CHEAP, JUNKYARD TRUCK 5.3L VS 365-HP 327-WHICH ONE MAKES MORE POWER? WHAT HAPPENS IF WE MODIFY THEM?

CHEAP, JUNKYARD LS VS MUSCLE SMALL BLOCK CAR LEGEND! HOW MUCH POWER DID THE ORIGINAL 365-HP 327 VETTE MOTOR REALLY MAKE? CAN YOUR AVERAGE 5.3L TRUCK MOTOR PULLED FROM A WRECKING YARD ACTUALLY MAKE MOTOR POWER? HOW FAR HAVE PERFORMANCE SMALL BLOCK EVOLVED SINCE THE ORIGINAL MUSCLE CAR ERA? CHECK OUT THIS COMPARISON BETWEEN A JUNKYARD 5.3L AND THE 365-HP 327 SMALL BLOCK FROM 1965. I COMPARED THEM BOTH IN STOCK TRIM, THEN AGAIN AFTER ADDING PERFORMANCE HEADS, CAM AND INTAKE TO EACH! HOW DO THEY COMPARE?

[@jeremygranier6086]

While I already know the newer engine would ultimately win this test, I have a 327 in my Chevy and I absolutely love the way it responds to mods. It revs quick. Quicker than any 350. I think that 327/375 was the most powerful small block ever until just a few years back. I love power but there's just something about an old 327. Anyone else feel that way?

[@MP-pz9oe]

The 283 is even better !

[@MrSpartanPaul]

I've had both. 283 makes the sweetest sounds I've ever heard from a car and the 327 is in 2nd place for sound only. Fastest car I ever drove had a fully built 327 in it. Just awesome...... 350s sound like metal is flexing and it's not a good sound at 6-7k rpms. All my current vehicles have 350s including my boat. 😅

[@jeremygranier6086]

@MrSpartanPaul my dad has a 56 chevy with a 265, I put a set of 40 series Flowmaster on it and let me tell you people think it's bigger than it is, it'll wind to the moon. But yea other than my 57 bel air having a 327 everything else has a 350. I can agree, it just isn't the same. I think for sound and revs, big bore, short stroke is the way to go. Plus if I am not mistaken, all the early small journal small blocks had a forged crankshaft

[@MrSpartanPaul]

@@jeremygranier6086 Not true, I used to think that as well until I took my 283 apart and found it had a cast crank. However, someone was throwing away a forged 283 crank at my local dump so I grabbed it!

[@jesuschristpose896]

Although I totally agree, the 327 is a very underrated motor, but modern small blocks make almost twice what the hp the 327 makes

[@JC-gw3yo]

I am actually surprised.. The old 327 with updated heads is very close to the new LS engine... It is all about the heads.. I wouldn't toss out an old smallblock

[@jojog8304]

Really all about volumetric efficiency. Heads is a easy way to fix, but you could do other stuff, like piston speed, port shape, cam timing, etc...

[@Frank289100]

YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT IT'S ALL ABOUT THE HEADS. WHAT DO YOU THINK THE HEADS ON THE LS ARE? THEY ARE COPIES OF THE WINDSOR HEADS. WHICH ARE SPIRAL-INDUCING COMBUSTION CHAMBERS AND WHAT GM DID IS GRAPH THE HIGH-RISE PORTS FROM THE FORD 427 HIGH RISER MOTOR ONTO IT. FORD COULD HAVE DONE THIS MANY YEARS AGO. BUT GM BEING THE CHEATS THEY ARE. HAS THE GOVERNMENT IN THEIR POCKETS AND ALWAYS PRESSURED THE GOVERNMENT TO PUT HEAVY RESTRICTIONS ON EMISSIONS, ON FORD IN ORDER TO TAME DOWN THEIR PERFORMANCE ENGINES. THE LS DOES NOT MEET THE EFFICIENCY THEY CLAIM. THE EPA LOOKS THE OTHER WAY BECAUSE OF THEIR LONG RELATIONSHIP THAT GOES BACK A HUNDRED YEARS WITH GM. MODULAR MOTORS ARE MORE EFFICIENT BECAUSE THEY ELIMINATE ALL THE PUSHRODS AND LIFTERS WHICH REDUCES FRICTION AND INCREASES EFFICIENCY. I HAVE A FRIEND OF MINE THAT HAS A '80S CORVETTE AND HE PUT A 383 OLD SMALL BLOCK CHEVY IT WITH A GOOD PAIR OF HEADS AND CAM. HE DRIVES IT TO THE TRACK AND DOES 11:50 AND BLAZES BY ALL THE LS'S ALL DAY LONG.

[@bobdeegan2293]

Yes they made similar power but the intake alone on the ls cost almost as much as the heads on the sbc

[@tomkielian5291]

@@bobdeegan2293 yeah they failed to mention $ per hp and $$ per hp for the mods. That is the information i really want. The fuel injection of the newer engine is nice for drivability but i believe they should have used the same carb on both engines as the displacement is the same.

[@buzzbomb67]

@@tomkielian5291 or FI… either way, def wouldve evened it out better

[@thomaswestby7926]

I rebuilt a 283, 327, and 350 when I was a kid. My favorite was the 327. Thnx Richard

[@DM-qp7do]

When I was a kid if you had 1 horse power per cubic inch you were doing pretty good. Now I expect that from my stock LS engines.

