LS conversion..Info overload. A little Help.

[obengston]

I have read so many post, to the point I forget what I'm actually attempting or wanting. There is so much info out there, and I end up getting lost in the threads, so give up. I currently have a 68 Camaro running a 383 (na 400 rwhp, nos 600rwhp), with the Fast 2.0. I probably should have went the LS route along time ago but was so comfortable with the SBC (old school). I have now updated this thing to where I'm now running the Fast 2.0, and have everything else electronic in the car you can buy (or it seems). At this point I don't know if it is even beneficial to change. Anyway I start researching then give up after I lose sight on what I want to do.

My goal is I want at least 500-550 rwhp N/A (either build a 427 SBC expensive, and keep everything front accessories). or Build a LS type engine to meet what I want, and use what I can from what I have.

So here it is.

1. I'm running a 1200HP rated 2004R can I keep this tranny with the conversion.

2. I have the Fast 2.0 (so is the what I need to run the engine?? If so what else do I need for the LS egine (is the a ecu/harness unique to the engine). This is where I have been getting lost. How much wiring comes with the engine or is it just a engine harness that will connect to the FAST 2.0. I spent 2300 on the Fast 2.0

3. I have the vintage A/C, I can still use the compressor I'm currently running?

4. Does the LS have a special type PS box I have to use (in other words I can't use my current SBC one correct, which runs my PS, and hydroboost).

5. If I change to a LS and I can keep my 2004r, will the tranny move forward or backwards or will the engine bolt up without having to move the tranny forward or back?

6. Fuel system I'm good. I have the aeromotive stealth Tank installed already with a feed line to the front (regulator), and a return line.

7. I have a MSD6AL that is controlled by the Fast 2.0, which I think I would need to upgrade to one that can control the coil packs? Another area that I get lost.

8. I have O2 sensors in both exhaust now, one goes to the Fast 2.0, the other is monitored by my nitrous system.

My thinking is and I don't really know, is I might only need to get a LS engine, headers, engine mounts, tranny adapter if possible, oil pan, front drive assembly that I would be happy with (want the A/c on the passenger side, down low if possible), radiator (I have a aluminum one know). Again so confused/lost at this point. I can do all the work (hopefully).

At this point I'm thinking the LS route only due to the fact it is such a easy power plant, plus you get even fuel distribution, individual coil packs per cylinder, just seems right.

I'm I really gaining much from where I'm currently at?

Here is my current engine

43921

43922

[Vince@Meanstreets]

I have read so many post, to the point I forget what I'm actually attempting or wanting. There is so much info out there, and I end up getting lost in the threads, so give up. I currently have a 68 Camaro running a 383 (na 400 rwhp, nos 600rwhp), with the Fast 2.0. I probably should have went the LS route along time ago but was so comfortable with the SBC (old school). I have now updated this thing to where I'm now running the Fast 2.0, and have everything else electronic in the car you can buy (or it seems). At this point I don't know if it is even beneficial to change. Anyway I start researching then give up after I lose sight on what I want to do.

My goal is I want at least 500-550 rwhp N/A (either build a 427 SBC expensive, and keep everything front accessories). or Build a LS type engine to meet what I want, and use what I can from what I have.

So here it is.

1. I'm running a 1200HP rated 2004R can I keep this tranny with the conversion.

2. I have the Fast 2.0 (so is the what I need to run the engine?? If so what else do I need for the LS egine (is the a ecu/harness unique to the engine). This is where I have been getting lost. How much wiring comes with the engine or is it just a engine harness that will connect to the FAST 2.0. I spent 2300 on the Fast 2.0

3. I have the vintage A/C, I can still use the compressor I'm currently running?

4. Does the LS have a special type PS box I have to use (in other words I can't use my current SBC one correct, which runs my PS, and hydroboost).

5. If I change to a LS and I can keep my 2004r, will the tranny move forward or backwards or will the engine bolt up without having to move the tranny forward or back?

6. Fuel system I'm good. I have the aeromotive stealth Tank installed already with a feed line to the front (regulator), and a return line.

7. I have a MSD6AL that is controlled by the Fast 2.0, which I think I would need to upgrade to one that can control the coil packs? Another area that I get lost.

