Decided to go LS3

[Rick_L]

I've been talking/thinking about going LS3 for a while now. I bit the bullet and purchased the GM LS3 495 hp crate engine. Should be here in a couple of days.

Plan is to convert my LT1 style T56 to LS style. I'm still researching clutches, accessory drives, oil pans, etc. but I'm pretty close on all those. Lots of parts to buy, list is long.

[MP&C]

One step closer!

[JT56]

Congrats Rick

[WagonCrazy]

What's it going into Rick?

[NickP]

Nice piece!

[rockytopper R.I.P 5-13-2017]

Congrats Rick going to be killer!!!

[Rick_L]

WagonCrazy, it's going in my 55 Bel Air 2 door post - the one I've been working (and not) for years. I'm as slow as Cnut - this deal had better renew some enthusiasm.

[Bitchin'57]

I've been talking/thinking about going LS3 for a while now. I bit the bullet and purchased the GM LS3 495 hp crate engine. Should be here in a couple of days.
Plan is to convert my LT1 style T56 to LS style. I'm still researching clutches, accessory drives, oil pans, etc. but I'm pretty close on all those. Lots of parts to buy, list is long.
Congrats on the engine choice! All aluminum LS is the way to go! Question...Is that 495 HP version called the LS3 376/480? When I bought my LS3 376/480, I had assumed the 480 stood for the horsepower it makes. Is yours a different engine?

[markm]

WagonCrazy, it's going in my 55 Bel Air 2 door post - the one I've been working (and not) for years. I'm as slow as Cnut - this deal had better renew some enthusiasm.

Don't feel bad it took me 28 years to get my 56 back on the road. However you are probably like me in that you built several other cars in that timeframe.

[Rick_L]

Bitchin'57, they are the same engine as far as I know. GM part number is 19301358. I have seen it listed at both 480 and 495 hp, even currently. Even the page in the Chevy Performance catalog kind of says both - description is LS376/480, very next line it says 495 hp.

I could have gone with the 525 hp version. Decided not to because the 525 hp is $1000 more, and as far as I can see only the camshaft is different. Plus the main deal is to be able to drive the car, and as a side bonus get some decent mileage - not to be fast as possible.

[Bitchin'57]

Bitchin'57, they are the same engine as far as I know. GM part number is 19301358. I have seen it listed at both 480 and 495 hp, even currently. Even the page in the Chevy Performance catalog kind of says both - description is LS376/480, very next line it says 495 hp.

I could have gone with the 525 hp version. Decided not to because the 525 hp is $1000 more, and as far as I can see only the camshaft is different. Plus the main deal is to be able to drive the car, and as a side bonus get some decent mileage - not to be fast as possible.
I had the same reasoning for not choosing the 525 hp. I'm building a driver as well, and the main reason I chose to go the LS route was because it made good power while still getting good MPG. Damn, I must be getting old, I'm giving up power for better gas mileage! LOL

[Rick_L]

Damn, I must be getting old, I'm giving up power for better gas mileage! LOL

Well me too. But there's a lot to be said to be able to go 300 miles with a 16 gallon tank as opposed to 150-200 miles. If you want to go that far without stopping. Stopping more often for other reasons is also a product of getting old. ;)

To me one of the cool things about LS engines is that stock or near stock they can idle at 500 rpm and make nearly 500 hp.

[Rick_L]

Branching out a bit, I'm still considering what to get for front accessory drive, oil pan, and clutch. I'm about 90% on my decisions.

Accessory drive: I'm thinking I'll go with the Corvette LS3 basic package that Chevy Performance sells, without the a/c which is low mount and probably hits the crossmember. For the a/c part I'm thinking using the Holley bracket and a Sanden compressor. It's high mount on the passenger side.

I could go with the Kwik performance bracket for the a/c as it's cheaper but the Holley isn't that much more and the bracket is OEM style. Curiously, Holley has a similar deal to the Chevy Performance LS3 Corvette setup (less a/c) but it's a bit more expensive. Also, Chevy Performance has a complete setup very similar in layout to a complete Holley setup, but it's even more expensive, probably in part because it uses a GM compressor which may be variable displacement. VA doesn't recommend variable displacement compressors with their systems, though some have made them work.

