JUNKYARD LS POWER-383 vs 6.0L (BIG BORE vs BIG STROKE)

6.0L OR 5.3L 383 STROKER? WHICH ONE WINS? IS BIGGER BETTER? CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO WHERE I COMPARED A PAIR OR 383 STROKERS (MILD & WILD) TO A PAIR OF 6.0L COMBOS (MILD & WILD). DOES THE BIGGER BORE OFFERED BY THE 6.0L OFFER MORE POWER THAN THE BIGGER STROKE ON THE 383? WHEN IT COMES TO POWER, IS IT AS SIMPLE AS BIGGER IS BETTER? WHAT ABOUT COST?

[@Ribbityibzki]

There are only a handful of 5.3/4.8 blocks that can be bored to 4.0", but they're easy to spot. If you look on the back where "4.8/5.3" is normally cast, some of the early gen3 blocks have "4.8/5.3/6.0" cast into them. You'll probably only find it in '99-'00 model trucks as GM started producing separate 6.0 blocks since it was cheaper than machining a 5.3 block out to 4.0"

[@youth1966truck]

I was going to say the same thing

[@bluecollarhotrods9781]

I've heard of those, but never actually seen one. Got me curious now... I'll be on the look out next time I am in LKQ.

[@gerardomontoya433]

I have a 2000 4.8 thinking of building et to a 383 stroker

[@timothywalker2273]

I actually had my 4.8 bored to 4" a few years ago I ended up loosing that block though but it didn't have 6.0 on my block it only had the usual 4.8/5.3 stamp I was told that it would take some more boring too not sure

[@TheHorselemonade]

Honestly, Thank you Richard for sharing all this invaluable information with us. Knowledge is wealth.

[@henrywal]

How much wealth was invested into both

[@petejoseph8257]

383 compares closer to an LS3 than a 6.0, they’re just 1/10 of a liter apart.

[@bdugle1]

Cubic inches always makes a difference. The 6.0 with tiny chamber heads was pushing a full point higher compression than the LS2 with flat tops, and that pushed the power up a lot. 560x1.04, a 4% increase due to compression, takes you to over 580 right there. The AFRs probably flowed better too, making the rest of the difference. The torque curve of the 383 is pretty impressive. The flat top pistons should give that combo close to 11:1, depending on head gasket, chamber size, etc. Previous tests that compared the Comp 459 to the 469 show the extra exhaust duration improving power at the top. Conversely, using the 459 in the 383 may have improved the mid-range torque, because it sure had some. You mentioned “good” heads on the 383 but never identified them, or at least I missed it if you did. If you can afford the several grand for the rotating assembly, that 383 looks really good. Or you can just put the sub-$200 eBay turbo on the $500 junkyard LS (any size) and there you are!

[@matt_1969ChevyC1o]

You're doing the Lord's work with these videos 👍🏻 Thank ya sir

[@eastoncolt8767]

You all prolly dont give a damn but does any of you know a tool to get back into an instagram account..? I was stupid forgot my password. I love any help you can offer me!

[@kendallmatthias9931]

@Easton Colt Instablaster :)

[@guillermocortez2665]

A video on underdrive pulleys would be interesting 🤔

[@teal_2v338]

He never run accessories.. 🤷‍♂️ better then a udp! Electric water pump no a/c electric power steering .. but yea curius how % you lost with them

[@richardholdener1727]

please see the ls accessory video and never say never

[@teal_2v338]

@@richardholdener1727 srry

[@maxwolthuis]

Please make a low rpm torque combination video for all the torque junkies, we love you Richard!!! You’re doing hot rod Jesus’s work bud 👌

[@Aseutester]

yes, I second this^!

[@Fritochiprt32221]

I would love a torque build! I am actually trying to decide on what engine for my CJ7 based on this.

[@TheDillio187]

agreed, something like a camper towers delight (besides buying a diesel)

[@davelowets]

Just use a stocker of you want low end torque.

[@kevinwest3689]

6.0 + Trailblazer SS intake+ 706 heads if lq4, 799 if lq9+ stage 1 btr cam 👍 need more? drop gear ratio, example 488 for your 35" tires. Or swapping those 410's for 456. 👍 don't think it can get any better than this for a naturally aspirated 6.0ls for low-end torque and Towing

[@joeyjojojr.shabadoo915]

So the long stroke motor makes peak TQ before the crossover point and the big bore motor makes peak TQ after the crossover. This is why I think that starting out with a near-giveaway (or really cheap) 4.8 and stroking it to 4" (since you would buy rods and pistons anyway) is much cheaper than buying a 6.0L (and rods/pistons) to start a project with. All that TQ in the RPM range of daily driving and not having to rev it to the moon to get anything out of it makes sense for a Street Car. Like I said in a previous comment, 4.8L + $700 Summit Racing 4" Stroker Crank is cheaper (where I am at) than a 6.0L by itself....especially if you already have a 4.8 or 5.3. All the hype around 6.0L junkyard specials has caused them to dry up as people are hording them now and when they are available, the prices are insane.

