When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Well. So the problem and beauty of this situation lie in the same field. The problem is that even if you buy a brand new engine, there is no guarantee it won't leak immediately, or that there isn't something wrong with the head that will cost a new engine for something like 30% of the owners of that particular year (corvettes had something like this happen). The problem is simply, nobody can tell the future. Well, not exactly...
The beauty is in time, we recognize (service bulletins and experience) these failure details, and write them down. Now everybody knows for sure that those particular years are to be avoided, or that this specific year range has the best parts or whatever. Also, as the vehicles in circulation gain mileage, more and more small details surface. And forums provide a venue for sharing similar details and combining them.
So if we can review a sizable population of engines between certain years, that are famed or renowned for their performance, trouble free operation. For example, everyone knows 1998-2002 sr20det 2.0L engines are basically oil change only 400rwhp monsters ~250,000 miles capable, and that 4.8/5.3L 02-05 engines are basically oil change only 500-600rwhp monsters with 200,00-350,000 miles on the table.
"low maintenance" is a critical components of review/critique in a daily driver application since some setups are known to be difficult or expensive to maintain when approaching the limits of factory power-level capable parts. For example the 2.0L mentioned above at 500rwhp can be a tricky maintenance issue. OEM 6L LS engine from 2004 with gen4 internals at 1000rwhp can be a tricky maintenance ticket. these combinations push the level of detail higher than average hobbyist is prepared for, they call for extreme protective measures (especially cast piston applications). So it is important for us to define what is strictly 'oil change only' type of maintenance, i.e. "easy to maintain" almost like a regular car, just turn the key and drive it. So what we have done is, taken the uncertainty from above out of the equation, by comparing all of the relevant applications and taking a certain amount of acceptable error within the population as a majority of owners/users/tuners is not going to properly set the car up, will tune it poorly or leave air leaks, poor details, and the resulting combination isn't going to last long or run well. And even when factoring the existence of these frequent attempts through out the use of those particular engine year ranges (in this case, roughly 02-05 or 01-06 if you want) truck 4.8/etc variants are remarkably successful, basically even in the hands of idiots. And that is not something you see very often in a high performance venue.
Lists like these https://ls1tech.com/forums/forced-in...lity-list.html
Allow you to compare some measure of success. There are at least three of those lists I am aware of for LS variants.
In some ways, the setups have become 'cookie cutter' to the point where its almost like following a recipe and there is very little invasive procedure so the results can be fairly positive even with minimal skill or attention to detail. But my point is simply, in the hands of smarter owners (corvette owners? ) the engines will last even longer, run cleaner and smoother, you will have more success than the average attempt if truly attending.
First, all engines leak oil. Actually their gaskets gradually seep. It is an unpreventable, eventual occurrence. Every new car will needs its valve cover gasket changed at 80k to 150k, most models. etc...
To say that "my engine doesn't leak" is impossible. Since all gaskets gradually seep and will weep. Blah, blah, blah...
This has got to be one of the weakest, dumbest, reasons that I've read on these forums for someone to avoid an car/engine and the fun/moddification thereof. You've got a point though. ALL engines will eventually leak oil. W...T.....F.....
OP should port the bejeezus out of his intake, throw exhaust on there and enjoy it for a while, until he makes another new plan. If it leaks oil, fix the ******* oil leak. Holy cow.
.
Last edited by Tom400CFI; May 30, 2019 at 10:52 PM.
guess ill be spending 5000...thanks....not trying to be a smart ***...i bought this car because i like this car....i will get another one but i wont get rid of this one
I don’t think it will cost anywhere near that. I’m in Australia I have to pay for shipping and our dollar is ****.
I dropped a timing chain on my 84 and decided to fix it. I thought about an LS swap but there is a lot more cost and effort than just the engine. So because I had to replace the timing chain I decided to replace the cam. That snowballed into new heads and a renegade intake manifold roller rockers etc. That stuff cost me about $2000 US. I also did long pipe headers and a twin system but you would have to change the exhaust with an LS swap anyway.
My 84 goes pretty hard now and I love it. I think there is something cool about those crossfires. They were very restricted when new but once you get them to breath (which is quite easy these days) they are a lot of fun.
not concerned about budget amd I know it will cost me alot more than the value
The car just fits....am i the only one that this car feels that good to?
not concerned about budget amd I know it will cost me alot more than the value
The car just fits....am i the only one that this car feels that good to?
not concerned about budget amd I know it will cost me alot more than the value
The car just fits....am i the only one that this car feels that good to?
