Talk:General Motors LS-based small-block engine

message: When it comes down to it the Gen II engines share nothing in common with the (LS based) Gen III-V engines.  The SBC and the Gen II engines however have several key traits in common: Deck height, bore spacing, part interchangeability (namely rotating assembly), and basic block architecture (which is about as strong an argument as you can have).  This commonality clearly demonstrates SBC's and Gen II's very close relationship and warrants the Gen II's inclusion on this page.  When it comes down to it, the Gen II engines are nothing more than modified SBC engines.
Now I know in the process of moving the Gen II section, I might have messed something up.  I was forced to rename the LS based engines to something and all I could come up with was Gen III-V small-block (LS based GM small-block engines seems a better choice to me).  There shouldn't be too much of an issue calling the Gen V engines LS based after all Deck height, bore spacing, part interchangeability (namely rotating assembly), and basic block architecture is shared with the Gen III and IV engines; the Gen V engine are not exactly clean slate designs. 
Gulielmi2002 (talk) 17:32, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renamed article and moved Gen II section 

message: The Gen II engine have mechanically nothing in common with the Gen III thru V engines.  The Gen II are bacically Gen I (specifally the Gen I 305 and 350) engines that have been slightly modified to incorporate the Gen II updates; the Gen I and Gen II have similar basic block and mechanical architecture, and there is some good part interchangeability.  It makes perfect sense to have the Gen III thru V grouped together beacuse their basic block and mechanical architectures are similar if not the same in many aspects, and there is some good part interchangeability.  Having the Gen II on this page also goes againts the basic idea that this page and the Gen I page have: part interchangeability.  you can remove the rotating assembly from a Gen II LT1 or Gen II L99 and put them into a Gen I engine with no issue. You can't take the rotating assembly of any Gen II engines and put them into a Gen III thru Gen V engine as they are 100% completely different.  you take a Gen III 5.3 L crank and put it into a Gen IV or Gen V and there is not issue epesically if you update the exciter ring on the crank to the a 58x. The Gen III thru Gen V aren't exactly the same but at the same time they aren't 100% different.Gulielmi2002 (talk) 18:40, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove the Gen II engines from this page and merge the Gen II with the Gen I page. 

message: The Gen 5 engines need detailed and tables given.
Idea for this page:  Give each Generation it's own article.  This page is pretty bloated and long, even though I would not say the information is as complete as it could be.  The High Feature V6 is well filled out and organized, using that as an example to follow would be good.
--2602:306:3778:3089:D414:B29C:71A1:6CA (talk) 14:17, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do: Gen 5 Engines & Tables 

message: I've just removed the reference to the Factory Five from the LS1 section - seeing as it's not a production vehicle (it's a kit car), it's about as relevant as mentioning that there are 1993 RX-7's with LS1s.  Ayocee 17:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factory Five 

message: One of GM's favorite things to trumpet about the new Z06 and LS7 is that it is the first engine to be certified using SAE's J2723 test.  I find it highly suspect that they would trumpet this, and yet somehow manage to 'miss' 45hp. Ayocee 02:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect, the LS7 (like all production engines) is rated via engine dynamometer. I.E. the advertised power is what the engine produces at the flywheel.  The LS7 only produces 430-460 at the rear wheels as measured via chassis dyno in stock form. To put it simply, the LS7 produces roughly 505 HP at the crank and is NOT "underrated". TheBalance (talk) 02:16, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  '550hp' claim 

