Engine and Transmission Tech

tips, technology, tools and techniques related to vehicle driveline components

Go to Thread: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicLog In
Goto Page: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3


Scott68B
Scott Costanzo
Columbus, Ohio
(541 posts)

Registered:
10/25/2007 11:30AM

Main British Car:
1968 MGB GM 5.3 LS4 V8

authors avatar
LS Engines
Posted by: Scott68B
Date: March 11, 2016 09:15PM

Take this for what it's worth. I found it interesting.





BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(5812 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: March 12, 2016 11:28AM

All good info.

For my money, IF sheet metal mods for an LS swap into an MGB could be minimal, that would be the way to go without question. Unfortunately, thus far nobody has shown us how to do that.

There seems in my mind to be a misconception that you have to position the engine rearward to achieve acceptable weight distribution. I do not buy this for two reasons. First, the car is very tolerant of extra weight on the front end, and second, when the rear axle is upgraded you will add ballast.

I would therefore suggest that somebody at least attempt a forward engine placement to see if it is at least possible to fit the LS in the car without carving great holes in the firewall. I realize this might be difficult but we need to know. If it can be done, we need to know how.

I noted that several of the LS claims to fame also apply to the SBB. "Y" block, light(er) weight, cast iron rigidity, and availability of good heads. The SBB also uses a long skirt piston, and we could use a little more study of bore length.

Good article Scott, thanks for posting.

Jim


danmas
Dan Masters
Alcoa, Tennessee
(574 posts)

Registered:
10/28/2007 12:11AM

Main British Car:
1974 MGBGT Ford 302

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: danmas
Date: March 12, 2016 11:50AM

Quote:
...when the rear axle is upgraded you will add ballast.

Just for the record, a Ford 8" axle with an aluminum carrier housing and disc brakes weighs 135 pounds, per Ted Lathrop. A stock B axle with drum brakes weighs 165 pounds, as reported by some one whom I can't recall - Dan Lagrue?

Still, I'd like to see more on MGB/LS conversions.


Moderator
Curtis Jacobson
Portland Oregon
(4411 posts)

Registered:
10/12/2007 02:16AM

Main British Car:
71 MGBGT, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: Moderator
Date: March 12, 2016 11:56AM

Nice video! The LS really is a great alternative.

I beg to differ on some of Jim's points. I don't think a few firewall and tunnel mods are a big deal. Also, the later MGB (Salisbury) axle is heavier than an 8" Ford (for example), leaf springs with lever shocks are much heavier than a 3 or 4 link with coilovers, and disc brakes can be lighter than drum brakes. Question: is a 5-speed readily available for LS? (T56 is so big and heavy!)

Scott, have you weighed your car yet?


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(5812 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: March 12, 2016 03:14PM

Didn't mean to start an argument, but dollars to pounds... IF you could even buy an aluminum 8" carrier anymore since Currie quit making them, and IF an 8" axle is considered strong enough for an LS which I'd say it isn't.

And yes, for many of us firewall mods are no big deal especially if you have what it takes to do the LS conversion in the first place, BUT Firewall mods tend to impinge on the rest of the vehicle, specifically the driver's footwell and the heater location and there's little enough real estate in the footwell already. Besides which, most owners I think really would prefer not to cut the car if they could avoid it. At least that's what I've been hearing.

But it seems to me this entire disagreement is really about the weight balance of the car. So the first question to answer is, "How much does the LS weigh?" I've seen figures around 418 to 450 lbs as being in the ballpark of the lightest practical weight. Considering the stock engine was 350 lbs that is a very reasonable range to work with. 68-100 lbs extra. Even if you center it where the stock engine was and don't do anything to the axle that's going to change the weight balance very little. Less than loading your weekend gear in the trunk will, and less than the difference between a full and an empty gas tank. You might get a one or two percent shift in the weight balance, and that simply isn't going to be enough that anyone but a race car driver out on the track would be able to tell the difference. What little change there might be can be readily tuned out with tire pressure and swaybar adjustments if deemed necessary, and in a high horsepower RWD car it is better to have a little more forward weight bias anyway, as it gives improved handling under throttle, and since most owners will not be using staggered tire sizes front to rear, will have absolutely no effect on braking.

So why cut up the firewall just for some theoretical advantage? I haven't heard any complaints about the 302's or 300's having weight balance problems and in a best case we are only talking about an 18 lb difference. Surely not enough to notice. By anybody, anywhere.