[@2000freefuel]

now people want 100 horse per 1000cc

[@CynHicks]

@@2000freefuel I was thinking the same thing and that's in actual HP to the wheel too. It's impressive to see tiny 2 l 4 cyl putting out 300 hp**to the crank but I just don't trust it. I have nothing against turbos or superchargers but it just feels more prudent to go NA if possible. *or supercharged -5 L v8s putting out 600 crank...

[@techs1smh13]

​@@2000freefuel check Packard performance Yamaha yxz 3 cylinder 700 plus hp. Rockets

[@drbendaroo9610]

The natural evolution of technology. If we didn't have the musclecar era and all of it's craziness, we might not have developed the power and efficiency we have now in our vehicles.

[@reevesautomotivefarm9614]

Thanks. i went with the 327 diamond pistons, jesel solid lifters, 12-700-8 cam, AFR 180 heads, Dart block mainly because the LS looks like crap under a 69 Nova. Daily driver BTW. Love your content!

[@davidgreen9663]

What is strange that I only recently (as in yesterday) started considering this exact choice issue for a 1938 Chevy coupe that I'm building. I really wanted to go old school with a 327 but began thinking about a 5.3. Thank you for showing us the difference and what is possible for both. Now if I can figure out the computer stuff on a 5.3, I will consider going that route. Thanks again for your efforts !

[@lifeonadime4703]

Not a bad comparison at all! I can't believe the whiney ones aren't saying "but you should have used the truck 327" lol. Fact is, unless you changed the Pistons in the truck 327, power would have been lower still and the 5.3 still had a completely stock bottom end and imo, a top end still on the milder side of the fence. I love sbc. The sounds, smells, working on them etc. But, an ls is just so much more advanced and stupid cheap to play with. Regardless I love all engines and engine dynos so, no complaints from this guy ✌️

[@DBSSTEELER]

The 5.3 LS at 9.5:1 compression and a roller cam murders the 11:1 comp SBC. You would gain some power with a modern roller cam on the SBC but I don't think even that would even them out. Same heads cam and intake on the 5.3 with 11:1 compression would make a good bit over 500 HP. Engineering is just so much better now.

[@chriscatarcio2983]

I don't think so. Check out NHRA stock.

[@jamieK111]

@@chriscatarcio2983 Saw an NHRA Super Stock motor - stock style block, .999 valve lift, 9000 rpm. Valve train probably costs more than these two motors combined :)

[@DBSSTEELER]

@@chriscatarcio2983 You are talking full race motor compared to street motors. Let’s keep the comparisons apples to apples.

[@WVXL64]

Put the same cam and a head with the same flow as the 5.3 on the 327 and its going to make pretty much the same power.

[@docsmallblock6584]

@@WVXL64 yup, about the same cubic inch, so that's pretty much the end game right there.

[@alexgolovchenko3791]

Love the 327. It can rev like a 302 but produce torque like a 350. Had an LT-1 in my '69 Camaro and it was good. If I were to do it over again, 327 just for the 'fun' factor.

[@guyforlogos]

Great comparison Richard! I love this kind of content.

[@daxtonbrown]

I went with my old 327 block in my 67 Camaro but with Blueprint aluminum heads, .485 lift roller cam, tru-ram stainless ramshead exhaut, Edelbrock airgap and AVS2 carb. I'm satisfied. I could have gone wilder, but you know, with my weight down to 2950 lbs and a 700R4 I'm having plenty of fun and the whole system is easily repairable. And I'm still within the old school look.

[@ronrotunno522]

Love the energy Richard! Hope you're doing well; it's been awhile. Great content as usual.

[@jimmaag4274]

And the small block needs good gas, the LS will run on cat pi$$

[@1967davethewave]

That old 327 did great. Of course another thing to consider would be durability. As Richard has proven, the 5.3 is durable enough to be pushed well over 1000hp. I doubt the 327 would be able to be pushed that far on a stock bottom end. Still, if you want a 500hp street small block in say a '69 Nova it shows that you don't have to throw in an LS because the old school engine with the right parts is just as viable.

[@MD-lm7fj]

I think the fuel requirements are a big consideration. An 11:1 327 isnt going to be happy on the crap 84-86 regular at the pump but the 5.3 will. And the power ratings vs drivability is a huge factor, same power with ease and reliability to be a daily driver is a win for me.

[@NCSTANGGUY]

Never seen 84-86 octane? 87 is the norm here(NC)

[@KingJT80]

youd have to do some magic with the timing and the curve itself. it may have less power then tho...

[@MD-lm7fj]

@@NCSTANGGUY I mostly see 86-87 at home in West TX but I travel a lot for work and it never fails I pull in somewhere and see 84 at least once a week.

[@levipegram6808]

You can always mix it with racing fuel

[@franksespool8150]

I have figured for awhile this was the case, thanks for doing the test, but I do have to put my 327 back together someday soon

[@chrishensley6745]

Nice video.....I love both new and old Push Rod 327 engines and like you said...the diff. in modern design! at least they resemble each other on size and not overhead cam vs. ol school.....beleive the LS Series Chevy is gonna be around awhile.

