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

[@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

[@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!

[@MrScottt28]

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

[@Aseutester]

Agreed!

[@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 :)

[@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!

[@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.

[@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...

[@petejoseph8257]

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

[@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!

[@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

[@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

[@carsonellis4125]

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

[@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.

[@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

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@johnparrish9215]

I'm going to have to do a cost breakdown on the 383 LS build. I'm really into cheap power and around here a 6.0 costs an average of $3000 for a complete engine with all electronics, A 4.8 costs about $800 complete. I think the nicest thing about the LS is that there are no bad heads, they are all good and with porting only get better.

[@DjDubStak]

I'd like to know what cost you came up with. I wanna LS swap my Jeep Cherokee with a 5.3 stroker

[@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

[@Its_Bobbys_World]

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

[@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.

[@jamiecampbell3068]

Damn glad these are both LS based. Me sitting here, building up 383 parts for my 1990 350 TBI V8 Surburban. Square body build. 3 years ago, it was quoted as a "pain" to modify my frame a tad, to fit the LS in its bay. Think a pulley arrangement would have also been the ticket. Soooo' .. parts buying 383 I went. Now here I am .. a set of Trick Flow TBI heads away from sending it all to the machine shop & ordering my 700R4 build .. .. .. literally SURROUNDED by LS powered Square bodies. Wondered so many times, the "pain" supposedly needed for a junkyard LS fitment versus my thousands of dollars in parts thus far.

[@richardholdener1727]

383 SBC WORKS TOO

[@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

[@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

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@jeepramz]

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

[@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

[@cconnon1912]

Thank you for trying to educate the masses. “Trying” 😇

[@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?

[@Jim_Lawrence]

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

[@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.

[@alexwhite176]

That power curve on the mild 6.0 is legit!

[@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.

[@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

[@anthonypescatore9047]

You rock for giving out all this free info !!

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@stanleyigras3120]

The 4.8/5.3 blocks can typically be bored out to the LS1/6 size of 3.898”, I think there are a few unicorns that can be bored to the 4” mark. I’ve got a 4.8 block that has been bored to the 3.898 size and haven’t had any heating issues either!

[@richardholdener1727]

we go 3.902 or 3.905 all the time-just have not gone the full Monty 4.0

[@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.

[@hardball107]

My biggest questions were about valve shrouding with a smaller bore but your answered that out of the gate. Now, for the average guy with a built 5.3 in the 425hp range you answered a big question. How do I get to the next plateau in hp NA ? Do I start with an expensive engine and throw a moderate amount of money into it to reach a 550hp level or buy the cheapest longblock out there and change the internals, have everything new and make slightly more power than a resealed junkyard motor for a little extra cash ? It all depends on what you can get that stroker kit for and of course with new pistons you can punch it out for more cubes. Now just to find that cheap stroker crank .........

[@richardholdener1727]

BOOST

[@hardball107]

@@richardholdener1727 Looks like you wouldn't need much.

[@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.

[@jonathonbelton2387]

Man I love how you just welcome the haters to battle in the comments so joyfully. You the man Richard!!!

[@jonathonbelton2387]

By the way good to see you on Fastest Car. That was real cool what your friend did with his wife’s wagon.

[@richardholdener1727]

THAT WAS FUN

[@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

[@thatturbotruck]

The 5.3 can be taken to a 6.0 but different year 5.3s have a little more meat than others. They always ran a wall thickness test on them beforehand and after at the machine shop I used to work at to make sure, some where safe and some borderline safe iirc

[@andyharman3022]

What was the limit for min wall thickness at final bore size?

[@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?

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@thomasgjonovich5524]

Hi Richard, I would be curious about doing the 5.3 stroker with a 4 inch bore and a set of ls3 heads. I think it could make some decent numbers N/A and booster. Perhaps a future video?

[@richardholdener1727]

most 5.3l blocks can't be bored that far-a 6.0l with a 4.0 stroke works though

[@flipacre8747]

All things being equal a larger bore/shorter stroke (A.K.A. short throw motor) would rev higher and have a flatter torque curve that peaks late. Making the higher stroke motor a better quarter mile engine and the short throw motor better for road racing. This is because having the torque come on late is better when coming out of a corner since you can get back on power sooner and more safely. Also the higher rpm and later peak gives you more grip in the tire in and out of a turn. Meaning torque at high RPM is smoother, more balanced, has less rev snap and is therefore less likely to overpower the available grip of the tire. To where on the drag strip having the torque come on sooner and harder is going to ripple the tire to launch harder, get through the gear faster and allow you to shift sooner. All good things for drag racing. That is why races with turns favor high revving engines with a late torque peak and drag races favor higher absolute torque that peaks sooner with the overall greater mechanical advantage at the crankshaft. Mechanical advantage is also why some strokers are more fuel and power efficient than other motors of the same displacement. The higher surface area of the piston is why some short throw engines are. High stroke with lower bore = Drag engine. Low stroke with high bore = Formula, cart or superbike engine. That is why drag engines shift around 7,000-9,000 RPM and Formula-1 engines can hit 20,000, but are now limited to 15,000 by the rules. Other things like larger valves with shorter lift, lower displacement, self adjusting fuel runners, power scavenging, multiple length runners and variable velocity stacks, bowl pistons, dual plugs, higher tolerances and lighter parts with less reciprocating mass all contribute to the 20,000 RPM of the bygone era of V-10 powered F1 racing, but the main thing is the high bore and short stroke. Because the same is true with high displacement V8 engines used in road, sprint and circuit racing. Low stroke is typically better for multiple turns and high stroke is typically better in one time straight line acceleration situations.

