As If You Didn't Hate The LS Enough Already...

Back when I was young and worked on a NASCAR team we called this infant mortality of parts. We individually serial numbered and tracked mileage on critical parts during testing to determine when they were most likely to break. Most parts had a higher initial failure rate that dropped off then slowly rose as the parts wore out. Once we had a baseline only parts in the determined "safe" mileage made it to a race day track.

 

I've never had one but the 2K GMC 4x4 that my son had ended up with around 300K no trouble from the engine miles on it before he traded it for a 2015 with a 6.0. He was good about taking care of that 2K GMC though. He beat the crap out of it but it was in good shape and well cared for mechanically.
The trouble now is that for a lot of us one already has over 100 K and is several years old before the price gets down to where we are willing to buy it. I've been wanting to sell off my 77 one ton flatbed and get a later 6.0 crew cab to tow with and anything that isn't beat up brings a pretty stiff price.

 

This has to be it. Think about it. We're picking up 300K LS motors from the junkyards. This motor isn't used: it's used up. The fatigue on the engine as a whole at 300K, in my opinion, would require that you junk everything except the block and start over.

Even then, you'd have to have the block machined by a machining god who mainly, or only, specializes in LS engines. Past the "seasoned" block, everything would have to be new.

Looks like the modern engines have been mastered in such a way so that once they are done, they are done.

 

Kind of the same thing with many old motors that we work on..........only cheaper.

 

That would be understandable if we were picking up 300K motors, but most of us are not. If I dropped the big bucks and bought a 50K motor, I'm not expecting it to be a pile of dung at 60K, I'm at least expecting it to last at least until 150K (as long as I'm not beating the crap out of it). Unfortunately, that is no longer the case with the modern motors.

We are buying motors that should run 300K that have 100K or 150K on them, and many are not making it another 30K miles.

Back in the 50s & 60s the motors had a life expectancy of 75K - 85K, but it was expected that a motor with 1/2 the usable mileage on it was still good to make it to the 3/4 life expectancy.

From the late 80s until the mid 2010 era, the expected life of the motors made it up into the 200K- 250K and used motors were expected to survive until they exceeded the 3/4 range.

I'm betting the hard reality is, there are probably a higher % of motors built today (built since 2014), that are not making it much past 100K then there was back in the 1980s. Maybe those that do survive past the 100K and going 300K, but I'm betting that is not an accurate life expectancy of the modern motors. The life expectancy is the average life of the full number of the motor size built, not what the exceptional motors made it to.

Back in the old days, there were ways to determine, with pretty good accessory, which motors were the "good" motors and which were not. Today there is no viable way to determine if the motor you are looking at is a "good" motor or a "time bomb" about to explode.

The LS seems to be the tip of that spear point.

 

Gene-koning, very well said. It also seems to me like the older engines had more meat on the bone when it came to a rebuild then the modern engines do now.

I wasn't worried about a rebuilt V8 twenty years ago as much as I am with today's V8s. Something is definitely wrong.

 

I do not believe i could hate the LS any more than I already do but you bring up some good points.

 

This is a 10 year old build from Sloppy Mechanics. He pretty much revolutionized the whole cheap LS horsepower thing, and now there are thousands of cars like this on the roads today. He gives away all his information, tune files, etc.

This is one of many of his builds, and this one made 711hp to the rear tires.

"2003 5.3, china studs, stock head gaskets never removed, pac1218 springs, 2 inch reiners forward facing hotside, truck manifolds, S476r Billet V3 wheel turbo from forced inductions, swapped rear gears to 3.15s, ran 235 radial tire, same 80e, circle d converter, etc

car went 9.68@145mph foot brake 1.58 60ft on the launch, 19psi, pumpgas and meth

car has been running and driving on stock 2000 silverado 2500 pcm and a PSI conversion harness, 3bar OLSD operating system tuned by myself, and a EFI source 3 bar map."

https://sites.google.com/site/sloppywiki/sloppy-builds/fairmont-3-0

 

My argument isn't about horsepower or torque. Clearly these engines can take horsepower and torque. My argument is about longevity.

Tony Angelo has several episodes of his show on YouTube where he gets 500hp from LS engines only for them to rod knock a few weeks later. That's too much money for too short of a return in my opinion.

 

Lots of good info in here. I wouldn't mind building a carb'd 6.0 for an Apache.

 

Hating on the LS is based on irrational emotion , not logic and reasoning. Had I known about the LS, when I put The "traditional" SBC in my C1, I would have. It would have drove the purists mad...not just the NCRS geeks, but the period correct nerds.

 

I just drove my Tahoe to town to run some errands. Man, is that 5.3 boring....

 

Jim
The 5.3L in my Yukon is boring also, but the tuned 5.3L in my 1980 step side is an absolute blast.
No matter what I did to the dog 80's 350 to pep it up it was still a dog and got 9 to 10 miles to the gallon in town or on the highway.
With my foot out of the 5.3 I get 14 to 15 in town with a mild tune and a lot more fun to be had if the tune is more aggressive.
I like it.

