Jump to content

5.3L Alum VS. 5.3L Iron


Recommended Posts

Posted

This is a topic in which I have found next to no information. I was wanting to know if anyone had any first hand experiences or knowledge on the issue. Here is my experience with the two. My 2004 had the 295 hp Iron with 3.42's. My 2005 has the 310 Hp Alum. Block with 4.10's. I can tell you that my 2005 alum. block is stronger than the 2004 iron. I am just not sure if it is more because of the gears rather than the motor. However, I did test drive an Aluminum Block 2005 truck with 3.42's. It also did feel stronger than my 2004 iron. I desperately wanted 4.10 gears though. Has anyone seen dyno #'s or seen any 1/4 mile times with the two different motors and seen any difference. I did not get to the dyno before my 2004 burned up so I wouldn't know how much if any power difference there would be when I dyno my 2005. I can tell you from experience factory hp ratings are worthless. I have personally seen stock Ls1's dyno anywhere between 287-326 rwhp on the dyno; so that tells you how much difference there can be between cars straight from the factory. All comments and knowledge on this topic are greatly appreciated. thanks.

Posted

I didn't think you could a 3.42 gear in an '04 Z71. When I optioned mine up it was either 3.73 or 4.10. The 3.42 rear end in a 4X4 was introduced for the 2005 model year.

My .02 cents

Posted

An aluminum block by itself doesn't make a bit of difference in output.

 

What it does do is reduce weight, allowing for better cooling, and *maybe* allow a little more compression (although that's really more with alum heads vs iron heads).

 

I think you're forgetting that the 310 is an HO, so the power-curve may be different, making it feel like more than just the 15hp.

 

And the 4.10 vs the 4.42 makes a HUGE difference !!!

 

But that with a 50lb difference in block weight also helps...

Posted
An aluminum block by itself doesn't make a bit of difference in output.

 

What it does do is reduce weight, allowing for better cooling, and *maybe* allow a little more compression (although that's really more with alum heads vs iron heads).

 

I think you're forgetting that the 310 is an HO, so the power-curve may be different, making it feel like more than just the 15hp.

 

And the 4.10 vs the 4.42 makes a HUGE difference !!!

 

But that with a 50lb difference in block weight also helps...

 

 

 

 

What He said ^

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Mr Quad- You are definately correct about the cooling. My 05' Aluminum motor runs about 15 degrees cooler than my 2004 truck. I have noticed that the 05' Aluminum motor does not keep as much oil pressure as did my 2004 iron. The compression from what I have read is 9.8:1 on the 05 rather than the 9:1 on the 04 iron block.

Posted

Aluminum heads tolerate compression better than iron heads, so everything else identical, AL heads can run more compression.

 

I'd assume an AL block would help even more ?? Don't really know that....

 

The oil pressure thing is just a co-ink-a-dink. I can't see where there'd be any difference there. Just looser tolerances or something...

 

One thing I do know is with AL heads, you want to make sure you get a decent amount of temp in the heads before you start hammering on it. They'll warp much easier than iron heads.

 

This is especially true on iron block/AL head engines, but apllies to AL block/ AL head engines too.

 

And it just a good idea in general to warm an engine before hammering on it. Warm oil works better than cold oil :confused:

 

 

One final note- I am be no means any kind of authority on this subject. This is just what I've picked up reading and talking with those that know.... I'm sure there are plenty of MUCH more knowledgable guys here on the subject...

 

I'm no expert... I just play one on the internet :cheers:

  • 5 months later...
Posted
Did they make the aluminum block in 2004?

 

 

 

 

Yes, they have been making them sine 1999. :flag:

 

 

 

 

 

 

No,Actually they didn't until this year ('05) for the trucks (And only the 5.3)

Now the 5.7 in the Vette has been an alum. block since '97 and in the Camaro since '98.

Posted

I have the 05' HO alum. 5.3. I do notice that my oil pressure is lower than alot of my buddies with older models. At a warmed up idle my truck sits around 35psi. Anyone else's similar? I switched to Mobil 1 fully synthetic at around 650 miles via many reccomendations here. Might that be why the pressure is lower than normal?