The Holley setup is pretty cool for some applications because they can use the same set of brackets with pretty much any water pump and balancer. They just supply spacers (sold separately) so that it works with the balancer/water pump you have.

I'd love to have a VA front runner, or a Billet Specialties or similar accessory drive, but those sure take the $$$.

Oil pan: I'm probably going with the Holley 302-1, which should fit my car. I'm considering the optional baffle kit, which is a fairly high cost add on, but should be a good thing. Anybody know how good the oil control on acceleration/braking/cornering is with and without this baffle?

Clutch/flywheel/bellhousing: Right now I'm considering a Monster Level 1 or 2 clutch, with a steel billet flywheel, and a Tick Performance adjustable clutch master cylinder. From my research, I've found that the OEM pressure plates are "self adjusting" but they have a reputation for the adjuster sticking. The Tick Performance master cylinder has a Tilton m/c that's 7/8" bore compared to OEM 3/4" plus it's adjustable. This means there's more fluid to move the clutch to full release which is good (and needed) since the aftermarket pressure plate isn't "self adjusting".

I could go for a dual disc setup but I'm not convinced that's what I want or need.

Also, since I have to buy a bellhousing anyway, I'm planning on springing for a Quick Time scattershield bellhousing.

I'd sure like to hear any comments, suggestions, or real world experience on any of these items.

[rockytopper R.I.P 5-13-2017]

Rick, I assume you mean oil pan. The Holley 302-1 is topnotch. We had to modify the windage tray on the ls2 but no big deal it was in instructions just fyi. Very nice product compared to my modified S&P on my cutlass.

[rockytopper R.I.P 5-13-2017]

Rick very interested in A/C bracket. I was considering the Holley mount I heard it was nice and oem style wanted to use it on my LS2 if possible.

[Rick_L]

rocky, thanks for the feedback on the Holley oil pan (yes I meant pan, my mind and fingers got disconnected there).

From what I've been able to find out, EVERY LS engine has the same bolt holes for mounting the accessory drive, with the exception of a missing hole on cast iron blocks, which can be drilled and tapped. So what you need to do is get pieces to match your water pump and balancer, or change them to suit. In the case of the Holley system, you just buy the right spacer installation kit. The only other deal with that is the spacers move everything forward by the thickness of the spacers, so you lose radiator clearance when you do that. Corvette = least amount of spacers, early Camaro and some others = medium spacers, trucks and late Camaros = thickest spacers. Not sure what your LS2 has, if it's Corvette it's one thing, others maybe different.

[WagonCrazy]

Are you sticking with the stock frame-front cross member? or have you moved to a C4 conversion frame?

[chevynut]

Are you going to get that thing running before the warranty expires? :)

I think I would have bought a dummy engine for setup and got the actual engine when everything else was done. I only bought mine when I did because I found such a good deal on it. It is probably a motivator though.

As far as I know you've been working on your car longer than. me and I think I'm ahead of you in the build with a lot more mods..... Plus 70 C4 projects on the side. ;)

What is it about the LS engines that lets them get such high mileage? I thought it was the OD transmisions more than the engine itself. I know the heads are what gives them such high horsepower potential. I'm sure EFI is part of it.

[Rick_L]

As far as I know you've been working on your car longer than. me and I think I'm ahead of you in the build with a lot more mods..... Plus 70 C4 projects on the side.

Thanks for the statement of your superiority.

The reason that I bought now was the motivation factor - plus I think prices are going up very soon.

On the LS mileage/hp, I think it's in the heads, as well as modern details. I don't have any real facts to back that up. I certainly think they will outperform any similar displacement Chevy engine in both mileage and power when equipped similarly (i.e. camshaft, gearing, etc.)

