5.3 stroker
Dec 6, 2016 | 08:17 PM
#23
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)
Dec 7, 2016 | 01:55 AM
#24
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.
Dec 7, 2016 | 05:25 AM
#25
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.
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.
Jan 22, 2017 | 09:15 PM
#26
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.