[jerry455]

What a cool Jag XKE, I would love that car but get rid of the electric and probably put in an LS. If I remember correctly that GM PP kit is over $8,000 dollars. I worked in the AVI Garage at the GM Tech Center and we worked on the E rod development stuff, the Turquoise and White Tri Five Chevy for SEMA. It is a cool package, 430 hp, emissions legal but pricey.

[Sirrotica]

Hurryin Hoosier has a 64 B body that had a slim jim in it, he and I have talked that all he would need to do was find a later B body transmission hump to retrofit a 4L80E into it. A 65-70 T 400 floor tunnel ought to be able to be easily adapted to the 61-64 body.

[Jeff Hamlin]

To me LS swaps are just like those who pull out the Cammer, to put in a V8
(JUST PLAIN VANILLA)

Like mentioned most folks will walk right by when they see the LS flavor of the month or just another Red GTO.

The reactions and conversations that arise when I open my hood are what make it worth keeping.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Sirrotica

Hurryin Hoosier has a 64 B body that had a slim jim in it, he and I have talked that all he would need to do was find a later B body transmission hump to retrofit a 4L80E into it. A 65-70 T 400 floor tunnel ought to be able to be easily adapted to the 61-64 body.

1961-1964 Bonnevilles and Star Chiefs had a larger tunnel than the Catalina/Ventura/GP, to accommodate the larger Hydramatic transmissions used in those cars. Transplanting the floor tunnel from one of those cars may be another option, and seems like it may be easier to fit.

[Formulajones]

I do like LS engines, we owned 4 4th gen fbodies back when they were new and enjoyed that platform and power train, I've even swapped an LS In to our 72 blazer and daily drove that for years.

But I got over the whole LS thing many years ago and quite frankly I'm tired of seeing an LS in everything these days. I'd rather they just leave the hood shut and I'll just admire the rest of the car. The funny part is most classic cars with the LS swaps are just show queens and rarely used anyway.

No reason vintage iron can't provide daily driver duties and do so in an efficient manor. We've been doing that for years with these 50 year old boat anchors and get better mpg than most SUVs on the roads today. Way cheaper to maintain to boot.

I also understand the attraction of dropping in an engine rather than doing the machine shop thing. There is also the argument of Pontiac engines not as easy to find these days as they dry up not to mention the cost to build one properly vs other brands is another weighing factor.

It goes both ways and frankly I don't care one way or the other, but I've seen enough LS engines already to last me a life time.

[mgarblik]

We build allot of different engines in my classes at the college. The cost to build a Pontiac V8 to 400-425 HP is about the same as an LS engine, possibly a little less. LS engines are a PIA to machine. You have to be very careful honing them and go slow because the cylinder walls are long and thin. They have a large amount of one time use fasteners, Main bolts, head bolts, balancer bolt. That adds allot of expense to the build. Gaskets are very expensive. Pistons are very expensive. Rods are a throwaway unless they can be resized by .002" hone on the OD. Oil pumps are expensive, water pumps are expensive, rocker arms are expensive. So rebuilding one is no picnic.

The LS advantage is they are a younger engine platform, no 50 year old ones out there. So the wrecking yard is full of good used engines. They are cheap to buy and just use as they are, no rebuilding. Or just do a basic back yard rebuild. Ball hone, rings and bearings, no machining. They seem to respond well to that approach.

A 60 year old Pontiac V-8 is going top need a full proper rebuild to be of any use in most cases.

[Jay S]

Like basically all engines, the LS has it’s own issues also, we run them, and have one LT, and don’t get me wrong, they are a great engine, but a long ways from perfect. They like to fowl the number 7 plug and fry the number seven coil pack. Some worse than others. It is a long time problem they have yet to really fix. The oil pump on the front of the crank with the sump on the back of the engine has it’s own set of problems also. LS oil pumps start to have cavitation before they hit 200,000 miles from pulling oil through the long oil pickup they run. So if you pull a LS from a junkyard with much more than 150,000 miles, replace the oil pump. The people that claim any used LS is great for a retrofit, because they are 500,000 mile engines, are really stretching that. I have made it to 350,000 on one. They really require 2 oil pumps to make it that far. When they get much for miles on them, I think the most common failure that kills an LS is the oil pump failure.

They are not cheap to rebuild!

[mzbk2l]

Jay S, is it the oil pump or the pickup tube o-ring? I have a family member with a 2005 Tahoe 5.3. I replaced the pickup tube o-ring at around 220k and it's still going strong at 335k.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by mgarblik

The LS advantage is they are a younger engine platform, no 50 year old ones out there. So the wrecking yard is full of good used engines. They are cheap to buy and just use as they are, no rebuilding. Or just do a basic back yard rebuild. Ball hone, rings and bearings, no machining. They seem to respond well to that approach.

A 60 year old Pontiac V-8 is going top need a full proper rebuild to be of any use in most cases.

Yes I agree, that's been my argument for years. That's just the way it is when talking about 50+ year old engines. Not going to find one in a bone yard and just plop it in.
Though LS engines are starting to approach that realm. 1997 is no spring chicken anymore for an engine and after about 2007 I stopped looking at examples because I don't really want to get into cylinder deactivation garbage that adds more to the cost of a retro swap. Even back when I did the 6.0 swap in my Blazer, that was about 2010 and I had a hell of a time finding a 2006 or older 6.0 with less than 100,000 miles on it. Took me a couple months and finally found one with 80,000 miles.
I just couldn't justify the expense of an LS swap ($7,000 when all said and done) starting with an engine that had 7 figure mileage. I may as well rebuild the original 350 at that point and just call it done.

These days I highly doubt I'd find a suitable LS to just drop in without feeling the need to rebuild it, or at least a refresh, but that's just me. I'm a little more particular about engines than most.