[chevynut]

You're the one who first made the snide remark about me being "slow" on my build. I just pointed out that I'm pretty sure I've done more work on my car (and other projects) the past several years than you have. Take that any way you want to.

[markm]

If you are slow on a build and have other done cars its not the same.

[NickP]

If you are slow on a build and have other done cars its not the same.

????????????????????????????????????????????????

[WagonCrazy]

Oh geez guys. cut the mud slingin' please. Let's stay on track here with Rick's resumption of the 55 build. We already know about all of the friction with each other at times. Let's give it a rest on this post and stay on topic.

Front Drive system choices:
My feedback to your post (Rick) is that it depends on your goals for this build. if you want to win some trophys at shows, then a billet front runner system is always a good choice. If you want a clean looking, functional, but not terribly flashy engine compartment, then the stock setup from various other GM vehicles will work just fine.

Your observation about the AC compressor is valid, as with the LS engine, it sits very low on the passenger side. I think there would be interference with the stock crossmember. (At least thats' how I remember seeing it on my Nomad when I first bought it. The previous owner had moved it up via a special one-off bracket because it wouldn't fit down low with the stock GM brackets).

[chevynut]

Why didn't you build one? :geek:

http://lateral-g.net/bored-and-stroked-600hp-ls3-build-part-one/

[56-210Sedan]

Congratulations Rick, sounds like a great package :cool:

[Rick_L]

Wagoncrazy, thanks for your OT sanity and feedback on the accessory drive.

My chassis is a simple OEM upgrade with C3 Corvette front spindles, rotors, and brakes, a CPP steering box, and leaf springs with a pocket kit on the rear, with Caltrac clones, also Hellwig sway bars front and rear. I have absolutely no motivation to do a C4 suspension; I would do an AME instead if I had the budget. If I wanted to go to some kind of pro-touring/lateral-g suspension, I'd either go 100% aftermarket or a C5/C6 deal (knowing it would require lots of engineering and mods) - but that's not in the cards. Unless one of you wanted to sponsor me on the project.

As for "building" an LS engine - why? I already explained why I chose the one I did, the only thing that would meet my goals would be something similar with more displacement, and that's insanely expensive relatively speaking. Again, if someone would sponsor me I'd build something to suit.

[chevynut]

I have absolutely no motivation to do a C4 suspension; I would do an AME instead if I had the budget. If I wanted to go to some kind of pro-touring/lateral-g suspension, I'd either go 100% aftermarket or a C5/C6 deal (knowing it would require lots of engineering and mods)

I see no advantage of a C5/6 front suspension over a C4. I don't think the geometry is significantly different, they're both aluminum, the brakes on the C5/6 can be put on a C4, and you have to change to a different rack and swaybar with the C5/6 setup. That's why not many use C5/6 suspensions except for the a-arms and spindles. They're way too wide to use intact.

The cost of a C4 suspension conversion frame is far less than an AME frame, and you can't get by that much cheaper with aftermarket bolt-ons that still compromise the performance. For example, if a guy had his own suspensions and wanted to do a lot of the fab work himself, we sell a basic clip and basic rear kit for only $2550. It completes a huge portion of the work needed to graft the suspension to a stock frame. At the other end of the spectrum we sell a complete conversion with BOTH front and rear C4 suspenions for under $8000, almost HALF the cost of an AME frame. Sure you might have to refurbish some of the parts, but the cost isn't that bad. The C4 setup is a significant suspension and steering/brake upgrade and a great bang for the buck.

But you know all of that and heard it before....this info is for others reading this thread. ;)

[Rick_L]

I don't really care what you think of C5/C6 suspensions. As I said they are not on my radar.

[markm]

Neither do I, if I wanted a later model Corvette I would go buy one.

[chevynut]

Neither do I, if I wanted a later model Corvette I would go buy one.