[@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

[@Silkmaster4200]

I never seen a LS4 5.3 stroke. I know used only in FWD applications. Still nice to seen what modds can do for it.

[@richardholdener1727]

same as every other 5.3L

[@Silkmaster4200]

@@richardholdener1727 I figured still never seen anyone did it.

[@shadowopsairman1583]

Its like the Series 2 Buick 3.8 vs Series 3. Nothing different. 5.3 is a truck block anyway.

[@Silkmaster4200]

@@shadowopsairman1583 the intake is different maybe the heads ?

[@american16]

Let’s not forget that the ls6 is an aluminum block so lower weight is significant when it comes together

[@rayman1230]

I think a more accurate and exaggerated sample would have been your 383 cubic inch 5.3 vs a destroked 388 cubic inch ls7. OR a 4.8 crank in the 6.0 block vs a slightly larger stroke 5.3 block! As always love the content!

[@Hogiewan1]

Loved the John Doc call out. Seems like good fun

[@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

[@NerdKid72]

Yeah we need a ported rec port head test, I feel most LS guys are looking at doing that these days. A.I, TSP, Katech, Lingenfelter, LME, Frankenstein, GPI

[@richardholdener1727]

I have a ported ls3 head test up to show what they do

[@NerdKid72]

@@richardholdener1727 oh you do! I see. Sorry your comment at 14:00 confused me. I guess you meant specifically on a "wild" 6.0L I guess?

[@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.

[@alshotrodgarage4779]

I pulled a 6.0 from a 2002 2500 Silverado with the 4L80e 2x4 with harness and ecu fuse box for $375 at my local pick a part 3 days ago. The 5.3 cost the same but I’m steady watching they’re new listings for more 6.0’s... pulled a 4L80e today from a express van, from they’re 2nd yard for $125 that makes 4 pairs of 6.0 4L80’s 2x4 in my garage and one 6.0 4x4 4L80 in my 2001 2500 Sierra I paid $750 for the truck and drive the hell out of it.... pulled a 2006 L33 with 4L80 and run it with Texas speed stage 2 in my 69 firebird and light up the tires doing 30 mph...love this game!!!

[@daltonhanleyjr4142]

Which junkyard do you go to?

[@jackofalltrades9292]

???

[@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.

[@johnb7430]

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

[@Aseutester]

Hear bloody hear!

[@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.

[@jody6121]

Most relevant content on you tube performance 👏

[@Crysmatic]

Mild 383 - 548 bhp @ 6300, 503 lb-ft @ 4700 Wild 383 - 603 bhp @ 6350, 543 lb-ft @ 4800 LS6 CNC heads Comp Cams 54-459-11, 231/239 duration 113 LSA 0.624/0.631" lift (with 1.72:1 roller rocker arms) ATI damper, Hooker 1-7/8" headers FAST LSXR intake, 102mm throttle body fwiw, the wild 6L with AFR heads had 119% peak VE, and the 383 with ported LS6 heads had 122% peak VE. ported LS6 heads ftw

[@07slowbalt]

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

[@korn111685]

I have a G8 with a cam 6.0. It has a lot of power but the around town manor is rough.

[@overnovacated6481]

Oh Thank you so much Mr Richard I asked for this comp and you delivered I know you didn't do it for me only but sweet otherwise. Intention: 05 tahoe 410 gear 6l80 and they just got whooped buy a woman in a 5.3 lm7 with cam and heads but they dont know its stroked oh so fun fun fun!!!

[@chezleymcdonald2481]

I added a 1/4 inch of stroke to a SBC and it picked it up almost a second in the 660 but I may have changed a few other things to

[@MrSGL21]

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

[@izaiahorta8599]

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

[@R006WRX]

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

[@willievanhoesen4455]

Accelerated race parts sells what they claim is an assembly ready 5.3 or 6.0ls blocks align honed, sonic checked arp main studs they'll even paint it. 4.065 max, molnar crank, molnar pwr adder rods. waiting for a answer from mahle they will even clearance the block for a 4.100 stroke on a 4.125 rod 428 cubes should i seek a shrink? i,d use uncut unported l92 heads. the idea came from a old motor trend/hot rod magazine build except the bore number but they offer the bore, thought it may open piston choices. i told you my A1C must be off or something.

[@richardholdener1727]

unless they sleeved the block, don't use a 4.065 bore or 4.100 stroke.

[@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

[@vongdong10]

I've really been going back and forth deciding whether I should stroke my LS1 or get a LY6 block and build it. LY6 makes so much more sense even though it initially costs more. Sell the LS1 and then the LY6 build would almost cost the same if I stroked the LS1.

