Might bring home a 6.2l ...

[87chevy.com]

I've been calling the same wrecking yard I do busisness with about 2x a month asking for a 5.7 and t-56 for my e46 (bmw) conversion and he said they had a 2002 with an automatic and I told him I would pass and wait for a 6 speed car to show up.. he also rememered Ive bought a few motors from him and he was like I have a 2010 6.2l here.. Im like nah to much motor for the car Im putting it in.. and I said how much and then my ears perked up and said I will be by tomarrow to look at it and see what the deal is. Stupd good deal IMO, no front accessories .. the 5.3 will transfer, no intake ebay style it. I need to see about getting a spare harness.
Ive done some research from the time I got home till now, and seems like there is a bit of work to convert the 6.2 gen IV to gen III style.
Looks like 24x reluctor wheel, new cam, new cam gear set, new front cover and still reading about new knock sensor placment... havent finished yet. Trying to make sure I dont regret any purchases.
So the 5.3 thats in the truck now will go in the bmw
clint

anyone here on the board conveted a 6.2 to a gen3 before? im gonna run the stock 4l60 too ;0

[87chevy.com]

I found a neat kit to do the converting of the front end
http://sdparts.com/details/scoggin-d...nter/sdlsck24x
not too bad$$

[BR3W CITY]

pick up a used trailblazer manifold if you need something on the lower cost side of things. Its the "truck manifold" but setup for the l92 style heads from what I understand. I'd have to see which year but I think its the trailblazer SS version specifically. It lets you keep the truck accessories..otherwise you need to switch to car style to run the LS/FAST type manifolds.

[87chevy.com]

i passed on the deal. it was a 2010 ls3 out of a camaro for 1k. the front accessories were smashed pretty good, didnt see any block damage though. What scared me off was for some reasone the valley pan was loose, like it was removed for one reason or another, and the passenger side rocker arm guide was removed??? very wierd for a junk yard motor to be opened up... oh well, the hunt is on ...again

[68GMCCustom]

Originally Posted by BR3W CITY

pick up a used trailblazer manifold if you need something on the lower cost side of things. Its the "truck manifold" but setup for the l92 style heads from what I understand. I'd have to see which year but I think its the trailblazer SS version specifically. It lets you keep the truck accessories..otherwise you need to switch to car style to run the LS/FAST type manifolds.

TBSS's only came with LS2's? Which are all cathedral port?

[BR3W CITY]

Originally Posted by 68GMCCustom

TBSS's only came with LS2's? Which are all cathedral port?

Thats a good catch 68' ; not sure where I got that from.

Edit; I was reading the build on an trailblazer ss that was changed over to L92 style heads. The "economy" manifold that would be correct would be for the 07+ Yukon, its the same exact part, but can be had a bit cheaper used since you don't pay the caddy premium.

[68GMCCustom]

some folks say the L92 heads don't perform well down low. Not sure I agree tho as my truck has real traction problems running BFG 275/60-15's. I bought bigger wheels and tires for the track...but it still has no trouble spinning 30" tall 315/60-15 MT ET Street drag radials.

no torque problems here!

[BR3W CITY]

^I had heard that before too. I think alot of that comes from the head swap discussions over on a "major LS site" lol. When the first l92 head swaps started, there was a huge fanboy band wagon...a number of guys spent big cash (at that time) to convert there motors over to the l92 heads. From what I understand the l92 head design will cause the valves to be shrouded on the smaller displacement motors. It seems to NEED the minimum 4.125 bore. I'm not going to say I understand it fully; they bolt up fine to the 4" bore motors, but the combustion chamber actually hangs .125-.128 wide of the bore. Add to that some guys mill them to get compression up (since the larger combustion chamber will lower it), which widens it a bit more.
I'm only 5 pages into a 12 page thread on the topic right now haha. Despite all that, there still are many making good power on the setup. They just don't like to share

Since they cost has come down SO low on these now, its much more viable than it used to be. Procharger + flow of l92 heads/intake = no problem with torque.

[68GMCCustom]

I've noticed that a good number of naysayers list their motors having aftermarket heads from other manufacturer's....cathedral port aftermarket heads...which also makes them more likely to bash the rectangular port heads.

GM seems to think its OK to put rectangular port heads in 6.0L....with motors like the LY6, L76, etc. Someday I'll get my truck dyno'd and we'll see. For now it ran a 8.46 @ 82.80 in the 1/8th on a shake down run...which is 13.0x's-13.1x's in 1/4mi. It will easily be running 12's when I get it sorted out next spring.