The fact is there are a lot more guys today who want an old car with modern running gear and suspension than those who want an old-school beater with 60 year old technology. All one has to do is look around the car scene to see that. A few are still stuck in the 60's, but they're a small minority and some don't even own the inexpensive technology to post pics of their car here. :D

Anyhow Rick, I hope this jump-starts your project again. Some day before another decade passes we'd like to see a pic or two of it. :p

[Rick_L]

Chevynut, do you realize that you've become the biggest troll on this site, surpassing the traditional ones?

[Maddog]

The fact is there are a lot more guys today who want an old car with modern running gear and suspension than those who want an old-school beater with 60 year old technology. All one has to do is look around the car scene to see that. A few are still stuck in the 60's, but they're a small minority and some don't even own the inexpensive technology to post pics of their car here. :D

Anyhow Rick, I hope this jump-starts your project again. Some day before another decade passes we'd like to see a pic or two of it. :p


That's a funny statement, I guessed biased by your desire to sell more of your stuff. Fact is, most guys install bolt on upgrades then anything else. If you would have been at the latest TriFive Nationals you would have seen no more then 1-2% of cars had C4 under them, almost all had bolt on disc brake upgrades/bolt on tubular arms in some cases and a few pure stock. There were way more pure stock then C4.
C4 is OK but bolt on with out having to cut up one's car is the best way to go.

[chevynut]

Chevynut, do you realize that you've become the biggest troll on this site, surpassing the traditional ones?

GFY Rick. You seem to think it's okay to post off-topic shit on my build threads, but when I address your comment about C4 suspensions here you get your panties all wadded up. It's impossible to carry on a conversation with you without your snide remarks and personal slams and insults. When did you turn into such an asshole?

Go work on your car for once. :D

[markm]

I do not know the numbers but am guessing CPP alone outsells the entire C4 industry 100 to one.

[Maddog]

I do not know the numbers but am guessing CPP alone outsells the entire C4 industry 100 to one.


Probably much higher then that.
Cnutroll will get his panties in a wad if you don't agree with his C4 stuff, nothing wrong with that route (C4) but most don't go that way. With all the different choices among aftermarket bolt on I see no reason to do a C4, but then I'm not trying to be some sort of a roundy round racer or looking for make believe bragging rights.

[55 Rescue Dog]

C4's have been around for 32 years, and BBC's for 51 years. Not exactly the latest stuff anymore.

[chevynut]

C4's have been around for 32 years, and BBC's for 51 years. Not exactly the latest stuff anymore.

Tell us what's so much better about the C5/6 suspensions than the C4 then. I don't see much in the front suspension and I have the parts in my hands. The biggest improvement came in the rear of the C5/6 with the a-arm suspension...the front wasn't much of a change except for width and corresponding geometry changes needed. The C4 was a huge improvement on anything before it, even over the C3 suspensions which weren't that much different than the 50's and 60's suspensions except for the IRS.

SBCs have been around for 61 years. The LS engine is just another generation (albeit a major revision) of the SBC. Even the LS has been around for 20 years and is pretty much obsolete in new Chevys. The Gen VI BBC came out in 1996, the SAME YEAR as the first LS engine in the C5 Corvette. Many improvements were made including changes to the casting, the addition of EFI, computer controlled ignition, and much better seals and gaskets.

So what's the "latest stuff" now? For suspensions there's not much that's usable on Tri5s. The aftermarket is just copying OEM stuff for the most part. As far as engines it's the new LT1 with supercharger, VVT, and Direct Injection. Why aren't you using that latest stuff?

http://image.superchevy.com/f/8917537+w667+h1000+q80+re0+cr1/p34113_image_large.jpg

[chevynut]

I do not know the numbers but am guessing CPP alone outsells the entire C4 industry 100 to one.

Ha ha! You must be joking. Just because someone buys that bolt-on crap doesn't mean it's any better, and it's not. Lots of guys have told me they'd go to C4 if they could afford it, and there are hundreds of them already out there. So they just buy the inferior bolt-on stuff because it's "easy" to do.