[@djmurria]

That's the comparison I been looking for thanks. Unless u get a sweet deal the price of a 6.0 is pretty close to just getting a crank and pistons for a 5.3 and turning it into a 383 with gen 4 rods

[@lukemorgan3368]

I’ve always wanted to put a 3.900” stroke in a 6.0L and have a nice balance of bore to stroke ratio with a mild cam and see what kind of numbers itd throw down!

[@TheOutdoorMentors]

"there's no replacement for displacement" - Don Garlits

[@deegan727]

Richard has proved a 150.00 EBay turbo is a replacement for displacement LOL.

[@TheOutdoorMentors]

@@deegan727 or you could look at it like a power adder as compensation not a replacement for good numbers. All im saying is it takes more psi to compensate for a motor that started at lower hp. In the end we are all blessed with all these options and there's really no wrong way to get where you want to be.

[@deegan727]

@@TheOutdoorMentors I agree, I was kidding.

[@alanjanderson9789]

@@deegan727 not realy 5L turbo v 6L turbo and displacement wins all time

[@deegan727]

@@alanjanderson9789 See previous comment. I was kidding. I agree, power adders boost power on any combo. Power adders can be a great equalizer as well. Say you have a good 4.8 and want as much power as your buddies 408 stroker and you don’t want to ditch the 4.8 you just dropped in and/or don’t have the money to drop on a stroker. A turbo is a great way of making up that power difference. Until your buddy puts a turbo on his 408 stroker anyway LOL.

[@deegan727]

Maybe I’ll just get a 4” crank for my 6.0. Dilemma solved. LOL.

[@madmod]

Mmmmore power!

[@5kwattson]

Make it a 408 with a .030 overbore and make some good power 🔋 💪

[@deegan727]

@@5kwattson Its already going to be .030 LOL.

[@ignaci0musik]

same

[@emmitthill7871]

So a 6.0 with a .030 bore is a 408?

[@darinschlabach492]

About 60ci. That is a liter. Simple math. Displacement makes power. Fuck I'm old. I do however daily drive a pro charged suburban.

[@darinvee4980]

You can't be that old, we're in a pretty exclusive club. The oldest "Darin" I know is 55 and the youngest is 45. I think our name was only used between 1965 to 75.

[@MrScottt28]

That 383 is killer!!! Thats a boatload of power in a middle-of-the-road combination. Cool vid

[@Aseutester]

Agreed!

[@Jim_Lawrence]

Cubic inches win, especially when you are a low RPM torque junky...

[@Faolan161]

The 383 is the type of build that wins races, and is more efficient for fuel economy and/or fuel efficiency. Great to see your experiences, Richard!

[@hotdog9262]

guessing id say the 6.0 probably win a fuel economy comparison by a good margin

[@Faolan161]

@@hotdog9262 all depends upon the build... Longer stroke with smaller valves and ports builds efficiency in the mist used rpm range, while rpm capabilities create better acceleration... I had a 390 in an f150 that got 18mpg around town, depending upon the level of spirited driving, while my 6.2 Yukon and 5.3 Suburban both get 13. The 390 would absolutely take both off the line as well as at 3000 rpm, but the LS is sure to leave the FE in the dust after about 50 mph... All depends on the build... Maybe check back in a year and I'll let you know, as I'm currently building a 416 LS for mpg in the Yukon... it's gotta have some more potential over the poorly designed FE ports...

[@jason.k30chevy31]

Please could we see the chart from let’s say 1000 rpm and up. Some of us would like to know the torque numbers off idle even.

[@WVXL64]

You cant really load a dyno down that low.

[@jason.k30chevy31]

@@WVXL64 I’ve seen other guys do it. Maybe that’s because it’s at the tire and not just on motor.?

[@hoonaticbloggs5402]

The engine dyno a won’t sweep that far. If you start at 1000 you’d have to sit at say 4000

[@jeepramz]

I would like to see the 363 5.3 standard bore 4 inch stroke comparison to stock 6.0

[@carsonellis4125]

I’ve bored a 99 model 5.3 to a 5.7. And used ls1 flat tops. Runs great.