[@SubePelayo928]

I love both engines! I’ve been debating on old school or LS in my off-road build. I like the simplicity and lack of electronics on the old school. Makes diagnosing problems in the desert easier. But I love the potential of the LS. Unsure which way I should go

[@bill2178]

i am all electronic even sbc i use standalone ecm once you understand the electronics its fairly simple

[@SubePelayo928]

@@bill2178 I know they’re pretty simple. But was I meant is getting the truck back running if I’m in the middle of nowhere. HEI are cheap. I can pack an extra. Right now I have a Holley sniper. If that goes out. I can toss on a carb and get it started up

[@colinstace1758]

You didn't mention the electronic complexity of the newer engine when it comes to the backyard mechanic, a lot less to go wrong with the 327 and the 327 is a lot easier to fix for the average Joe

[@SpecialAgentJamesAki]

Ive got a 68 327 impala and an 02 5.3 tahoe. I like them both a lot. I always thought of the 5.3 as the 327 coming back like Gandalf even stronger hahaha. If someone were considering which to build for their ride I would say it’s so close between the sbc and the lm7 that I would just run what the vehicle came with, or could have came with, for simplicity and so you don’t have to spend a million years doing wiring and making stuff fit. Both motors build up really well and for cheap (realativel speaking of corse).

[@sssrp80]

Thou shall not pass

[@davelowets]

Don't need to spend "a million years on wiring and making stuff fit". There are literally plug and play kits to install LS engines in most chassis these days. 🤷🏻

[@SpecialAgentJamesAki]

@@davelowets ah, mr not enough zinc we meet again. Didn’t get a response from you on dd’s vid after telling you how much zinc he had, just in case you didn’t see he had more than twice the recommended amount from the manufacturer of the cam. And on those harness it’s an exaggeration joke bud, you know… humor? You were supposed to laugh not get upset. Those harnesses are out there but they always need some working over and in no universe is it easier to swap a harness than use the existing stuff. No ones saying it’s impossible it’s just pointing out that one of these options is significantly easier and with the consideration that the results are almost exactly the same power wise between the two motors this is something a lot of people would be glad to know going into a project.

[@davelowets]

@@SpecialAgentJamesAki The LS platform is superior over an ancient small block. The LS gas mileage WILL be better, the engine WILL run longer, there will be LESS maintenance, and you dont know what you're talking about. There are systems out there with NO harness to have to mess with, the the entire fuel injection system including the pcm is contained within the fuel rails, or entirely within a throttle body. All you need is power, keyed power, and ground for such a system. There are MANY examples out there, such as David Freiburgers "Muscle truck". Do your research before you post incorrect information. As far as the content of oil in the other video goes, HE didn't even know the content of the zinc in the oil, so you didn't either. 😒

[@SpecialAgentJamesAki]

@@davelowets He shows the oil and additive used in the video which amount to a ppm over 5000 of zinc and the manufacturer of his cam required 2000. It’s simply incorrect to state that no one knows how much zinc was in there. So much chemical testing has been done and is readily available on these particular fluids. And no one said the ls isnt good the ls is almost a perfect motor it’s just that it’s such a marginally small gain over the sbc that it really isn’t worth swapping with all the added cost and time for the average person. I’ve watched so many people dive in head first not knowing what they are getting into with these swaps it’s just a good thing for the kind of person who will find themself watching this video to consider when weighing their options. The Forrest for the trees man.

[@jacobgonzalez1756]

A 421 Sbc vs any LS would be a cool comparison.

[@richardholdener1727]

421 is not factory

[@mewrongway]

I had a Gen I 327 (68 large journal) in a 70 Chevell but I put my money on the 5.3L!!

[@johnbehneman1546]

GREAT VIDEO RICHARD!!!! BOTH ARE GREAT OPTIONS!!!! BOTH ARE WINNERS!!!! BOTH MAKE GREAT DAILY DRIVER MOTORS!!!!!

[@hawkdsl]

"Fun" is big torque down low... because the vast majority of your time behind the wheel in a daily is not racing at 5k+ rpm. Something that is lost on nearly everyone. Torque is what you actually feel when you hit the go pedal. The more of it, the more fun it is... So once again, the mighty LS proves it's a worthy successor to it's wonderful parents.

[@b.c4066]

And neither of these have much low rpm torque

[@jeredfowler7194]

More stall converter and gear solves that problem

[@hawkdsl]

@@mewrongway Such things are totally bizarre... Even scientist can't figure out how that is possible. I pray that one day they find a firing order. A small morsel to help relieve their self induced pain. So tragic.

[@hawkdsl]

@@jeredfowler7194 True, but that is just a fix. What you end up with is something that sounds like it's about to explode just cursing down the highway.

[@mewrongway]

@@hawkdsl 🤣

[@victorjohnson7512]

The old carburetor engines are great for being uncomplicated. No electric fuel system and electronic engine controls required. Just tune your carb right and burn rubber...

[@edwardpate6128]

I am still a huge fan of the Gen 1 small block.

[@derekmelyndadeckens2982]

Excellent video!!

[@gregeoryl]

There is 60 years of development between the two, plus a more honest horsepower rating system that takes 30% off the same engine starting in 1972. Roller cams and engine management made powerbands so much wider, than anyone could dream about in the 60s.