It's funny that you think it's okay to bolt on aftermarket wannabe junk but you can't see using good OEM production parts. Show me one aftermarket aluminum a-arm or spindle that uses modern hub bearings. Show me one aftermarket front-steer rack made for a Tri5, that eliminates all the problems with oilpan clearance, etc. Show me one aftermarket set of parts that give you all the geometry gains of C4 tech....you can't. The stock frame doesn't allow for it.

[chevynut]

I've said before that if I had it to do over I'd probably do what Rick did and go with an LS engine, but I'd go with an LSA, LS9, or some other supercharged version, buy one custom built, or build one myself. If I decide to build my 56 sedan, I may just do that.

But I don't think I'd change much on my chassis because I don't see anything that much better out there short of an entire new frame like RS, AME, etc. I may have added the AME center section for stiffness if it was available at the time, but there are downsides to it as well, like negating the use of an x-pipe and more difficulty routing exhaust in general. I'm not even sure where one would put electric cutouts with that setup.

[markm]

Actually, Mark I BBC 1958, Mark II 427 1963l, not much never than a SBC.

[Bluegrass Trifive]

Just for comparison purposes....I built a iron block 408 LS with all good aftermarket internals, LS3 CNC'd heads, carb style intake but EFI, complete including pan, custom wire harness and programmed PCM with trans control,Holley brackets and all accessories I'm at $10k. I did do all the work myself. My guess based on size, head flow data, compression and cam, is that it should make about 600 HP.

[Rick_L]

What's the cam specs?

[Bluegrass Trifive]

231/242 @.050 .625/.600 112 +3 with 11.6:1 compression

[Rick_L]

Just wondering where you got your 600 hp, makes sense with the extra cubes, ported heads, and bigger cam compared to the LS3/480.

[Bluegrass Trifive]

Just wondering where you got your 600 hp, makes sense with the extra cubes, ported heads, and bigger cam compared to the LS3/480. Honsetly I think yours would make more than stated by GM. In my experience the current crate engines make 5% or so more. I think they do it just to be safe in case somebody dynos one. I've seen several engines similar to mine on a Superflow and make right around 600. The cam is the limiter in my case, it's about all you want with an auto trans and air.

[Rick_L]

Thanks for that feedback, honestly I thought 495 hp might be exaggerated rather than conservative. But I'm planning on full length headers so that should help, don't know what they dyno it with.

[Rick_L]

Got another 3 boxes of parts today. Holley oil pan, QT bellhousing, engine mounts, starter.

Everything looks nice. The only thing I mocked up was a fail - the optional Holley oil pan baffle with the trap doors doesn't fit in the Holley 302-1 pan. Looks like some trimming will be in order. I had seen some complaints on the net about the Holley pans having burrs and other defects but mine looks nice. The baffle looks good too, it just doesn't fit. You'd think after it being on the market all this time they could get it right especially considering the price they get for it. Oh well, hot rod parts.

I thought I might be able to set the engine in the chassis with these parts but I may have to get the parts for modifying the trans as it doesn't look like the bellhousing will bolt up to my transmission's front plate.

More parts coming next week.

[NickP]

The only thing I mocked up was a fail - the optional Holley oil pan baffle with the trap doors doesn't fit in the Holley 302-1 pan. Looks like some trimming will be in order. I had seen some complaints on the net about the Holley pans having burrs and other defects but mine looks nice. The baffle looks good too, it just doesn't fit. You'd think after it being on the market all this time they could get it right especially considering the price they get for it. Oh well, hot rod parts.


Old stock maybe? I doubt anyone out there in vendor land rotates stock if new comes out that has improvements. It's a lot easier for the purchaser to be the QC and effect the stock replenishment. Love the change though. I know some here would love to see progress in the form of images but honestly all I ever recall are some from way way way back - before this site and when Ctalk was young.

[Rick_L]

You are quite the one to comment on "images". I have never seen a photo of your project, if you even have one. Nor any of a "customer's" car. Is there a double standard here?

You and Cnut are ruining my "trophy" build thread.

What do you want to see a photo of?

