Another '93 LO5 Caprice 9C1 owner, in Oregon, added 94-96 LT1 exhaust manifolds & dual exh to his car, along with a swap to dual elec fans (deleting the mech fan). With only those changes he's run 15.50 @ 87+. In neither of these Caprice LO5 9C1 cases has the fuel pressure been optimized, nor has the stock fuel pump been changed. Acceleration simulations (on a computer) of these cars, with 4400 lbs wgt, show that they need 225-230 fwhp and 320+ ftlbs to be able to run those ETs and trap speeds. 225-230 hp and 320+ ftlbs are close to specs of a stock L98 TPI Fcar engine (with 230-245 fwhp and 320-340 ftlbs), so again, mid-14s is what you should expect with no other changes for mild mods on an L05 9C1 in an Fcar, because the Bcar is roughly a second slower.
And I believe there is more to be had in the 93 9C1 cars mentioned above, and likewise in yours (even with the poor heads). So the LO5 crate choice isn't that bad, especially in a cost-sense for the near term. And nothing that bolt-on L98, or L31 (or other) iron or aluminum heads can't fix.
I was talking to kevin moore the other day about our motors. Anyways....I know the 9C1 is the same as an LO5 but I dont believe it IS an LO5...i mean you talked of 3 different ones...why would GM make 3 different engines w/ the same engine code? Just because a motor is a 350 w/ TBI doesn't make it an LO5 does it? I'm not telling you you're wrong....i'm ASKING. Info is power ya know.
Originally posted by ir0cz ... Anyways....I know the 9C1 is the same as an LO5 but I dont believe it IS an LO5...i mean you talked of 3 different ones...why would GM make 3 different engines w/ the same engine code? Just because a motor is a 350 w/ TBI doesn't make it an LO5 does it? I'm not telling you you're wrong....i'm ASKING.
GM didn't make 3 different LO5 engines in the manner you suggest. They made gradual changes to the intake/exhaust ON the LO5 engine over the years (1989-1995) and across several models. That's why the ratings differ from year-to-year, and across models. Here's the progression:
1. 1989 Caprice (brick body) 9C1 (police) LO5 350, first year for TBI. 190 fwhp and 290 ftlbs. This engine was not available in civilian Chevys until 1993 and even then it was detuned (using LO3 cam). Same specs for 1989-1990. The LO5 replaced the carburated roller lifter 350 (LG4?), which had 180 hp and 285 ftlbs IMS.
2. 1991 Caprice 9C1 (police) LO5 350, first year for whale body. Exhaust was revised so the engine was rated at 195 fwhp and 295 ftlbs. Civilian 180 hp version of the LO5 offered on Buick Roadmaster, Olds Custom Cruiser and Caddy Fleetwood... but not in the Caprice civilian model (they got the LO3 305).
3. 1992-1993 Caprice 9C1 (police) LO5 350. Revised exhaust and air intake (cold air snorkle), so the engine was rated at 205 fwhp and 300 ftlbs. The Caprice LTZ (predeccessor of the Impala SS) got the LO5, 180 fwhp and 300 ftlbs, as well as in fullsize Buicks, Olds and Caddys.
4. ????-1995 GM truck (Tahoe, 'burban, not sure about C/K pickups) got a 210 hp version of the LO5. I don't know what cam they got, but they probably got a better breathing exhaust and that's where the power came from. The truck LO5s would have been better off with the milder LO3 cam, but I haven't ever checked what they actually got.
So the engine itself stayed almsot the same, year to year, either as a non-police (or what I call civilian) LO5 using the LO3 cam, or the police 9C1 version using the L98 cam. The only internal engine difference I know of is that the cars got roller lifters from 1988+, but the truck LO5s didn't until the L31 engine (Vortec) debuted in 1996. HTH. - Ken
so the engine from SDPC Part #12513151 came out as the LO5. and thats the engine IROCZ says is better than the LO5. yet that is the LO5 part number. but anyway im just gonna get this engine and put a lt1 cam in. then heads later on. is there a bigger cam i can put in it fully stock?
Originally posted by TKD89RS so the engine from SDPC Part #12513151 came out as the LO5. and thats the engine IROCZ says is better than the LO5. yet that is the LO5 part number. but anyway im just gonna get this engine and put a lt1 cam in. then heads later on. is there a bigger cam i can put in it fully stock?
Yes, it's an LO5. But TOM400 said something bout the motor you were talking about only having 180-190 HP, so I thought that you and me were talking about 2 totally differenct engines. I dont know of a bigger cam you could put in stock w/out having to change the springs. I mean, i'm pretty sure there are plenty from comp cams and such, but they wont be as cheap as the LT1 cam....so i think the LT1 is a good choice.
Originally posted by ir0cz I dont have many mods....TPI ( i consider this a mod because my motor is supposed to be TBI), air foil, K&N filters, underdrive crank pulley, AFPR, headers, flowmaster, 3.73 gear, CAT!, AIR! TB!, no smog pump, gutted air box
If you're going to get a crate motor, don't even bother with the L98 or the LT1. I'd say opt for a LT1 if you were going to get a used one, but if you're getting a crate motor, get something like the ZZ4...
Pace Performance has the GM 350 HO for $2219.17. 330 HP/380 FT-LBS isn't bad...it's only 9:1 compression, but that's OK for the price. It's part number 12486041.
If you're going cheap, that's LEAST you should settle for.
You know, that's all fine and dandy to day go get the ZZ4 or HO350 from GMPP. Everyone would love to have one, but the simple fact is, it isn't affordable. Sure the price tag for the engine itself is ok, but the money you are going to spend to make it work in a TBI car would not be reasonable.
Aside from everything you are going to have to spend additional money on to make that engine work well, our tranny's would never hold out. So now you might as well figure on a tranny. Won't be long and the rear end will give away, so might as well plan on buying a new rear end. Of course now you can't just buy service replacements, you gotta buy hi-po stuff (which is cool in itself) but it is of course much more expensive.
What I'm trying to say is, even though the engine is $2000, you are easily gonna spend $3000 on the rest of the car, just to make it work with a reasonable amount of reliability. An Lo5 has parts available thru other cars. Won't wreck your tranny or rear, and will make life a lot simpler for longer. Grant it, no where near as fast. But for reliability and cost-effectivness, you can't beat it. I say go for it.
Originally posted by dmair5_0
Aside from everything you are going to have to spend additional money on to make that engine work well, our tranny's would never hold out. So now you might as well figure on a tranny. Won't be long and the rear end will give away, so might as well plan on buying a new rear end.
Man, what a pessemist! I'm SO glad I don't think like that. If I did, I wouldn't have ended up with a low 13 second car running through the stock T-5 trans, and rear end -all with no problems I might add. lol.
Quote:
Originally posted by dmair5_0 An Lo5 has parts available thru other cars.
LOL, 'cause L05 parts are SOOOO different thans other chevy parts
__________________ CFI, T/A is Gone
Camaro Z28 is gone now too
C6 Corvette in the garage!
LOL!
