l1lartur0
...
"Welp, I got a doner." Sounds like a phrase that would be uttered when a DOA arrives at emergency. Swear autocorrect likes to troll us sometimes, @Astro!
Regarding the LS/SBC debate: For about eight years, I daily drove a 2003 Silverado 1500 ECSB with a 5.3 owned by the roofing company that I worked for. Driving it without carrying a load was fine. If there was a couple hundred pounds of material in the bed, I wasn't particularly fond of having to give it the beans for the 5.3 to wake up and do its job. Did it hurt the engine having to do so? I don't imagine that it did, as the 5.3 didn't go kaput until it had nearly 330k on it. It just didn't feel right to me having a need to get the engine up into a higher RPM range to gain the same pulling power that I was/am able to achieve at a lower RPM with a 305 or a 350.
Keep in mind all my experiences have been with stock drivetrains. A tweak here and there may have changed my perception, who knows. Of course, reliabilty-wise, you can't go wrong with either the LS or the small blocks.
Regarding the LS/SBC debate: For about eight years, I daily drove a 2003 Silverado 1500 ECSB with a 5.3 owned by the roofing company that I worked for. Driving it without carrying a load was fine. If there was a couple hundred pounds of material in the bed, I wasn't particularly fond of having to give it the beans for the 5.3 to wake up and do its job. Did it hurt the engine having to do so? I don't imagine that it did, as the 5.3 didn't go kaput until it had nearly 330k on it. It just didn't feel right to me having a need to get the engine up into a higher RPM range to gain the same pulling power that I was/am able to achieve at a lower RPM with a 305 or a 350.
Keep in mind all my experiences have been with stock drivetrains. A tweak here and there may have changed my perception, who knows. Of course, reliabilty-wise, you can't go wrong with either the LS or the small blocks.