I'm considering dropping an L76 and 6L80-E from an 08 G8 Pontiac, into my LX hatch (replacing the current 304). While I'm not expecting this to be a simple drop in and drive away, the ability to use something like the Castelmaine Rod Shop LS1/LS2 conversion kit would make the job a lot simpler. From my reading, it seems that the L76 is essentially an LS2 with minor internal differences. I can't find any of those differences that would appear to prevent it from being able to use the kit, but keen to hear from anyone that knows.
As well as any info on the suitability of the conversion kit, I'm interested in hearing any other challenges that I can look forward to, not only in being able to get it all to fit, but also to get it registered in WA.
Cheers,
Chris
L76 (with AFM/DOD) + 6L80-E into LX?
Started by
_TankT_
, Jan 24 2010 09:00 PM
19 replies to this topic
#2
enderwigginau
-
- Moderators
-
- 2,000,527 posts
Admin Wrangler
- Name:Grant
- Location:Parramatta
- Car:76 LX Sedan, 4 seater
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 24 January 2010 - 09:41 PM
The L98 used in our commorwhores is the L76 with bits taken off. And we used the L76 before that.
So yes, it will fit - as far as I know the block is generally the same as the LS2.
Grant..
So yes, it will fit - as far as I know the block is generally the same as the LS2.
Grant..
#3
_TankT_
_TankT_
-
- Guests
Posted 25 January 2010 - 08:06 PM
Great, thanks Grant. I notice some others (such as ls2lxhatch) use the CAE mounts, headers, sump etc. Anyone have any thoughts on the benefits of one over the other (CAE vs Rod Shop)? I see the Rod Shop don't have their Torana LSx headers ready yet, so that's a benefit of the CAE kit.
Cheers,
Chris
Cheers,
Chris
#4
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,335 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
Posted 25 January 2010 - 11:26 PM
The LS2 is just within the maximum engine size limits for a LX in WA. You should have not have any problems getting approval in principal from the WA Technical Section.
To fit the 4L65e in an LX you will need to fabricate a new transmission tunnel. Once the transmission is as high as possible the oil pan is roughly level with the bottom of the chassis rails. The 6L80e is considerably larger, I doubt you will be able to get 100 mm clearance between the 6L80e and the ground without the car looking like a 4WD. In my opinion 4 gears are more than enough for a LX Torana.
To fit the 4L65e in an LX you will need to fabricate a new transmission tunnel. Once the transmission is as high as possible the oil pan is roughly level with the bottom of the chassis rails. The 6L80e is considerably larger, I doubt you will be able to get 100 mm clearance between the 6L80e and the ground without the car looking like a 4WD. In my opinion 4 gears are more than enough for a LX Torana.
#5
enderwigginau
-
- Moderators
-
- 2,000,527 posts
Admin Wrangler
- Name:Grant
- Location:Parramatta
- Car:76 LX Sedan, 4 seater
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 25 January 2010 - 11:37 PM
holy shit - it's a bigun...
#6
_TankT_
_TankT_
-
- Guests
Posted 26 January 2010 - 09:45 AM
The LS2 is just within the maximum engine size limits for a LX in WA. You should have not have any problems getting approval in principal from the WA Technical Section.
To fit the 4L65e in an LX you will need to fabricate a new transmission tunnel. Once the transmission is as high as possible the oil pan is roughly level with the bottom of the chassis rails. The 6L80e is considerably larger, I doubt you will be able to get 100 mm clearance between the 6L80e and the ground without the car looking like a 4WD. In my opinion 4 gears are more than enough for a LX Torana.
Thanks Andy, that's good info. The main reason I was considering going to the 6L80e was it was part of the package with the L76. But given the clearance issue, I agree with you. I've never wanted more than the 4L60e that's in it now, so no reason to change.
Cheers,
Chris
#7
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,335 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
Posted 26 January 2010 - 01:10 PM
It would be interesting to get some accurate height measurements for the 6L80e. You may be able to make it fit but it probably is not worth the effort.
I made the mistake of ordering the full Castle Auto Electric kit in Sept 06. I have not used any Castle Auto Electric components in my conversion.
My engine mounts, headers, starter motor and crossmember are custom made, the oil pan is a Moroso 20140. The engine position is the same as the Castlemain Rod Shop HQ-WB LS1 engine mounts, I just did not like the Castlemain Rod Shop engine mount design.
I notice some others (such as ls2lxhatch) use the CAE mounts, headers, sump etc.
I made the mistake of ordering the full Castle Auto Electric kit in Sept 06. I have not used any Castle Auto Electric components in my conversion.
My engine mounts, headers, starter motor and crossmember are custom made, the oil pan is a Moroso 20140. The engine position is the same as the Castlemain Rod Shop HQ-WB LS1 engine mounts, I just did not like the Castlemain Rod Shop engine mount design.
