Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado)
| [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204634] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 10:12  |
Mr ERFisher
Messages: 7117
Registered: August 2005
Karma: 2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES
One risk of going to a Rally is, your reality gets jerked into some other
area
I was not even thinking about engines when I went to the Amado rally.
and
riding with Manny is always risky business..... :>)
but
*ENGINES*
- if it works - don't fix it
- I know of 3 (current) engines that died from "up grades", causing the
owners to look for rebuilds
- I know of 7 GMCs looking for rebuilt engines - now - which means 10x that
number are possible
- there are only 2 nationally known re-builders - and they are maxed out
- not only are the engines getting older, the re builders are getting
older, or leaving the business
(Dick, Mondello,Lamey, etc)
- we know of 4 or 5 owners who have done more than 3 total engine, R&Rs ,
trying to get a good rebuild
(dan,chuck,jerry,gorgon,nick,jim,etc)
- most of the New/Old rebuilt engines, have to be torn down to see how they
survived
- we know of several who have R&Red their 500's, and 455, more than 3 times
to fix the seals, mains, and intakes, etc
- I talked with 3 Diesel owners, and they cannot tune, repair their own
engines ( GMC, AND SOB)
- an old Diesel is no better and harder to work on
- finding someone to work on your SOB, is more difficult that finding
someone for your GMC
- I know an SOB that spent $5,000 on an engine repair and one that spent
$5,000 on an inverter
*
SOME TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION*
*- there is an out-of-the-box supplier for new, never used, engines (crate
engines) ----GM.*
- Buskirk , and others have used 502 engines, for years
- Tandy has several hundred thousand miles on these engines
- Hal has the stretch, using this engine
- and many more
- they are available in carburetor, and efi , versions
- vendors are starting to think about this direction
-
*ISSUES*
- Manny can bolt-up our tranny to these engines
- You need a pan with a hole in it
- I do not know of any 454 crate engines installed
- there is a move afoot, to use current (modern engines) but the computer
programing is not cheap or easy
- some think 502 engines are not good enough for this use, but there are a
lot of them in place
-
I cannot talk about these issues (not qualified),
but
someone has to start the conversation, (it is a dirty little secret:>)
argggg, why do I go to these rallys :>)
stay tuned, there is much , much, more to come on this topic
Encourage our Vendors
glad I have 2 GMCs, and 3 engines
gene
--
Gene Fisher -- 74-23,77PB/ore/ca
“Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today --- give him a URL and
-------
http://gmcmotorhome.info/
Alternator Protection Cable
http://gmcmotorhome.info/APC.html
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204636 is a reply to message #204634] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 10:23  |
kerry pinkerton
Messages: 2565
Registered: July 2012
Location: Harvest, Al
Karma: 15
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I intended to talk to Dave Lenzi about making 8.2 oil pans while at Dothan and forgot. I've never seen an 8.2 in my life much less an 8.2 modified pan but there is no doubt in my mind that modifying an existing pan or building one from scratch is possible at a reasonable price/effort. In other words, it should not be a show stopper.
Kerry Pinkerton - North Alabama
Had 5 over the years. Currently have a '06 Fleetwood Discovery 39L
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204638 is a reply to message #204636] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 11:04 |
James Hupy
Messages: 6806
Registered: May 2010
Karma: -62
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I am not saying that it won't work, but there is more to it than just sheet
metal work on the oil pan for drive shaft clearance. The crank
configuration with regards to main bearing web location has a HUGE bearing
on which engines will work with the transmission and final drive that the
Gmc has. Olds and Cadillac are a direct bolt in. Chev big blocks, the
engine and trans bolt together and that is where it ceases to be easy.
Given enough CUBIC MONEY, any engine can be made to fit, but the big
question is, "Are there enough compelling positive reasons to do the swap?"
Better fuel economy in the order of 15-17 mph might be a good target. The
diesels will do that, and they don't vapor lock. Spendy rebuilds are the
rule rather than the exception here, and they stink and are noise machines.
Just some thoughts from me.
Jim Hupy
Salem, Or
78 Gmc Royale 403
On Apr 14, 2013 8:23 AM, "Kerry Pinkerton" <Pinkertonk@mchsi.com> wrote:
>
>
> I intended to talk to Dave Lenzi about making 8.2 oil pans while at Dothan
> and forgot. I've never seen an 8.2 in my life much less an 8.2 modified
> pan but there is no doubt in my mind that modifying an existing pan or
> building one from scratch is possible at a reasonable price/effort. In
> other words, it should not be a show stopper.