[@carlinshowalter1806]

I'm not sure about the rest of the U.S. but the junkyards here in Texas seem to think that the LS is gold plated and want insane amounts for 250k mile motors. Even want a bunch for the LS core motors they get back from a sale. Then they act like you should pay another few hundred extra for the LS wiring and ECM(Or you pay for the stand alone harness new.) I've got all kinds of early small block high performance parts cheap from Craigslist,Facebook marketplace and friends. I just don't see the LS being more bang for the buck unless I could find a better deal on one. And I'm looking every day!

[@scottsigmon926]

Nice comparison

[@docsmallblock6584]

Also, do you want to run a harness full of wires and connectors or one 12v wire to make the thing run?? Also for some reason (maybe head design?) the original sbc''s sound a lot better/ tougher! If you're doing an Ls swap into an older car, it cost a lot of money! Need different motor mounts, different header's, different oil pan, different radiator, Ignition to control the LS and make it run! So there's a lot to it, don't be fooled by those saying it's so easy cuz it's not!

[@mewrongway]

Its really easy unless your to lazy to learn the differences and the LS will give you far more HP for less fuel, less carbon emission, will last another 100,000 miles. I can go on and on!

[@mistered9435]

Also need a baffled gas tank and entire fuel system, if running efi. As you said, “lots of things”. I looked into it when i started on my Nova. I ended up building a 408 sbc (really a 409). LOVE the 408!

[@mewrongway]

Ever heard of a Distributor? Put it on your LS with a carb and blow your old Gen 1 off the road! Its that easy boys! But I know I know cant teach some old dogs a new trick.

[@twatdidusay304]

@@mewrongway you can't put a distributor in an ls unless you use an expensive belt drive one that's run off of the crank.

[@twatdidusay304]

@@mewrongway another thing, converting from coil on plug to a distributor is stupid! High cost, plus the timing events aren't as accurate as coil on plug , which means less power for more dollars. Only an idiot would do that.

[@forterierocks]

327 is a great engine 50 years ago but the modern LS is miles ahead of old school small blocks.

[@chriscatarcio2983]

Their stock heads are better THATS it. Big deal. I fear no LS .engine . With my small block. They got it right the first time.

[@forterierocks]

@@chriscatarcio2983 Lmao my 88 T/A has a 5.3 with a T4 1.10 S475 and will walk any old small block🤷

[@mewrongway]

@@chriscatarcio2983 lmaog every inch of a LS is superior to the Gen I 327. I had a gen I with camel hump heads in a 70 Chevell! 😂😂😂

[@elmerfudpucker3204]

@@mewrongway Yep, when the bowties copied the SBF Windsor head for their engines, it really woke them up!

[@mewrongway]

@@elmerfudpucker3204 Is that the best you can do? lol That has been disproven 100 times over! And Fords new Crapzilla 7.3 is a push rod copy of a LS. The Coyote didnt work out so Ford went back to push rods! lol

[@ocam988able]

SBC 327s are awesome. I use to run 327s in my dirt track race car. I was very competitive and the engine held up. I love the way they rev up on the straight aways. Lots of curious race fans would ask what you running due to the way it sounded. Great memories.

[@ocam988able]

@Your Pappy we used the 461 double hump heads and a Comp Cam 268H. 👏👏

[@ronpflugrath2712]

W z-28 oil pump

[@antonitorres5934]

Thank you for the wealth to knowledge.

[@pyromedichd1]

I think this is a good comparison, especially for anyone with a desire to build a street rod with an engine as the centerpiece with no hood deciding which to run. From my point of view aesthetically, the new engines don't look nearly as good as the older engines rather it be Chevy, Chrysler or Ford. I'd much rather see an old 426 Hemi than a modern Dodge Hemi, for example, so it's good to know that old iron can still make comparable power. Even so, new engines in stock form make more power on regular pump gas and get better fuel efficiency too.

[@mikeh.753]

The engineering in the LS heads is light years ahead of anything built back in the 60's and 70's.

[@dianedonovan4073]

agreed, but engine parts , boilers, hydro-electic power water pumps, etc. were constructed from cast iron. Anything made from aluminun such as LS heads are temporary, thus old 60's & 70"s cast iron cylinder heads are still going while aluminum parts are time sensitive such as old beer cans.

[@mikeh.753]

@@dianedonovan4073 yes, I had a brother who worked at the GM aluminum foundry in Defiance Ohio and he said the exact same thing. I agree wholeheartedly. The old V8 blocks and heads could be overheated and still hold together. Today's motors are trash if they get overheated one time. Aluminum has some big advantages but far more disadvantages. I will trade longevity for performance any day. Aluminum has a niche and I believe it's in racing, and I believe cast iron had a niche and that's in everyday reliability. Without a anode aluminum's self passivation isn't enough to protect it from serious harm compared to the self passivation of iron. Just look at cast iron engine parts from the 30's and 40's that are still being brought back to useful service. 50 year old aluminum becomes so pitted and corroded that it is beyond machine repair to be brought back to usage. Sorry so long or TMI. But I wanted to explain my position about today's aluminum usage in automotive application. Aluminum in aircraft parts is a different story because they are subjected to a completely different set of conditions. I'm a automotive shade tree mechanic and a retired jet engine parts machinist and aircraft sheet metal mechanic. So I believe I have a a little experience in both fields.