[@KaosProject21]

why not compare a 4" crank in a 5.3 to a 6.0, stock truck to stock truck? do 799 heads on both? like, cheap, simple, apples to apples, right? then throw a cathedral port wipple around 3l on each one and see that too?

[@briansmith2984]

I’d like to see 363 stroker vs lq4

[@joeyjojojr.shabadoo915]

I have been beating that dead horse in many posts. It doesn't get better than THAT for a comparison considering they are within a cube or 2 of each other. I think if Richard sees me post that once more, he will find a way to track me down and beat me senseless.....lol

[@gunzillagunzilla7975]

This 6.0L (560HP & 494ft/lbs compared to the junker 6.0L at 443HP & 467ft/lbs) is a much fairer comparison with that Coyote 5.0L you used in you Dec 29/20 video. Hhhhmmmm??? Go figure. I call what you did sandbagging.Wonder why you did that? You can not compare a LS TRUCK Boat Anchor to a half step back from a RACE ENGINE in the Coyote. Apples to Apples my friend. Your comparison is like bringing a knife to a gun fight. Each engine is designed to do something 180 degrees differently than the other. Don't see that Coyote living a long life in an everyday truck. Btw that 383 at 603HP & 543ft/lbs is a STUMP Puller.The Coyote only punched up to 400ft/lbs at 4300rpm while the 383 was doing so somewhere around 2500rpm and continued to make well over 400ft/lbs all the way to 6500rpm, where as the coyote started to lose it's torque at around 5300rpm. Broad versus very narrow. 2 very different engines designed to to do 2 very different things. *What I am saying is that your Coyote vs Truck LS was a very unfair & bias comparison. It was set up, designed for the Coyote to win based on a very narrow set of parameters. Still it's a fun channel and I would love to be able to play around as you do. ThnX I appreciate the info/specs.

[@HioSSilver1999]

I said the same thing.

[@robertalexander4989]

The only race I was beaten in my f150with the 5.4L tritan was against a Silverado Z71 SS with the 454 so go on somewhere with your talking trash about my 5.4

[@bigjohn1948]

what about a 4" stroker on a aluminum 5.3 with a .030 bore you would have a 6.0 liter aluminum block with thicker sleeves for more turbo pressure

[@here_to_watch2115]

Will a 4" crank for a 5.3 /4.8 block? Is do that combo with my 4.8

[@shadowopsairman1583]

You cant mill aluminum blocks

[@allanb3222]

@@shadowopsairman1583 You can resleeve them though.

[@baddbradd89]

I JUST pulled my 4.8 (2012) for a mild 5.3. I'll be keeping the 127K 4.8 and make a 383!!! THis video was just what i needed!

[@seanhayden7151]

How don’t u know the answer if ur doing the test

[@sstevocamaro]

I’m here for the 383!! The under dog stroker.. The little stroker that could 💪🏽

[@CLEEPER1]

Swap the fast out for an msd and that 383 would have carried out farther making even more

[@richardholdener1727]

I'VE RUN BACK TOBACK TESTS ON THE MSD AND FAST

[@427TTM6]

Dude in Mexico people they bore out 5.3 blocks to 6.0/6.2s all the time and I’ve never seen or heard one to have a crack a sleeve, this is on boost or nitrous motors also.

[@ignaci0musik]

Yup Mexico Racing is full send

[@anthonypescatore9047]

You rock for giving out all this free info !!

[@danieldeweese8749]

I'm building an all forged 383 with twin turbos. And quite frankly. I wish I had started with a 6.0 to get more displacement in the long run. But as it sits. This thing will hit 4 digits easy. So. I guess it is what It is. Everybody wants 1000 hp until they actually drive 1000 hp and realize it's downright scary.

[@madmod]

Its easy enough to pick up a used LQ4 to keep as backup, however I wouldn't look back with the 383 however. It'll make its power so much earlier in the curve than 4.8/5.3 combos while still having enough displacement to get a really meaty torque shelf. Unless your trying to sneeze out 1000hp with little to no effort, you really dont "need" the extra cubes. Now if it's an all-out, no power left on the table application, then its a no brainer which to use.

[@drjoe2323]

🤣

[@RyanSteele92]

A stroker with turbos doesn't make sense save the money on the stroker just add more boost

[@madmod]

@@RyanSteele92 How doesn't it make sense? More power na is more power under boost.

[@danieldeweese8749]

The stroker assembly was mostly because it's forged and will be beat on heavily. It was about the same money to stroke it than to just buy a normal forged crank.