 

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on the longevity of these engines. Putting 300K on a block doesn't really hurt it. As long as there is room to bore it and deck it, it will make a good starting point for a build. Yes metal can fatigue with the number of cycles some components are subjected to, like pistons and rods and maybe even the crankshaft. There are a lot of reasons why older engines didn't reach these high miles.....not just the engine, but the oils that were available, the filtration, dusty roads, and people didn't drive as far on a regular basis. Look at the engines in diesel trucks used in semis......how long before the block goes bad in them? Lot more vibration and compression affecting everything.....but they last.
Heads......the casting is just fine, add new valves and springs and probably time to replace the rocker arms as well, but they don't just start failing because of the mileage.......and they are aluminum.
It's kind of illogical to say that an engine type that's known for going 200K/300K miles, and often with little to no attention beyond oil and filter changes is short on longevity. Yes, the wear parts and consumable parts will need replacement. As I mentioned earlier, the DOD crap does fail and can take the engines bearings and moving parts out, but those blocks and cranks and heads just keep going like the Energizer Bunny. The whole crux of the idea is that many "purists" just don't want to accept them because they are afraid it will do the same thing to the smallblock chevy that the smallblock chevy did to the flathead Ford..........and also many people are afraid of new electronic technology that they know little to nothing about. On another thread several months ago I mentioned attending a forum on EFI (Electronic Fuel Injection) that was presented (Free) at the Street Rod Nationals this year. Every seat in the Forum was filled and there were many people standing. Probably a hundred or more packed in the room. Every ONE of them had GRAY HAIR.........because some people still want to learn and recognize the benefits offered by technology.

 

Tony Angelo doesn't know what he is doing. He copied Sloppy Mechanics with the "Bone Marrow 10 seconds for $10k" and utterly failed for the whole world to see. In the video I posted above, that Fairmont probably has less than $3000 in it, clicking off 9's, running to and from the track, doing burnouts with a finger out the window.

As far as reliability and longevity, when was the last time you saw an old square body GM truck with a SBC with over 200k miles without ever being opened up? Drive for 20 minutes through your local town and you'll pass 20 late model LS powered GM trucks with over 200k that are still on the same spark plugs, coolant, belts, etc. that have never been opened up.

If the SBC was superior, why did it go away? Because technology. Catch up or get left behind.

 

You two think you've got me, and you're proving my point. I never said the SBC is greater, but it is certainly better in certain applications.

The LS is a mystery to most people in this community. This is an engine where what you don't know will hurt you. You two are proving my point because you're saying what I said in a different way:

In order to get one to work right, you've got to know what you're doing.

I own an LS and several SBCs. I'm a fan of both engines. What I am saying is going into the LS, I had no idea what I was doing. Clearly what I am saying is neither do most people. This is a situation where the SBC is better. If you know basic engine mechanics, you can get the SBC to work for cheap.

The LS can also be made to work, but you've got to know what you want going into it. Most people, including me, do not and did not think about it before we buy one for our collection. This will cost the novice thousands and chances are they will still be nowhere close to running the LS.

My observation is for all the talk with the LS most people do not know what they should about these engines to make them work for their applications as easily as the SBC works in all applications.

 

If you really want to be helpful with information on the LS, post links to great LS machine shops. Post links to articles concerning effective rebuilds.

You say it's the best. Put your money where your mouth is.

 

I vote to be left behind. Isn't that the whole point of the HAMB?

 

Trust me: it took me a long time to warm up to the SBC much less the LS. One day it just dawned on me: if the guys from the '50s and '60s trusted them enough for their hot rods, why am I fighting the SBC so hard?

That was enough change for me to last a decade...

 

Nobody is trying to "get you". You created this thread with the question "what are your thoughts?". Thoughts and opinions are shared, but I'm not going to argue for the sake of arguing. It seems your mind is made up on the subject, so I'll let it be.

 

My mind isn't made up. That's why I started the thread. I don't want to chase you off. I'm asking you to contribute more.

If you can provide the articles or the links you've been talking about, I'd like to see them because I want to learn more. I'm asking for your help and assistance.

Make me a believer...

 

No matter what engine you start with, parts are going to need to be replaced. its a used engine.

Unless you're beating the shit out of it, you probably won't have an issue. but again, that goes for all engines. I have a vortech sbc in my 1997 2500 tow pig, it just passed 355,000 miles and has never had more than an oil change.

Starting from the bottom, It's an engine, short of the cylinder DOD things mentioned above, its just another motor. if you can rebuild a SBC, you can rebuild an LS. and if your local machine shop can't figure out how to machine one, I wouldn't be taking any other motor I owned there either...

The main thing that gets everybody is the wiring, but I've watched my buddy pair down stock harnesses and get LS' running and driving for practically no money. there are a bunch (I just looked) of Youtube videos showing how to do that, but if that still freaks you out, you can buy plug and play stuff from holley, and even speedway!

When I started my rambler project, I looked at an LS as an option because it would be hidden under a hood. but it got beat out when I got given a sbc 305 for free. with a two barrel Rochester, and a power wire to the coil and starter, it will easily get 15-18 mpg and be simple.