[NickP]

You are quite the one to comment on "images". I have never seen a photo of your project, if you even have one. Nor any of a "customer's" car. Is there a double standard here?

You and Cnut are ruining my "trophy" build thread.

What do you want to see a photo of?

Have a Blessed day Rick. I'm done with you and this place. I'm certain that's just what you want and are quite happy.http://www.trifivechevys.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6252&stc=1

[markm]

You know why the call aftermarket parts NEW. Never Ever Worked. Should be called "cut to fit, patch to match".

I too get tired of the whole picture deal, Cnut actually criticized me on a thread that included a link to my car running at the stoplight drags an activity he will never accomplish. When I get in the mood to work in the shop I don't take time for pictures. However, I will admit to enjoying some of them my Dad used to take of projects.

[Rick_L]

So Nick, what's toxic?

Doing what you do? Or commenting about you doing what you do, which is what you are accusing me of?

And backing up, I post that I'm as slow as Cnut, poking a joke at myself, not Cnut. But Cnut can't stand that, he gets his panties in a wad and has to explain how what he does is far superior to me. Again, I'm toxic? Give me a break.

[Rick_L]

markm, good explanation of what NEW parts are.

[chevynut]

Markm where have you EVER posted a picture of your car? I don't recall ever seeing one. I don't see taking a car to the drags as an "accomplishment".

And people here are constantly asking for pictures. Most of us like pics of cars and projects but some guys act too embarrassed of their cars to post any. How boring would it be here without pictures? We post them so people can SEE what we're doing, not imagine it. Would you buy a magazine without pictures?

You're one who seems to praise aftermarket parts...the ones you use when your junk stash doesn't work...lol.

[chevynut]

I post that I'm as slow as Cnut, poking a joke at myself, not Cnut.

Thats like someone saying he's as stupid as you, as as joke of course.

You call me slow so I explained all the things I do aside from my car that keeps me from working on it all the time. You're supposedly retired and don't build things for others part-time as far as I know. What have you accomplished? If you ake my comments as me being superior that's your issue.

And Nick's "toxic" description is right on. You very seldom, if ever, give anyone (not talking about me) kudos on their work but never hesitate to criticize or attack them. I don't praise shitty work but i think guys like Custer, Robert, and several others do nice stuff and I've said so. I've never attacked anyone without being attacked first. There's a handful like you here...."toxic" is a good description. You didn't used to be like that.

[markm]

Markm where have you EVER posted a picture of your car? I don't recall ever seeing one. I don't see taking a car to the drags as an "accomplishment".

And people here are constantly asking for pictures. Most of us like pics of cars and projects but some guys act too embarrassed of their cars to post any. How boring would it be here without pictures? We post them so people can SEE what we're doing, not imagine it. Would you buy a magazine without pictures?

You're one who seems to praise aftermarket parts...the ones you use when your junk stash doesn't work...lol.

Your memory is both bad and selective. several years ago you and Rick prodded me and I posted a picture of my 56 sitting next to my 67 Camaro at a test and tune night. A couple of weeks ago I posted a video link that included my 55 racing. So go back to polishing your pieces.

[bobbybelair]

Wow, lots of nasty going on here lately. I'm gonna need my safe space.....lol.

[55 Rescue Dog]

BTW Rick L, That is a great engine choice that I wish had. Just the improvement alone, in handling, and acceleration make the lighter all aluminum engine worth half it's cost.

[oceangoer]

Rick_L ,, Let me say Congratulations !!

I love the LS motors, they are very reliable, don't leak, great power, good fuel economy, and don't require constant tinkering - At least that's my experience with mine. We installed the LS-1 in mine '56 early summer of 2007. There's a lot of items that we needed to change for the LS-1 & T56 swap, the $$ added up quickly. But, was so well the $$ and effort.

RE the oil pan. I had mine modified to fit over the Dutchman's Rack & Pinion assembly.

