5.3 pinged, LS1 or LQ9?
09-05-2009, 06:35 AM
#21
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Edinburg, Texas
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah the lq9 was more expensive and most everyone i asked recommended i get the lq4. I'm probably going to sell my 220/220 cam and get something bigger for it later on. Til then i'm gonna be a cheapskate on an 87 octane tune lol. I'd like to get nitrous but I'd really like to have a procharger or TVS supercharger. 
09-05-2009, 07:46 AM
#22
In 05 up the LQ4 got the LS2 style rod.
supposedly the Lq9's got them in late 03 early 04
No one seems to be 100% but I guess there was a mid year design change at some point in 03 production of the LQ9.
1500 is alot of money for one. the only thing that is really different between an LQ4 and an LQ9 is the piston. LQ9 has the same floating pin flat top piston from the LS2 motor and the LQ4's will have a dish piston. early ones will be pressed and 05 up will be Floating.
supposedly the Lq9's got them in late 03 early 04
No one seems to be 100% but I guess there was a mid year design change at some point in 03 production of the LQ9.
1500 is alot of money for one. the only thing that is really different between an LQ4 and an LQ9 is the piston. LQ9 has the same floating pin flat top piston from the LS2 motor and the LQ4's will have a dish piston. early ones will be pressed and 05 up will be Floating.
(I'd be even more proud of it if it were together and running lol)
09-05-2009, 11:55 PM
#27
5.3L, 5.7L & 6.0L LQ4's would have a rod with casting number 143 BW on the side of the cap.
4.8L's would have had an 121 BW casting number.
Beings we are talking about your motor, these numbers should be correct. These were casting numbers used through '04.
If you were looking for rods by part number:
LS1/LQ4 = 12568734
LQ9 = 12567583
LS2 = 12577583
L92 = 12604629
LS3 = 12617570 also listed as a replacement for the LS2
09-06-2009, 12:11 PM
#28
Look for a casting number on the side of the cap. If it is 123/145 you have a LQ9 rod, not to mention if it is bushed for a floating pin.
5.3L, 5.7L & 6.0L LQ4's would have a rod with casting number 143 BW on the side of the cap.
4.8L's would have had an 121 BW casting number.
Beings we are talking about your motor, these numbers should be correct. These were casting numbers used through '04.
If you were looking for rods by part number:
LS1/LQ4 = 12568734
LQ9 = 12567583
LS2 = 12577583
L92 = 12604629
LS3 = 12617570 also listed as a replacement for the LS2
5.3L, 5.7L & 6.0L LQ4's would have a rod with casting number 143 BW on the side of the cap.
4.8L's would have had an 121 BW casting number.
Beings we are talking about your motor, these numbers should be correct. These were casting numbers used through '04.
If you were looking for rods by part number:
LS1/LQ4 = 12568734
LQ9 = 12567583
LS2 = 12577583
L92 = 12604629
LS3 = 12617570 also listed as a replacement for the LS2
The block is out of an 03 so it could go either way.
09-06-2009, 01:33 PM
#30
TECH Veteran
I would take the LQ9 over any of them. The LS1's are a great motor and lighter weight with the aluminum block. The downside is that they come out of cars that people buy just to beat on. If you buy a pre-01' LS1 make sure to change the rod bolts. I recomend the Katech bolts. The LQ4 to me is only worth it if you buy it cheap. I did this for my wife's Tahoe and used 5.3L heads to up the compression. The LQ9 comes with the better rods and the flat top pistons are a better thing. One of my friends has ran his LQ9 to over 20psi of boost and regularly runs to just shy of 20psi with it. The LQ9 will be just fine in an every day street vehicle at 10-12psi with fueling and spark right. The LQ9 holds up just fine to rpm also as many have turned them 7k without any problems. If performance is the idea and you can afford the LQ9 that's what I'd go with. They hold boost, nitrous, and high rpm just fine. For the Gen III motors they are the big cube best compression option and very hard to beat.