Supercharged 5.3 or LS2

[IrishBoxer92]

Hey guys, just wondering which one would be a better runner for a car that's going to be more of a hill climb/canyon carver kind of car. The 5.3 is cheap and a supercharger could add some nice power but is a heavy iron block. The ls2 is much lighter, would make around the same power if not more from bolt ons but is a lot more expensive. I've done research but still can't make a choice, so I'm wondering if you guys with a lot more experience can help street me in the right direction with this.
Thanks guys!

[andrewb70]

There is something easy and simple about running a naturally aspirated engine. Personally, I would run the biggest, lightest engine possible. For a laundry list full of reasons. Weight, packaging, cooling, durability, etc...

Andrew

[Bonehead]

All personal preference really. There's little you can do wrong with the LS platform. I have an Edelbrock supercharger on my 2009 Silverado with a 5.3L. Its been flawless. Boost on demand and with a positive displacement style unit, you don't have to run a ton of boost to get them to perform. Link to a little YouTube video in my signature.

I wouldn't worry a bit about an iron block vs an aluminum block on a street car. Practically zero difference in weight savings if you have a suspension that's dialed in for the vehicle. Find a nice LQ4 with less than 200K, and build it how you want it.

[IrishBoxer92]

Cool, thanks guys. I might just save up for the ls2. N/A is so much less of a hassle than forced induction.

[carguykeith]

By the time you added ALL of the necessary items to supercharge you would be much cheaper to buy the LS2. Have you thought about an L92? More displacement, better heads and maybe even cheaper than an LS2.

[andrewb70]

By the time you added ALL of the necessary items to supercharge you would be much cheaper to buy the LS2. Have you thought about an L92? More displacement, better heads and maybe even cheaper than an LS2.

I will second the above sentiment. More displacement is better. My L92 (with LS3 top end and LS7 cam) makes 418rwhp, gets 20mpg, and idles like grandmothers station wagon.

Andrew

[IrishBoxer92]

totally forgot about that engine, might be a good idea if it's a little cheaper and with a little more cubes. Isn't that the one with vvt though?

thanks for the ideas guys!

edit: and does it share the same intake manifolds as the other LS motors?

[blu72nova]

By the time you added ALL of the necessary items to supercharge you would be much cheaper to buy the LS2. Have you thought about an L92? More displacement, better heads and maybe even cheaper than an LS2.

^^^

This. But if you are considering forced induction, do some more research. You can make way more power with the 5.3 compared to a full bolt on LS2. Check out the forced induction section on ls1tech.com lots of good info there.

[chuckd71]

The dod and afm stuff can be removed from the l92 (though if I were to do it over I'd probably keep it).
It can also be turboed, so nothing says you can't buy a bigger motor now the boost it later.

[joshtownsend]

difference is 60lbs... but the iron block itself will more then make up for that in terns of holding my boost and not flexing... after 20 psi or so.. aluminum will start to have issues..

[snappytravis]

I just fired up my supercharged 69 Camaro. ls3 413 lysholm 3300 with wegner front drive setup. Here is the thing, How much power do you need, How much money do you want to spend, Horsepower=Money, If you want a nice engine that is simple skip the S/C idea. If I was to do It again I may not go the route I did. Sit down a put a pencil to it, You don't just buy a supercharger for a 69 Camaro with intercooler. It is all custom stuff that has to be pieced together. Intercooler, Pump, hoses, front drive, Good luck whatever way you go!