[@BuckCity229]

Run the 3.9 stroke on a 6.0. Thats what im leaning towards going with. 30. Over will be a LS396

[@MrScottt28]

Are 3.900 strokes common? Not familiar with pricing on 3.900 crank and piston combos. A 4.000 inch stroke gets u a 408, and bigger is cool.

[@BuckCity229]

@@MrScottt28 the 4 inch is more common but in a stock block it pulls the skirt out of the bottom of the cylinder bore. The 3.9 brings it level

[@MrScottt28]

@@BuckCity229Good to know. I have an LSX Block and I'd love to go 4.125 some day.

[@bluecollarhotrods9781]

I've had both, my 382" (about 15 years ago) was - LS6 block, Eagle rotating assembly, AFR 205s @ 58cc and "Mamo-fied", Crane 228/236 .600"ish lift 114 LSA, FAST 90mm ported by Tony Mamo, Meziere EWP, Kooks 1.75-1-1875 step headers, 3" duals with an X, 42lb injectors, 90mm TB, 85mm MAF, stock 411 PCM tuned, stock rockers - it made right at 480 RWHP and 443 RWTQ through a 60E and a 10 bolt in an F body. Currently have an LQ4 in my daily half ton Silverado, it is a balancing act between - more power, and keeping the ability to tow and daily drive it still. (I think it needs boost) I am building a pro tour-ish 68 Chevelle as well - starting with an LQ4 short block... I keep watching your videos and crunching numbers to figure out the rest of that combo - heads/cam/intake manifold. Keep up the great work Mr. Holdener

[@TheJMan1K]

480WHP in a Fbody with that kinda torque is not to be screwed with on the street

[@Eidrian111]

Ls6 383 on my c5 Z06. It’s great, light and crazy torque. And now with a procharger...

[@bmcapo6853]

I’m currently thinking bout pulling the trigger on this 383 build for my c5 could get a 5.3 block right now for 500 to get started

[@Eidrian111]

@@bmcapo6853 if you are going for crazy hp it’s really good and that steel block it’s really strong. I went for a ls1 because it’s lighter and I track the car.

[@bmcapo6853]

@@Eidrian111 o currently have the original 5.7 in it this will be a temporary build to hold me over till I can build a ls3 to my liking will prolly use as a daily or very often

[@Eidrian111]

@@bmcapo6853 well I think that you’ll be more than happy with the 383. Mine is a little bit faster than a stock c6 z06 I had.

[@bmcapo6853]

@@Eidrian111 sheeesh yeah I’m pulling the trigger

[@sorryociffer]

Would love to see you experiment with Ford and Chrysler V-10s! Building a 6.8 3V next year for my excursion...

[@OgamiItto70]

Seconded.

[@acemobile9806]

I been begging for a 6.8 throw down for a while. So far crickets. I think I'm gonna have to make a road trip & just show up at the door 1 day with it.

[@sorryociffer]

@@acemobile9806 Please! Doing a 3V next summer for my 05 excursion. Bbk TB, banks headers, touch of head work and maybe a small procharger...

[@acemobile9806]

@@sorryociffer wow. All I got is a straight pipe on my service truck. Still sounds mean tho when I gas on it. I always wanted to do a Town Car V10 swap with some kind of forced induction. Something weird & different. Go fast with class. Guess I been watching Cleetus too much 😁🦅

[@sorryociffer]

@@acemobile9806 Swaps are tricky. A guy on a F150 site put a 6.8 in his F150..... it was a HUGE job.... because of all the electronics and mismatched wiring and connectors and sensors. A 3V in an 05 excursion should be MUCH simpler as it shared the same basic chassis as the SD.

[@tylertruitt377]

i noticed there was a bigger percent gain in tq(505/543=9.3% gain in tq) then the percent gain in displacement(364/383=4.96% gain in displacement) so some of that extra tq came from something other then displacement. My theory is the longer stroke gives you more mechanical advantage rotating the centerline of the crank. basically a longer lever. let me know what you think.

[@Russell_and_Rosko]

I've come back to this video a few times. That 383 with a 23x/24x cam making over 600hp and nearly 550tq is a wicked combo. On the flip side, I've seen stroking the 6.0 into a 416 has brought nearly 650hp and 580tq. If you build it to handle high engine speeds ie above 7k, what more do you need in a sub 3500 lbs car. Spray another 150 hp safely and up to 300 wet with good fuel. I want a dry sump motor like this for a 944 time attack/hill climb car.

[@TheSilverSphincter69]

i just watched a video where a guy said that the 5.3 is a stroked 4.8, and a 6.0 is a bored and stroked 4.8.....is this not accurate???? it sounds like if you bore out a 4.8 to be a 6.0 you might have some issues????

