INTERNAL ENGINE MODIFICATIONS Valvetrain |Heads | Strokers | Design | Assembly

5.3 stroker

Old 12-06-2016, 07:21 PM
  #21  
13 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (7)
 
trxmxzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hartland, MI
Posts: 874
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

Found my answer



359ci
Old 12-06-2016, 08:04 PM
  #22  
I have a gauge for that
iTrader: (42)
 
Atomic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 16,252
Received 373 Likes on 254 Posts
Default

Just because someone sells parts for it doesnt mean that its a good idea!
Old 12-06-2016, 08:17 PM
  #23  
13 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (7)
 
trxmxzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hartland, MI
Posts: 874
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Atomic
Just because someone sells parts for it doesnt mean that its a good idea!
I agree!

What I was mostly getting at was someone is doing something I haven't heard of yet (5.3-4" stroke)

Just curious of what the out come of this would've been ( sorry if this is considered hijacking a thread)
Old 12-07-2016, 01:55 AM
  #24  
8 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (32)
 
Blown06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,662
Received 39 Likes on 31 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Atomic
Just because someone sells parts for it doesnt mean that its a good idea!
Yeah but in the case of an iron 5.3, there really is no better combo for a budget motor. By budget I'm talking about anything with 4 head bolts per hole. The iron 5.3 block, because gm also considered using the same casting for the 5.7 liter stuff, has extremely thick cylinder walls. They are capable of being bored to 3.905".

So in this day in age with forced induction technology what it is, a stock bore 5.3 iron block is ******* awesome. The extremely thick cylinder walls add a great deal of rigidity to the block. I'm a die hard "there is no replacement for displacement" advocate, however the idea of a stock bore iron 5.3 with a 4.000"+ crank shaft is the **** in my book.
Old 12-07-2016, 05:25 AM
  #25  
13 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (7)
 
trxmxzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hartland, MI
Posts: 874
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Blown06
Yeah but in the case of an iron 5.3, there really is no better combo for a budget motor. By budget I'm talking about anything with 4 head bolts per hole. The iron 5.3 block, because gm also considered using the same casting for the 5.7 liter stuff, has extremely thick cylinder walls. They are capable of being bored to 3.905".

So in this day in age with forced induction technology what it is, a stock bore 5.3 iron block is ******* awesome. The extremely thick cylinder walls add a great deal of rigidity to the block. I'm a die hard "there is no replacement for displacement" advocate, however the idea of a stock bore iron 5.3 with a 4.000"+ crank shaft is the **** in my book.
Have you heard or seen one done yet? I'm curious of the outcome
Old 01-22-2017, 09:15 PM
  #26  
On The Tree
iTrader: (2)
 
Jermoslin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Longview TX
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Im having an 07 LM7 block rebuilt with .100 over pistons on stock bottom end. Going to use AMS racing to do the work on block too. https://www.amsracing.net/collection...ant=5728423107 I will be using stock 243/799 heads with a very small cam.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:34 PM.