Edited by ls2lxhatch, 26 January 2010 - 01:19 PM.
#8
_TankT_
_TankT_
-
- Guests
Posted 26 January 2010 - 01:23 PM
Ahhh, I assumed you'd used the CAE kit after reading this. You just earned even more respect, going the custom path.
I'm still planning to pick up the 6L80e with the engine as a package, so can compare the 2 when it gets here. I think sticking with the smaller 4L60e makes sense though. I'll probably sell off the existing 304 and the 6L80e once the job is done.
Chris
I'm still planning to pick up the 6L80e with the engine as a package, so can compare the 2 when it gets here. I think sticking with the smaller 4L60e makes sense though. I'll probably sell off the existing 304 and the 6L80e once the job is done.
Chris
#9
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,335 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
Posted 26 January 2010 - 01:43 PM
I only went down the custom path because at the time the only kit available was from CAE.
I wish I had built a 355 or a SBC.
I wish I had built a 355 or a SBC.
#10
_TankT_
_TankT_
-
- Guests
Posted 26 January 2010 - 02:30 PM
Stroking the 304 would be the easy (and cheap) path, but the fuel economy is nowhere near as good (hence going with the L76 for the AFM option). It's probably hard to see that spending $15k+ to save fuel makes any sense at all, but I want to be able to drive it without the nagging feeling that I'm wasting money every time I fill up. I'd like to be able to do road trips, like the drive across to Summernats, without carrying a trailer full of jerry cans etc.
It's not too late to convince me otherwise... I haven't forked out for the L76 combo yet
.
Chris
It's not too late to convince me otherwise... I haven't forked out for the L76 combo yet
.Chris
#11
_showoff_
_showoff_
-
- Guests
Posted 26 January 2010 - 02:39 PM
ive had a vs ss 304, a vu maloo r8 manual, vx r8 clubby auto, vz clubby ls2 auto then changed too manual.
the 304 compared too the two ls1's sounded the best in raw form, the cam i had in the maloo was nasty and made up for that, but in stock
form the 304 pulled say 16lts 100k's the ls1 auto 12.5- 13 general driving, manual ls1 about 12, cam was awful 20 id say.
ls2 different kettle of fish much meater standard, auto or manual was between 11.5 too 13lt fuel and lower if u were nice too it.
and power makes the 304 cry, no matter how much money u chuck at the 304 even a 355, ls power is hard too beat, the money u spend initually
makes up with cheap power parts and economy
ls1/2 for the win
the 304 compared too the two ls1's sounded the best in raw form, the cam i had in the maloo was nasty and made up for that, but in stock
form the 304 pulled say 16lts 100k's the ls1 auto 12.5- 13 general driving, manual ls1 about 12, cam was awful 20 id say.
ls2 different kettle of fish much meater standard, auto or manual was between 11.5 too 13lt fuel and lower if u were nice too it.
and power makes the 304 cry, no matter how much money u chuck at the 304 even a 355, ls power is hard too beat, the money u spend initually
makes up with cheap power parts and economy
ls1/2 for the win
#12
_TankT_
_TankT_
-
- Guests
Posted 26 January 2010 - 07:46 PM
ive had a vs ss 304, a vu maloo r8 manual, vx r8 clubby auto, vz clubby ls2 auto then changed too manual.
the 304 compared too the two ls1's sounded the best in raw form, the cam i had in the maloo was nasty and made up for that, but in stock
form the 304 pulled say 16lts 100k's the ls1 auto 12.5- 13 general driving, manual ls1 about 12, cam was awful 20 id say.
ls2 different kettle of fish much meater standard, auto or manual was between 11.5 too 13lt fuel and lower if u were nice too it.
and power makes the 304 cry, no matter how much money u chuck at the 304 even a 355, ls power is hard too beat, the money u spend initually
makes up with cheap power parts and economy
ls1/2 for the win
My thinking as well. LS2 in an ~1800kg car giving 12-13 l/100km, should mean the AFM equal in a ~1200kg car should be able to give me 9-10 l/100km. So the package is a comfortable daily driver with a potential 11 sec time slip (after a tune, and traction permitting), then a cheap trip home
. That's Torana nirvana for me!Chris
#13
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,335 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
Posted 26 January 2010 - 08:45 PM
All the above arguments are why I chose to fit an LS2 in 2006. I now wish I had chosen the 355 or SBC.
Once there is a good quality reasonably priced conversion kit available or you have the time and skills to make conversion components yourself then I would recommend the LS2.
Price the components required for the LS2, 355 and SBC and make an educated decision on which suits your needs and budget. Don't forget CAT's, fuel systems, engineering etc. Do not purchase a conversion kit from anyone unless you have spoken to people that have successfully fitted the kit and are happy with the result.