>
>
> --
> Kerry Pinkerton
>
> North Alabama, near Huntsville,
>
> 77 Eleganza II, "The Lady", 403CI, also a 76 Eleganza being re-bodied as
> an Art Deco car hauler
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204647 is a reply to message #204634] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 13:48 |
Cadillackeeper
Messages: 464
Registered: October 2012
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I got 17 mpg once in my 68 Eldo.Drove from Ft Lauderdale to NYC and back.Got more like 13 on the way home as trunk and back seat were full.It had everything stock except a little modded intake
gasket matched and mild polish/port.stock exhaust manifolds and true duals into 2 dynomaxes mounted sideways.I feel there is no other choices.Olds or giant Cad.Remember the land speed record is held by an iron headed 472/500 at 419 MPH.I get a consistant 12 mpg in my current Eldo combo.I will be tracking coach mileage this week,kinda long trip ahead.
77 455 Elaganza II and 67 Animal, Built 500 Powered Eldo
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204668 is a reply to message #204661] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 17:23 |
mojoe
Messages: 319
Registered: November 2012
Location: Monroe, NC
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Did I not read someplace that someone used a 6.0? Then again I could of been dreaming.
Joe Kemenczky..
1975 Eleganza ll " Odie " 75,000 miles..
"When I was younger, I could remember anything, whether it had happened or not." - Mark Twain.
.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204670 is a reply to message #204661] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 17:46 |
 |
mike miller
Messages: 3576
Registered: February 2004
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| Gary Berry wrote on Sun, 14 April 2013 14:10 |
... I've been trying to find out which crate 502s that Chevy has
that is the one I would need for the Stretch. ...
|
I have thought "a bit out of the box" on this...
For a light coach, JimB has installed a 350 Olds. It bolts right in with "off the shelf" parts... mostly 403 brackets and stuff. But, while "better" availability than the 455 and 403's (They made a LOT of them) I am not convinced of the long term availability of parts for ANY Oldsmobile motor.
I have seen project cars were they used the TH425 (and TH325) transmissions. A very common engine mated to the same transmission we use is the Chevy small block. (SBC) Looking over these projects, they use an oil pan designed for swapping SBC's into 4x4 S10 pick-ups and Blazers. A remote oil filter set-up is also required, but it seems that most everything needed can currently be ordered from many sources. With the smaller deck height (compared to the 455) it should easily fit under a flat engine hatch... as long as you stay way from any high rise manifolds.
Looking around the Internet, I see "lots" of SBC crate motors. I would look for one set-up for truck, towing or other low RPM high torque application. Say what you want about SBC's, upgrades available are almost endless. Turbos, superchargers all kinds of fuel injection.... what do you want? 
They will be making parts for SBC's for a LONG time into the future.
I do not think we are close to the tipping point were rebuild-able 455/403's are to expensive for "common" use...
But I can see that day coming.
Mike Miller -- Hillsboro, OR -- on the Black list
(#2)`78 23' Birchaven Rear Bath -- (#3)`77 23' Birchaven Side Bath
More Sidekicks than GMC's and a late model Malibu called 'Boo'
http://m000035.blogspot.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204671 is a reply to message #204661] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 17:47 |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Found two of those here in Sierra Vista Gary. I told the owner that I
might know folks interested especially since they were such low mileage and
had working turbos.
Steve
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Gary Berry <duallycc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey;
>
> So this should be a pretty good thread. I'm at a crossroads with the
> engine in the Stretch. It still runs good, uses a quart of oil every other
> fillup, has good compression, but I think the timing chain is stretched and
> needs to be replaced. I've always said (at least to Gene and Manny) that
> when it came time to change the engine I would go with the Chevy 6.5 Turbo
> Diesel as others have down. I don't think I would get the 455 rebuilt, but
> I like this 502 idea (I've seen both KerryT's and HalK's setups and they
> are sweet). I've been trying to find out which crate 502s that Chevy has
> that is the one I would need for the Stretch. I can't find the one that has
> the fuel injection, computer, etc. Anybody have a part number? Thanks (and
> thanks to GeneF for starting this thread (and hoping that it doesn't turn
> into a mileage thread)).