8. I have O2 sensors in both exhaust now, one goes to the Fast 2.0, the other is monitored by my nitrous system.

My thinking is and I don't really know, is I might only need to get a LS engine, headers, engine mounts, tranny adapter if possible, oil pan, front drive assembly that I would be happy with (want the A/c on the passenger side, down low if possible), radiator (I have a aluminum one know). Again so confused/lost at this point. I can do all the work (hopefully).

At this point I'm thinking the LS route only due to the fact it is such a easy power plant, plus you get even fuel distribution, individual coil packs per cylinder, just seems right.

I'm I really gaining much from where I'm currently at?

Here is my current engine

43921

43922

1. I'm running a 1200HP rated 2004R can I keep this tranny with the conversion. Yes you can with a flexplate adapter and correct converter.

2. I have the Fast 2.0 (so is the what I need to run the engine?? If so what else do I need for the LS egine (is the a ecu/harness unique to the engine). This is where I have been getting lost. How much wiring comes with the engine or is it just a engine harness that will connect to the FAST 2.0. I spent 2300 on the Fast 2.0

I believe you can with the right intake and ignition upgrade.

3. I have the vintage A/C, I can still use the compressor I'm currently running?

Yes, with the right drive system. We run Wegner automotive on all of our build and it uses the SD7 comp.

4. Does the LS have a special type PS box I have to use (in other words I can't use my current SBC one correct, which runs my PS, and hydroboost).

You can use the same steering box and hydroboost. You get a new pump with the accesory drive set up.

5. If I change to a LS and I can keep my 2004r, will the tranny move forward or backwards or will the engine bolt up without having to move the tranny forward or back?

Same location with the right engine adapter plates. Trans stays put.

6. Fuel system I'm good. I have the aeromotive stealth Tank installed already with a feed line to the front (regulator), and a return line.

As long as you can regulate to 58 psi.

7. I have a MSD6AL that is controlled by the Fast 2.0, which I think I would need to upgrade to one that can control the coil packs? Another area that I get lost.

You may need a new ignition controller to utilize the cam and crank sensors. You can call MSD tech. They are very helpful.

8. I have O2 sensors in both exhaust now, one goes to the Fast 2.0, the other is monitored by my nitrous system.

Again should be fine if you are running the correct set up for a carb manifold LS engine.

[INTMD8]

If it was my car I would sell the engine/trans/fast and do LS with stock PCM and 4l60e.

Unless your trans is manual valve body and you want to keep it like that it's nice to have electronic control over the trans.

I don't know of any drive systems that puts the compressor down low that will fit with the stock front subframe. Agreed that the Wegner stuff is very nice and symmetrical looking.

[obengston]

Good info. The thing with the trans, is I just had it built ($5500 time built/convertor/cross member/trans brake), and the fast just spent 2300+ on that as well, so not so easy to just throw them away and even selling at this point would be crazy to me, but I agree with having control over your trans.

[BBPanel]

... it's nice to have electronic control over the trans.,,,.
Once the trans is setup the way you want it what's the advantage to e-control? Can one save several setups so they can be switched on/off? -Bob

[INTMD8]

Well I'm no 2004r expert but having electronic trans control allows you to set shift points at an ideal rpm.

Lets say you dyno the car and it makes peak power at 6500 and you want it to shift exactly at 6800rpm. A few keystrokes with an electronic trans and you are there.

I would think it would be harder to achieve that with a 2004r.

Also with a stock ecu and speed input from the trans you have throttle adders vs mph which is nice.

[hifi875]

Get a 6.0 or 6.2 truck engine with ls3 heads, put a camshaft in it, get a gmpp carb intake put your fast system on it. Bolt up your 2004r to it and enjoy. It's not hard to get 500+ hp out of this setup and it will idle like a baby and run like heck!

[toddoky]

It's no problem to install/run a 2004R in a 1st-gen behind an LS and parts exist that allow you to do it in a bolt-in fashion, as shown in the attached photo.

[redefined]

Some good info here. From my research, kinda in the same boat now, already have a built SBC but looking to go LS, I'd say go LS. Seems to be better in all aspects except possibly the $$$$ area.

