Weekend Progress Part II - 5.3 install - pics

[Lane]

Well - finally finished the motor mounts.. Ended up welding the I6 mounts to the plates I made for the 5.3. Got tired of trying to line everything up and make it a bolt on deal. The only reason I didn't weld it up to start with was because of the rubber in the mount. I was afraid of melting/damaging it - or seperating it from the mount itself. Didn't hurt it at all - I just took my time welding - and cooling it off.









Got all the accessories back on:









Yes - the exhaust manifold is backwards. Just thinking WAY ahead.. It does not clear the frame rail(normal), which has me worried about headers. I'd like to run Mac mid lengths(F-bod), but I'm not too sure they'll work either. If not, guess I'll be making headers too.

One last shot:

[GRIMSS]

I was thinking you were going turbo with the exhaust that way.

Keep the pics coming.

[scotts62]

Heck ya that looks good!

[TR65]

Hey Lane,

Thanks for all the pics and info. The motor mounts look good.

I have a 6 litre to go in my 65 and I was planning on using the cast iron exhaust manifolds. It looks like I have a ton of clearance with the frame rail. They might hit the motor mount but not the frame. They look very similar to yours but not exactly (mine are from a SSR). Where exactly are you hitting?

Thanks,

TR

PS. I was going to use header wrap or something on mine. The cast manifolds are pretty hard to beat power wise. In the tests I have seen the headers can usually barely match the cast iron on LS1 / LS2.

[1974k5blazer]

sweet man! how is all the wiring going to be??? fairly easy or what?

[BlueJeep]

I believe the stock truck manifolds splay out too far to where the frame would have to be notched to fit them. There was a post on the 67-72 forum where the guy notched his frame around the manifolds to fit the stock truck ones.

[pcmcobra]

fbody manifold will probably fit, they fit my 86.

[Lane]

Originally Posted by TR65

Hey Lane,

Thanks for all the pics and info. The motor mounts look good.

I have a 6 litre to go in my 65 and I was planning on using the cast iron exhaust manifolds. It looks like I have a ton of clearance with the frame rail. They might hit the motor mount but not the frame. They look very similar to yours but not exactly (mine are from a SSR). Where exactly are you hitting?

Thanks,

TR

PS. I was going to use header wrap or something on mine. The cast manifolds are pretty hard to beat power wise. In the tests I have seen the headers can usually barely match the cast iron on LS1 / LS2.

Yeah, some of the stock manifolds flow very well - especially the Vette's. Your motor must be sitting higher, because the manifold on mine just comes down too far and hits the rail all along the main runner. It(header) needs to be either closer in to the motor or not hang as low.

Header wrap should do the trick for heat.

[Lane]

Originally Posted by 1974k5blazer

sweet man! how is all the wiring going to be??? fairly easy or what?

LOL - I've got some good pics of my harness - that's spread out all over a room in my house. :yikes: I'm switching to a fly-by-cable setup so I'm going to have to change/add some plugs on the harness I have(fly-by-wire harness) -which will be the hardest part of it. Other than that, I have it all cleaned up and ready to add relays/fuses and it's ready to wire up.

I'll post some pics on that as well when I get to that bridge.

[Lane]

Originally Posted by BlueJeep

I believe the stock truck manifolds splay out too far to where the frame would have to be notched to fit them. There was a post on the 67-72 forum where the guy notched his frame around the manifolds to fit the stock truck ones.

Yes - too far out and too low. It would take some serious notching on my truck to make it work..

An F-bod mandifold may work. I've heard of guys using long-tubes with this setup no problem. But they had after market mounts - or home-made mounts.

[billysbowties]

DAD BURN IT

This is what I was afraid of, I had my heart and soul set on putting a 5.3 in my truck and the way it looks your going to have to do some wild bending or notching your frame or something. Please post anything you figure out on this and if there is anybody out there that has already accomplished this please let us know something.

Thanks
BB

[greg64]

Looks great, Lane! Looking at your passenger side motor mount pic, I see your "secret" for increased fuel economy!

[joe231]

Billy, there are a few trucks on here with the new gen small blocks, it can be done.
i believe super73 has one in his drag truck, might pm him and see if he will give you some input.

[Lane]

Here's one - a '68, but the frame is the same right?





F-bod LT's - it's tight, very tight on the passenger side, but it's in there. His motor may be a little farther back than mine.

billy - it my take some tweaking, but overall it looks like these motors were made for our trucks!