> --
> Gary and Diana Berry
> 73 CL Stretch in Wa.
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Take care,
Steve
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204672 is a reply to message #204661] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 17:52 |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Kerry (Ken Rose built) has a 502 and when the dyno shop replaced the
engine, they put peanut port heads on it. The HO 502 heads have gigantic
rectangle ports and those are just not necessary for our application. The
peanut port heads are very popular for big pickups pulling big horse
trailers. Tremendous intake port velocity makes for great throttle
response in a high torque situation. Having said that though, the two that
Ken Rose installed in GMCs were both 500hp marine engines. Kerry's only
went 177,000 miles before an injector leaned out and busted a piston. I
did the post mortem on that one.
Steve
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Gary Berry <duallycc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey;
>
> So this should be a pretty good thread. I'm at a crossroads with the
> engine in the Stretch. It still runs good, uses a quart of oil every other
> fillup, has good compression, but I think the timing chain is stretched and
> needs to be replaced. I've always said (at least to Gene and Manny) that
> when it came time to change the engine I would go with the Chevy 6.5 Turbo
> Diesel as others have down. I don't think I would get the 455 rebuilt, but
> I like this 502 idea (I've seen both KerryT's and HalK's setups and they
> are sweet). I've been trying to find out which crate 502s that Chevy has
> that is the one I would need for the Stretch. I can't find the one that has
> the fuel injection, computer, etc. Anybody have a part number? Thanks (and
> thanks to GeneF for starting this thread (and hoping that it doesn't turn
> into a mileage thread)).
> --
> Gary and Diana Berry
> 73 CL Stretch in Wa.
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Take care,
Steve
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204686 is a reply to message #204634] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 20:36 |
Cadillackeeper
Messages: 464
Registered: October 2012
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I don't know guys but,Even a Pontiac or Buick or another Olds built up 455,would be
smarter,easier and cheaper if you did not go with the Killer Cad.Maybe I would feel different if it was already proven for years and years instead of new low end Chevy.
My Opinion...
77 455 Elaganza II and 67 Animal, Built 500 Powered Eldo
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204705 is a reply to message #204634] |
Sun, 14 April 2013 23:07 |
Chr$
Messages: 2690
Registered: January 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Just back from Amado myself. I missed you Gene and Manny, Bummer. We got there friday evening. (Why don't ralies START on Friday and END on tuesday? By the time us still working stiffs get there, everyone is done and leaving, but that is another topic.)
I'm interested in this topic because I'm on the "need an engine" list for my GMC and with all the stories and problems and money down the drain from others rebuilding geriatric old boat anchor engines, I just gave up, and got a trailer, for now.
I looked at the 502 in the Buskirk stretch. nice setup. Something to consider.
But wait, there's more:
A couple of us were talking about LS6 engine swaps this morning. Now before anyone poo-poos that, think about this:
1. 405HP, 400 TQ (More than the 455)
2. Light Weight
3. All electronics already on board the crate motors
4. ANYONE can work on them
5. Lots of parts, current technology (Well, as ancient Pushrod motors go)
6. Much longer lasting due to precision manufacturing.
http://www.chevroletperformance.com/EngineShowcase/index.jsp?engId=LS6&engine=LS6&sku=17801268&engCat=ls
The average weight of the coaches at the Amado weigh in was around 10K for the 26's and 9K for the 23's, give or take, I was told. I arrived with 11K of Truck and Trailer and got 11 MPG @ 65-70 all the way from Phoenix. (and 10.5 on the way back) This was with a 2009 4.6L 3V Ford Explorer weighing 5K towing a 6K trailer. That's a 281 Cubic Inches guys, 281. Sure, my torque peak is higher, and the little mill winds out on the hills, but with a 6500 RPM redline, and never exceeding 4000 at 85 MPH passing a Semi today I think there is merit in discussing smaller more modern mills. At 65MPH I averaged 2600 RPM with my foot on the gas. with the cruise control on, the computer seemed to think one lower cog (6 speed auto) at 3K RPM was better. I have not digested that yet. I carried a 6% grade for 5 miles at 72MPH last month, never above 4K RPM, PASSING a Tundra, Titan, and 98-ish Silverado all pulling similar trailers. The specs on the mod 4.6 are: HP:292 @ 5700; TQ: 315 @ 4000.