RE the Pulleys, I used the WS6 OEM pulleys, belt, idler, ETC - has never let me down. Slightly different than the Vette setup

RE the A/C pump. Mine also bolts on the passenger side down low. We modified the front cross member, took a couple of hours. We didn't install the A/C system then.. And every Summer about the end of July I tell myself that I need to install the A/C system this next Winter. Some over project on another Car always seems to take up my time.

Clutch Kit, I purchased and installed a new OEM ZO6 clutch kit, suites me just fine. I don't race or abuse this car. Not that I don't get heavy on the Pedal,, most days. We used the Camaro / Fire Bird Hydraulic master and T.O. bearing. We designed a few brackets so all bolts up without drilling holes in the Firewall now the Clutch pedal.

Little Stuff,

You will find lots of small items needs to be attended too, Fuel system, Wiring, fans and,,,, If you need any input, let me know, happy to help.

Good Luck !!

Michael..

[hutchenc]

Really excited to see this build thread. Rick...just take some bad pics like me with your cell phone of your messy garage (that's me beating myself up, because my garage is a disaster right now!).

Honestly, looking back, before I had my Dart SHP 420ci SBC built, I thought about going to an LS3 (or some LSx for that matter). What held me back was that I had everything resolved including headers (which we all know can be a real pain!), front accessories, and I already had a full EFI swap including an in-tank EFI pump/tank setup and full Holley HP EFI kit. Sometimes I look back and think I shoulda gone with an LS, but that ship has sailed, at least for my '56. My '72 Camaro may full well receive an LY6 motor at some point in the future though...if I blow up the 355 in it now ;)

I think what makes the LS motors last so much monger than old SBC's is two-fold. The first is the fuel control of EFI...it's just better than a carb, period. It may not make better power, but you can't argue that it controls the AFR much better than with any carb, especially at cruise and other points of street driving. No cylinder washing, better oiling too. The second is the overdrive...just keeping the RPM's down helps a lot. I know lots of old SBC's have overdrive and EFI too...and that's my point. My pop has an '88 Silverado with EFI and a 5 speed...thing has 300K on it. No way you get that with an old school SBC with a carb and a Muncie. With superior priority main oiling and low friction rings combined with coil on pack sequential EFI and deep overdrives these things last forever as long as you maintain them.

[Rick_L]

just take some bad pics like me with your cell phone of your messy garage

I didn't realize you'd been here to see my mess, how did you guess? It's compounded by all the new boxes of parts.

I've now ordered and mostly received most of the big stuff I'm going to need. Engine, pcm/wire harness, starter, engine mounts, oil pan, scattershield bellhousing, and part of the accessory drive are here. Transmission parts and clutch/flywheel are on the way. The other half of the accessory drive is backordered. I still need to order the headers. I was a bit disappointed that Hooker doesn't offer their coated headers with O2 bungs or some kind of a flange to connect to the rest of the exhaust system. So I'll weld the O2 bungs and flanges for V band clamps then send them out to be coated.

I could set the engine in the chassis with the pieces I'll have next week. Looking forward to the first cool front so that I can move all this stuff around in more comfort. Not hard, just a logistical mess.

[Rick_L]

Update, I've received almost all my big parts now.

The GM accessory drive I was going to use is on extended back order, so I ordered a Holley one instead. I had already ordered and received the Holley mount for the a/c to mount it up top on the passenger side. The Holley unit for the driver side is VERY similar to the GM one I had intended to use but it's about $300 more than the GM one (this includes not just the brackets, but the alternator, p/s pump, and reservoir). This week I found that Summit has a kit with the Holley brackets and Summit sourced alternator and power steering pump for about the same price as the GM kit, except it doesn't have a p/s reservoir, which is almost $100. So I ordered that and received it. Looks like from my research that the biggest difference in price is the power steering pump. Holley's is an aluminum Corvette piece. Summit's is a steel pump. From first glance it looks like the inlet tube on the Summit pump may be a problem but we'll see what can be done.

I've also received the headers, clutch package and related parts, and the pieces to modify the LT1 T56 to LS1 configuration.