Jim


mgb260
Jim Nichols
Sequim,WA
(1978 posts)

Registered:
02/29/2008 08:29PM

Main British Car:
1973 MGB roadster 260 Ford V8

Re: LS Engines
Posted by: mgb260
Date: March 12, 2016 05:04PM

Curtis, Scott's LS4 uses the small 60 degree V6 bellhousing(check Scott's thread with custom flywheel and starter mods). The other LS are able to use a SBC with mods(1 bolt hole and TQ spacer for Auto). T5 is doable or Colorado/Solstice/Toyota R154 with Novak or Advance adapter.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2016 05:08PM by mgb260.


Scott68B
Scott Costanzo
Columbus, Ohio
(541 posts)

Registered:
10/25/2007 11:30AM

Main British Car:
1968 MGB GM 5.3 LS4 V8

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: Scott68B
Date: March 12, 2016 05:32PM

Quote:
Scott, have you weighed your car yet?

Curtis, yes, at the meet last year. It was 2104# with a 1/4 tank of gas. The LS added 100# compared to the V6. I'm using a T5....same one I had with the V6.

Are you coming to the meet? Hope so!



MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(3744 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
79 MGB, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: March 12, 2016 07:02PM

I have kept an eye out for a used Currie 8" aluminum carrier. They seem to be extinct. :(

As Jim N. mentioned there are ways to still use a T-5.

I have pics of 2 different LS builds where the stock heater is still in place, so it doesn't have to be hacked up. Some just want more setback. Like Jim B., our feet are too big to lose any real estate in the driver toe box area.

Jim B., you are sounding like Deja vu all over again. :)

[forum.britishv8.org]


danmas
Dan Masters
Alcoa, Tennessee
(574 posts)

Registered:
10/28/2007 12:11AM

Main British Car:
1974 MGBGT Ford 302

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: danmas
Date: March 12, 2016 07:03PM

Quote:
"How much does the LS weigh?" I've seen figures around 418 to 450 lbs as being in the ballpark of the lightest practical weight. Considering the stock engine was 350 lbs that is a very reasonable range to work with. 68-100 lbs extra.

Again, just for the record - a stock MGB engine weighs very close to 400 pounds, so we're talking 20-50 pounds difference? As Jim says, no big deal.
MGB engine.jpg


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(3744 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
79 MGB, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: March 12, 2016 09:10PM

Here's another current LS MGB/GT build. It was a hack job Olds 215 TH350 conversion many years ago. The Son is now trying to repair the damage & go LS T-5. It looks like it will have more setback, too.

[corner-carvers.com]


tr8todd
Todd Kishbach

(355 posts)

Registered:
12/04/2009 07:42AM

Main British Car:


Re: LS Engines
Posted by: tr8todd
Date: March 12, 2016 09:51PM

I know you guys like your MGBs, but I'm getting ready to stuff a LS3 and the Tremec TR6060 6 speed into a TR8 coupe. As soon as I get done reinforcing the body that is. Thats a 2010 Camaro SS with 11,097 miles. Bought the whole car at salvage auction for less than what I paid to build my last 5.0 Rover engine that made 327HP. Stock LS3 makes 426. This one has been warmed over and makes closer to 500. By the time I get done selling the good pieces off this Camaro that I don't use in the TR, my buy in should be around what it costs to do a nice rebuild on a 3.5 Rover.
DSC04053.JPG
DSC04051.JPG
DSC04052.JPG


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(3744 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
79 MGB, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: March 13, 2016 11:56AM

What is wrong with the Camaro?! RR quarter panel?

A TR7/LS3 & Group 44 flares would be mighty tempting to switch Marques! ;)


tr8todd
Todd Kishbach

(355 posts)

Registered:
12/04/2009 07:42AM

Main British Car:


Re: LS Engines
Posted by: tr8todd
Date: March 13, 2016 07:36PM

Looks like the whole right side went up against a guard rail. Front and rear bumper covers tore at the ends. Both right side wheels have slight curbage. Tie rod end snapped and lower control arm bent. Would be an easy fix, but thats not going to happen. Pretty sure it was totaled because of all the engine and exhaust mods done to it. First owner only covered 1700 miles in 5 years and did all the mods. 2nd owner covered 9300 miles in 7 weeks and wrecked it. 2nd owner wasn't able to get it to pass Mass emissions because of the mods, so I'm sure that played into it getting totaled. Saw the salvage report, and there were things listed on there that were perfectly fine. Even with the phantom repair work, there was only $12K worth of repairs, and payout was 34,000. I don't get it, but I'm not complaining. No Group 44 flares for me. Trying to keep it stealthy. Cage is as hidden and fully incorporated into the body as is possible. Fenders were forcibly flared enough to get a full 12" or tire in the rear and 11" in the front. Goal is 500hp and somewhere around 2500 pounds. Once I get use to that, I'll think about a small turbo for it.


primaz
Alan P
Northern California
(13 posts)

