Engine Swap Tomorrow

[Mudsport96]

Cam comparisons

Richard holdener did a cam comparison on a 5.3. So yes the torque will be down compared to a 6.0 but results will be the same, just higher numbers.
The ls6 cam is bigger than the LS1 cam by a fair amount. So when you get to the LS1 part of the video i would guess that you could add 5 to 10 more lb ft of torque lost to the ls6 cam.

 

[m1949]

Here is an informative youtube video by SDPC on the LS364/450HP. In it they specifically mention this engine is well suited for a NBS truck swap.

 

[m1949]

Transmission has no affect on what stall you need, engine combo does.
I really am interested in seeing how this swap goes driveability wise. That cam is leaned more towards a hotrod swap with power and torque coming in pretty high up the rev range. And rec port heads lose out on torque to cathedral heads down low as well.
While it will most certainly make more power than the original engine, i think it may get fewer mpgs and feel hindered by a tight truck converter in a heavy vehicle.

I've heard your concern expressed before here. But, GM doesn't seem to share it. Here is a youtube video by Scoggin-Dickey Parts Center, who imply they were involved in at least the conceptual development of this engine. In the video they promote using the LS364 in NBS trucks and SUVs and intimate GM Performance had this market segment in mind as part of its target market.

 

[m1949]

Here's another informative cam comparison. SDPC tested cams using a 5.3L with TBSS manifold/rails/injectors with stock cam for a baseline. They then test 2 of their own versions of LS6 cams. The stock cam setup produced ~350f/lb lowend torque at 2700rpms and 395f/lb at 6300rpms. They call their LS6 cams LS6 power Max and LS6 Power Max Plus. The milder of the two, the LS6 Power Max, is spec'd at 204/222, .551/.570 lift and 112lsa. That is slightly more agressive than the LS6 cam GM Performance uses in the LS364, which specs at 204/218, .550/.55o lift and 117.5lsa. The SDPC LS6 cam dyno'd almost identical low end torque as the stock 5.3L cam at ~347f/lb at 2700rpms, but increased top end torque to 426f/lbs. What I find interesting is their LS6 style Power Max cam initially produced a fraction less torque at the low end but by 3000rpms was producing more torque than the 5.3L stock cam and continued to throughout the rest of the run up to 6300rpms.

 

[Mudsport96]

Well i am interested in seeing how it works. But i personally wouldnt go below 3.73s, i think it would lug the engine too much. Hell even a bone stock vehicle should have those at a minimum, ive thought about swapping my 3.42s for 3.73s just for a little better driveability around town.

Oh... also we want dyno sheets. They are exciting.

 

[m1949]

I too am excited about seeing dyno results.

I found another informative video on youtube by POWERNATION of an LQ9 in which they swapped the stock cam for a comp cam. They dyno'd the stock cam for a baseline and then dyno'd the comp cam using different timing settings. The stock cam at 22* timing advance produced 380/432ft/lbs torque and 370hp. The comp cam is spec'd at 231intake/239exhaust, 0.617intake lift/0.624exhaust lift @ .050" duration, 113LSA. The baseline "truck" advance for the comp cam was 22* and produced 345ft/lbs at 3000rpms, 450ft/lbs torque at 6300rpms and 435hp. But, by advancing timing to 26* they got 410low end/449max ft/lbs torque and 450hp. At 28* timing advance they got 415/457ft/lbs and 464hp. All the runs were 3000 to 6300rpms. Their results suggest tweaking timing can improve low end torque.

My truck is getting a tune based on it's setup and information the tuner gets from me about driving habits and the performance/fuel efficiency goals I have in mind. With this information, the tuner/programmer will do a general tune. Then, he will drive the truck for a week to collect data and tweak the tune. My guess is he will do a number of dyno tests during the process. I plan to ask for copies of all the tests; and I'll post some of them.

 

[Mudsport96]

I too am excited about seeing dyno results.

I found another informative video on youtube by POWERNATION of an LQ9 in which they swapped the stock cam for a comp cam. They dyno'd the stock cam for a baseline and then dyno'd the comp cam using different timing settings. The stock cam at 22* timing advance produced 380/432ft/lbs torque and 370hp. The comp cam is spec'd at 231intake/239exhaust, 617intake lift/624exhaust lift, .50/.50, 113LSA. The baseline "truck" advance for the comp cam was 22* and produced 345ft/lbs at 3000rpms, 450ft/lbs torque at 6300rpms and 435hp. But, by advancing timing to 26* they got 410/449ft/lbs torque and 450hp. At 28* timing advance they got 415/457ft/lbs and 464hp. All the runs were 3000 to 6300rpms. Their results suggest tweaking timing can improve low end torque.