[im4u2nvss]

I'd say go LS. Seems to be better in all aspects except possibly the $$$$ area.

Couldnt agree with you more.

[MaxHarvard]

*SHAMELESS PLUG ALERT*


I wrote about a lot of these questions :)

I'll just leave this here.

http://www.amazon.com/Swap-Engines-into-Camaros-Firebirds/dp/1613250312/

[Vince@Meanstreets]

that was you? thank you.

I thought you name was Max, or is Eric Mcclellan your pseudonym.

[MaxHarvard]

that was you? thank you.

I thought you name was Max, or is Eric Mcclellan your pseudonym.

Looks like my post got deleted, too much shamless plugging it seems.



Umm... Thanks for... ? What did I do now? LOL

Eric McClellan is my real name, Max is my sons name. I've had this screen name for probably 20 years... so it's kind of a family name :)

[obengston]

Get a 6.0 or 6.2 truck engine with ls3 heads, put a camshaft in it, get a gmpp carb intake put your fast system on it. Bolt up your 2004r to it and enjoy. It's not hard to get 500+ hp out of this setup and it will idle like a baby and run like heck!


This is alone the lines I was thinking about, if I was to do this, because of the Tranny I currently have (and the money tied up in it), as well as the Fast 2.0 system I recently purchased. So I should be able to just get a LS engine with a carb intake, headers, mount, and a tranny adapter, and all the front accessories, and the brackets?? I would like to have a combination set-up that will make at least 500 to the wheels?

[Sparks67]

This is alone the lines I was thinking about, if I was to do this, because of the Tranny I currently have (and the money tied up in it), as well as the Fast 2.0 system I recently purchased. So I should be able to just get a LS engine with a carb intake, headers, mount, and a tranny adapter, and all the front accessories, and the brackets?? I would like to have a combination set-up that will make at least 500 to the wheels?

To get 500hp to the wheels (rwhp) then you need a stroked LS3 418. LS418 makes around 645 or around 515 rwhp. The other poster is talking about fwhp. I recently talked to Brian Thomson (Builder of Stielow's engines), about FAST being used with the TVS2300 (I have one for sale), but he said that FAST ECU can be used with an LS engine. Although, he said that the LS ECU are more reliable than aftermarket.

Jeff

[obengston]

To get 500hp to the wheels (rwhp) then you need a stroked LS3 418. LS418 makes around 645 or around 515 rwhp. The other poster is talking about fwhp. I recently talked to Brian Thomson (Builder of Stielow's engines), about FAST being used with the TVS2300 (I have one for sale), but he said that FAST ECU can be used with an LS engine. Although, he said that the LS ECU are more reliable than aftermarket.

Jeff

This is now on track where I want to be. So if I can build a LS3 418 I should be in the area where I want to be.. You lost me about the Fast being used with the TVS2300?? Also the LS ECU is more reliable?? Would that be the FAST I have?? and whats the TVS2300? With the LS ECU, would relate to having it programed correct? The Fast System I have is more of a self learning, but can change basic things to it. Back to the LS3 418, what type of heads (stock?? LS3), sorry for the 3rd grade questions, but I'm in elementary when it comes to the LS side..

[Sparks67]

This is now on track where I want to be. So if I can build a LS3 418 I should be in the area where I want to be.. You lost me about the Fast being used with the TVS2300?? Also the LS ECU is more reliable?? Would that be the FAST I have?? and whats the TVS2300? With the LS ECU, would relate to having it programed correct? The Fast System I have is more of a self learning, but can change basic things to it. Back to the LS3 418, what type of heads (stock?? LS3), sorry for the 3rd grade questions, but I'm in elementary when it comes to the LS side..

OEM parts from GM have much more testing done on the parts, so they don't fail as compared to aftermarket parts. For example, my 2000 Silverado uses LS ECU with 24x reluctor wheel, the engine has 140,000 miles on it. Never been serviced for the ECU. I doubt if you get that mileage out of your aftermarket ECU (FAST).

I have my Harrop TVS2300 up for Sale, and a person asked if he could use it with his FAST. So, I talked to Brian Thomson and he said that it could be used. Although, he said that LS ECU is more reliable. The only disadvantage is that you have to hire a custom tuner for the factory LS ECU to set it properly.