No, My '84 4+3 feels great to me and brings a smile to my face every time I take it out. I however am perfectly content with it's limited power and strive to keep it as stock as possible.
If more power were my aim I would find a '96 to add to my driveway.
You are correct the early C4's feel more connected.
The motor is a pollution motor that had basic electronics control. The intake was designed for torque and pollution.
I rebuilt my 85, it's a small block Chevy and responds as such to mods.
Depending on your abilities, you can get a good , reliable car with 400 HP.
I chose to go basic SBC and did away with the computer. Later on I added a 6 speed. For what I have into it and the miles and smiles I get out of it - it was a great investment.
I did not buy it as an investment, I bought it as a hobby car - to enjoy and work on. ( I did away with the MSD box , a while ago, as it was used and failed)
It has done both very well. People will talk bad about carburetors, but they don't remember that cars ran well with them for 50+ years. I have had only minor issues since a conversion to a carb in 7+ years. It has not been the fuel system.
The HELI module went bad, and the dash went bad. Both cost less than $300 total.
I'm over 100k miles, and just spent $600 to re-do the suspension. Try that on a new Vette.
For me it's not a money issue, I have an A/C 67, top flight + others. I enjoy driving the 85 and the look.
Last edited by BLUE1972; May 31, 2019 at 09:47 AM.
The age is upon us, past us, where newish 4-cylinder 2L turbo cars produce 500rwhp with mostly factory equipment.
They also get 30mpg.
who wouldn't want 30mpg and 500rwhp when looking up from 280rwhp and 18mpg. Which is about typical for OEM V8 near 1980. It isn't the car's fault; But to attain the level of 30mpg and 500rwhp just to match what a 2.0L turbo can do, you have to swear off natural aspiration and supercharging immediately. And 1980's engines.
Turbochargers are the future. Almost every car will likely eventually wind up with one until gas is no longer a thing.
Exhaust driven compressor wheel gives any engine an incredible advantage: you can select the power output with a dial now. Dial down for cheap fuels, long distance driving fuel savings use 87 octane.
With the right fuel you can get as much power as you want by turning a ****.
To utilize a turbo effectively, the engine needs to be sealed up properly. Every oil seal will experience boost pressure and the piston ring is also a special kind of seal to consider. A thick layer of permatex is no longer adequate or desirable on gaskets (insert joke about the only thing holding a 2-piece rear main engine together). The additional boost pressure in the intake manifold which leads to additional pressure in the combustion chamber, and varying fuel/air quality conditions experienced throughout daily driving, these additional stresses absolutely depend on the seals and spaces within the engine to remain high quality and intact. The reason 2.0L engines are successful at 500rwhp and 30mpg is because mostly due to the sealing ability of such a small engine with its small parts and small gaskets, they remain good condition even with 35psi of boost pressure on pump fuels. In fact 2.0L engines can be run past 37psi on pump fuels and produce 600rwhp apparently and it isn't even a new thing, we've just been in the dark: https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...l-project.html
Because of turbocharging, small engines can do 500-600. So what can we do with larger engines?
How about 3L engine? I think around 900rwhp from 3.0L Toyota 2jz engine is not even the record for factory block.
So because of turbo, we don't need displacement to achieve maximum OEM internals power output (600-1000rwhp typical)
You can choose any V8 you want because its more than enough displacement.
e.g. 4.8L from 2005 will support near 800rwhp. At least 600 minimum. Before the block/rotating assembly approaches what I call a 'tuning limit' (its up to the tuning if you can approach 1200 theoretically possible horsepower without blowing out a rod)
anyways, The thing that matters more than the displacement now is the seal design of the engine.
Any engine with excellent seals is ideal candidate for turbocharging, because turbo generates high intake and exhaust pressures.
Moving forward, having a turbo means excessive engine mods are no longer required. now you can have any power output while keeping the engine idle and fuel economy near original. And the camshaft profile can be docile, low ramp rate roller with the lightest spring available using a low lift, in order to minimize guide wear and provides excellent valve control/smoothest operation at the high rpm.
Speaking of high RPM, high exhaust gas pressure cushions the piston on exhaust strokes relieving rod stress, making high RPM safer for the rod than in naturally aspirated engines.
But... turbos don't add fuel economy...
I am not going to get into how a turbo works right here because this is already a page. I am going to explain how economy can be achieved.