[@billj5645]

That's an interesting comparison. I thought the 5.3L would not do as well stock but would do have done much better when modified. Consider that the small block in 1965 had grown from a 1955 design, the 5.3L is what an almost 50 year newer design? And BTW I have a stock LS2 in my daily driver. It isn't as much fun as the modified SBC that I've owned in the past but probably makes as much power with less fuss and much more reliability.

[@JeepMan80]

Hello Richard! Love your video's, thanks for making them! Question: What would be the maximum horsepower you can make with each of those two engines with changing pistons, cams, intake, heads, rocker arms, and adding say fuel injection? Both being naturally aspirated. No blowers, turbo's, nitrous, etc.?

[@rscamarolover]

I happen to love the 283 / 327 motors alot more than the 350s . I also have 4 suburbans a 99 with a vortec 5.7 ,03,07 and 2010 all have the awesome 5.3s my 03 has 697k miles and her motor has never been rebuilt, I've done intake gaskets a couple times, no major work no oil pump issues ever so I'm impartial to the 5.3s they have plenty of balls ,plenty of torque, get very good gas mileage even towing, but I have a 69 chevy g10 mid engine van iput an lt1 in back in 2006 I don't like she runs hot and funky with points and carb, although j have a 5.3 4l60e in the shed from a wrecked 03 suburban 90k miles I'm putting in a 65 283, the motor was made for points and I can finally put her original gas pedal linkages, and hook up my original gouges in my dash inst cluster finally if they still work otherwise i may buy back a twin van to mine and put the 5.3 in that one I would ls swap mine but I want everything stock no modifications to her wiring

[@nedaCFilms]

Richard, you are “Engine Yoda” my friend lol

[@jdcarguy1242]

DV would say that the 327 has incorrect cam events due to 1.25 tq/cube output. Still looks fun!

[@richardholdener1727]

this wasn't to choose the best cam-just show you what happens when you run this cam

[@bigpigslapperoinktoo4953]

I'm a stubborn old school fella,, an old 350, lil bit of work and it makes enough to run with the new ones,, makes it sweeter too when the old man whoops a yungun,,

[@austincjett]

Anything goes when both engines are modified. I'm not bad mouthing the 327, but life expectancy and drivability decreases rapidly with increases in power. The 5.3 valve train and bottom-end are much better than a 327. I remember back in the good old days, when wiped out cam lobes where common. The "only" design flaw a LM7 has, is the heads have to come off to change lifters.

[@williampowell2078]

The thing that always strikes me at this point is that the modern engine lasts for a quarter of a million miles, isn't at all cranky, and gets substantially better fuel economy than the older tech. Anyone remember having to put timing chains in at 80 or 100k? I sure do also remember things like carburetor icing, and having to file contact points. How many times did I have to say... Must need a new condenser.

[@richki.24]

Nice, thanks ....

[@lawrencefoster2120]

The simplicity of the older engine blows that, not market created, away. The"diognostic tool's" required makes a lot of unessential crap essential. Like air-conditioning and having to buy a"reclaimer". The issue is wrongheaded.

[@SuperchargedSupercharged]

I would still take the 327

[@russelljackson7034]

Right on

[@matthewwise3402]

I really wanted see similar camshafts 590 lift

[@mrmatt2525able]

Love the videos

[@derekheuring2984]

The 400 cu. in. motor in my 1970 GTO was rated at 350 h.p. The 5.7 L Hemi in my Ram is rated at 395 h.p. It would have cost a lot of money to get that extra 45 h.p. back then.

[@richardholdener1727]

the 395 hp Hemi makes at least 100 hp more than your GTO motor-the gross rating was different in 1970 than the net rating of today

[@mpetersen6]

You know in The Graduate when the guy at the graduation party takes Dustin Hoffman aside and whispers "plastics". What he should have said was "computers" And that's what we're seeing here.

[@doc221978]

I don't miss the old school engines. I had 432 rwhp out of a 350 in my Camaro. It was fun, but it wasn't street friendly..... Now the same car has a 5.3 with twin t04e turbos. It's faster, better mileage, street friendly, and more dependable.

[@roomwithapointofview]

What happens if you strap tbi and coil packs on a 327? Or a 4-barrel and a dizzy on the 5.3? Since you are comparing apples and oranges.

[@pontiac411]

I've always wondered what the traditional small block would do with a 14 or 16 degree head like the ls has, I know the price would Skyrocket for that type of an aftermarket top end but it's always been a curiosity

[@gilgil5351]

There is a clear winner in the look departement...

[@BCars_Garage]

I wish you would have picked a cam with comparable duration of 236/242 in the ls for a closer test

[@msh6865]

You can have a lot of fun with either of these engines. But, as expected the modern version is better. In fact it SHOULD be better! Seems to me the biggest improvement since 1965 has been in head design. That's to be expected when you use modern design and production methods. In 50 years, if combustion engines are still around (unlikely at the rate things are going) then we'll most likely be able to say the same thing about the dinosaur LS 5.3 engine. Lol.

[@Mr.CJohnson]

Duntov cam is the ONLY choice. In a LIGHT car you will KICK A** & take names all day EVERY day. I have one in my 2100# Model A Coupe...I'll show ya my teardrop tail lights any time.....

[@Land_Raver]

Makes me want to go port some heads.