[Gator67]

Originally Posted by Formulajones

The funny part is most classic cars with the LS swaps are just show queens and rarely used anyway.

So true. Always wonder why folks go to the trouble to do this if they only drive their car once or twice a month to a show or cruise-in. LS swaps are also very common in the pro-touring arena. After having dabbled there some, I appreciate why that platform is attractive in that context.

[72projectbird]

Originally Posted by Jay S

Like basically all engines, the LS has it’s own issues also, we run them, and have one LT, and don’t get me wrong, they are a great engine, but a long ways from perfect. They like to fowl the number 7 plug and fry the number seven coil pack. Some worse than others. It is a long time problem they have yet to really fix. The oil pump on the front of the crank with the sump on the back of the engine has it’s own set of problems also. LS oil pumps start to have cavitation before they hit 200,000 miles from pulling oil through the long oil pickup they run. So if you pull a LS from a junkyard with much more than 150,000 miles, replace the oil pump. The people that claim any used LS is great for a retrofit, because they are 500,000 mile engines, are really stretching that. I have made it to 350,000 on one. They really require 2 oil pumps to make it that far. When they get much for miles on them, I think the most common failure that kills an LS is the oil pump failure.

They are not cheap to rebuild!

My GMC is sitting at 240k miles. Original pump, cam, lifters, coil packs etc.

Still has great oil pressure. No ticking, no strange valve train noise. And yes, the #7 cylinder is alive and well.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by Gator67

So true. Always wonder why folks go to the trouble to do this if they only drive their car once or twice a month to a show or cruise-in. LS swaps are also very common in the pro-touring arena. After having dabbled there some, I appreciate why that platform is attractive in that context.

Yep, I can understand the attraction there, the all aluminum light weight package does have advantages in the handling department if that's the direction one takes, and they do make good power pretty easily with minimal changes.

Yeah that's the whole problem with me on these LS swaps. People like to state they wanted better mileage, cold starts, drivability etc.... but they only take the car to the local cruise once a month that's 5 miles up the street What it really tells me is they don't have a very good understanding of carbs and distributors

If it's a daily driver and something you put 10,000 miles a year on it that's one thing, but something that comes out once a month is pointless to me. I guess people are trying to avoid the whole "rebuilding" thing but like I mentioned earlier, LS engines are reaching an age where that's starting to get more difficult now. These things aren't exactly cheap to retro swap either if done properly.

[Jay S]

I have 356,000 on one 6.0. Never had problems with number 7. 210,000 on another and the number 7 is a recurring problem. I know I am not the only one that has that issue. Once it happens once and the engine starts to miss there is no reason to put a scanner on it, you pretty much can plan on it happening again. My trucks have tough lives compare to you guys in the city.

I have heard of the oil ring going bad on the pickup. I think it is also a cavitation problem from the long pickup. I also know of some that had the oil pump go bad at just past 160,000. Different life, different weather, lots of factors. Lighter viscosity oil like a 0w-20 I think helps the oil pump cavitation up where I am at that has a lot of cold starts.

[mgarblik]

When I had my fleet repair business, we had one fleet with 6 G vans, all 6.0L. IMO, they were great engines. They still have 1 left with 320K miles on it. Has lots of valvetrain noise, is leaking every fluid there is like a torpedoed tanker, oil light flickers at hot idle with the AC on, but it's still in service. Has had a flashing check engine light on for 3 years with a random misfire code. But they are damn tough. As mentioned, #7 is usually the first coil to go.

[taktikian]

IMO The engine is the identity of a performance car.. In other more pedestrian vehicles not so much. The American musclecar was iconic in its own right because of the characteristics of the powerplant.. The high rpm performance on a SBC gave a different experience than the torque of a BOP.. There will always be newer more advanced and powerful engines being developed but if we all switched over to them the musclecar will just become one homogeneous experience. After all how many of our predecessor s Duesenbergs ,, Bugatti 's and Auburns were experiencing SBC or BBCC transplants? The engine is integral to the identity of a musclecar.in my humble opinion

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by taktikian

IMO The engine is the identity of a performance car.. In other more pedestrian vehicles not so much. The American musclecar was iconic in its own right because of the characteristics of the powerplant.. The high rpm performance on a SBC gave a different experience than the torque of a BOP.. There will always be newer more advanced and powerful engines being developed but if we all switched over to them the musclecar will just become one homogeneous experience. After all how many of our predecessor s Duesenbergs ,, Bugatti 's and Auburns were experiencing SBC or BBCC transplants? The engine is integral to the identity of a musclecar.in my humble opinion

I can understand a Duesenberg engine swap, those engines used to cost about $200,000-$300,000..........if you could find one LOL A lot of those engines were discarded or thrown to the side decades ago because they were too expensive to repair.

[Stuart]

Comparing a mass market car like a Pontiac to a Duesenberg or Bugatti is kind of extreme.

[taktikian]

I agree. I think it depends on what you have. There were 350 Duesenbergs produced. 327 RA 1V 4speed Judges. In no way am I conflating the two. Just opinion.

[geeteeohguy]

Originally Posted by taktikian

I agree. I think it depends on what you have. There were 350 Duesenbergs produced. 327 RA 1V 4speed Judges. In no way am I conflating the two. Just opinion.

481 Duesenberg Model J's were built. 378 of them survive to this day.

According to Jay Leno, the current price of a core J engine to rebuild is a shade over 1 million dollars. Just for the engine core.

[Radman]

I always enjoy the look of shock when someone goes from the right side of the engine bay to the left side when looking at my stock 62 Tempest. Mine is a factory 4BBL car which was potent in the day at 166HP. Yes it is the 195 Trophy 4