sticking with the 4.8 in my truck...
#31
I've never found anyone that will restall a stock converter any higher than 2000rpm... The case is just too large in diameter... The smaller it is, the easier it is to make it a higher stall speed.
I don't recall them building an SS3400... And honestly I don't remember a 3200, I'd check their website.... I know the 3600 scares most but once you've driven one, you wouldn't have it any other way... Hell, come down and drive mine if you'd like... My truck has sat and collected dust since the weather has gotten nice... I've been racking up the miles on my harley
I don't recall them building an SS3400... And honestly I don't remember a 3200, I'd check their website.... I know the 3600 scares most but once you've driven one, you wouldn't have it any other way... Hell, come down and drive mine if you'd like... My truck has sat and collected dust since the weather has gotten nice... I've been racking up the miles on my harley
#32
Thread Starter
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (14)
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 653
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, TX
I've never found anyone that will restall a stock converter any higher than 2000rpm... The case is just too large in diameter... The smaller it is, the easier it is to make it a higher stall speed.
I don't recall them building an SS3400... And honestly I don't remember a 3200, I'd check their website.... I know the 3600 scares most but once you've driven one, you wouldn't have it any other way... Hell, come down and drive mine if you'd like... My truck has sat and collected dust since the weather has gotten nice... I've been racking up the miles on my harley
I don't recall them building an SS3400... And honestly I don't remember a 3200, I'd check their website.... I know the 3600 scares most but once you've driven one, you wouldn't have it any other way... Hell, come down and drive mine if you'd like... My truck has sat and collected dust since the weather has gotten nice... I've been racking up the miles on my harley
#33
Well the converter is in!!! It is really loose, it was advertised as a 2800, but IMO and the installers opinion it is alot higher... Probably cause it is a 9.5". Makes driving the truck alot of fun, it really made a nice difference... Hopefully new track times next wednesday.... Definately go with the smaller diameter TC.... Let me know when you want to come drive it...
Last edited by BlackGMC; 10-08-2008 at 08:51 PM.
#34
[QUOTE=silver-mod-o;4018870]You can put them on that motor but you will run into slight valve shrouding problems as they are intended to go on a stock LS1 bore. But some run them and claim gains... You will LOSE compression though since the chambers are quite a bit bigger...
QUOTE] i dont know where you got that info but is incorrect. a 4.8/5.3 is same motor. the HO 5.3s use 243 heads. the HO 5.3 still same bore as the 4.8
you wont have shrouding
the flow difference of a 4.8/5.3 head and 241 are the same. I have 241s on my 4.8 to lower teh compression down to around 8.8cr. when i did this i used the factory 5.3HO/5.7 GM MLS gaskets
QUOTE] i dont know where you got that info but is incorrect. a 4.8/5.3 is same motor. the HO 5.3s use 243 heads. the HO 5.3 still same bore as the 4.8
you wont have shrouding
the flow difference of a 4.8/5.3 head and 241 are the same. I have 241s on my 4.8 to lower teh compression down to around 8.8cr. when i did this i used the factory 5.3HO/5.7 GM MLS gaskets
#35
I got that informaton from this website and it was confirmed by Rick @ Synergy motorsports and WCCH when I considered doing 241s on my 5.3 a while back... Valve shrouding would have been the problem on top of the loss in compression because of the bigger chambers. Boost is a different animal when it comes to this, and you made the right move. Hell I've seen 317s on stock 5.3 bores... But also with a turbo... N/A and nitrous are different than f/i in this aspect... There had to be some a reason why I was steered away from those heads by professionals right?
I have always wondered about the factory 243/799s on the later 5.3 and wondered if they were slightly different than previous LS6 heads to accomodate the smaller bores... Maybe, maybe not... I've never had 2 side by side to compare
I have always wondered about the factory 243/799s on the later 5.3 and wondered if they were slightly different than previous LS6 heads to accomodate the smaller bores... Maybe, maybe not... I've never had 2 side by side to compare
#37
I got that informaton from this website and it was confirmed by Rick @ Synergy motorsports and WCCH when I considered doing 241s on my 5.3 a while back... Valve shrouding would have been the problem on top of the loss in compression because of the bigger chambers. Boost is a different animal when it comes to this, and you made the right move. Hell I've seen 317s on stock 5.3 bores... But also with a turbo... N/A and nitrous are different than f/i in this aspect... There had to be some a reason why I was steered away from those heads by professionals right?
I have always wondered about the factory 243/799s on the later 5.3 and wondered if they were slightly different than previous LS6 heads to accomodate the smaller bores... Maybe, maybe not... I've never had 2 side by side to compare
I have always wondered about the factory 243/799s on the later 5.3 and wondered if they were slightly different than previous LS6 heads to accomodate the smaller bores... Maybe, maybe not... I've never had 2 side by side to compare
i was saying shrouding...cause Rick himself installed 317s on his 5.3.
not sure why you were steer'd away. same reason maybe why some ppl are pointed in some directions and in the end it doesnt work...all in what that one person said at that given time with info that person has encouterd
as for the 5.3s....i seen a LS4 apart. i compard the 243s to that of the heads i used to own. both had standard heavy stock valves. only difference was the production year number underneath them. same identical heads
#38
I was steered away because I was looking to add to a n/a setup... You yourself said that they wouldn't be any good for a n/a setup.
I'm sure you have owned both, seen it all, and turned wrenches on every part GM made...
Please, don't pollute this thread George... Like you have so many in the past with your bullshit and attitude. We all know who you are and its only a matter of time till the axe is dropped on your head again... It can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned.
I'm sure you have owned both, seen it all, and turned wrenches on every part GM made...
Please, don't pollute this thread George... Like you have so many in the past with your bullshit and attitude. We all know who you are and its only a matter of time till the axe is dropped on your head again... It can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned.
#39
I was steered away because I was looking to add to a n/a setup... You yourself said that they wouldn't be any good for a n/a setup.
I'm sure you have owned both, seen it all, and turned wrenches on every part GM made...
Please, don't pollute this thread George... Like you have so many in the past with your bullshit and attitude. We all know who you are and its only a matter of time till the axe is dropped on your head again... It can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned.
I'm sure you have owned both, seen it all, and turned wrenches on every part GM made...
Please, don't pollute this thread George... Like you have so many in the past with your bullshit and attitude. We all know who you are and its only a matter of time till the axe is dropped on your head again... It can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned.
#40
not trying to polute. i just stated valve shrouding wouldnt be an issue. as for not good idea yes i said and agree. if that is why you were steer'd it makes sense. steer'd cause of shrouding would be wrong. You have no idea what ive worked on or ownd. AXe was dropped before cause of a cry baby.