[1974k5blazer]

can't wait to see it all done man!

[Chevysdominate]

Whats the ground clearance like with those headers?

Originally Posted by Lane

Here's one - a '68, but the frame is the same right?





F-bod LT's - it's tight, very tight on the passenger side, but it's in there. His motor may be a little farther back than mine.

billy - it my take some tweaking, but overall it looks like these motors were made for our trucks!

[billysbowties]

Thanks for the great pictures, they look great. What size exhaust is that and what do the headers come from. I don't know if a 68 frame is the same width as a 66 (is it). Oh and buy the way what is F-bod LT's.

Thanks again
BB

[TimE]

Not positive on the frame widths but I believe that they are very close if not the same. As for the meaning of F-Bod LTs, it is short for F-Body(Camaro/TransAm) Long Tube headers.

[billysbowties]

Thanks alot.
BB

[Lane]

Originally Posted by Chevysdominate

Whats the ground clearance like with those headers?

Here's a side pic:

This is not my truck btw

[Lane]

You can tell in this pic that he's going to have issues on the passenger side. Looks like the header is resting on the rail.

[Fastrucken]

Those are Pasesetter headers. Last summer they were 399 and are worth every penny. I used those for my 5.3 swap. The end of the collector of the d/s has to be angle cut to clear the frame rail, but not too bad. Ground clearance is excellent. My exhaust guy went under my stock tranny crossmember. they fit good, even with my column shift (4l60e of course)

I bought a set of mac mid length but if memory serves me correct I was going to notch the top of the d/s frame. the bends coming off the exhaust ports was not tight enough. The pacesetters fit way better.

It doesn’t look like a flex fuel motor, but looks like you don't have a separate return line off of your fuel rail. The non returnless is way easier to run because only one line is needed to run all the way to the front. I used aluminum line and some high pressure fuel line (will get the brand if you want, its way cheaper and better then the efi fuel line from napa) and used the factory fittings. the russel fuel line adapters are prone to failure and are expensive.

Also I like how you used the I6 engine stands. I ended up spending 40$ on the normal adapters, but I already had the v8 stands. I think it ended up moving the motor back further because I had the same coils you have on your engine but had to swap for the round ones because the square ones wouldn’t fit on the p/s.

Let me know if you have any questions and I will try to get some pictures too.
Graham

[Lane]

Originally Posted by Fastrucken

Those are Pasesetter headers. Last summer they were 399 and are worth every penny. I used those for my 5.3 swap. The end of the collector of the d/s has to be angle cut to clear the frame rail, but not too bad. Ground clearance is excellent. My exhaust guy went under my stock tranny crossmember. they fit good, even with my column shift (4l60e of course)

I bought a set of mac mid length but if memory serves me correct I was going to notch the top of the d/s frame. the bends coming off the exhaust ports was not tight enough. The pacesetters fit way better.

It doesn’t look like a flex fuel motor, but looks like you don't have a separate return line off of your fuel rail. The non returnless is way easier to run because only one line is needed to run all the way to the front. I used aluminum line and some high pressure fuel line (will get the brand if you want, its way cheaper and better then the efi fuel line from napa) and used the factory fittings. the russel fuel line adapters are prone to failure and are expensive.

Also I like how you used the I6 engine stands. I ended up spending 40$ on the normal adapters, but I already had the v8 stands. I think it ended up moving the motor back further because I had the same coils you have on your engine but had to swap for the round ones because the square ones wouldn’t fit on the p/s.

Let me know if you have any questions and I will try to get some pictures too.
Graham

Great info! Not a big fan of Pacesetters, but if they fit well compared to Macs I guess I'll start looking for a pair. Heck, I may just make my own and save some money.

Made these a few years ago for a '67 Chevy II swap:





I hadn't even paid attention to the single fuel line - which you're right, that's all it's got! I get kind of focused on one thing, then the next.. The fuel system is a few weeks away, after I get the rear gas tank. I may PM you for the part # for the line you used.

[TimE]

Any updates on your progress?

[padresag]

Originally Posted by Lane

Here's one - a '68, but the frame is the same right?
F-bod LT's - it's tight, very tight on the passenger side, but it's in there. His motor may be a little farther back than mine.

billy - it my take some tweaking, but overall it looks like these motors were made for our trucks!

frames are the same from 64-69
ron