Now an LS-6 isn't a Ford OHC Modular. But it does benefit from all the modern engineering and CNC machining (Discussion with Steve F) and does come ready to run with 12V to the computer module.
There are guys here in Tempe that will mill off your bell housing and bolt/weld whatever you need/want to the tranny to bolt up an engine, or you can go cheap and dirty and use a BOP adapter, if the crank/driveshaft issue can be resolved then perhaps we should look at small block motors. Perhaps I may be the guinea pig on this one. My coach is not going anywhere, and I don't actually need it currently...
Jim Bounds, I forgot to ask you about the Olds 350 coach project (or the new genset) project, but hope you can shed light on that.
Yeah, I'm thinking new LS6 Crate, or very young used Ford 5.4 or V10 Modulars... That's If I decide to re-engine and keep my coach. I think a Diesel clattering below my ass isn't something I'll even consider.
Oh, some other food for thought. I got 8-9 MPG on 87 Unleaded on my last two trips, 10.5-11 on 91 Unleaed on this one. Yeah, the extra $3.60 a tankful is worth it. My in-town non towing MPG is up 1.5-2 also, and the truck runs better on premium (incidentally, my 2001 V6 Explorer did not). Like getting 27-36 MPG on that last gallon.
Some Engine Specs:
Olds 7.5L 455 Cu in: 212 HP @ 3400, 344 ft-lbs @ 2400
Olds 6.6L 403 Cu in: 200 HP @ 3600, 330 ft-lbs @ 2400
Chev LS6 350 Cu in: 405 HP @ 6000, 400 ft-lbs @ 4800
Chev 8.2 502 Cu in: 502 HP @ ??? 567 ft-lbs @ ??? (already in RV's)
Ford 4.6 281 Cu in: 292 HP @ 5700, 315 ft-lbs @ 4000
Ford 5.4 329 Cu in: 310 HP @ 5000, 365 ft-lbs @ 3500
Ford V10 415 Cu in: 362 HP @ 4750, 457 ft-lbs @ 3250 (already in RV's)
-Chr$: Perpetual SmartAss
Scottsdale, AZ
77 Ex-Kingsley 455 SOLD!
2010 Nomad 24 Ft TT 390W PV W/MPPT, EV4010 and custom cargo door.
Photosite: Chrisc GMC:"It has Begun" TT: "The Other Woman"
[Updated on: Sun, 14 April 2013 23:11] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204709 is a reply to message #204708] |
Mon, 15 April 2013 01:08 |
Chr$
Messages: 2690
Registered: January 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
My point listing the V10 and 8.2, At what point is too much too much?
Looking at my list, the OHC's develop more HP and TQ per Cu In, but at higher RPM, as expected, but look at the 402/455, HP and TQ similar to the smaller OHC V8's. Sure the Big Chev V8 and Ford V10 generate gobbs of both, they are newer designs, and a bit of overkill, at least the Chevy. I guess what I am trying to say is that todays smaller engines perform as well as or better than yesterdays big blocks.
Modern engine management comes into play, I mentioned that I never exceeded 4000 RPM at any cruise speed, the computer saw to that. Kept the motor at the torque peak without my even paying attention to it.
Just too many unknowns in a rebuild for me, regardless of who does it.
| JohnL455 wrote on Sun, 14 April 2013 22:39 |
Then there was the phrase " There's no substitute for cubic inches".
|
-Chr$: Perpetual SmartAss
Scottsdale, AZ
77 Ex-Kingsley 455 SOLD!
2010 Nomad 24 Ft TT 390W PV W/MPPT, EV4010 and custom cargo door.
Photosite: Chrisc GMC:"It has Begun" TT: "The Other Woman"
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204712 is a reply to message #204634] |
Mon, 15 April 2013 06:42 |
g.winger
Messages: 792
Registered: February 2008
Location: Warrenton,Missouri
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
|
Remember,,, a 502 and a 496 are diffrent engines. Dave L. installed a L18 496, not a 502. ,,,,,PL
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204713 is a reply to message #204705] |
Mon, 15 April 2013 07:23 |
jhbridges
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I've run the V-10 Ford cammers in commercial service since they came out - never had a bit of trouble with them. Change the oil, and go. If it would fit without the world to make it fit, I'd stuff one in a coach in a minute.