Posted

Yep,Either look at the eighth digit of your VIN or your RPO label in the glove box.

The eight digit of your VIN will be a "B" and you should have option code "L33" on your label if you have the "H.O." 5300-Alum.Block Engine.

Posted
Just read that the aluminum block was available in the extra cab but not the crew in '05 is that correct?

 

 

 

 

 

Yep,Thats correct,Its only available on the 1/2 ton ext.cab short-bed trucks.

Posted

Hey MS3DALE,

I thought they introduced the 5.3L in 1999 and it was aluminum block and heads?? I knew the LS1 was introduced in 1997 to the vette and 1998 to the camaro and transam.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Most thermostatically controlled ATF systems use a 'wax' pill just like the one in your water thermostat. They work on the expansion volume of the wax and the pill is constructed in such a way as to limit the travel to remain within that range. This means it has an opening temperature often called the 'cracking temperature' and a fully open temperature. For whatever reason oil is designated by it's fully open temperature and water by it's cracking temperature.    Between the two it the "Regulating Temperature" The entire range is about 20 F from closed to open. In your example the lower limit, opening point of 145 F then has a fully open temp of 165 F and a throttling temperature of 155 F.    Thing is, the throttling temperature needs two things to work properly. Enough system load high enough to reach the minimum and a heat sink (cooler/exchanger) large enough to prevent any load applied from exceeding the fully open temperature.    If your system exceeds the fully open temperature it is screaming MORE COOLER.    Here is the silly part of the whole thermostat system where the oil is cooled/heated by the radiator. Nothing is flowing to that system until the oil temperature reaches the cracking temperature unless it is equipped with a minimum flow bypass orifice or a bypass built into the seating surface of the plunger. That system meant to get it up to temp quicker isn't doing a thing until WORK drives if from ambient to cracking temp. One a cold winter day, like zero F, it may never get hotter than about 110 F. Sometimes not even that.    People forget or are young enough to not know that until this millennia transmissions were cooled by the radiator cold tank alone and without a thermostat at all.  In the 50's they weren't even cooled. OEMs learn everything the hard way.    When an OEM tells you the trans "Works best" between 175 F and 220 F it means works best for THEM. The transmission thermostat is fuel play. If you watch you trans temps like I do you will learn that it may take a hundred miles if you are not towing and not driving more than say 55-60 mph on a zero F day to even reach 120 F and it might sit there all day if it's colder. Yet if functions perfectly over about 100 F. It may need to get a bit warmer for the fuel and spark maps to go without an multiplier.    Worry more about too hot. Use a cooler large enough to put that thermostat in range.         
    • Around 2008 if memory serves they took sulfur out. That was when diesel went up. 
    • Question for you Grumpy, why is diesel so much more than gasoline? Seems to me that it may be slightly a little less refined than gas and it doesn't have 10% alcohol which presumably lowers the price of gas
    • Thanks, so being a different beast altogether, anyone know what the "optimal" temp is for the 10L80/90 for proper shifting?
    • How many years have I pointed out every point in that link to the folks here and been avalanched with criticisms and outright hostilities at times? I ran counter to even the great CUSTOMBOSS and Lake Speed Jr and the half dozen experts on YouTube and in the final.....GM, Physics (Stribeck) backs that Grumpy old Bear.    Honestly, I never said a thing engineering hadn't studied silly and laid in concrete during WWII. But I'm old, the information is old and yet, the Laws of Physics are eternal.    Okay there is one exception. I vehemently disagree with their use of the word 'tolerances' when what it meant is "clearance".   The clearance is the distance between two objects. The tolerance is the degree of acceptable variation permitted in that clearance. I.E., piston to bore clearance is 0.004" with a tolerance of +/- .0002" so the clearance is in specification if it lies between 0.0038" and 0.0042". Cutting that 'tolerance in half has ZERO impact on lubrication requirements. Makes for more difficulty in manufacturing.  But a tighter clearance 'MAY'. Depends on finish. Anyway....   It's one of those statements made by people to make themselves look smarter than they are to convince people who are as un-enlighten as they seem to manipulate their behaviors. But hey, the blind leading the blind puts them both in the pit. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...