[@richardholdener1727]

difference between the 4.8L and 5.3L is stroke length (same bore). Difference between the 4.8L and 6.0L is bore and stroke

[@brotherlogicrmf2199]

Pretty soon I'll be getting a C5 Z06. I would like to put a stroker kit in my ls6, but I don't know what size would produce the most power for maximum performance.

[@Begoodcustoms]

Hey mate I've buyed a LS1 stroked to a 383 with forged pistons and rods I've had alot of people tell me to run different oils I'm currently running a 20 50 high in zinc oil and it doesn't like it I've read Castrol eage 10 60 oil is the go I'm still not sure what oil I should run as I don't know much on the engine build

[@richardholdener1727]

we run 5-30

[@ajjskins]

Richard, we need to have a talk, a talk about Torque. Max NA torque for an LS. furthermore, why cant the dyno be loaded lower in the rpm?

[@richardholdener1727]

max torque so far for any LS I have tested is over 1300 lb-ft

[@TheOutdoorMentors]

im personally interested in truck pulling/airboat motor configurations too. i want all my power from idol to 5500 but that's apparently not how Richard likes to cam his builds. but you can cam them so they peak earlier, just keep the long runner intake for low end TQ

[@ajjskins]

@@TheOutdoorMentors yea without carbs the best I have seen is the Trail blazer ss intake and turbocharger. I know they can get there with out boost but it gets pricey.

[@ahoneyman]

@@TheOutdoorMentors He has done a comparison of 5.3 and 6.0 truck cams. Don't expect miracles under 3000 rpm versus the stock cams.

[@nashvilleoutlaw]

I have a comparison for you 😂 30 over 5.3 block with 4'' stroke = 364.8ci and of course a true 6.0 is 364.4ci. Thats about as close as you could possibly get and run the same hardware. I believe the longer stroke shines where you can't test on that dyno, below 3,000. I've come to believe that air flow behaves different with long stroke than a short stroke at lower rpm. Reminds me of one of the 4.3 v8 video's where the 3'' stroke really liked the longer runners for torque. The longer the stroke the higher the air velocity at low rpms.

[@richardholdener1727]

displacement

[@rexdakin4556]

I have pieces of 2 different engines. I have a .020 5.3l and a crank from a 6.2l. Roughly the same year. Would there be any benefits from running that crankshaft in the 5.3l?

[@richardholdener1727]

that is the same stroke ass the 5.3l crank

[@canadapainter658]

it is a very long video and pretty confusing... it could HAVE been done just comparing graphs....a 5 min thing...

[@richardholdener1727]

I feel the same way about this comment

[@billwilliams3352]

So what if you put the 383 stroker crank and rods Or just the crank in the 6.0 what will the horsepower be then🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

[@richardholdener1727]

a 4.0 crank in a 6.0 makes a 408 with a .030 bore

[@lesterbrown1432]

6.2 ( 383 ) vs 6.0 ( 366 )

[@sportsmansparadice42]

Every 61 cubic inch equals =1 liter. 61x 6.0= 366 ci motor. Now 61x 6.3= equals 384.3 ci motor.

[@jody6121]

Most relevant content on you tube performance 👏

[@timothywalker2273]

I'm waiting to see the 5.3 bored to 6.0 brother

[@thomasdearing7718]

I am thinking about swapping out my tired 5.3l in my 2000 chevy 1500 z71 and putting in a 6.0 long block with a stage bt2 truck cam with 1.78 long tubes bolted to my fully built 4l60e. I have thought about doing a 383 stroker rebuild on that 5.3. The cost between both is almost identical. However, the long block 6.0 3 year unlimited mile warranty.

[@docsmallblock6584]

Another great test would be a gen 1 383 vs an Ls based 383! Keeping all things as equal as possible.

[@jonmartin7977]

I’d love to see this.

[@hjfcoco]

He already did this, there's a video

[@williamperkey4952]

I think getting over on the man is y we like boosting. Take a 5.3 boost it & avoid the pricey premium option teatherd to the sales price of set option 😉. Then more cost effective 4 parts & replacement engine. Its probably the reason y a lot of consumers went that direction. Their wising up saving 🤑🤑. Even at the track

[@crazymanprankster]

Hey Richard could you pull some funds to do a 396 stroked ls?

[@richardholdener1727]

where do I pull those from? lol Take a look at the 408 and the 383-the 396 would be between those

[@JOMaMa..]

@@richardholdener1727 pull some funds !!