[@garywilson7992]

I should have read the title more closely, I thought I was going to find out what exactly is the difference between these old muscle car era very high-performance modified engines , compared to the modern day technology engines that are supposedly creating these very high horsepower ratings, and yet are many times handicapped by the same problem that killed off the muscle car era, lack of high compression.

[@bobsworld8145]

I had a 66 Impala with a 327 and a power glide tranny I loved the engine but I had to put another transmission in about once a year I was very efficient at changing tranny's by the time I got rid of that car 😂😂

[@davidstephenson7194]

The issues are availability and driveability. 5.3s or 6 0s are available everywhere and are super reliable, while the 327s are near impossible to find and more suited to racing or occasional driving rather than daily driver status IMO.

[@painkillerjones6232]

When I was young, putting headers on your car to increase the HP didn't impress the older generation, who thought we did it for the 'sound'... NOW, all the 'radical high-performance" stuff we did is now standard on most cars today. Look at the factory exhaust now. Looks a lot like the old "Headers"... And fuel injection is now standard...

[@JadXtreme]

Love my Gen 4 L76 in my Pontiac!

[@richardholdener1727]

also good

[@Roninx1980]

I was actually wondering this same scenario. I have a set of Afr 195 comp port heads and am starting a resto on a 1950 3600 5 window and was trying to decide whether to go sbc or ls. I have a daily driver Tbss that is worn and could be donated to the cause also. Or a 2004 2500 4x4 chassis with a 6.0. Decisions decisions. 😂🤷🏽‍♂️

[@amazin1827]

You should have did the cam upgrade on the Fuelie heads to maximize the original appearance 327.. and possibly a ported set of double humps. I have some 291 heads with 2.02's and factory relief cuts and port work. I'm thinking about a roller cam upgrade.

[@jeredfowler7194]

I’d just put afr enforcer 195s on it it’ll probably make more power the double humps flow like 215cfm the as cast afr head flows 250-260ish they will make 500hp pretty easy in a high rpm small block

[@amazin1827]

@@jeredfowler7194 I'm trying to keep a original appearance. Not spend $3,000! The 291 castings are supposed to be the best Fuelie heads (no accessory holes) and I'm just trying to optimize what I already have.. I have a vortec motor I could use but I like old school stuff.

[@amazin1827]

@Your Pappy David Vizard ported a set of 186's to flow as good as a AFR Renegade. I haven't flow benched mine but I've opened up the bowls pretty good and pushed back the pushrod wall. And my intake relief cut matches the lump in the SBC head gasket and looks like it promotes swirl better than a vortec. With the old AFB carb it looks like the original 265 in my Camoe. (Except the oil filter)

[@Dr_Reason]

GM actually produced some curves for internal use that showed the power at the piston crown. They did this by 'motoring' the engine on a dyno and recording the drag in lb-ft. Then they ran the engine and recorded the difference. I am not sure what they were looking for but the graphs seem to be out there and I have seen Corvair graphs.

[@richardholdener1727]

power at the piston crown? do you mean cylinder pressure?

[@Dr_Reason]

@@richardholdener1727 They really measured the friction torque and added it to the output torque. It made a higher reading than gross up.

[@Dodgevair]

Your historical knowledge on all things SBC is incredible. What if GM had produced a factory mid-engine SBC option in the late model (65+) Corvair? Corvettes might have been obsolete.. Oh, what might have been.

[@stlchucko]

Duntov wanted to make the Corvette mid engine as far back as 1958. If only the bean counters didn’t get in the way

[@mewrongway]

They did put a 327 in a 67 Corvair but it kept poping wheelies so they came out with a new design called a Camaro! GM answer to the Mustang! Corvair production reached 1,835,170 produced from 1960 until 1969 imagine all of them running around with LS7 in the trunk. 😁

[@SweatyFatGuy]

A 1963 Tempest stomped a mudhole in Corvettes, Ferraris, and everything else on the track in the 1963 American Cup Challenge, lapping them several times. Brian Lohnes did a video on it, so you don't have to take my word for it. Mercedes bought that Tempest and shipped it to Germany for 'engineering purposes.' You know Lohnes, he does the announcing for Drag Week and NHRA. The sbc is still just a taxi cab engine, with barely adequate design, barely adequate machining, and you have to throw the aftermarket at them to make ok power when you spin the snot out of them. I get that people are fans of them, because you could go to a junk yard, yank one out, stuff it in your camaro, run 14s, blow it up on the weekend, and do it all again over and over.. similar to what you can do with a 5.3 now. The LS engines share more design with the engine that powered that Tempest than they do with the sbc. A lot more. What does the LS share with the sbc? The pattern for the transmission and the name put on it. The sbc uses the rocker arm from the Tempest engine, chevy had to steal that design otherwise the sbc would have a shaft rocker system like a mopar. Without the ball stud rocker system nobody would ever care about the sbc, it would be just a weak suck fleet vehicle engine that leaks everywhere. What the LS shares with that other engine is 4 head bolts per cylinder, cam retaining plate, air gap intake with a valley pan over the lifters, fully machined combustion chambers and gasket surfaces, 12-14 degree valve inclination, long runner high velocity intake ports, the bore and stroke of the LS1 is closer to the 350 Pontiac than the sbc, and the 5.3 B&S is closer to the 326 Pontiac than the 327sbc, and a few other things. The LS is more Pontiac than it is chevy. GM took the best of their engine designs and then added the chevy transmission bolt pattern so they didn't have to retool the transmission plant. Its about time the Corvette and GM trucks got a good engine, only took them until 1997.