message: An effort should be made to adopt some unit convention, either SI (english) OR english (SI).  It reduces the quality of the articles if the units are constantly mixed.  For example, the engine size notation ci (cc) is proper if other measurements are cited as inches (centimeters).
That's the interesting part with American engines. The engineers design and build the block with SI, but they publicly post the engine's vital stats in english. The LT and LS blocks were both designed with SI measurement and their displacements are both advertised in metric. In this case, unit conversion should stand as "SI (english)"
With that said, it's safe to say that Detroit doesn't use cubic inches anymore. Only the old guys are calling an LS7 a "427" or an LS1 a "350".--24.89.215.104 23:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The LT block was still designed in inches, it has the same 4.0/3.48 combo that all prior 350's had.  That said, anyone calling the LS1 a "350" either works for a parts store or doesn't check their facts...most people refer to it as the 346 that it is, if they call it in cubes.  The LS7 is at least still technically a 427, even if it isa  427.9 cubic inch engine.  Ford can keep the 428 number ;) Ayocee 16:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Units 

message: HSV's GTS didn't use the LS6.  It used the LS1, that was modified by Callaway & was designated "C4B": http://autospeed.drive.com.au/cms/A_1553/article.html Aml_0000 15:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  HSV GTS 

message: I think this should be part of the article. There was a class action suit, for LS1s, no? As I recalled there were alot of pist-off GM owners. 192.197.71.189 22:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There were some, but they still amounted to a small percentage of all LS-series V8's produced.  Given that GM has never issued anything more than a TSB for the issue, and that these TSBs only cover engines up through 2002, I think the mention / wording in the article was a bit sensationalist.  For every one vehicle that had an engine replaced, or other bottom-end repairs done to resolve this issue, there are literally thousands on the road with no piston slap problems whatsoever. Ayocee 18:28, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: HAHAHA. Tell that to the people who ended up with piston slap. A manufacturer may not release a recall as this would be admitting there is a known problem, would open them to litigation and more serious class actions. By the way, what's your reference for the numbers of engines w/wo piston slap? CJ DUB 22:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please sign your posts.  How would a recall open them to more litigation, or any at all?  I have no reference that is not anecdotal (I know many people who own / have owned Generation III V8s and not one has ever had a serious case of piston slap) but I have also never once seen any actual information provided regarding the actual numbers of engines that are affected.  I get the feeling it's as overstated as the Mazda 1.8 #4 failure from 1999-2000, and Mazda did issue a TSB and recall procedure for those.Ayocee 17:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

text:  Dude that is a class action suit waiting to happen. You get $10K, I'll find a trial lawyer. The comment "I know many people who own..." is pure anecdote. The article makes it seem as though it something that really happened to nobody. The text entry "However, the scope of the problem appears to be fairly limited as no recall has been issued by General Motors, and the majority of owners of these engines do not report this issue. [citation needed] Additionally, it appears that this issue is confined only to a small number of the engines produced between 1997 and 2002." is also anedotal. Please reference the "fairly limited" and the "only early" engines. I have found evidence that this issue affect 2007 models, even. CJ DUB 22:20, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I know that my only evidence is anecdotal (which is why I noted it as such) but I've never seen any non-anecdotal evidence to the contrary.  If this is truly a 'class action lawsuit waiting to happen', how has it not happened in the decade that the engine has been out?  Where are the numbers and evidence showing how many engines have actually been replaced due to this problem?  Where are the TSBs relating explicitly to GenIII / IV engines after 2002?  The only TSBs for newer model years that I've found are GM policy changes across GM's whole line, everything below 8500LB, so basically every GM engine from the Ecotec on up except for the Duramax and 496.  Where is the proof that the problem is anything other than a cold-engine noise in almost all cases?  Every Volvo redblock I've ever seen was noisy as hell on startup and yet they'll run 200k or more like it was nothing; cold noise is not a definite indicator for long-term problems.  Where are the used GenIII / IV equipped vehicles with "New engine at xx miles" in the ad?  You'll find it with other vehicles that have engines with longevity issues (such as the FD RX-7...the turbocharged 13B rotary makes for some great power, but cared for improperly and it will eat apex seals like nobody's business).  There isn't much that can be offered as evidence that it is not a large problem, but where is the evidence that it IS a problem?Ayocee 16:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piston Slap 