--johnny
'76 23' transmode norris
'76 palm beach
________________________________
From: Chris Choffat <cchoffataz@yahoo.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 12:07 AM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado)
Just back from Amado myself. I missed you Gene and Manny, Bummer. We got there friday evening. (Why don't ralies START on Friday and END on tuesday? By the us still working stiffs get there, everyone is done and leaving, but that is another topic.)
I'm interested in this topic because I'm on the "need an engine" list for my GMC and with all the stories and problems and money down the drain from others rebuilding geriatric old boat anchor engines, I just gave up, and got a trailer, for now.
I looked at the 502 in the Buskirk stretch. nice setup. Something to consider.
But wait, there's more:
A couple of us were talking about LS6 engine swaps this morning. Now before anyone poo-poos that, think about this:
1. 405HP, 400 TQ (More than the 455)
2. Light Weight
3. All electronics already on board the crate motors
4. ANYONE can work on them
5. Lots of parts, current technology (Well, as ancient Pushrod motors go)
6. Much longer lasting due to precision manufacturing.
http://www.chevroletperformance.com/EngineShowcase/index.jsp?engId=LS6&engine=LS6&sku=17801268&engCat=ls
The average weight of the coaches at the Amado weigh in was around 10K for the 26's and 9K for the 23's, give or take, I was told. I arrived with 11K of Truck and Trailer and got 11 MPG @ 65-70 all the way from Phoenix. (and 10.5 on the way back) This was with a 2009 4.6L 3V Ford Explorer weighing 5K towing a 6K trailer. That's a 281 Cubic Inches guys, 281. Sure, my torque peak is higher, and the little mill winds out on the hills, but with a 6500 RPM redline, and never exceeding 4000 at 85 MPH passing a Semi today I think there is merit in discussing smaller more modern mills. At 65MPH I averaged 2600 RPM with my foot on the gas. with the cruise control on, the computer seemed to think one lower cog (6 speed auto) at 3K RPM was better. I have not digested that yet. I carried a 6% grade for 5 miles at 72MPH last month, never above 4K RPM, PASSING a Tundra, Titan, and 98-ish Silverado all pulling similar trailers. The specs on the mod 4.6 are: HP:292 @
5700; TQ: 315 @ 4000.
Now an LS-6 isn't a Ford OHC Modular. But it does benefit from all the modern engineering and CNC machining (Discussion with Steve F) and does come ready to run with 12V to the computer module.
There are guys here in Tempe that will mill off your bell housing and bolt/weld whatever you need/want to the tranny to bolt up an engine, or you can go cheap and dirty and use a BOP adapter, if the crank/driveshaft issue can be resolved then perhaps we should look at small block motors. Perhaps I may be the guinea pig on this one. My coach is not going anywhere, and I don't actually need it currently...
Jim Bounds, I forgot to ask you about the Olds 350 coach project (or the new genset) project, but hope you can shed light on that.
Yeah, I'm thinking new LS6 Crate, or very young used Ford 5.4 or V10 Modulars... That's If I decide to re-engine and keep my coach. I think a Diesel clattering below my ass isn't something I'll even consider.
Oh, some other food for thought. I got 8-9 MPG on 87 Unleaded on my last two trips, 10.5-11 on 91 Unleaed on this one. Yeah, the extra $3.60 a tankful is worth it. My in-town non towing MPG is up 1.5-2 also, and the truck runs better (incidentally, my 2001 V6 Explorer did not). Like getting 27-36 MPG on that last gallon.