[@SweatyFatGuy]

@@mewrongway who is upset about that? Oh yeah the Ford guys are.. Before the 1963 racing ban Pontiac was owning all of them in NASCAR and in the stock/super stock classes. GM didn't like that the Pontiac division was winning so much, and the gov was talking about breaking up GM so no more racing for Pontiac. All through the 60s and early 70s GM had to keep the Pontiac engineers restrained from doing performance things. Thats why they had to do the end around thing to put a 389 in a 1964 A body, it was an option.. We all know how that turned out.

[@mewrongway]

@@SweatyFatGuy Your confused with Ford! Chevys shitty ass taxi cab engine gave GM more NASCAR wins than Ford or Dodge! Almost all of your statements about the SBC and LS is incorrect and there are 1,000's of LS Fords and Dodges to prove it! Chevy and Pontiac are one and the same! Its called GM, nobody stole anything! lol Your posts are so entertaining! Thanks

[@richardsmith-qy6vl]

Love the video I'm not a LS guy by no means but I seen what they can do when you put turbos on a pretty much stock one and I know they have a really strong bottom end and are very reliable I just have never seen a carburetor on a LS ran and make alot of power please show a NA version of a 5.3 or 6.0 on the dyno and what horse power they make stock I wouldn't mine putting a 6.0 in my 88 SS monte carlo NA if it could make the power my big block make it would be alot of weight of the front end. Thanks your friend from Louisiana 427

[@richardholdener1727]

please see the stock ls video-but this 5.3l was stock

[@darrylb5247]

Amazingly BROAD POWERBAND ...roughly 350+ HP from 3100-6500 RPM...so 3400 RPM Range at near max HP! Great for Racing and less pressure of course to "be in the right gear to stay in the powerband"!

[@2000freefuel]

Rich, Have a go a running Methanol with compound turbocharging

[@mylanmiller9656]

In 1966 you could buy a Nova with a 327 for the same price as it cost for the cam train in a today engine.

[@richardholdener1727]

CAM TRAIN?

[@bryanphipps9131]

I can't believe how heads can allow the 327 to make 450hp. Holy crap, that is an insane power gain. Regardless of cost, i didn't think the short stroke 327 could make that power.

[@richardholdener1727]

THEY CAN MAKE A LOT MORE THAN THIS

[@mewrongway]

450? Try 600 NA

[@carlinshowalter1806]

It's like the DZ302 that came in the 69 Z/28. Factory rated at 290 H.P. Numerous people have dyno tested stock 302s and came up with 370 H.P. more or less. Can you imagine what that motor would do with these same mods?

[@kenm724]

I need to see more RPM out of both of these engines. They’re both capable of more.

[@richardholdener1727]

WE WERE ALREADY WELL PAST THE HPPEAK-WHY REV IT HIGHER WHERE IT MAKES LESS HP?

[@kenm724]

@@richardholdener1727 Doesn’t necessarily have to be the way they’re set up now. I just love RPM. But… I’m always into seeing how high power can be carried. I turn my LS6 about 700-ish RPM past peaks because it carries well and gains about 40-50 WHP on shift recovery.

[@davelowets]

@@kenm724 Ok, Dulchich.... 😆

[@B81Mack]

327 🇺🇸 👍

[@burnz3132]

I like the comparison. I still wonder if you add all the same fuel injection, cam specs, heads flow same, compression, etc etc… where it would land on new vs old. I’ve seen a lot people make serious power on both. Better yet investment wise which would be more worthwhile building?!

[@reginaldbowls7180]

The answer is always LS

[@OOICU812]

@@reginaldbowls7180 you misspelled "Miata." 🤓

[@hillarylevenworth8824]

Drink every time he says " back in the day"

[@brianlafollette7530]

I have not found the '91 Cavalier I want to put the 5.3ls in, yet.

[@GuruTwan]

Sbc 327 my favorite 🥰💕

[@mikecrimmins3519]

Yep. No doubt!!

[@charlieduran7791]

Richard how would i go about getting an actual parts list for the 5.3? This is what I have been hoping someone would do a test and video on. While I like both engines, sometimes you have to move along with technology.

[@richardholdener1727]

ALL THEPARTS ARE LISTED FOR THE 5.3L

[@TheChris196668]

Dude. That fuel line on the carb in the intro won't let much fuel in.

[@shadowopsairman1583]

A 327 vs a 325

[@shadetreegenius1102]

This is an LS commercial 😅... Put the AFR 220's on and give the old guys a chance

[@arizonahandy9481]

i'm very old school with carbs and stuff and always stuck with it for engine swaps. If You did go down to the old junkyard and got an LS engine, what kinds of computors would you need to make it run??

[@richardholdener1727]

stock or lots of after market choices-you can also use a carb

[@jasonbailey8960]

Can you run a dyno test on the edelbrock vrs carb

[@jeredfowler7194]

If you have a 327 that already has a good forged bottom end put the afr on it and do the cam you will still be money ahead vs doing an ls swap and have within 20-30 hp and no headache of a swap. If you don’t already have an engine it’s hard to beat the price on a junkyard 5.3

[@robparker7512]

cost and complication v simple to work on and less expense your choice.