The best heads is the LS3 or L92 style heads for an LS 418.

[onevoice]

Well, I'll be the one to say it - keep what you have and just drive the wheels off it.

In the lsx vs small block thread you said it runs 10.6 quarter miles. And now you want 100 more hp. It doesn't make any sense unless cost is no object to you.

I love the lsx platform, but you are talking about spending a boatload of money for an extra 100 hp that won't make a bit of difference on the street.

An lsx does do everything better than a gen 1 small block, but unless you are really stepping up the hp number, ie to 600-700++, there is no reason to throw out everything you have now.

When your current engine needs a freshening, no question - go lsx. Or by then, the new direct injection platform may be the hot ticket, and an LS3 might look as current as a TPI engine does now.

[Rybar]

To get 500hp to the wheels (rwhp) then you need a stroked LS3 418. LS418 makes around 645 or around 515 rwhp.

Jeff

Not really true I have a stroked 383 LS1 that made 496 rwhp.

[Sparks67]

Not really true I have a stroked 383 LS1 that made 496 rwhp.

Here is the thread that I pulled the dyno numbers. There is actually several on the L92 418. Dyno numbers will vary on several different factors.

http://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/1279957-418ci-ls3-low-rwhp-numbers.html

Although, if you do a supercharged LS 418, then the numbers will increase. My LS418 with Harrop TVS 2300 at 15lbs of boost was around 691 hp @ 5200 rpm and torque was 787 ft/lbs at 3900 rpm on the engine dyno.

Jeff

[Sparks67]

When your current engine needs a freshening, no question - go lsx. Or by then, the new direct injection platform may be the hot ticket, and an LS3 might look as current as a TPI engine does now.

I talked to Brian Thomson last summer on the new engines and it is going to be awhile before you be able to put an LT1 engine in your first gen.

Jeff

[rallystyle]

not sure about that taking long to swap part. there is a stand alone harness for them out now

http://ls1tech.com/forums/generation-v-internal-engine/1669413-gen-5-stand-alone-wiring-harness.html

[Rybar]

Here is the thread that I pulled the dyno numbers. There is actually several on the L92 418. Dyno numbers will vary on several different factors.

http://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/1279957-418ci-ls3-low-rwhp-numbers.html

Jeff

I understand, just letting the original poster know you don't need a stroked 6.2L to reach those power numbers. You can achieve it with a cammed LS3 in my opinion.

[Sparks67]

not sure about that taking long to swap part. there is a stand alone harness for them out now

http://ls1tech.com/forums/generation-v-internal-engine/1669413-gen-5-stand-alone-wiring-harness.html


I bought a Speartech harness for my LS418 TVS 2300, but actually it was not tuned for a supercharged engine. (Speartech sent out a stock ECU, but it was still setup for a stock fuel injection). I had to hire Rich Gala from the former W2W to tune it. So, I suspect that Speartech is selliing a stock ECU with this harness. Also, you don't want to use a 6L80E, because on a 67-69 Camaro's you be forced to raise the tunnel for that transmission swap. (Well, my floor pans are rather detailed) Now if you use a 4L80E, it bolts right in the transmission tunnel without raising it.

When I talked to Brian Thomson last summer(builder of Stielow's engine), he said that ECU is ant-tamper proof, but here is a more recent article that sound promising. http://www.streetlegaltv.com/features/sema-coverage/sema-2013-hp-tuners-tackles-the-latest-and-greatest-factory-efi/

[Sparks67]

I understand, just letting the original poster know you don't need a stroked 6.2L to reach those power numbers. You can achieve it with a cammed LS3 in my opinion.

He wants 500rwhp, but you are saying something like this engine.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-tech-performance/3092369-ls3-c6-makes-527-rwhp.html

I can't say that I had a high compression LS engine, but I did have high compression SBC in a 383 612 hp. Oh, that sounds similar to the SBC. Yes, it would work. Although, you need to change the motor mounts, similar to what was done on Camaro XV to LS style rubber mount or it vibrate the car.

I got to drive Brian Thomson's Chevelle 850 HP / 930 TQ on pump gas LSX, and it was smooth. You could take it on the power tour and not have any problems. Depends on what you want, but I had both.