Old school SBC/BBC to LS family comparo.

Discussion in 'High Tech Retrofits' started by newschool72, Sep 23, 2013.

  1. Protour-Camaro

    Protour-Camaro Veteran Member

    Messages:
    2,111
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Location:
    California

    Basically what I have. LS1 with LS6 top end, bolt on goodies, cam, heads are CNC ported

    = 530hp


    BTW...the extra 14 cubes does make a difference. There is a guy at my work with a 6.0 Goat with similar mods (not as crazy as mine) and is right at the same power level. The 6.0 will produce about 20 RWHP more with all other things equal
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2013
  2. frankz

    frankz Veteran Member

    Messages:
    2,107
    Likes Received:
    21
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    Illinois
    I know somebody (Wink Wink ) making 550+ with an all iron SBC.........All old school but high quality parts. The take away is that IMO all Chevy V-8's are great !! An LS wouldn't fit my build parameters but it might yours!
     
  3. david.carlton@s

    david.carlton@s Veteran Member

    Messages:
    1,075
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2009
    Location:
    CA
    What about a serious comparison of the torque curves down low in the RPM range where most folks cruise?

    Old school - best for torque down low?
    LS - best for weight
    $$ - you can built cheap or expensive with either option
    HP at high RPMs - doesn't matter to me
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2013
  4. ZS10

    ZS10 Moderator Staff Member Lifetime Gold Member

    Messages:
    12,165
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2003
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    I'm going to step in and say, "If I knew then what I know know...LSx all the way."

    I've never owned one, but I've ridden in a few, and if I could start again it would be with a 6.0, and learn all the efi stuff. But I'm down the BBC road, I've learned it and it does what I want it to do.

    I didn't get any part of mine for free, cheap, deal, stolen, tradeses, swapses, insurance claim, or gifts from my mother, so I'll just be straight up and honest and say it cost a well over $10/hp...more like $14 and through Darwinian evolution and routine maintenance over the last 10 years, I'm sure its into $20+
     
  5. david.carlton@s

    david.carlton@s Veteran Member

    Messages:
    1,075
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2009
    Location:
    CA
    So if I buy an LS engine, like the one in my truck, or like the one in all the GM cars I've rented, and stuff in a new cam, it'll be.... "fun"?

    I have a few friends with Corvettes, they say their cars are "fun". Will my car be ... "fun" with an LS?

    I want "fun". The sound of an BBC is "fun". A hot SBC with a carb is "fun". Will an LS be "fun"???? Will an LS in an old Camaro be more fun than an LS in a new Camaro? If not, I'll buy the new car.

    I'm just not sure. I'm afraid it might be practical, sensible, the smart thing to do.... a learning experience.

    I'll bet the LS guys all download their music from iTunes don't they? Anyone still like CDs or vinyl?
     
  6. Air_Adam

    Air_Adam Veteran Member

    Messages:
    2,927
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Location:
    Saskatoon, SK, Canada
    For what its worth, the 6.1 Hemi in my Charger is brutally fast and very torquey, but at the same time its alot more user-friendly as a DD than my old 350 and 454 - mostly due to modern EFI vs the carb on the other two. I know its not an LS, but the parallels are the same. The biggest benefit is the much more modern cylinder head design and the much more advanced EFI system (on the Hemi and the LS alike) - they allow the best of everything... power, fuel economy, and driveabilty.

    That said, the new motors just don't have the 'character' or the 'feel' that the older ones do. In my experience though, thats usually alot more fun in smaller doses, like with a weekend summer toy. After awhile, it becomes tiring, or even like work, to drive that stuff in traffic every day, and you really do start to wish it was more civilized. I have the 454, LS1, and 6.0 sitting there and I'm constantly wrestling over which one to use...
     
  7. sbca96

    sbca96 Veteran Member

    Messages:
    2,897
    Likes Received:
    5
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2004
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, Ca
    Its not a "false" statement, its just not always true. Some engines respond well
    to forced air, and some need extra work to make it happen. If you start with a
    compression ratio too high, you cant use as much boost. If your EFI you can get
    away with more through programming, if your carbed you risk running your engine
    too lean and burn holes. Forced air isn't guaranteed. I have seen a range of 30
    to 50% depending on the platform its used on. Not false, just playing it safe with
    the number, something the LS guys need to learn. When you quote a ridiculous
    number people will question them. Chevy did that back in the 60s and got beat
    an awful lot by "lower" HP cars, Ford did it again in the late 90s with the Cobra.

    "You" was a "you people" Ross Parrot moment : I meant LS-guys, I believe it was
    actually our host "newschool72" that claimed this on another thread, or perhaps
    it was Aceshigh. Regardless it was on another thread that ended up being deleted
    after I posted up a wonderful reply to LS motors being factory detuned to protect
    the 4L60E transmissions. A friend that does programing on LS engines blew a hole
    the size of the gouge left in the Titanic on that one. This was after I questioned
    the torque curve of the LS vs the LT when a fellow forum member posted up that
    he was disappointed with the low end power of the LS engine he installed when it
    was compared to the SBC he removed. Since an LT is a SBC .. I stepped in... BTW
    torque management is simply traction control, not "detuning". If there is wheel
    slippage it will mod the program, if there is not it wont. You wear the trans when
    there is a load on it: No wheel slippage. IMO torque management would actually be
    the opposite of "protecting" an auto trans.

    If you really want to hit ALL those .. the LT1 is the one to consider, they are very
    affordable now with the LS hype, they make good torque for that push back into
    your seat around town, they are only 50 pounds heavier then an all aluminum LS,
    they pull high RPM better than any other SBC, They bolt right in with the stock SBC
    mounts and they still sound like a SBC. Its a 300 hp engine with SIMPLE mods : it is
    mostly intake ducting, better exhaust helps a lot as the Camaro/Impala manifolds
    are purposely restrictive to put HP below a Corvette rating. A dremel and some cut
    off wheels can remove some of the designed casting blockage.

    Check out my install thread ... and its California legal!

    Tom
     
  8. 71RS/SS396

    71RS/SS396 Veteran Member

    Messages:
    2,639
    Likes Received:
    41
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Location:
    Wake Forest NC
    I don't doubt the cubes help but it's not like it's a 100 hp difference like Tom was implying.
     
  9. 71RS/SS396

    71RS/SS396 Veteran Member

    Messages:
    2,639
    Likes Received:
    41
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Location:
    Wake Forest NC
    Sure it will be fun! If you put that bone stock LS3 from the new Camaro in yours it will be faster simply because your car is quite a bit lighter. BTW I don't have an i pod, smart phone, or any other MP3 device to use downloaded music, it's all CDs or over the air music for me :)
     
  10. sbca96

    sbca96 Veteran Member

    Messages:
    2,897
    Likes Received:
    5
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2004
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, Ca
    Speaking of over rating .. back in 2003 at the Certified Stock drag races this '64
    Studebaker Lark ....

    [​IMG]

    went up against this 1969 427 Yenko Camaro.

    [​IMG]

    And BEAT it ... he ran a 111.35 MPH and 12.71 ET. This is a stock 304 cu in
    Studebaker V8 with a 4 barrel Carter AFB and a Paxton supercharger running
    8 pounds of boost.

    The R3 produced 365.1 HP MEASURED AT THE REAR WHEELS with a "loaded"
    drive-train at 5830 RPM! Mind you, this is for an engine that Studebaker rated
    at 335 HP @5300 RPM on the test stand.

    The Internet lists the 427 Yenko as having 450 hp, the owner claimed a dyno
    of 416 hp.

    Not making this up ... feel free to do a search.

    http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=107423&page=1

    Tom
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.