GM Engine & Exhaust Performance EFI | GEN I/GEN II/GEN III/GEN IV Engines |Small Block | Big Block |

Looking at options...5.3L

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 06:27 PM
  #1  
YenkoST's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
20 Year Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 4
From: GA
Default Looking at options...5.3L

I have an '07 Classic 5.3L Flex-fuel with ported manifolds, Corsa cat-back, AEM CAI, Factory e-fans, and tuned with 3.23s and Silverado SS wheels. A stall converter is not an option and must retain the mpg I'm getting. I have a friend with an LS2 TB SS. He is looking at a cam and heads for it. However, I could get the LS2 (204/211) cam and heads. I know the heads flow better but the combustion chambers are bigger thus my compression would go down so I would have to mill the heads to keep compression up. Probably mill them down to 58cc to bump the compression up to roughly 9.75:1. What can I expect to see in the powerband and overall gain in hp/torque from this? I wouldn't expect mpg to suffer much since I'm keeping the cam small.

Thanks!
Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 06:37 PM
  #2  
2007chevy5.3l's Avatar
TECH Addict
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,625
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Default

Man, seems like a lot of work and money for such small gains
Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 07:30 PM
  #3  
HoveyBayou's Avatar
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 123
Likes: 1
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Default

20 RWHP, I wouldn't be surprised.

You would be faster with gears, that thing must suck to drive with 3.23s. 3.90s would probably make your gas mileage improve if anything, expecially with those wheels. Just because your engine will be turning more RPMs doesn't mean mileage will suffer. If an engine is being lugged like yours is it has to work to get into an RPM range that will make some power, which wastes fuel uneccessarily.
Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 08:11 PM
  #4  
05RST2NV's Avatar
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 751
Likes: 1
From: Brandon, MS
Default

My 05 RST came stock with 3:73s and believe it or not but with running 20" rims, the gas milage got better when i went to 4:10s. The motor didnt lug as much and no longer downshifted when the cruise is set.
Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 08:26 PM
  #5  
YenkoST's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
20 Year Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 4
From: GA
Default

Thanks guys with the input but gears are staying for a while...knocking out 21mpg going to work city driving and 24 mpg on the hwy so....can't complain with that.
....hand calculated...no DIC crap.

Thats what I was thinking....it wouldn't be much....I'll save the money for my project truck then.

Thanks.
Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 08:30 PM
  #6  
YenkoST's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
20 Year Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 4
From: GA
Default

Originally Posted by HoveyBayou
20 RWHP, I wouldn't be surprised.

You would be faster with gears, that thing must suck to drive with 3.23s. 3.90s would probably make your gas mileage improve if anything, expecially with those wheels. Just because your engine will be turning more RPMs doesn't mean mileage will suffer. If an engine is being lugged like yours is it has to work to get into an RPM range that will make some power, which wastes fuel uneccessarily.
Not really concerned about being faster...if I did, I'd go TVS or 6.0L....just trying to make my daily driver a bit more enjoyable withotu spending a ton of money since I have a project truck that takes all of it anyways.
Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 08:41 PM
  #7  
HoveyBayou's Avatar
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 123
Likes: 1
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Default

Those are some impressive fuel economy numbers. Sounds like the 3.23s have there place.
Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 10:12 PM
  #8  
YenkoST's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
20 Year Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 4
From: GA
Default

Yeah, I'd have to admit...I'm impressed with the 3.23s with the 275/55R20 tire. It does struggle a bit down low around 1200-1600rpms but other than that...it moves along pretty well....similiar to my 2002 I had that was a Z71 and 3.73 gears.

All my mods are Corsa Cat-back, AEM CAI, throttle body bypass, factory e-fans, billet servos, and the Big 3. The Big 3 did help with fuel economy as well. I'm also running non-ethonal Marine Gas that's 89 octane which gave me another 1 mpg.

I'll be doing gears though....my 1990 has 3.73s and I'm going 4.10s in it and I'm going to take my 3.73s and put them in my 2007 since the gear sets are interchangable with the proper bearings.
Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 11:41 PM
  #9  
Camaro Zach's Avatar
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
From: Alvin/Friendswood Texas
Default

21 is pretty good. Here are some of my numbers from back in the day... I don't calculate it anymore lmao

Pretty similar setups. Mine was STOCK 06 ccsb 5.3/60e/ 3.73's and ss 20's on 275/55's (magnaflow/cai only)

Reply
Old Jun 7, 2010 | 11:44 PM
  #10  
cdub81's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
From: ft worth texas
Default

Originally Posted by Camaro Zach
21 is pretty good. Here are some of my numbers from back in the day... I don't calculate it anymore lmao

Pretty similar setups. Mine was STOCK 06 ccsb 5.3/60e/ 3.73's and ss 20's on 275/55's (magnaflow/cai only)

damn now that's getting dirty with the fuel mileage nice setup though haven't seen anybody do it like that before and thats funny u see a 15 dollar rise in gas from feb to june for the same 18 gallons
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:30 AM.