[@richardholdener1727]

get the LY6

[@freyja4954]

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

[@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.

[@Wrenchen-with-Darren]

Great comparison !! The 383=6.2 so all things considered, the power difference is what I would expect. Cubic inch is pretty much Cubic inch.

[@bowhite1293]

Close, its actually a 6.3L

[@Wrenchen-with-Darren]

@@bowhite1293 so glad you cleared that up. But. Rounding IS math.

[@Wrenchen-with-Darren]

@@bowhite1293 or 6.27 actually

[@bowhite1293]

Correct. I was just going off the top of my head with the LS3 being a 6.2 with 376ci and the HEMI 6.4 being 394 so 385ci being dead in the middle of that so I rounded lol

[@Wrenchen-with-Darren]

@@bowhite1293 👍

[@vernm6189]

Off topic - Rich can you help me? I have a 65 289 4.030 and I'm rebuilding it using a eagle 302 crank(2M), do I change my Rods from 5.155 to a 5.090? I see that the boss 302 used the 302 crank and 289 rods? more dwell timing? I see the Ford boss 302 pistons but I am not seeing a lot of piston info, so , Question - 302 crank & 302 rods, pistons , or use the 302 crank & 289 rods and Boss pistons? I'm using world jr heads and going with a retrofit roller about .486 to 531 lift 178 or 182 dur. I was looking for running 9.5:1 Hypern. pistons. my car has a TL 4 speed with 3.25 rear gear. Thank you Rich for being a You Tuber and starting this channel with all this great info!!!

[@richardholdener1727]

CHECK THE WIDTH OF THE RODS AND MATCH PISTON COMP HEIGHT WITH ROD LENGTH

[@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.

[@benhowe2087]

On another subject entirely. I am having a long going argument with an exhaust fabricator. He states that there is almost no difference in power from an exhaust built with a squashed tubing bender verses a mandrel tube bender. Both with X pipe. Have you ever done a comparison? Let’s say a LS 5.3 engine with 450-500 hp. Duel 2.5 exhaust? Exhaust is sized to have an effect on power as it is smaller than ideal I am assuming. Maybe use factory manifolds and long tube headers. Maybe it is only 10 hp difference? Or is it 50 hp? Same mufflers on both systems. Use good high flow mufflers or no mufflers at all.

[@richardholdener1727]

watch the Engine Masters episode where they crushed the header-I have an LS exhaust test up

[@benhowe2087]

@@richardholdener1727 I did see that episode. But that is on the primary tubes. What happens in the exhaust down stream? The pulses are more rapid. The flow rate slower due to the reduced heat. It may be completely different result.

[@srage9188]

Right on time Richard!😼👍

[@MegaBill502]

Hi Richard, I really like your work, I look forward to each of your new posts. I have a 6.0 L76 from a 2007 Silverado MAX that I will be swapping into a SWB C10. I want to keep my rotating assembly stock and get around 550 hp. My plan is to keep the truck intake and delete the AFM, while also upgrading the valve springs, pushrods, and cam. I want a nice choppy idle. I’m willing to mill my heads to bump the compression up but I’m not sure how much to take off and still maintain valve to piston clearance. I know that also depends on cam lift so that’s where my question lies. What cam would you recommend, and how much should I mill my heads? The heads are 823 castings. I will also upgrade my throttle body, fuel pump, and injectors and run long tube headers. I will be using a built 4L60E transmission, and 3.73:1 rear end gears. Could you also recommend what stall converter would work well with this combination? There is so much information out there that it becomes overwhelming. That’s why I wanted to ask you about this build. I know that your knowledge is second to none so I wanted to come to you for your recommendation. Thank you Richard, I appreciate your help.

[@tannertummons6005]

I'm building an aluminum 5.3 stroker for my Silverado

[@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

[@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

[@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.

[@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?

[@nissman3]

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

[@767dag]

This guy is great , this is good stuff

[@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

[@bradsimpson4899]

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

[@jordanv5400]

love this video and all your videos richard! have you tested a 5.3/383 on boost?? would love to see a video on that!

[@richardholdener1727]

yes-that vid is up

[@crw3673]

Waiting to see you use performance recport heads!

[@richardholdener1727]

please see the rec-port head test videos

[@219streetcars4]

So Richard on the wild 383 motor roughly where do you think the compression ratio was? Great information Great videos

[@richardholdener1727]

11

[@bowhite1293]

I think the 3.905 bore shrouds the valves a good bit and limits rpm no matter the combo compared to 4.000

[@andyharman3022]

That's the bore size (.007" over) of the LS1 and LS6 production engines. They make good power.

[@bowhite1293]

Yes for sure but compared to a bore almost .100" larger that's more airflow.

[@richardholdener1727]

something to consider-the head flows over 320 cfm on a 3.90 bore-it has enough flow

[@bowhite1293]

Got flow numbers on a 4.000?

[@andyharman3022]

@@bowhite1293 users.erols.com/srweiss/tablehdc.htm#Chevy_Big_Block There are all of the cylinder head flow numbers you could ever ask for.