Registered:
05/26/2014 10:43PM

Main British Car:
1965 Jaguar 3.8S LS V8 5.3 liter aluminum block/heads

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: primaz
Date: March 13, 2016 11:27PM

I think you folks with the small British sports car are just amazing at your creative talents with V8's! I have a much larger Jaguar 3.8s and used the 5.3 liter aluminum block/head LS1 truck motor with a mild cam, upgraded ECU/computer, headers, and it puts out about 460 hp at the fly wheel. It was still a tight fit but it did fit. Some things like the horns, AC had to be mounted into the wheel wells. Also a good tip look into creating additional air intake to route air into the engine bay. I had no issues with upgraded radiator,etc. for the engine but the engine bay being so stuffed need more air flow. I solved this with a ram air intake under the car that routed air around the V8/headers and then out larger holes in the inner wheel wells near the firewall. These motors are great with so much power, so many after market performance parts and kits for engine swaps. They will last easily 200 to 300K.


tr8todd
Todd Kishbach

(355 posts)

Registered:
12/04/2009 07:42AM

Main British Car:


Re: LS Engines
Posted by: tr8todd
Date: May 29, 2016 07:12PM

Pulled the engine trans combo from the Camaro today and put it on the scales. Engine with trans bolted to it comes in under 650 pounds. No exhaust manifolds/headers, no power steering pump, no AC compressor, no engine mounts. Had the complete intake with a cold air kit, complete wiring harness, shifter, clutch, flywheel, starter. Engine still had the oil and tranny still had the fluid and the fluid lines. Seems these trannys have an internal pump that sends the oil to a cooler and then sprays the fluid onto the gears. Tranny alone is listed at 142 pounds... ouch! 650 for the complete ready to drop in weight is not too hard to handle. I should weigh up a complete Rover with intake and tranny to see how much of a difference there is.



Anarchy99
Jim Purdy
Memphis, TN
(117 posts)

Registered:
12/06/2013 03:54PM

Main British Car:
61 austin healey sprite LS6

Re: LS Engines
Posted by: Anarchy99
Date: May 30, 2016 09:07AM

I know for a fact one won't fit into a sprite without extensive mods... I had one shoe horned in, even had forward facing manifolds, but there was no way to get it to fit under the hood, which was the big selling point of the LS engine for me... Even with the intake swapped around backwards and the TB in the dash area. Ended up just putting a SBC in and a 142 through the hood. I have pics of the LS stuff though in the Sprite if anyone wants them.


Dan B
Dan Blackwood
South Charleston, WV
(972 posts)

Registered:
11/06/2007 01:55PM

Main British Car:
1966 TR4A, 1980 TR7 Multiport EFI MegaSquirt on the TR4A. Lexus V8 pl

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: Dan B
Date: May 31, 2016 03:21PM

Can you post the pics?


Anarchy99
Jim Purdy
Memphis, TN
(117 posts)

Registered:
12/06/2013 03:54PM

Main British Car:
61 austin healey sprite LS6

Re: LS Engines
Posted by: Anarchy99
Date: June 01, 2016 12:09PM

[forum.britishv8.org]

most of the pics are in there but I can dig up specific pics if needed


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(3744 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
79 MGB, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: LS Engines
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: June 01, 2016 02:51PM

[quote]Tranny alone is listed at 142 pounds.]

I'm guessing that number is a dry weight.

As for adding ballast with a heavier rear end such as an 8.8, unsprung weight gain? You feeling okay, Jim? ;)

Other than the LS4, I believe the common flywheel is 14" 168 tooth, way big, like BBC. a "621" BBC bell housing can be used. We need to go smaller, though, for our LBC. As Jim N. mentioned a SBC bell will work using 5 of the 6 bolt holes along with a 153 tooth flywheel. I believe Scott's LS4 used a 142 tooth flywheel with that even smaller bell. Of course, then you have to get a starter to mate up.

So for mockup, we need the smallest bell & flywheel combo that will work with all the other LS variants (since the LS4 is the red headed stepchild), then we can see how well it will fit in a RB MG without ANY footwell intrusions.

LS motor mount adapter plate template.

[www.diyautotune.com]

More bellhousing/flywheel/clutch info.

[www.hotrod.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2016 03:10PM by MGBV8.


tr8todd
Todd Kishbach

(355 posts)

Registered:
12/04/2009 07:42AM

Main British Car:


Re: LS Engines
Posted by: tr8todd
Date: June 01, 2016 04:24PM

Thats why I ponied up the big dollars and bought a whole Camaro. I figured in the end I would have spent the same amount or more trying to piece it together. This way I get everything, including a tunable ECM. Now I just need to figure out how I want to go about moving the shifter forward.
Goto Page: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.