In my opinion if you want a standard easy reliable motor that can look good in an open hood car, I feel like the aforementioned late vortech sbc gets slept on alot. I picked up a fully machined (30over/decked/checked/cleaned) example off marketplace for $500 and it had factory provisions for a roller cam. so I get modern durability with an old school look.



hell the first sbc I built for the car was a JUNK motor we BEAT the pistons out of.
still did 10,000 miles with a dingleball rebuild.

I find LS motors interesting, but useless in most of the cars I build, due to the lack of hoods.

But the reliability is the same as any other motor, based heavily on the money spent and the way you drive it.


.

 

You are blaming the LS when you now say that it is a lack of knowledge about the LS engines and not the engines that are the problem! It seems that most people just don't like the looks of the LS because it isn't traditional looking.

 

Sorry if you think I'm playing "gotcha"..........that's not my intention. I simply have a different view than you do and I'm trying to explain why I see it that way.

The basic engine stuff for rebuilding is pretty similar and anyone who can do a decent rebuilding job should have no problem rebuilding an LS. Sure they need to look for some info on the specifics because there are some things on an LS that a smallblock with a carburetor doesn't have..........but its the same situation that rodders faced when engines went from flathead designs to overhead valve designs. If I bought an old Hemi Chrysler, I would need to get a book or find info specific to that engine.........because I don't know all the little special things about them. I don't even know the common things about them beyond them being really heavy and having huge heads.

Think about what you just said. Would that same logic not have been applicable when the new fangled overhead valve engines began replacing the flatheads? We would all still be driving flatheads if the rodders of the day felt they were a mystery and avoided the smallblock ?

I'll try to help, but I'm not a miracle worker............ (That was meant to be funny, so hope we can be a little more lighthearted in our replies.)


First, this is not a refute of the smallblock Chevy. They are excellent engines and reliable. I believe that many of them are capable of high mileage today because they have been refined over the years and the oil and filters used today along with dust free highways help them as well as LS engines. I've got an 89 Corvette that I bought for a parts donor. Its injected and it fires right up every few months. It came with headers and its pretty healthy sounding. It would be a nice donor for an S10 or hot rod.

What it doesn't have. It doesn't have the heads with a 15 degree (or less) valve angle. Stock LS heads easily outflow stock smallblock heads with a 23 degree valve angle. With some work the LS can flow 300 cfm with a common truck head. That means a serious HP advantage with a small investment. I bought a complete 6.0 (366 cu in) engine and 4L80 transmission for $1200. I can remove the heads, basic porting (myself) new (better) valve springs and a high performance roller cam with the OEM roller lifters, new timing chain and make 450 HP or more. If I do it, I will go ahead and install new bearings and probably rings and pistons.......simply because thats how I would want to do it......but in a rod that isn't driven a lot, the OEM stuff usually is ok. There are many things that contribute to an LS engines ability to make outstanding HP easily. There are plenty of the 6.0s that are capable of over 500 hp right from GM. Do the somewhat standard installation of installing a stroker crank like the 383 Chevy uses and you can get a 408 cu in engine easily capable of 600+ HP. Its all about the ability of an engine to ingest air/fuel. The smallblock was a lot better at ingesting air than a flathead, and the LS is way better at it than a smallblock. The LS also has replicated ports.....meaning that all ports are virtually the same length, size, and shape......so more consistant distribution of the fuel and air. The smallblock has different lengths and shapes and fuel/air distribution is less consistant. It was a major improvement in 1955. Hurrah for that step forward . Today the LS has stepped forward and improved things even further. Its a descendant of the smallblock. I like them both, and hope smallblocks continue to flourish for decades more......even forever........but ignoring the LS just isn't something I'm comfortable with. Its the new smallblock............

 

Ekimneirbo, you get the golden star my friend. Thank you.

I have an LS. A 5.3l LM7 actually that is reported to have 107K miles on it. It's complete, but I can tell that it came from a vehicle that was in a crash.

I've not wanted to move forward with it because I keep seeing the horror stories of guy's rebuilding them only to wipe out the cam bearings and the rod bearings after a couple of hundred miles.

That scares the snot out of me.

I want to be able to look at a LS with the same confidence I have with a SBC, but I just don't know enough.

Keep posting information. This is helpful.

 

I like keeping carbureted cars carbureted, but I wouldn't mind stuffing a LS into something like this. Twenty years old. Never could afford one brand new.

 

Now your getting nasty!....
I own a 2019 GT/CS.... I'll keep mine 100% Ferd..

 

As far as longevity of LS motors, I am amazed. Reason: when I retired I worked as a driver at a large auto auction in Twin Cities metro (MN). All vehicles had to have mileage on the window sticker when they came into the ring. Virtually the only vehicles with in excess of 400,000 miles were LS chevy trucks. And many, many with 300,000 plus. And they drove just fine.

 

The LS doesn't have provisions for a regular distributor in it.... If it did, then maybe I'd give in....

 

Oh you opened a can of worms Dueces
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-851000
personally I don’t like the looks of LS engines, however it’s hard to argue with the potential said engine has. Any engine can be converted to a distributor and carburetor, maybe a LS would look better this way not sure. It’s all hot Rodding , just not traditional
Dan