Some Engine Specs:
Olds 7.5L 455 Cu in: 212 HP @ 3400, 344 ft-lbs @ 2400
Olds 6.6L 403 Cu in: 200 HP @ 3600, 330 ft-lbs @ 2400
Chev LS6 350 Cu in: 405 HP @ 6000, 400 ft-lbs @ 4800
Chev 502 502 Cu in: 502 HP @ ??? 567 ft-lbs @ ??? (already in RV's)
Ford 4.6 281 Cu in: 292 HP @ 5700, 315 ft-lbs @ 4000
Ford 5.4 329 Cu in: 310 HP @ 5000, 365 ft-lbs @ 3500
Ford V10 415 Cu in: 362 HP @ 4750, 457 ft-lbs @ 3250 (already in RV's)
--
-Chr$: Perpetual SmartAss
Scottsdale, AZ
77 Ex-Kingsley Featuring: 455, Power Drive, 3:21, Rockwell, Jim B QJET, Qbag. Now for Sale
2010 Nomad 24 Ft Travel Trailer
Photosite: Chrisc "It has Begun"
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204715 is a reply to message #204713] |
Mon, 15 April 2013 07:47 |
Mr ERFisher
Messages: 7117
Registered: August 2005
Karma: 2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
none of these engines, are going to work
the only thing that works is
- a vendor supply's a drop-in kit
- it has been done before, and shown to work
- it is cost-effective for replacement
- it lasts forever :>)
-
most of these folks want a cheap replacement engine that will run forever
gene
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:23 AM, Johnny Bridges <jhbridges@ymail.com> wrote:
> I've run the V-10 Ford cammers in commercial service since they came out -
> never had a bit of trouble with them. Change the oil, and go. If it would
> fit without the world to make it fit, I'd stuff one in a coach in a minute.
>
> --johnny
> '76 23' transmode norris
> '76 palm beach
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Chris Choffat <cchoffataz@yahoo.com>
> To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 12:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado)
>
>
>
>
> Just back from Amado myself. I missed you Gene and Manny, Bummer. We got
> there friday evening. (Why don't ralies START on Friday and END on tuesday?
> By the us still working stiffs get there, everyone is done and leaving, but
> that is another topic.)
>
> I'm interested in this topic because I'm on the "need an engine" list for
> my GMC and with all the stories and problems and money down the drain from
> others rebuilding geriatric old boat anchor engines, I just gave up, and
> got a trailer, for now.
>
> I looked at the 502 in the Buskirk stretch. nice setup. Something to
> consider.
>
> But wait, there's more:
>
> A couple of us were talking about LS6 engine swaps this morning. Now
> before anyone poo-poos that, think about this:
>
> 1. 405HP, 400 TQ (More than the 455)
> 2. Light Weight
> 3. All electronics already on board the crate motors
> 4. ANYONE can work on them
> 5. Lots of parts, current technology (Well, as ancient Pushrod motors go)
> 6. Much longer lasting due to precision manufacturing.
>
>
> http://www.chevroletperformance.com/EngineShowcase/index.jsp?engId=LS6&engine=LS6&sku=17801268&engCat=ls
>
> The average weight of the coaches at the Amado weigh in was around 10K for
> the 26's and 9K for the 23's, give or take, I was told. I arrived with 11K
> of Truck and Trailer and got 11 MPG @ 65-70 all the way from Phoenix. (and
> 10.5 on the way back) This was with a 2009 4.6L 3V Ford Explorer weighing
> 5K towing a 6K trailer. That's a 281 Cubic Inches guys, 281. Sure, my
> torque peak is higher, and the little mill winds out on the hills, but with
> a 6500 RPM redline, and never exceeding 4000 at 85 MPH passing a Semi today
> I think there is merit in discussing smaller more modern mills. At 65MPH I
> averaged 2600 RPM with my foot on the gas. with the cruise control on, the
> computer seemed to think one lower cog (6 speed auto) at 3K RPM was better.
> I have not digested that yet. I carried a 6% grade for 5 miles at 72MPH
> last month, never above 4K RPM, PASSING a Tundra, Titan, and 98-ish
> Silverado all pulling similar trailers. The specs on the mod 4.6 are:
> HP:292 @
> 5700; TQ: 315 @ 4000.
>
> Now an LS-6 isn't a Ford OHC Modular. But it does benefit from all the
> modern engineering and CNC machining (Discussion with Steve F) and does
> come ready to run with 12V to the computer module.
>
> There are guys here in Tempe that will mill off your bell housing and
> bolt/weld whatever you need/want to the tranny to bolt up an engine, or you
> can go cheap and dirty and use a BOP adapter, if the crank/driveshaft issue
> can be resolved then perhaps we should look at small block motors. Perhaps
> I may be the guinea pig on this one. My coach is not going anywhere, and I
> don't actually need it currently...
>
> Jim Bounds, I forgot to ask you about the Olds 350 coach project (or the
> new genset) project, but hope you can shed light on that.