message: It's getting pretty bad with a lot of GM pages but this one is particularly bad.  It looks to me that, when compared against WP:EL, none of these links pass the criteria.  Thoughts? Ayocee 16:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: All LH6's have aluminum block and heads, right?  The LS4 section of this article indicates that it is iron.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.171.180.101 (talk) 23:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aluminum LH6 reference 

message: Unless I just missed it I heard no mention of the 8.1L  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.128.182.76 (talk) 06:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: the 8.1 L vortec is a BBC engine with some mods originating from LS family.  i went to a car dealership (ron carder in alvin, tx awhile back) and they had a cut-away of this 8.1L engine.  externally and internally its a BBC; basically it's a stroked 454 with coil over plug, and even retains its hole for a distributor, but that hole is being used for some sensor that is used for timing of the coilsGulielmi2002 (talk) 16:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  what about the 8.1 liter 

message: Some pictures showing the engines apart of cars would be informative. --46.115.124.135 (talk) 13:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: what happened to the first generation in this article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BIGBLOCKFAN (talk • contribs) 15:39, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: BIGBLOCKFAN, there was never a first generation General Motors small-block engine. General Motors considers the Chevrolet small-block engine as the "first generation" small-block engine. However, it should be noted that the General Motors small-block engines are a corporate design and differ significantly from the original Chevrolet small-block engine design; enough to warrant a separate article. I hope that makes sense. Regards, VX1NG (talk) 15:12, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Generation 

message: Please consider incorporating any useful information from this submission. ~KvnG 00:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/General Motors Gen 5 "Small Block"]] 

message: Technically, there is always a number after LS, and no single engine called just LS. Instead of listing all the numbers, the common number substitution is "x". LSX Forum, LSX Fest, LSX Challenge, etc. Shouldn't it have that here? 
Plus, if you remember the ricer craze, LS is a Honda engine. 68.229.212.186 (talk) 02:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  LS or LSx? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on LS based GM small-block engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120317125329/http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2008/Whats%20New/Gen%20IV/Gen%20IV%20Car/08_LS4.doc to http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2008/Whats%20New/Gen%20IV/Gen%20IV%20Car/08_LS4.doc
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:40, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I noticed a recent edit regarding cylinder liners on the aluminum blocks was reverted.  Thing is, it's true, the aluminum block LS and LT engines use cast iron liners. Carguy1701 (talk) 01:54, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aluminum block cylinder liners 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on LS based GM small-block engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071012042027/http://www.idavette.net/hib/ls6/page3.htm to http://www.idavette.net/hib/ls6/page3.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150620181509/http://www.motoring.com.au/reviews/2008/large-passenger/holden-special-vehicles/gts/csv-gts-ls7-5794 to http://www.motoring.com.au/reviews/2008/large-passenger/holden-special-vehicles/gts/csv-gts-ls7-5794
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:18, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Add information about LT5 (376 ci V8 DOHC for 2018 Corvette ZR1) and LF3 (3.6L V6 DOHC twin turbo for 2020 Corvette C8) with same engine technology.
Reference 3 minutes 30 seconds into https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cq7YimybK_w&t=184s  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.72.253.2 (talk) 01:14, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  engine table 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on LS based GM small-block engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130702155012/http://gmpowertrain.com/VehicleEngines/PowertrainProducts.aspx to http://gmpowertrain.com/VehicleEngines/PowertrainProducts.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050112062930/http://www.corvettemuseum.com/specs/2006/LS7.shtml to http://www.corvettemuseum.com/specs/2006/LS7.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070820143041/http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/AutoshowArticles/articleId%3D117396 to http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/AutoshowArticles/articleId%3D117396
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:16, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LS based GM small-block engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140424194327/http://www.chevrolet.com/content/dam/Chevrolet/northamerica/usa/nscwebsite/en/Home/Vehicles/Performance/Engine_Showcase/LS/01_images/LS9%20Crate%20Engine%2019244099.pdf to http://www.chevrolet.com/content/dam/Chevrolet/northamerica/usa/nscwebsite/en/Home/Vehicles/Performance/Engine_Showcase/LS/01_images/LS9%20Crate%20Engine%2019244099.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:45, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I assume this is well known among people who actually do LSx swaps but do the different engines or even generations generally mate up with a given GM vehicle's existing transmission?  e.g. would an LM7 bolt up to an LR4 truck?  The C5+ Corvettes have transaxles so obviously the torque tube is not shared, but what about the other platforms?  I'm not looking for advice, and I don't think wiki would be the place to ask for it, I just think it would be notable one way or the other in terms of the history and continuity of the "GM small-block" that has been called so since 1955.74.96.220.27 (talk) 09:14, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If my memory is correct, the LM7 and the LR4 used the same transmission during production, so yeah.  Hell, the only difference with the LSx bellhousing bolt pattern versus the classic SBC is one bolt, IIRC. Carguy1701 (talk) 12:23, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swaps vs transmission mating? 

