Ls 6.0???

[Rick D]

So IF I decide to go with a LS motor what is the best 6.0 to look for??? I found a 99 with 132K on it complete with everything included for $950??? I even get the harness.

Just not sure where to start "if" I go with a LS??

[mikels]

So IF I decide to go with a LS motor what is the best 6.0 to look for??? I found a 99 with 132K on it complete with everything included for $950??? I even get the harness.

Just not sure where to start "if" I go with a LS??

There really isn't a 'bad' LS 6.0L out there. There are several options and differences though.

LQ4 - Fe block / Al cathedral port heads / 24x crank
LQ9 - Fe block / Al cathedral port heads / 24x crank
LS2 - Al block / Al catherdral port heads / 24x (2005 Corvette / 2006 Trailblazer SS) 58x after
L76 - Al block / Al rectangular port heads / 58x crank
LY6 - Fe block / Al rectangular port heads / 58x crank

The early LQ4 / LQ9 engines were (and still are) very popular for building boosted motors as the iron block withstands considerable power before becoming a liability - and was available long before LSX block and other 6 bolt head blocks were available. Weak point is 4 bolt heads once >~1200 HP as head gaskets lack clamp load to withstand.

Aluminum block options are much more appealling from a mass perspective, but newer and more costly to puchase.

As far as the 24x vs. 58x crank signal - if building the engine, is not an issue and can make whichever you prefer (there are advantages to later 58x software / controllers).

Cathedral vs rectangular port heads - same thing - if you are changing heads, doesn't matter. If not, rectangular heads lack capability to reach airflow limits that rectangular ports can.

Since you mention a '99 - I assume it's either an LQ4 or LQ9. Only differences are the compression ratio (and calibration). LQ4 was 87 oct engine / LQ9 was premium. Both are great engines.

Bottom line - there are no bad choices - just depends on your goals and budget.

[jwcarguy]

There really isn't a 'bad' LS 6.0L out there. There are several options and differences though.

LQ4 - Fe block / Al cathedral port heads / 24x crank
LQ9 - Fe block / Al cathedral port heads / 24x crank
LS2 - Al block / Al catherdral port heads / 24x (2005 Corvette / 2006 Trailblazer SS) 58x after
L76 - Al block / Al rectangular port heads / 58x crank
LY6 - Fe block / Al rectangular port heads / 58x crank

The early LQ4 / LQ9 engines were (and still are) very popular for building boosted motors as the iron block withstands considerable power before becoming a liability - and was available long before LSX block and other 6 bolt head blocks were available. Weak point is 4 bolt heads once >~1200 HP as head gaskets lack clamp load to withstand.

Aluminum block options are much more appealling from a mass perspective, but newer and more costly to puchase.

As far as the 24x vs. 58x crank signal - if building the engine, is not an issue and can make whichever you prefer (there are advantages to later 58x software / controllers).

Cathedral vs rectangular port heads - same thing - if you are changing heads, doesn't matter. If not, rectangular heads lack capability to reach airflow limits that rectangular ports can.

Since you mention a '99 - I assume it's either an LQ4 or LQ9. Only differences are the compression ratio (and calibration). LQ4 was 87 oct engine / LQ9 was premium. Both are great engines.

Bottom line - there are no bad choices - just depends on your goals and budget.



Just to add a couple notes:

the LQ9 6.)l didn't start production until 2002, so any earlier one will be the LQ4

The 99' & 2000 engines came with a iron block AND iron cyl. heads

Another difference in the pre 05" 6.0L is the LQ4 did have lower compression as mentioned before, but also has lighter duty connecting rods w/ press fit wrist pins
Where as the LQ9 came with the higher compression and heavy duty connecting rods w/ floating wrist pins, crank is alittle heavier due to the added rotating mass weight also

I say "pre 05' ", since 2005 - up, the Vortec series engines came equipped with the stronger bottom end with heavy duty crank, connecting rods and floating pistons w/ coated skirts

[Rod P]

great info

[im4u2nvss]

Beware of the "early" iron head LQ4. The early ones have a longer crank with no spacer. Depending on your transmission choice, this may not be a problem. LS1 t56 would be a no go. On the later model 6.0 you would just remove the crank spacer.

[tubbed69]

Rick I did not know we're anything but ls engines for these cars,you will be satisfied if you do get a 6.0 or 6.2,good luck and show us some updates.

[ADiCarlo]

I purchased a LQ9 with LS3 heads and a upgraded cam. It was used as a test mule for Hot Rod magazine to test the increased power of different cams.

The last configuration made 530 on the dyno but the piston to valve clearance was really close. Most guys running these numbers will throw in dished pistons to compensate.

I think ultimately it depends how far your going to go with the motor and how custom you want to get. If you want something to throw in and drive an aluminum LS is a easy win. But if your going to stroke it, run high compression, boost it, I would go with the iron block because it can take a better beating.