[@izaiahorta8599]

You should test ported intakes like a tony Mano fast 102 vs a unported fast 102

[@richardscarlett7942]

ha! your tests and comparrisons are never that lol

[@nissman3]

How bout a 5.3 comparison to a 6.0 with a 4.8 crank?

[@KreatorOfDeath1985]

Why do LS engines always have a torque plateau?

[@austindoud273]

Efficent

[@SweatyFatGuy]

Its about high velocity, relatively long runner ports that compliment the displacement. Pontiac engines have a similar looking torque curve, except they start making torque around idle and carry it to 4500 to 5800 with stock heads. Longer runners tend to make more low end, as do smaller ports, so a medium sized long runner will have a high velocity and fill the cylinders very efficiently. Large short runners are lazy down low and start making power up top because the velocity isn't there until the revs increase. Its all relative to the displacement though. Bigger engines can handle larger/shorter ports than smaller engines, generally. A small engine with a large short runner is going to make all its power high up, and almost none down low.. like a 265 sbc with a big aluminum head that flows a lot at high lifts and would easily feed a 434 sbc at 8500rpm. Compression, valve timing, and other variables have an effect as well..

[@MichaelSmith-ov1nf]

@@SweatyFatGuy well said 👍

[@KaosProject21]

you left out efficiency... an undersquare setup at the same displacement making the same power is going to be *more efficient* that higher rpm square and oversquare engines. if you wanna rev fast, build a flat plane youll gain some efficiency back if you dont care about torque...

[@richardholdener1727]

nope

[@KaosProject21]

@@richardholdener1727 Brother, Tzee Germans literally collaborated on a few years of research and came to this conclusion. how are you figuring MPGs from a crank dyno my guy 🤣

[@kenkaniff4505]

Cubic inches and trickflows....

[@idisaunders9503]

Hey buddy I love your content. This your buddy from Bahamas again.i was one of the first owners of a ls engine! I had a Chevy Silverado when they first came out & love that motor! Keep up the great content ❤🇧🇸

[@richardholdener1727]

Ya Mon-I've been to the islands a couple of times-beautiful place and people

[@wydopnthrtl]

In a street driven car... I'll take the 383

[@johncalhoun8011]

Which LS 5.3 or 6.0 has the most Horsepower and likely out of what Vehicle? Out of the Junkyard?

[@richardholdener1727]

6.0

[@mitchellhahn5342]

Would like to see tests with an 8.1l vortec

[@james10739]

Ya I think they are kinda expensive but a big bang would be cool but everyone says they can't handle a lot of power

[@austindoud273]

I've seen where guys fold the rods with a tune

[@Silkmaster4200]

He did a few vids on the 8.1 (496ci) already.

[@austindoud273]

@@Silkmaster4200 he's done 496 testing not 8.1 testing completely different animal kinda

[@james10739]

@@austindoud273 well LT might be in trouble he is almost done with his turbo

[@5sinmex]

I had a 6.0 block bored to a 6.2, 4.065 with ls3 top end. In my c10, has about 15k on the motor runs great.

[@rmarsden8485]

My 94 GMC Sierra needs.a rebuild, considering a beefed up 5.3 now!!! LMAO 😂😂😂😎😎😎☺☺☺ ...no turbos though IN roads aren't GREAT!!!

[@johnb7430]

I'd like to see some efficiency comparisons. BSFC numbers.

[@Aseutester]

Hear bloody hear!

[@tonkatoytruck]

Everything else being pretty much equal, the 6.0L block will cost you twice as much as an LM7 block. Is the $750usd difference worth it to some?

[@chomin3025]

Lm7 with turbo is the cheap way

[@googsutube6402]

That's cool you can see the difference between each cam. The 6.0 liter cam pulls harder as you build revs all the way to the top of the throttle, which is awesome.

[@unclesquirrel6951]

Personally I blame squirrels

[@johneighmy6344]

Yeah! Had they kept doing their job consistently, it'd be called Squirrel Power. Lol. Too funny Uncle Squirrel! Nice one...

[@dalethomas9307]

I’d be willing to bet that the cam with the shorter exhaust duration 239° versus 247° would make more torque anyways and sooner. combined with larger displacement it’s no surprise the 383 makes more torque.

[@richardholdener1727]

That is incorrect-I have run these cams back to back-they make identical power curves through 90% or the rpm range-only differ at the very bottom and very top and only by a few hp

[@josephrodriguez4029]

Richard, I looking to use 6.0 LS iron block LQ4 with a stage 3 BTR cam. 799 heads? Thoughts? Going into a 70 C10 with an SM465 manual transmission and 12 bolt rear end.