My truck is getting a tune based on it's setup and information the tuner gets from me about driving habits and the performance/fuel efficiency goals I have in mind. With this information, the tuner/programmer will do a general tune. Then, he will drive the truck for a week to collect data and tweak the tune. My guess is he will do a number of dyno tests during the process. I plan to ask for copies of all the tests; and I'll post some of them.

Ive always been a big believer that gm handicapped the stock LQ4 with a bad cam from the factory. It is supposed to be the same as the LS1 cam. Which even though it has a low .050 duration, the overall it still has a long .006 duration that kills DCR. But... thats part of the power vs warranty game, it has to last till gm doesnt have to fix it on their dime. Thats why aftermarket companies get better numbers with similar 0.050 duration numbers. The lower the overall duration and speed the opening and closing events to get the valve to peak lift faster then hurry to get it shut to have a better cylinder charge. And they dont worry about longevity because there is no warranty they really have to cover.

 

[mattt]

Just heard from the builder they are swapping the stock 6.0L in my 06 Escalade tomorrow! I'll be headed up that way on Tuesday and will post some photos then. This is what we are replacing it with, along with TBSS intake and fuel injectors and Summit Racing shortie headers.

---

LS364/450​

View attachment 361565
LS364/450

---

LS364/450 Tech Specs

• Part Number: 19370163
• Engine Type: Performance LQ9 long-block
• Displacement (cu. in.): 364 cu. in. (6.0L)
• Bore x Stroke (in.): 4.000 x 3.622 in. (101.6 x 92 mm)
• Block: Cast iron with 6-bolt block,
  cross-bolted main caps
• Crankshaft: Nodular iron
• Connecting Rods: Powdered metal
• Pistons: Hypereutectic aluminum
• Camshaft Type (P/N 12565308): LS6 hydraulic roller
• Valve Lift (in.): 0.550 intake/0.550 exhaust
• Camshaft Duration (@0.050 in.): 204º intake/218º exhaust
• Cylinder Heads: LS3 rectangular port; aluminum,
  as-cast with 68cc chambers
• Valve Size (in.): 2.165 intake (hollow stem)
  1.590 exhaust (solid stem)
• Compression Ratio: 10.3:1 (nominal)
• Rocker Arms: Investment cast, roller bearing
  trunnion
• Rocker Arm Ratio: 1.7:1
• Recommended Fuel: Premium pump
• Maximum Recommended rpm: 6800
• Reluctor Wheel: 24X
• Balanced: Internal

Congratulations on the new power plant. Just wondering, what happened with the original engine that you're replacing it? It sounds like you're having the swap done by a shop?
I am in the same boat with a lq9 swap right now, but I didn't find a local shop that wanted the job. I suspect they all shy'd away from it because of the unknown going from a 5.3 to 6.0. My swap is going from a 5.3 FF in an 04 Tahoe to a warmed up lq9 I had built. The original 5.3 is out now and I'm cleaning everything, prior to dropping the 6.0 in. Since time to work on it is in short supply with work, family, etc, it is slow going. My lq9 6.0 is set up a little different than yours. Kept the cathedral port heads and went with a Summit truck cam, 8718R1. I'd like to have it dyno'd to know what it's putting out, not sure if I'll have it on the roller though. I do plan to have the ECU tuned.

I'll be interested to see and hear how yours turns out once it's all said and done. If you don't mind me asking, what is the engine swap (labor cost) costing if you know? Not sure where you are, but here in SoCal everything is on the pricey end of the spectrum. That pushed me to tackle it myself after not getting any positive results for a shop to do the job.

 

[m1949]

You asked, "Just wondering, what happened with the original engine that you're replacing it? It sounds like you're having the swap done by a shop?"

The guy doing the build wants the engine, so we included it as partial payment for the build. It's a good engine. It has around 150K miles on it; and, like the rest of the truck, was treated well by previous owners.

Too bad you aren't convenient to N. AL. I just paid the labor bill for the swap, plus installing new fuel pump, catch can, power-steering pump, alternator, starter, A/C compressor and general engine buttonup and service of the rear differential. It came to $1500; of course, that's labor only. The builder's son did the swap. He has his own shop and a good bit of his business is hotrod mods to GM trucks and cars. I asked him for a business card this morning when I paid for the swap. He gave me a funny look and said, "I don't have cards. I have so much business now and I'm so behind, I don't know how backed up I'd get if I start advertising."

 

[m1949]

Out with the Old!

Well, I won't be there when the new motor is fired up for the first time, but I did get photos of them removing the old LQ9.

The fellow holding the flywheel in photo 3 is the builder.

Last photo shows the wheels I scored from Santaannawheels.com. (The cladding is removed for paint reconditioning and new clear coat.)