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

MAF if you're running a basically stock or mild cam/header engine with a stock ECU. But even if you didn't have a MAF Sensor, you could have the ECU tuned to run just fine without the MAF. Eliminating the MAF is basically "Speed Density" if you're using an aftermarket ECU or adding forced induction to a stock ECU.

For example: My 5.3 was setup with the stock ECU and a stock harness when it was naturally aspirated. The ECU had a base tune in it to get rid of the an***heft (VATS), and compensate for a slightly larger cam with some fuel & timing changes. This was using a stock MAF.

Same engine, but turbocharged... I used a stock ECU that was tuned for the larger injectors and different fuel & timing tables for the boost, but no MAF needed, so it was a Speed Density tune in the stock ECU.

Now it's on a Holley Terminator X-Max ECU & Harness that doesn't have a MAF. It operates on a MAP sensor, so it is a Speed Density setup.

 

Hey if you’re gonna go traditional might as well use points
Dan

 

I've had a hard time figuring out where to place the MAF in order to make it work for my application. I'll post a picture later of where it ended up.

All this talk of traditional made me realize something: the first LS came out in 1997 in the Corvette. That means in three years here in Texas the DOT will consider the LS1 to be an antique.

The Gen III LS is already in cl***ic status. Man, do I feel old...

 

Why not a chevy RO7 motor????.....

 

Never heard of it before. What is it?

 

NASCAR stuff.

 

Yep! Chevy has been using those since '08 I believe.... 960 ponies from a 358 ci motor.. With 12.5:1 compression..

 

But it’s not a production engine?

 

No....

 

Here's my solution for the MAF on mine. I don't have a great deal of room in the engine bay. So at the time, this made more sense.

 

Thats gen1 R07 with a carb and a distributor. It would screw with people to see a chevy engine with a distributor up front like a Ford, lol. Current motors have gone to coil packs like the LS engines along with the throttle body and fuel injection setup. Those types of motors dont often come up for sale outside of the stock car world.

 

My worthless 2 cents on the LS debate, Ive always had good luck with them. I have had 2 LS1 4th gen Camaro's, a L99 (Ls3 with the DOD) and then our tow rig is a 5.3 that has been a little workhorse. Everyone of them would run circles around my small blocks if we really wanted to be worried about all out performance. My current 17 Camaro with its stock LT1 runs as fast/faster than my 33 Pickup with its built up small block and it weight half as much as the Camaro, while then also getting super gas mileage.

I agree the looks of the LS can be the real sore spot for rodders and I am one of those as well. I admit though if there is one area of a car I get extremely OCD detail oriented, its in a engine bay. Whether thats full decked out traditional hot rod with multi carb setups and proper amounts of chrome or being nut and bolt factory correct.

There are some simple things that help its looks, mainly just hiding the coil packs makes a huge improvement. Then if you can swap the stock car or truck intake for a carb manifold and run a throttle body to then put a normal air cleaner on it to make it look more like a traditional SBC.

Then if you like spending lots of money there is a whole company dedicated to disguising the LS and honestly the results are not that bad. To alot of us we would still spot it a mile away but most places you would show it off, people will never catch it.





Heck they even make intakes that look like the early Ram Jet or Flat Top fuel injection units if you want that vintage look and dont mind spending alot of money, lol.

 

I've never run it in this configuration. I found too many broken things in the wiring harness to try it.

I bought all the stuff to convert it over to carburetor a year ago until I find a fuel injection system I like, but then I walked away from it shortly after.

I'm trying to get the juices flowing again.

 

The problem is making them look like a first Gen costs a ton of money.

 

My thing is the only reason I would entertain the LS idea is for the fuel injection reliability. I worry about the aftermarket stuff leaving me stranded. If the PCM goes out on the Holley systems, it's basically a grand to fix. The R&D spent by the big 3 far exceeds anything an aftermarket company can afford to do. I wouldn't buy an LS and stick an aluminum intake and Holley EFI on it....that's counter productive in my mind.

 

I'm familiar with Speartech and all of the stand alone stuff. That incorporates the factory fuel injection stuff. I am talking about the guys pulling off the GM intake and installing an Edelbrock and an FI Tech TBI. To me that is going backwards, if that makes sense.

These guys make some beautiful engines. Unfortunately, their website isn't current.
Home

 

L79 parts on an LS..............BLASPHEMOUS (is that a word)?

 

The "it is better to look good, than to feel good" mentality about the appearance of an engine is definitely counter productive. No one ever tried to make their 283 look like a Ford flathead-now there is an ugly engine...yeah, I said it.

 

MCjim I agree to a point, however a late model engine with a carb and distributor simplifies installation and doesn’t require a laptop and all the ***ociated skill that goes along with it, looking better is a bonus! Also everybody has their likes and dislikes, our hobby would be boring if everyone had the same engine etc.
Did you say flat heads are ugly? - PM me I’ll get you hooked up with a good eye doctor lol
Dan

 

I think what this discussion has taught me is that the LS is great if you want an "easy" swap into fuel injection. If you're fine with a carbureted engine, the SBC is still the best option.

BigJoeArt pointed out that the perfect hybrid is the 350 Vortec engine that preceded the LS. It's a roller engine that can be made to look traditional. What's better than that?

 

A 327?

 

It's funny you say that. I have one of those, too.

 

5.35857 liters equals 327CI

 

yeah, but it's a 325, really...and that don't sound right!

 

Agreed. I just want to make sure that I use the GM components rather than Holley. They tends to have failures. When I start looking at buying something new, I google "Problems with **X part." Usually you will find a forum that people are asking questions.

I base my decision off of how many people are having problems and how long these forums have been having the same questions asked, indicating that the problems have never been addressed by the mfg. I tend to over- research.

 

Agreed. That's the road I will probably head down.

 

"You can't use the multi-point with a roots supercharger because the supercharger requires some fuel hit the lobes for blower cooling. (Note: there is a way but I'm not going there)".

Killjoy... .
Opened *that* can of worms - may as well offer up a dissertation on the subject. . Patiently waiting... .
Bi-level FI, just like the funnys n fuelers...
Marcus...

 

Bingo!

 

To those traditionalists - if junkyard 5.3 LS engines were available in 1955, EVERY backyard rodder would run them. This forum pays homage to the rodding spirit of going as fast as possible on the least money - regardless of the name on the valve cover. The countless stories of pulling a LS out of the junkyard and adding a cheap turbo to make 1000 HP is EXACTLY in line with the stuff that was done in the 50’s. The difference is a half century of engineering. Long live the LS…. Until the next better thing comes along.

Random thought - do you think there will be “LS forever” traditionalists in our future? Will they argue over the “proper” appearance of the coils on the valve covers? LOL.

 

The “better” part of that is the fact that the heads on the traditional SBC flat out **** compared to even the worst LS. The basic architecture of the LS is vastly superior in every performance data point. Lighter, stronger, O ring seals, oiling, performance, availability, ignition, etc, etc…

This is ***uming that we are hot rodders looking for the best bang for the buck…. If we are discussing “art”, then that’s a different conversation which is based on emotion and not logic.