Time to get going mocking everything up. I still have some logistics problems to solve with space to store and access all the stuff I have, so it may be a few more days.

[Bluegrass Trifive]

Update, I've received almost all my big parts now.

The GM accessory drive I was going to use is on extended back order, so I ordered a Holley one instead. I had already ordered and received the Holley mount for the a/c to mount it up top on the passenger side. The Holley unit for the driver side is VERY similar to the GM one I had intended to use but it's about $300 more than the GM one (this includes not just the brackets, but the alternator, p/s pump, and reservoir). This week I found that Summit has a kit with the Holley brackets and Summit sourced alternator and power steering pump for about the same price as the GM kit, except it doesn't have a p/s reservoir, which is almost $100. So I ordered that and received it. Looks like from my research that the biggest difference in price is the power steering pump. Holley's is an aluminum Corvette piece. Summit's is a steel pump. From first glance it looks like the inlet tube on the Summit pump may be a problem but we'll see what can be done.

I've also received the headers, clutch package and related parts, and the pieces to modify the LT1 T56 to LS1 configuration.

Time to get going mocking everything up. I still have some logistics problems to solve with space to store and access all the stuff I have, so it may be a few more days. Please let us know how the Holley brackets work for you as I have the same setup and will install it soon. Do you have an SD-7 compressor?

[Rick_L]

I got the bigger 508 compressor.

[Bitchin'57]

Hopefully that Summit sourced alternator is the same or better quality as OEM. Do you have a radiator yet for your LS3?

[Rick_L]

Agree on the alternator. GM uses remanufactured alternator and p/s pump, but they are AC Delco, who I generally trust. Can't tell who does the Summit alternator, the only branding on the box is Summit. It's 145 amp.

I'll be using a PRC radiator originally purchased for my abandoned Gen 2 LT1 setup. It has the smaller radiator hose barbs that match the hose size on the later engines, so hopefully it's just a matter of finding some hoses that fit.

[oceangoer]

Rick,

Hey, good luck with the engine install. Anxious see photos of you progress.

I was looking at a LS3 on my next build I recently started. This new build will keep me very busy and in particular keep me from constantly making changes to my '56

I did bite the Bullet nut I went with a LS7 crate engine and super magnum RPM T56. To save a few $$ and fitment issues I'm using the C6 Corvette pulleys and accessories. The dry sump solves any oil pan issues, and it's been a very long time since I've had a 427


Michael

[rockytopper R.I.P 5-13-2017]

Rick did you buy a oil pickup tube girdle? If not you should. GM did a piss poor job of saving a few pennies and only put one bolt in a 2 bolt flange on the oil pickup. I built my own on my first swap but they now offer them well worth the few $ spent.

[Rick_L]

Rocky, I was unaware of the need.

[rockytopper R.I.P 5-13-2017]

Rocky, I was unaware of the need.


The LS blocks have two threaded holes at the oil pickup. Ls oil tubes only use one of the bolts and have a single hole flange which can lead to a leaking Oring and loss of oil pressure. I purchased mine from BRP I believe there are others on the market now also. See link below toward middle of page 35$.

http://www.brphotrods.com/products/55-57%20Chevy/index.html

[Rick_L]

Interesting. It looks simple enough to make, but at $35 it's probably better to buy.

I wonder why Holley for instance doesn't make the flange on their pickup with a second bolt hole? Is anything fastened to the second bolt hole? I.e., wonder why it's even there. Looks like perhaps the second bolt may be hard to get a wrench on.

Also I wasn't aware that BRP had expanded their product line to 55-57s. I hadn't looked at their stuff in a while, looks like they have some good stuff.

[rockytopper R.I.P 5-13-2017]

The second hole in block isn't used for anything to my knowledge. My Ls1 and ls2 are the same as far as only using one of the holes from the factory.

here are a few more for 24$

https://www.google.com/search?q=+&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-SearchBox&ie=&oe=&gws_rd=ssl#q=ls+engine+oil+pickup+tube+girdle%3F&tbm=shop