Once there is a good quality reasonably priced conversion kit available or you have the time and skills to make conversion components yourself then I would recommend the LS2.
Price the components required for the LS2, 355 and SBC and make an educated decision on which suits your needs and budget. Don't forget CAT's, fuel systems, engineering etc. Do not purchase a conversion kit from anyone unless you have spoken to people that have successfully fitted the kit and are happy with the result.
#14
_TankT_
_TankT_
-
- Guests
Posted 26 January 2010 - 08:52 PM
Wise advice, Cheers Andy. BTW, could you give me an estimate of your engineering costs, and did you need to do any chassis strengthening to get it across the line?
Cheers,
Chris
Cheers,
Chris
#15
ls2lxhatch
-
- Members
-
- 5,335 posts
- Location:Perth
- Car:LX Hatch
- Joined: 29-May 06
Posted 26 January 2010 - 11:37 PM
My car is still not finished, the engineer does not need to see the car until it is finished. I was quoted around $600 in 2006 for the engineer complete the Engineering Consultant Report specified in the approval in principal.
Engine
Gearbox
Diff
Fuel Tank
Brakes
Speedo
The approval in principal from the WA Technical Section did not specify a chassis kit as a requirement. I decided to fit one anyhow. The chassis kit will also need to be approved by the engineer.
You will find copies of the application and approval in principal documents here.
Engine
Gearbox
Diff
Fuel Tank
Brakes
Speedo
The approval in principal from the WA Technical Section did not specify a chassis kit as a requirement. I decided to fit one anyhow. The chassis kit will also need to be approved by the engineer.
You will find copies of the application and approval in principal documents here.
#16
enderwigginau
-
- Moderators
-
- 2,000,527 posts
Admin Wrangler
- Name:Grant
- Location:Parramatta
- Car:76 LX Sedan, 4 seater
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 27 January 2010 - 04:42 PM
LT5 - the economy you will get from what is a racing engine is amazing - though you will pay a premium for one.
Grant..
Grant..
#17
_TankT_
_TankT_
-
- Guests
Posted 31 January 2010 - 11:37 PM
Just a heads-up for those looking to go the AFM route... turns out the AFM option gets a bit tricky outside it's natural environment. There's a bunch of sensors around the car used to activate and deactivate AFM, and the LX pre-dates those sensors by a decade or 3. That's not to say it's not possible, just that it adds significant complexity that make it unattractive for me. The next best option (bang/buck/economy) for me seems to be the L98. So I'm on the hunt.
Chris
Chris
Edited by TankT, 31 January 2010 - 11:38 PM.
#18
enderwigginau
-
- Moderators
-
- 2,000,527 posts
Admin Wrangler
- Name:Grant
- Location:Parramatta
- Car:76 LX Sedan, 4 seater
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 01 February 2010 - 01:39 PM
What other sensors above the std ones on the L98? You may find that you are almost doing it all anyway.
Grant..
Grant..
#19
MRLXSS
-
- Members
-
- 12,415 posts
The Render Garage
- Name:Matt
- Location:Upwey, Melbourne
- Car:355 LX Hatchback, DeLorean DMC-12, LX SS Hatch, VY Cross8 Crewman
- Joined: 09-November 05
Posted 01 February 2010 - 02:19 PM
I reckon, with a mafless tune, and the weight of a Torana. You'd be down near the 9-10L/100km's with the AFM turned on. I believe there are many functions that can be switched on/off or altered that will get you better economy.
Getting the weight down further in a torana would save even more on economy... Light weight race seats, a BW diff over a heavy 9", a 6 Speed Manual, Light Weight Wheels, and maybe even some fibreglass bumpers/panels. You'd be lifting front wheels and using bugger all petrol!
Getting the weight down further in a torana would save even more on economy... Light weight race seats, a BW diff over a heavy 9", a 6 Speed Manual, Light Weight Wheels, and maybe even some fibreglass bumpers/panels. You'd be lifting front wheels and using bugger all petrol!
#20
_TankT_
_TankT_
-
- Guests
Posted 01 February 2010 - 08:04 PM
What other sensors above the std ones on the L98? You may find that you are almost doing it all anyway.
Grant..
I'm told ABS, and I think traction control was mentioned amongst others. The indications were that it was likely that it could still be made to work, but unlikely to be perfect, likely to be expensive, and the worst case scenario was a poorly (or even non) functioning AFM. That sounded like more risk than I was interested in (really only to squeeze out the very best economy possible). The price of that extra economy is limited cam upgrade options, or expensive AFM removal if I want more power (and who doesn't
). I came to the conclusion that I can handle the already impressive economy of the LS2 or L98, and have the flexibility of easily squeezing more grunt out of it without having to think about the AFM every time.Chris
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
