The "L" series GM engines (LS, LT, LQ) are probably the best engine ever offered but the ones with exposed coils will win no beauty contests. A standard dress up item is after market coil covers which takes a bunch of ugly off the duckling and gives some swan beauty. Herein lies a problem as a set from maybe the best known induction parts company DON'T FIT. I won't give a name because they have just been made aware of the problem and I'm 99.9% sure they will resolve the problem. These covers move the coils from the factory position to the underside of the dress up covers but the factory coils won't mount (different bolt spacing) and the coils included in the kit have the injector wire plug on the opposite side which is inaccessible. The only opening in the cover is for the spark plug wires at the bottom so heat is trapped in around the coils.
I'm going to put a 5.3 truck engine in a 55 Chevy 210, so I might just only open the hood on request. They are definitely "form follows function" as far as looks go.
I think it's a great idea. I too would be concerned about the extra heat the coils would be subjected to on the first set of covers. The vented covers are probably safer. I've seen at shows where some people mount the coils on the fender-well with longer plug wires, and that's not bad looking.
-David
1953 2-Ton GMC
I'm a machinist... because engineers need heroes too.
Even kissing a frog will not help to make a LS motor look good. All the cover up tricks guys try to hide the ugliness doesn’t help as we know what’s under the camouflage. Kinda like putting lipstick on a pig.
They dont have any issues with heak soak. My LS turbo car will run 240 deg sometimes at the end of a hard 2 laps off the rev limiter. Underhood temps will melt most zip ties under it and has melted lots of other things. Coils have never been a issue and they are right next to a glowing exhaust manifold thats up and forward.
Here is pics of a decent camouflaged LS for those that are bothered.
Hmmm. They are about the best looking LS motors ive yet to see, anywhere for that matter. Maybe because they look like something they're not? The key here seems to be, making them look like vintage style/type motors. Whys that? If you want modern powerplants, why dress em to look like older motors? Kinda like, you wouldn't dress an older motor to look like a LS unit. Or is that a thing also??
Hmmm. They are about the best looking LS motors ive yet to see, anywhere for that matter. Maybe because they look like something they're not? The key here seems to be, making them look like vintage style/type motors. Whys that? If you want modern powerplants, why dress em to look like older motors? Kinda like, you wouldn't dress an older motor to look like a LS unit. Or is that a thing also??
Following your line of reasoning, why bother starting with an old truck to begin with? The answer will invariably be styling. Same reasoning can be applied as to why dress up an LS engine which looks like a de-fleshed Terminator. Again, styling. I have a 1974 350 in my '49. I shortened 216 valve covers, painted the Thrift-master lettering on them, and covered the original 350 valve covers with them. People cannot stop staring at them at car shows. Many cannot figure out what engine it is. That's why I do it.
1952 5-window - return to "as built" condition | 1950 3100 with a 235 and a T-5 transmission
Well answered. Never was really up my ally. I like to see things for what they are. But to each their own. I dont care much for Halloween either, but thats jmo also.
I grew up around drag Racing on the West Coast, there was always someone doing something different. If it worked everyone followed suit, if it didn't they just tried something else. I knew a guy with a 440 in a Vega, didn't look right but he would take the win light form you more often then not...There are some really good looking LS's out there and you can't complain about the performance. A lot of work goes into making these engines look period correct , I do appreciate the ingenuity and creative genius it takes to do that. I personally just don't like them in older vehicles, I see them at shows with an LS in a Ford or Mopar, that I just don't get. If you have a Mopar it should have a Mopar engine. I know that the same was true about the SBC, 350's were put in everything, I didn't understand that either.... I know this is the HYPO forum and this is where different is accepted, or at the least tolerated.
Last edited by TUTS 59; 01/09/20201:12 PM.
~ Craig 1958 Viking 4400 "The Book of Thor" Read the story in the DITY 1960 Chevrolet C10 "A Family Heirloom" Follow the story in the DITY Gallery '59 Apache 31, 327 V8 (0.030 over), Muncie M20 4 Speed, GM 10 Bolt Rear... long term project (30 years and counting)
Come Bleed or Blister, something has got to give!!! | Living life in the SLOW lane
Well answered. Never was really up my ally. I like to see things for what they are. But to each their own. I dont care much for Halloween either, but thats jmo also.
I do respect that, Glenn.
1952 5-window - return to "as built" condition | 1950 3100 with a 235 and a T-5 transmission
Most people that do swaps (me included) just look at cars/trucks as a “shell”. You find the “shell” you like most or works best and install whatever “powerplant/drivetrain” that you like best or works best. For example foxbody mustang with a LS engine is basically one of if not THE best drag car out there with minimal effort. The worlds fastest fords tend to be GM powered....and thats a fact. I run a bone stock LS in my ‘49 just because it wasnt worth fixing the stock engine for what i wanted/needed. Was the stock motor ok when new? Sure was....BUT your not gonna be able to do half the things you can do with the newer powerplants. I get your stance somewhat on the “keeping it as it should be” style. I actually built my GMC around that stance but with a hidden LS hahaha. If the average joe looked at it they wouldn’t kno anything was ever done to it. At least its still all GM ðŸ‘
I agree with you. That's why I'm building a 292 for my 53. I'm being told to expect 550 HP on pump gas and 750 to 800 HP on race gas. I have been told that over 800 HP the crankshaft will leave the building if you don't dowell the mains. I know of 3 guys racing 292's at 1000 HP, one in a 49 chevy pickup. The last I know of his personal best was 8.44 in the 1320. I'm a firm believer in the "it's your truck do what you want" thing. I think a lot has to do with the ease and cost of parts. My engine is 2 years into it and not done yet. Almost everything is a one off. It hemerages obscene amounts of money. 292, billet crank and cam, 4-71 blower, 3 Roch 2 bbl's, 12 port cross flow aluminum head, distributorless ignition, 5 stage dry sump oil system. TKO 600 trans and Frankland quick change rear end. Should make it into the 8's in the 1320 and street legal, at least in Indiana. Thank you for your time.
Yea in this day in age a stock bottom end 4.8 LS base with 200k on it and nothing more than a cam slapped in it and some springs and boost from a elcheapo turbo with make 800hp to the wheels.
After reading Barnfind's comments on taking turbo heat we went ahead with the non-vented covers install. Look nice but had to enlarge the firewall recess to clear covers.