[@richardholdener1727]

that works

[@elonmask50]

Excellent video as are all your tests Richard, never been a fan of those Flintstone tech, Lemon Scented, boat anchors, but they are certainly popular amongst the bogans. Merry Christmas to your family and the guys at Westech, thanks for making 2020 better.

[@repurposedperformance5762]

I built a 5.3-6.0 last year. She still runs awesome today and it has .144 wall thickness at the thinnest area. The engine is a little monster and I’m more or less “partial” to it because I didn’t think it would last or perform and it has done amazing for 17k miles now. It has a sloppy 2 cam and 799 heads & a $64 set of Diamond Pro Ebay pistons (yes $64 for all 8) I did not want to invest any more money than I had to on a motor I wasn’t sure would even work. It makes 363whp on my dynojet 248X with winpep8 fully updated. Tuned on e85 with HP tuners. Now the scary part, I tried it again and almost went through a cylinder wall. Not all blocks are created equal. Sonic check it before and after make sure you start with a good block. I used a lm7 & Lr4. I’m not sure if it makes a difference but the first build (the good one) started life as a 4.8L and the one that was to thin started as a 5.3L If I build another one I will use .030 over LS1 pistons from Diamond Pro to be sure it’s good. I have 8 sets of those Diamond Pro pistons new in box, I will donate a set to you if you would like a set. They are no longer available for that price on eBay. Message me shipping info if you want them. Displacement comes out to 5.8L with the pistons I have. I have the same $64 pistons in a std. bore 5.3l making 544whp with a GT45 on 14lbs.

[@richardholdener1727]

THNX FOR THE FEED BACK-NW i HAVE TO TRY ONE

[@robertalexander4989]

Ohh and I had a 350 small block Chevy with around nine hundred horses we had each hole machined especially tight for just on piston out the set and had the guy mark them so we knew which holes for which pistons with 300horse 327heads that were shaved and ported as much as possible without getting in the water jacket and both intake and exhaust valves were 202 with triple valve springs and a Crower cam that we matched to the stroke of the motor with and a weiend six inch rise dual plane intake that we opened up also with a Holley eight fifty double pumper on it and a morrosso electric water pump the Holley had been jetted out and had a msd super cool that fastened to the cap of the distributor and a set of long tube three inch hooker headers

[@MrSGL21]

the 383 made 7.5% more peak torque with 5.2% more displacement. BUT at 3600 rpm that torque difference is 11.36%

[@9Apilot]

My 383 is from an LS6 block.

[@kenross863]

Do you know how much hp/tq at wheels it makes and is it very pricey to build or not as bad as most thinks? I have an 02 firebird

[@9Apilot]

@@kenross863 it made 500 rwhp even. Similar torque. I used ported 5.3 heads and a Fast 90.

[@bigdog397a]

Richard what about some 400 Mopar stroker 451 512

[@MegaMustangkiller]

I’d like to see the 4” bore 5.3. Also like to see a 5.3 stock bore with a 4” crank

[@Aseutester]

A 4" stroke pulls the pistons too far out the bottom of the Bores in OEM Blocks!

[@MegaMustangkiller]

Ase MacGyver is that why there’s so many good running 416 408 and 383 stock block ls combos running around?

[@bigredracer7848]

I took a 6 L from the junkyard the lq4 6 l $250 I turned it into a 408 cubic inch lq4 6.7 l for $5,300 and then I am putting it in my suburban 2001 3/4 ton for pulling a car trailer I move cars across the Nation

[@DBGMLV]

Richard, I have an idea for a video: Put the same cam in different displacement motor. Say get a 240-ish cam and put it in a 4.8, 5.3, 6.0 and 6.2 with all the same peripherals to see how the power curve is affected.

[@austincohoon4203]

He has already done this - check out his truck cam videos

[@andyharman3022]

The 383 LS is just not a combination I like. You have to buy a complete rotating assembly to do the build, which is going to cost an easy $2500. Buy a junkyard 5.3, add ring gap, a decent cam, and a GT45 turbo. Easy 600 hp with better torque than the NA 383. Within the narrow range of bore in this test, you haven't tested the extremes yet. Get an engine notorious for its small bore and stroke it to 383. (That is, if you were made of money.) A 5.4L Triton 2-valve would make a good example of small bore/long stroke to go up against a "traditional" SBC 383 (4.03 bore x 3.75 stroke). With its 3.55 bore, the Ford 5.4 would have to be stroked to 4.837" to get to 383. Then try to get that pooch to breathe at 6000+ rpm.

[@hawkeye2816]

I suspect even with identical heads, intake, and cam, we would see similar results. Bigger cubes = more power. But bigger bore means more airflow at high RPM, as you've shown in other videos. So the 383 would make more power down low, while the 6.0 would hit similar power at higher RPM with lower torque throughout.