Also FYI the iron to aluminum LS is approximately 80lbs more which is not alot when you look at the safety of running iron to aluminum.

-Armand

[Rick D]

Wow great info thanks to all that replied :thumbsup:

Not looking to boost it well not to start :knokwood: just looking to keep the cost down. Really want to come up with my plan see how much it will hurt the budget and then go from there.

As for the motor I just want freshen it up and of corse get the most out of it. It's a street car so I'm not all that concerned about the 80lb difference, I'm sure the iron block setup is about the same as a SBC, or close.

As for which one I think I'll look for an lq9 as it would make alittle more power with the right cam, heads, and intake?

Here's another question, I want to run the carb intake, maybe even start with a carb? I was thinking to run a set of L92 heads as they seem to be a real good lower cost option and make nice power?

I guess what I'm asking is what would a good setup be for the lq9? Carb, cam, heads, and intake?? I may run EFI later but for now to keep the cost in line I thought a carb setup would better on the budget?? Maybe I'm wrong in my thinking??? :headspin:

[NvrDun71]

If you are already thinking Lq9 with an LS3 head swap, skip a step and pick up a LY6 6.0. As they already come with the square port heads and have valve reliefs from the factory for increased PTV clearance with bigger cams. Best bang for the buck out there IMO. Hit up Pat G over on ls1tech for a custom cam spec for your intended application, One of the best in the business and will get you headed in the right direction.

[ma73z]

Rick, as a guy building a 2nd gen with a carbed 6.0. I'd say you're not going to save much money going the carb route, by the time you get all the parts your going to spend about the same amount as EFI, you also won't run into hood clearance problems :headscratch:. Just my opinion.

[glassman]

Rick, look at Rod's build thread on P.T.. He did with his engine what you'd like. A carb''d, iron block, alum heads LQ something or other.
And it runs good, very good.....(aka Plain Jane). He has a build thread here, i think its "newbie here"? OOhhhhh Rodneeeeey? where u at....?

Also did you see the Hooker setup? on Martys SEMA thread...good price well drawn out.

[Rick D]

Rick, look at Rod's build thread on P.T.. He did with his engine what you'd like. A carb''d, iron block, alum heads LQ something or other.
And it runs good, very good.....(aka Plain Jane). He has a build thread here, i think its "newbie here"? OOhhhhh Rodneeeeey? where u at....?

Also did you see the Hooker setup? on Martys SEMA thread...good price well drawn out.

I thought you'd show up in this thread at some point :poke: :)

Yes I saw the hooker setup and talked with Marty about it already. That is the setup I will go with for sure, I love how everything is so high up in the frame.

I think I have a plan now or at least what I'm going todo for now :G-Dub:

[214Chevy]

Rick, I'd like to be the first to welcome you to the LS family. IF you promise to post pics.

[Rick D]

Rick, I'd like to be the first to welcome you to the LS family. IF you promise to post pics.

Thanks Marcus!! :cheers: but it will still be a little while before pictures can be posted. The LS is going to be after I get it painted and suspension done. Or as Marty likes to call version 2!!!

[INTMD8]

No carburetor! :D

If you get anything in decent shape I wouldn't even freshen it up. Just do cam/springs/pushrods, heads if they're in the budget and let it fly.

[Rick D]

No carburetor! :D

If you get anything in decent shape I wouldn't even freshen it up. Just do cam/springs/pushrods, heads if they're in the budget and let it fly.

Easy for you to say :BlahBlah: mister LS!! If you would just finish up the caddy motor :idea: then I'd be in a better place as far as a motor goes!!! :hello:

[67Rally]

Curious why you want to go with a carb'd set up? I thought about it originally because I wanted an old school look, but I was able to accomplish the same look with a 4 barrel TB and keep the EFI setup.

http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee208/modi_photos/enginepics001x_zps75debabe.jpg (http://s228.photobucket.com/user/modi_photos/media/enginepics001x_zps75debabe.jpg.html)

http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee208/modi_photos/enginepics013x_zps28e41340.jpg (http://s228.photobucket.com/user/modi_photos/media/enginepics013x_zps28e41340.jpg.html)

[WSSix]

x2 would not go carbed. Yes, it can be done and be good etc etc. EFI is still better, period.

I think you're on the right track if considering a iron 6.0 for a budget build, Rick. It's a great motor. I would however not discount the 5.3 if your budget is that tight and your power levels not very high. It, too, is a great motor capable of great power. You want go wrong with either. You'll just have to decide what your budget can support.

[RdHuggr68]

I thought you'd show up in this thread at some point :poke: :)

Yes I saw the hooker setup and talked with Marty about it already. That is the setup I will go with for sure, I love how everything is so high up in the frame.

I think I have a plan now or at least what I'm going todo for now :G-Dub:

ok, fill me in on the Hooker set up
:hairpullout: