Swap old gasser motor for a Chevy LS 6.0L Vortec?

[HDN]

I've pondered this ever since I looked at an old tractor wrecker with a bad Continental motor - has anyone done an LS swap with a 5-ton gasser? I think the Chevy 6.0L Vortec has the same or better horsepower and torque than the old Continental motors. I'd consider trying this if I found a sweet deal on a dead gasser 5-ton...

 

[Mullaney]

I've pondered this ever since I looked at an old tractor wrecker with a bad Continental motor - has anyone done an LS swap with a 5-ton gasser? I think the Chevy 6.0L Vortec has the same or better horsepower and torque than the old Continental motors. I'd consider trying this if I found a sweet deal on a dead gasser 5-ton...

.
I have never swapped out the old REO 330 (Golden Comet) with the LS, but we swapped about 50 of them with in-line 300 Ford Industrial Six's in a place I worked many years ago.

 

[chucky]

The 6.0 are out there but everybody is using them in everything around here from jeeps to whatever and you could probly start watching the auto scrapyards and buy a whole total cheaper than a pulled 6.0 and you would have all the other stuff that u need to run the vortec then sale the vehicle back for scrap price and come out to the good !

 

[NDT]

Thing is, the 6602 can churn out 224 hp all day every day for years. Ask that of a Chevy engine and the results may not be that great.

 

[porkysplace]

I've pondered this ever since I looked at an old tractor wrecker with a bad Continental motor - has anyone done an LS swap with a 5-ton gasser? I think the Chevy 6.0L Vortec has the same or better horsepower and torque than the old Continental motors. I'd consider trying this if I found a sweet deal on a dead gasser 5-ton...

Not sure about the LS motors but weren't they made for pickups ?

I know back when I joined SS there was a member from Indiana who put a Ford 429 in a deuce ,but unsure if it was a 429 car motor or truck motor .
They shared a lot of parts but the truck motors ( f600 ect) had heavier blocks . Ford did the same with FE and FT motors ( 360,361/390,391).
For a parade truck it will probably be ,to use it as a 5 ton was designed for it may have a shorter life .

 

[chucky]

Thing is, the 6602 can churn out 224 hp all day every day for years. Ask that of a Chevy engine and the results may not be that great.

Have you ever been over to Langtry Tx ?

 

[HDN]

Have you ever been over to Langtry Tx ?

What happens there?

Not sure about the LS motors but weren't they made for pickups ?

I know back when I joined SS there was a member from Indiana who put a Ford 429 in a deuce ,but unsure if it was a 429 car motor or truck motor .
They shared a lot of parts but the truck motors ( f600 ect) had heavier blocks . Ford did the same with FE and FT motors ( 360,361/390,391).
For a parade truck it will probably be ,to use it as a 5 ton was designed for it may have a shorter life .

They're used in the GM pick-ups and full-size vans.

Here's a comparison between the L96 Vortec 6.0L (for greater than 10000 lb GVWR trucks, or is it GCWR?) and the Continental R6602 (From TM9-2320-211-20):

Attribute​	GM L96 Vortec 6.0L Small Block V8​	GM L18 Vortec 8.1 Big Block V8​	Continental R6602 Inline-6​
Horsepower​	322 @ 4400 RPM​	320 @ 4200 RPM​	224 @ 2800 RPM​
Compression Ratio​	9.7:1​	9.1:1​	6.4:1​
Torque (lb-ft)​	380 @ 4200 RPM​	440 @ 3200 RPM​	425 @ 2000 RPM​
Governed or Max Speed (RPM)​	6000​	5000​	2800 with no load​

(Added the 8.1L Vortec motor as mentioned by @Jbulach )

It turns out that I mis-remembered the torque of the LS motor being equal or better than the old Continental, about 11% less torque. However, the LS motor develops about 44% more horsepower. Is it worth the trade-off? I'm thinking not.

Also, something would have to be done about the gearing on the truck to accommodate the LS motor's higher RPMs needed for doing anything. At least the motor won't be red-lining to get the spec, but it will be spinning a lot faster than the Continental. I'd like to think that modern motor technology can withstand such high RPMs continuously compared to the older motors, but I only know enough about motor design to cause trouble

 

[87cr250r]

Torque at the crankshaft is unimportant, it's horsepower to the wheels that matters. If you change the gearing to work with the 6.0 it will outperform the 6602. Of you change the gearing to work with the 6.0 it will likely not work with your budget.

 

[Jbulach]

If your going through the trouble, might as well find an 8.1

 

[HDN]

Torque at the crankshaft is unimportant, it's horsepower to the wheels that matters. If you change the gearing to work with the 6.0 it will outperform the 6602. Of you change the gearing to work with the 6.0 it will likely not work with your budget.

I was thinking about a 2:1 reduction gearbox between the Vortec and the original 5-ton transmission. We'd be seeing up to 760 lb-ft at the gearbox output.

• Does a reduction gearbox like that exist, or would that be a custom component?
• Would that much torque break anything on the driveline?

If your going through the trouble, might as well find an 8.1

Thanks for mentioning that motor! I added it to the chart for comparison. I briefly considered re-motoring my Savana 3500 with the 8.1L but that's a thirsty motor for someone who doesn't tow much at this time. I think it's a better fit for a 5-ton than the 6.0L, but I'm not sure about its availability. Seems like there are 6.0L motors everywhere!

 

[porkysplace]

It doesn't matter how much horsepower or torque it has at high rpm , you need a motor with high torque in the low power band .

 

[87cr250r]

If you put a 2:1 gearbox between the 6.0 engine and transmission you will likely exceed the torque rating of the transmission. 2 x 380ftlb = 760 which is greater than 425 ftlb.

 

[HDN]

If you put a 2:1 gearbox between the 6.0 engine and transmission you will likely exceed the torque rating of the transmission. 2 x 380ftlb = 760 which is greater than 425 ftlb.

That's super-important - thanks for mentioning that I really didn't know what the stock transmission was rated for.

 

[87cr250r]

It may be rated for more. I'm just assuming it's rated, at a minimum, to meet the output of the stock engine.

 

[gringeltaube]

If you put a 2:1 gearbox between the 6.0 engine and transmission you will likely exceed the torque rating of the transmission. 2 x 380ftlb = 760 which is greater than 425 ftlb.

What are the real world hp/torque limits for the Spicer 6000's for highway use at full load?

I know I found the specs for max input torque once... but I can't find them now. I'm turning up my 250 and I'll be pulling a 30k trailer. I was wondering if any of you who have already tuned up their 855's or swapped them out for a bc350, 400, etc. are still running the 6000 series Spicer and...

www.steelsoldiers.com

 

[williamh]

The only experience That I had with any sort of a V-8 replacing a straight 6 was after the V-8 had failed ( still ran but the thrust bearing was wasted ) it was in a M-211 GMC and the 302 6 was replaced with a 455 V8 It don’t have any of the low end tork the straight 6 had ( I had an M-135 at the same time ) , it wouldn’t go any faster since the gear ratio didn’t change. Those heavy ass trucks take a lot of low end tork to get them moving , going down the fwy at speed might be ok but when it comes to low end tork. The straight 6 can’t be beat. IMHO

 

[RenegadeActual]

Don't think a chevy v8 will be as robust as any diesel engine, it may move the truck but for how long?