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

4.8 vs 5.3

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 10, 2006 | 09:24 AM
  #11  
regency's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (15)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,961
Likes: 3
From: Alexandria, LA
Default

so ??? basically the 4.8 is a better motor over the 5.3. a little less HP but a lil more TQ??? i dont understand
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 09:30 AM
  #12  
Big ED's Avatar
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Pearl,MS
Default I always heard bigger was better.

No replacement for displacement!!!
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 11:00 AM
  #13  
Pjstucn's Avatar
TECH Apprentice
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
From: Merrillville, Indiana
Default

Originally Posted by Big ED
No replacement for displacement!!!

Not always true, cause if u have say a stock 5.7 350, and go to 383, with a better set of heads or cam or intake, or a power adder, u wont gain much of anything
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 11:20 AM
  #14  
TXsilverado's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
Loved
Liked
Community Favorite
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 18,364
Likes: 292
From: Humble Texas
Default

Originally Posted by regency
so ??? basically the 4.8 is a better motor over the 5.3. a little less HP but a lil more TQ??? i dont understand
he was joking about the superior motor...5.3 is the better motor of the 2
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 12:08 PM
  #15  
silver-mod-o's Avatar
Hunt&Fisherator
iTrader: (15)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 14,314
Likes: 17
From: SETx
Default

while the 5.3 only has 10 more hp, it has a lot more in Tq like 330 (I think)... its a substantial difference though over the 4.8....

no replacement for displacement
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 12:12 PM
  #16  
METALMULISHA777's Avatar
On The Tree
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
From: MA
Default

Originally Posted by Big ED
No replacement for displacement!!!
yep lol
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 12:17 PM
  #17  
Hydramatic's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
From: New Braunfels, TX
Default

But the 5.3 has a lower oil capacity to displacement ratio. And the 4.8L is closer to making 1hp to ci than the 5.3L. just my .02.
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 12:30 PM
  #18  
speedy02's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
From: Fort Myers, FL
Default

5.3 pawah!!
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 12:48 PM
  #19  
TurboGibbs's Avatar
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,257
Likes: 0
From: Decatur, AL
Default

I really have no idea why gm built the 4.8. Why do they need it? In 2005 the 4.8 285hp 295tq, 5.3 295hp 330tq. With the same heads & cam the larger cubes will basically always make more tq but often the smaller cubes can make more hp at a higher rpm. It takes tq to make hp, just always keep that in mind.
Reply
Old May 10, 2006 | 01:07 PM
  #20  
Hydramatic's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
From: New Braunfels, TX
Default

How true.... I'm thinking the 4.8L is there for the average fuel economy thing, or to give customers a "higher-value option" for their trucks and SUVs. That's kinda like how they have the new 3.6L and 3.9L, both are pretty much identical, except for internal dimensions, and fairly similar output-wise.

GM is starting to look like early 70's Mopar...
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:49 AM.