>
> Yeah, I'm thinking new LS6 Crate, or very young used Ford 5.4 or V10
> Modulars... That's If I decide to re-engine and keep my coach. I think a
> Diesel clattering below my ass isn't something I'll even consider.
>
> Oh, some other food for thought. I got 8-9 MPG on 87 Unleaded on my last
> two trips, 10.5-11 on 91 Unleaed on this one. Yeah, the extra $3.60 a
> tankful is worth it. My in-town non towing MPG is up 1.5-2 also, and the
> truck runs better (incidentally, my 2001 V6 Explorer did not). Like
> getting 27-36 MPG on that last gallon.
>
> Some Engine Specs:
>
> Olds 7.5L 455 Cu in: 212 HP @ 3400, 344 ft-lbs @ 2400
> Olds 6.6L 403 Cu in: 200 HP @ 3600, 330 ft-lbs @ 2400
> Chev LS6 350 Cu in: 405 HP @ 6000, 400 ft-lbs @ 4800
> Chev 502 502 Cu in: 502 HP @ ??? 567 ft-lbs @ ??? (already in
> RV's)
> Ford 4.6 281 Cu in: 292 HP @ 5700, 315 ft-lbs @ 4000
> Ford 5.4 329 Cu in: 310 HP @ 5000, 365 ft-lbs @ 3500
> Ford V10 415 Cu in: 362 HP @ 4750, 457 ft-lbs @ 3250 (already in RV's)
>
> --
> -Chr$: Perpetual SmartAss
> Scottsdale, AZ
> 77 Ex-Kingsley Featuring: 455, Power Drive, 3:21, Rockwell, Jim B QJET,
> Qbag. Now for Sale
> 2010 Nomad 24 Ft Travel Trailer
>
> Photosite: Chrisc "It has Begun"
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Gene Fisher -- 74-23,77PB/ore/ca
“Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today --- give him a URL and
-------
http://gmcmotorhome.info/
Alternator Protection Cable
http://gmcmotorhome.info/APC.html
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] THOUGHTS ON GMC ENGINES (post Amado) [message #204719 is a reply to message #204670] |
Mon, 15 April 2013 09:14 |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The SBC workhorse of present is the 6.2 It is the gas alternative to the
Duramax and has the same GVW (22,000 lbs). This engine is available over
the counter in crate form. There are several versions of this engine
available: http://www.gmperformancemotor.com/parts/19271821.html
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Mike Miller <m000035@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Gary Berry wrote on Sun, 14 April 2013 14:10
> > ... I've been trying to find out which crate 502s that Chevy has
> > that is the one I would need for the Stretch. ...
>
>
> I have thought "a bit out of the box" on this...
>
> For a light coach, JimB has installed a 350 Olds. It bolts right in with
> "off the shelf" parts... mostly 403 brackets and stuff. But, while
> "better" availability than the 455 and 403's (They made a LOT of them) I am
> not convinced of the long term availability of parts for ANY Oldsmobile
> motor.
>
> I have seen project cars were they used the TH425 (and TH325)
> transmissions. A very common engine mated to the same transmission we use
> is the Chevy small block. (SBC) Looking over these projects, they use an
> oil pan designed for swapping SBC's into 4x4 S10 pick-ups and Blazers. A
> remote oil filter set-up is also required, but it seems that most
> everything needed can currently be ordered from many sources. With the
> smaller deck height (compared to the 455) it should easily fit under a flat
> engine hatch... as long as you stay way from any high rise manifolds.
>
> Looking around the Internet, I see "lots" of SBC crate motors. I would
> look for one set-up for truck, towing or other low RPM high torque
> application. Say what you want about SBC's, upgrades available are almost
> endless. Turbos, superchargers all kinds of fuel injection.... what do you
> want? :twisted:
>
> They will be making parts for SBC's for a LONG time into the future.
>
> I do not think we are close to the tipping point were rebuild-able
> 455/403's are to expensive for "common" use...
>
> But I can see that day coming.
>
>
> --
> Mike Miller -- Hillsboro, OR -- on the Black list
> (#1)'73 26' exPainted D. -- (#2)`78 23' Birchaven Rear Bath -- (#3)`77 23'
> Birchaven Side Bath
> http://m000035.blogspot.com
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Take care,
Steve
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Sep 06 11:02:35 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02136 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