message: Does LS stand for something?  MBG02 (talk) 08:33, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not particularly, no.  However, GM engine RPO codes usually use the letter L as the first digit, and obviously the LS1 was the first member of the family, hence the designation. Carguy1701 (talk) 00:08, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why LS? 

message: I was thinking about this idly (and got into a minor argument on Facebook over it), but the LT engines shouldn't have much if any interchange with the LS engines, should they?  I know the top ends are different (the valve layout in the heads is flipped: intakes on an LT are where exhausts would be on an LS and vice versa), as well as camshafts (since LT cams need an addition on the end for the HPFP, something LS engines lack), but do the rotating assemblies have any interchange at all?  I had added a note about the design differences in the Gen V section but I'll admit I'm not 100% sure. Carguy1701 (talk) 03:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: doesn't seem like it, I looked up rotating assembly products for various LS engines, and it seems that gen III/IV are definitely interchangeable whilst the gen V doesn't show up. Hope this helps (albeit it is a bit late) Obama gaming (talk) 21:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interchange between Gen III/IV and Gen V? 

message: In my opinion the Gen VI doesn't have this place in this article. As the sources already in this section points out, the LT6 is a clean sheet design. No major parts are interchangable and the only characteristic that is tuely shared is the bore spacing. 
The Gen V also had little part intechangability with the gen III end IV, but those still had an obvious filiation in the concept (pushrod 16 valve) and the general shape of the components. This is not something that we have in the Gen VI.
Frongicide (talk) 23:12, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to agree, for the same reasons you listed. Unless GM officially calls it a Small Block (and/or Gen VI, I honestly don't recall any of the articles for the C8 Z06 or the engine using that term), it should be spun off into its own article. Carguy1701 (talk) 02:57, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Understand where you're coming from but until GM officially says otherwise, we're treating this as a sixth generation block. We'll keep an eye on it, & if any updates pop in the next couple of months I'll be more than willing to move it to it's own page. Obama gaming (talk) 03:55, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree with this is if that page was titled something like "Chevrolet small block engine family" and would encompass all gens from I to VI, but currently gen I and II have their own dedicated page. If gen I and II are different enough to LS based engines warrant their own page, then surely gen VI is too. But currently this page is titled "General Motors LS-based small-block engine", wich is not a good fit for the content of the page since while the LT6 fits the usual criterias for a small block, it is not based on the LS. Moreover, the intro of the page makes goes into detail about the choice of pushrod thechnolgy and the consequences of that choice in terms of packaging and costs, wich doesn't applies to the LT6 since it is DOHC. Frongicide (talk) 15:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes I see where you're coming from, but as you can see from this article it is still referred to as a small block, and until GM releases another engine similar to this current "architecture" then we can seriously consider creating it's own page like for generation I & II. So for now, we'll keep it here. For now. Obama gaming (talk) 22:40, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:   I am not, and have never been, contesting the "small block" part. I am contesting the "LS based" part. I find it ludicrous that we have an engine explicitely descibed as not based on the LS at the end of an article about LS based engines. If you want to wait before the split, then this page should be renamed as "modern Chevrolet Small Block engine", or something like that. The Blackwing fits the criteria for a small block too and yet has its own page - Despite the fact that it was essentially only produced in one version (with two different ouputs but hey, so was the LS3). Frongicide (talk) 03:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

