Sign in to follow this  
76ChevyTrucker

General Motors SB V8

8 posts in this topic

All right, ya'll, I have a question that's been nagging me for some time now and I haven't been able to come up witha concise answer, or theory. In the 1999 model year, why did Chevrolet and GMC drop the beloved 305 and 350 from their line up and move to the smaller 4.8 and 5.3 engines? I know that sometimes you can get more out of a smaller package, but why get rid of the two engines that at least three generations had grown to know and love?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NeonLX    40

Updating technology to improve fuel economy and emissions? That would be my guess.

The 5.3L apparently does pretty well but from what I've heard, the 4.8L is a real stone.

Is the 6.0L engine a relative of the 4.8L & 5.3L?

Edited by NeonLX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carguy    20

The 4.8L is NO DOG like the old 305 was. And yes the 4.8L/5.3L and the 6.0L are all related yet there are differences between them. The 6.0L can take a 4.00 in bore while the 4.8/5.3 can not due to a different casting. All of these NEW GEN small blocks use a mutch STRONGER BLOCK DESIGN with 6 bolt mains that replaced mear 2 bolt ones in the old 305's and some 350's. Other 350's in HD form used 4 bolt mains but NOW even the base 4.8L is STRONGER AND SUPERIOR then the old HD 4 bolt main 350's. These new ones are FAR SUPERIOR to the old ones in EVERY WAY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NeonLX    40

I haven't personally driven a vehicle with the 4.8L; only the 5.3L and 6.0L V8s (a Suburban and an Yukon XL Denali respectively). A coworker of mine has a 2002 GMC 1500 2WD with the 4.8L and he says it doesn't have much low-end grunt, which makes sense considering the relatively small displacement. As you note, the 305 wasn't exactly a barn stormer either.

I've also heard that these newer V8s are pretty rugged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new LS series engines take the best of the old, reliable and bullet-proof simplicity and wrap it up in a sophisticated and yet timeless design that leaves out all the bull$h! like timing belts and expensive, complex, heavy, bulky & high maintenance DOHC.

Long live the SBC. I hope that it lives forever... it may just outlive most other forms of internal combustion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NeonLX    40

The new LS series engines take the best of the old, reliable and bullet-proof simplicity and wrap it up in a sophisticated and yet timeless design that leaves out all the bull$h! like timing belts and expensive, complex, heavy, bulky & high maintenance DOHC.

Long live the SBC. I hope that it lives forever... it may just outlive most other forms of internal combustion.

Amen. I've always been a fan of the SBC, going back to my '56 Chevy 210 and its gutsy little 265 V8.

One of the endearing qualities of the current Caravan/T&C for me is their rugged pushrod V6 engines. Of course, they've got the usual distributorless ignition, roller lifters and SMPI injection, but the underlying simplicy of their design shines through --and they tend to be pretty bulletproof as well (not to mention torquey).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rkmdogs    0

One of the endearing qualities of the current Caravan/T&C for me is their rugged pushrod V6 engines.  Of course, they've got the usual distributorless ignition, roller lifters and SMPI injection, but the underlying simplicy of their design shines through --and they tend to be pretty bulletproof as well (not to mention torquey).

Thank you for the endorsement of the new D-C offerings. I just bought a '05

T & C, with the 3.8L V6. After having 3 Astros that went forever with the 4.3L V6,

I was wondering how the D-C boys had done with this older design engine. Glad to

hear that it too, is a good reliable design.

Maybe someday GM will wake up again and rejoin the mini-van market!

The SBC design has constantly improved since Ed Cole did it in 1955, and the

new versions in the LS2 configuration seem to carry on that tradition.

Just wish that they would put it in a vehicle that I can use! :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NeonLX    40

The Chrysler 3.3L/3.8L engines are really rugged. I've owned four different vehicles with them myself (all minivans) and I've never experienced any mechanical difficulties except having to replace a water pump. The basic design is very simple and sound. They will seemingly go forever.

Interestingly, DC will be using the 3.8L V6 in the updated '07 Wrangler. It will take the place of the old AMC 4.0L inline six. those are mighty big shoes to fill. The old inline six is one of my very favorite engines of all time--but I've got a lot of respect for the 3.3L/3.8L V6s as well.

I feel bad for the current GM minivan offerings. They have nice interiors but they are not particularly well-designed. The extra length of the schnozz, to make them look more SUV-like, is nothing but wasted space and makes them that much harder to park. They've also gained several hundred pounds over the previous generation so they are pokier and get worse fuel economy to boot.

Edited by NeonLX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this