For 30mpg with engines from 2001-07 era, it is typically done with the following conditions:
1. vehicle under 3300lbs
2. If it has a V8, it needs a 0.5:1 final overdrive, six speed manual transmission
3. Healthy engine with good seals and pcv, paper element air filter
4. over 10:1 compression and 93 octane fuels for fair energy extraction and full highway advance
5. Good insulation practices (no throwing heat away, no excessive heat exchange rates, i.e. coolant temperature is 217*F)
6. 14.7 or leaner air fuel ratios
7. vehicle has reasonable rolling resistance, free brakes, good bearings, no crazy kind of tires that would alter friction coefficients unfavorably for economy
Next, lets consider some what if's
What if I use a automatic instead?
Highway mileage will drop to 22(4l80e) to 25mpg(700R4) depending on the auto. Automatics use more fuel because their internal parts which turn are heavier and shaped less favorably than a manual transmission.
What if I use a numerically low rear gear with the automatic 700R4 to compensate for increased rotating energy costs?
In theory you may recover mileage, and approach 29mpg if you keep reducing the cruise RPM by numerically lowering rear gear, however it might take a rear differential ratio of 2.5:1 or something like that, which might not be fun in other gears.
Anything else I can do to improve mileage?
Something to consider is using 87 octane fuel if the engine has a low enough compression ratio.
Ex.
10000miles/30mpg = 333.0gallons @ 3.23/gallon 93 octane = $1076.7/year
10000miles/23mpg = 434.7gallons @ 2.45/gallon 93 octane = $1065.2/year
So the economy can be significantly worse (using an automatic) but if you can put 87 in the tank, its still cheaper.
The most common 2002 5.3L that everybody is giving away (LM7?) is around 9.5:1 and runs excellent on 87 octane, even with 3 to 5psi of boost it's never had a hiccup.
So don't always assume that increasing compression ratio and using 93 will 'save you money' when the difference in price is so dramatic. It depends on fuel prices, so try to see the future.
I hope you enjoyed this look at engine seals and economy
The cross fire is a high rev high hp engine that with little mods can make HUGE power. I can’t believe GM abondoned this technology after only a 2 or 3 year run...
I agree the HP numbers are all in the heavens, 2000+ for the LXS engines.
The real question is what do you need for your daily driver on the street.
My 85 was a daily driver after the rebuild, the 6 speed gave me 25+ gas mileage with 500+ HP on the dyno.
I went to a milder tune and enjoy the car more. The new ZR1 is fun to drive, but can be a pain in traffic on a highway. Too easy to get into trouble..
Turbos, super chargers, blowers all add power, but how long do they last. Most start to show the need for repairs at 80k miles...
Nitrous is fun - but one lean run and OOPS..
A lot of decisions and wonders await us.
Each year the choices get more numerous - hopefully it will continue to amaze us.. at a cost most of us can afford. I still love my 67 with the side pipes and A/C on, ..or the windows open.. The C7 , to me, feels like a disconnected Caddy ride with more handling and speed. Probably due to my age and growing up with a 64 Chevy with a 6 and 3 speed on the column. That was until I got my 67 Firebird 400 in 68.
Whatever you do = build it and enjoy it that is most important...
Not one person here knows the OP's GOALS and BUDGET....yet look at all the "advice" that is being given. Pages of cow dung, so far.
.
I think the OP knows what he has and what he is looking for. It sounds like he wants to give his car some more “pep”. A renegade or ported manifold, exhaust, properly balanced injectors, and a bump in timing will do that.
And finally, for the fellow that turbos only last 80k,
A properly done turbo setup will last as long as the engine.
nissan sr20det 1995 2.0L turbocharger has been known to last 250,000 miles,
And the same could be said for certain years of other factory turbo vehicles.
You simply need to know how to set one up properly. Cast, thick wall tube for example retains alot of heat, so the turbo needs some form of water cooling when those are used.
And this is rarely done for oil-only turbo applications. It takes creativity and attention to specific areas of the setup.
I think the OP knows what he has and what he is looking for. It sounds like he wants to give his car some more “pep”. A renegade or ported manifold, exhaust, properly balanced injectors, and a bump in timing will do that.
I think you're probably right. And I agree with your recipe.
But then you got goons like Kingtal0n talking about LS engine, turbos, supercharging, etc. etc...that you can't rebuild an "old block". WTF? OP needs to state his goals and budget.
) the engines will last even longer, run cleaner and smoother, you will have more success than the average attempt if truly attending.
OP needs to state his goals and budget.