text: I'd say "modern Chevrolet Small Block engine" or "Post-LS General Motors small block engine" Frongicide (talk) 14:08, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmmm, do you think something like "Chevrolet small-block engine (sixth generation)" could work? Because obviously we don't know if this is a chevy exclusive or GM-wide engine, but those are good ones Obama gaming (talk) 20:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh you meant you agree on splitting ? Great ! "Chevrolet small-block engine (sixth generation)" would indeed be the most appropriate name for the dedicated Gen VI page IMO yes Frongicide (talk) 21:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have created a dedicated page with this name. Content is mostly info that was on this page for now. Frongicide (talk) 04:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gen VI removal 

message: It would seem this article was written by fanbois? 2607:F598:B69A:8D0:AD0B:1E18:FE37:B537 (talk) 17:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: There are 1-2 paragraphs that could stand a rework, even though the info is nominally correct. Carguy1701 (talk) 21:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The introduction is certainly worded in a way that it completely deserves a re-write, but I'm not quite sure if we should remove it or reword it. The whole article needs a refresh to be honest, I'm just starting off with easy things such as replacing dead links for dyno charts. Obama gaming (talk) 20:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I might take a stab at the one where Sloppy is namedropped if I get time, but if you beat me to it I won't complain. Carguy1701 (talk) 03:33, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

text: Would pointing out that some LS engines outpowered their slightly larger Ford counterparts be too fanboyish? Examples would be how the 4.8L rather handily outpowered the 4.6L 2V in trucks and vans, as well as the 5.3L outpowering the 5.4L in both 2V and 3V forms. Carguy1701 (talk) 17:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that should be mentioned, unless there are specific mentions in tertiary sources (i.e. the 4.8L was the most powerful engine when it was released in X vehicle, more powerful than its Ford counterpart in Y vehicle). Otherwise I think it's WP:UNDUE. X-750 Rust In Peace... Polaris 23:55, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. Carguy1701 (talk) 03:07, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone 

message: Since this seems to be a hot button issue, I'll quote Cadillac's own press release: "The Escalade-V’s engine shares architectural similarities with the CT5-V Blackwing’s supercharged V-8, but features a larger, 2.65L R2650 TVS supercharger that helps overcome the higher inlet and exhaust restrictions on the full-size SUV application."; Car and Driver essentially says the same thing. That sounds like it's a modified version of the LT4. However, the press release does not give an RPO code for the engine (I think the press release for the CT5-V Blackwing did, for context). I'll admit I can't see GM developing a new variant of the Gen V engine for one application, but until we've got more concrete information, I think we should hold off on adding the Escalade-V to the LT4 application table. Carguy1701 (talk) 01:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If you insist, . I have no objections. X-750 Rust In Peace... Polaris 02:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Jalopnik says it is in fact the LT4. The supercharger (and block casting, apparently) are different from the CT5-V Blackwing. Wouldn't be the first time that GM has done something like this (the twin versions of the LT1 from the 90s come to mind). Carguy1701 (talk) 11:49, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep. Lot of articles say the engine is the same from the CT5-V blackwing (which has the same block, but a 2.65L supercharger instead of whatever the original displacement was). Cheers GM. Makes things really clear. X-750 Rust In Peace... Polaris 23:53, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  LT4 in Escalade-V 

message: For anyone wondering; I've rectified the broken anchor by red-adding it into the Silverado page. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 19:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anchor  

message: In several places, there appear to be incorrect cubic inch displacements. For example, the 5.3L Gen V L83 is listed as being 320 ci, but the 96 mm x 92 mm creates a 325 ci displacement. I was wondering whether the article or the calculator is correct. Thanks! 209.122.138.80 (talk) 21:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Displacements