[@scottmartin3679]

Not necessarrily the intake and exhaust as well as the cam dictates this

[@hotdog9262]

likely better mpg and all year driveability with the 6.0 though

[@robertalexander4989]

Watching the video u did on the ford 5.4L you might had lost you ever loving mind u haven't ever seen a ford lightning before I seen one with twelve hundred horses

[@richardholdener1727]

Thnx-I've done a lot of testing with 5.4l 2V Lightning motors

[@robertalexander4989]

My f150 the Dyno place told me it had thirty more miles per hour before it ran out of gear in the transmission so I figured at a.hundred and fifty it wasn't turning hard enough to hurt it for real and you can get over a thousand horsepower from the lightning motor

[@07slowbalt]

Id like to watch a comparison on a 383 vs a stroked 6.0L.

[@OgamiItto70]

So, in identical chassis with identical wheels and tires and identical gearing, how long does the straight have to be for the 6.0 to catch up to the 383?

[@jrwstl02]

Almost the same question: How long does the straight have to be for the 6.0 to PASS the 383? Lol

[@frenettaoneal2482]

Can you do a Ls build or tune for best throttle response? The Ls1 in my Ws6 is a great motor and makes outstanding power but even after a mods and an expensive tune 8m not happy with the throttle response. It’s just not “snappy” or crisp. The carbed motor in my Malibu is super crisp and is a joy to drive. Just want to know if that type of throttle response is even possible with this motor.

[@acemobile9806]

383 = street motor. Higher piston speed, not suited to running against redline all day but gobs of torque down low where a street car is usually driven. 6.0 = track/road course car. Easily spend all day winding it out with no fear of hurting it. Of course the biggest motor wins the power race but in this case it better be geared perfectly or else it'll run out of wind on the big end quick.

[@xgentruck83-es68]

I'd like to see a video on the vortec 8100 L18, 496 big block, they were used in Silverado , Sierra's and 'vocational media duty GM trucks 01 '07, A company called Raylor makes performance parts for them, I have a pickup truck with one in it, not sure if it would the worst building.

[@dannyrivas5125]

Have done a lsj or lsa ecotec big supercharger or big turbo or compound charging with twin cooler set-up or 2.4 L ecotec with that set-up I don't know if that cheaper block to buy and have you done mine Cooper engine with the supercharger and turbo connected to it sn45 engine pretty cheap I think

[@lsjay1258]

My friend did his 5.3

[@RumblestripDotNet]

How fast do you want to go? How much money you got?

[@christopherking2012]

Real fast and I'm broke

[@vinknepprath4404]

Lol friend if used to say "how fast do you wanna spend"

[@767dag]

This guy is great , this is good stuff

[@jicastroe88]

I need one of those for my datsun 😢

[@bradsimpson4899]

Love the content, but what the hell were you comparing in this video?

[@kelevra558]

Hey man, can you do some boosted vortech 350 stuff? Maybe an affordable mandatory supporting modifications for boost kind of deal? I have so many friends that drive late 90s chevys with the vortec 350 and because were all young fathers living paycheck to paycheck, hard to do something to see if it works. We dont have access to the engines and components like you do so it would be really really cool to know what setup works. Thanks for all your work man youre a friggin champion.

[@casjjwett7208]

That's bad motor with ported heads and cam 450 hp

[@kelevra558]

@@casjjwett7208 youve ported vortech heads and put in a more aggressive cam?? Do you mind if i pick ur brain a bit? I just have a few questions man i dont wanna spend money on things that aren't necessary.

[@goodfellasinc.5648]

If you look at it it is Apple to apples your trying to compromise to the same level in other words you're trying to play on the same playing field as close as possible in conclusion you're always right on I remember these tests that we've done are kind of similar and I'm pretty close good job

[@Bryce621]

Awesome video 🔥🔥

[@R006WRX]

I wish these videos at least had audio of the dyno runs.

[@bcbloc02]

No replacement for displacement.

[@3800S1]

If you are already quite limited by the heads with standard stroke due to small valves and physically no room to enlarge them, is it better to stick to standard stroke rather than increasing the stroke? According to engine sim software I use this seems to be the case, adding more stoke always reduces power even if I increase cam, comp and all the other stuff but leave heads alone.

[@freyja4954]

I would love to see a direct comparison sbc a 4.125 x3.25 vs a 350 with same heads cam.

[@sswcubes]

Well that first comparison blew. Put the same topend on both short blocks. Then give us the numbers.