[@stephenmitchell3569]

Run both without the "puter"! lol

[@stschryer]

Can you test the lokar retro intake for ls ?

[@OdinForce4]

Wonder what the 327 would make with a roller cam and Vortec heads. You know for the ones who are on a some kinda of budget. I have a set of ready to boot on Vortec heads, just curious

[@brianwilliams4326]

Technically speaking though weren't the first "Muscle car's" created ( Pontiac Tempest / GTO) by ordering a large TRUCK engine placed in the car from the factory ? So using the modern 5.3 from a truck should be a fair comparison. Side note, I own both, 55 1st series 3100 w 67 327 202 heads and power glide, /2014 Silverado Z71 5.3 Happy Happy.

[@JROC734]

Here's an idea. Take a 6L LS based engine, destroke it with a 4.8L crank, and the compare it with a 376 L76. At that point you're working with the same displacement. 2 different engines with a 4" bore, and 3.25" stroke. Of course when modded the LS will likely make much better power. I'm just not a big fan of 2V engines with less than a 4" bore for modding N/A power out of them. I've owned LS1 cars that I thought were great, but even a GEN3 5.7L SBC is rocking too small a bore diameter. Proof being how much more efficient of a head will fit on a 6L+ LS than on a 5.7L LS.

[@richardholdener1727]

DID YOU MEAN 327 AND NOT 376? THESE TWO WERE COMPARED BECAUSE THEY WERE BOTH PRODUCTION ENGINES

[@JROC734]

@@richardholdener1727 Yes, my bad. I owned a 19 1SS 1LE up until recently, and got 6.2L (376 ci's) on my brain. Lol

[@aaronjohnson6616]

I’d like to see the 327 with a similar cam spec as the 5.3 in modified form. To me only then would it be a more fair and convincing test.

[@richardholdener1727]

THE 327 CAM WAS BIGGER

[@mewrongway]

Ya Apples to Apples! Same Compression too!

[@jeffcolt9185]

What I would like to know is how much hp did that 327 make without the electric water pump with an alternator and no headers ?

[@O3h529]

Good for you for not putting a 236/240@.050" cam in the 5.3. The SBC guys would have a stroke when they saw it eclipse 500 hp. with a 3.780 bore.

[@daviddavids3468]

WE WERE RUNNING 600 HP 327'S BACK IN 1970 BUD. TUNNEL RAM, DUAL CARBS, RACE PORTED HEADS. RACE SOLID LIFT CAM. NATURALLY ASPIRATED 600 HP. 327'S.

[@richardholdener1727]

I don't think that cam will fit

[@corvettejohn4507]

@@daviddavids3468 And Grumpy Jenkins was running a 700+ hp N/A 327 in his '72 Pro Stock Vega that ruled Pro Stock that year.

[@mewrongway]

1972 Bill was running 331cid, 020 over 327 and 292 turbo heads. 680hp, 9000 rpm and a 9.90 pass. The Chevrolet engineers were tasked with building the lowest-priced OHV8 and given the directive to use as little iron, steel and aluminum as possible. When they were done, a ready-to-install engine cost Chevrolet about $55 to make in 1962 when released and included a 4bbl and 11.5 comp. That it came to handle horsepower and RPM incredibly well was a happy accident.

[@corvettejohn4507]

@@mewrongway Yeah, that sounds right. I think he broke 700 hp with that set up in '73 or '74. My memory is not as good as it used to be. BTW, I have a modified 331 SBC in my '68 Corvette. She runs good.

[@jarvislarson6864]

1960s technology 327 vs today's tech isn't giving the general design the best iteration for a fair test today. Modern tech comes from the history of "race on Sunday sell on Monday" & "let's tear it apart and make it better". And we know the venerable sbc has better attire to be had for instance why stick to 23°head? I don't believe modern ls/lt platforms are anywhere close....letz be fair and if 15° build a 15° sbc! Aftermarket dry sump blocks are available with better main caps and valvetrains to put them at equal limitation of tech in regard to keeping them appearing to a degree as the intro designs.....

[@poortouringhotwiregarage5617]

5.3 is obviously a superior engine but the 327 was essentially designed in the mid 1950's Let that sink in for a minute

[@b.c4066]

More than likely the sbc began development during , at the end of WW2, or shortly after the war. Even with modern prototyping technology it still takes a lot of time to develop an engine design, test it etc. Back then ten years wasn't out of the norm.

[@poortouringhotwiregarage5617]

@@b.c4066 i agree but if I had said that, a bunch of "experts" would disagree with me lol I'm guessing Chevy didn't spend a ton of time developing the 1955 265 V8 because they pretty much ripped the engine design off from Cadillac. The 322 is almost identical to the SBC

[@mewrongway]

GM first V8 was 1914 and Ford 1932. Ford still trying to catch up! Let that sink in for a few days.

[@elmerfudpucker3204]

@@mewrongway And the French had a V8 in 1904, let that sink in for a few more days.

[@corvettejohn4507]

@@mewrongway Chevy offered a 287cid OHV pushrod V8 in 1917. It came with nickel plated valve covers.

[@fullpeppa7697]

Roller cam in 327 would have been real close

[@richardholdener1727]

it didn't come that way