Stroked 5.3L Vortec

Chevy Forum Chevy Classifieds Photo Gallery Chevrolet News Search Contact CF Sponsors
Member List Forum FAQ Chevy Timeslips Chevy Recalls TSBs Calendars Register Login

Stroked 5.3L Vortec

Printable Version

Chevrolet Forums >> Chevy Trucks, Vans & SUV's >> Silverado >> Stroked 5.3L Vortec

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Stroked 5.3L Vortec - 6/26/2007 10:49:09 PM

dragondad

Posts: 10
Joined: 7/1/2006
Status: offline

Hi Everyone! Has anyone ever stroked a 5.3L Vortec. If so, how much did you stroke it to and what other modifications were needed to accomodate. What is the max a 5.3 could get stroked and is there a kit available to do so. Thanks for any advice.

Post #: 1

RE: Stroked 5.3L Vortec - 6/28/2007 9:27:59 PM

chevytruck22

Posts: 3
Joined: 6/28/2007
Status: offline

The 5.3 block has plenty of meat on it. You can take punch it out to a 5.7 , that way you have a much larger piston selection at a nicer price, as far as a kit.......go to a good speed shop, you can get 500hp pretty easily with the correct setup. If your gonna do all the wrenching, make sure it see's a dyno and a good computer tuner.

(in reply to dragondad)

Post #: 2

RE: Stroked 5.3L Vortec - 7/2/2007 10:19:33 PM

dragondad

Posts: 10
Joined: 7/1/2006
Status: offline

Do you mean just bore it to a 5.7 or bore it and stroke it to a 5.7. It would be great to get 500 horses out of it, but I'm also wondering if the stock 4L60E tranny could take it. Let me know and thanks again.

(in reply to chevytruck22)

Post #: 3

RE: Stroked 5.3L Vortec - 7/3/2007 9:32:33 AM

ZX1100F1

Posts: 2429
Joined: 8/1/2006
Status: offline

I have never seen a stroked out 5.3L nor do I believe there are parts available to do so.
The larger displacement Vortec motors are done so via bore, even the6.0L and Cadillac 6.2L VVT use the same 92mm stroke as the 5.3L.

In any application of greater than 360ft/lbs of torque you would want to go with a stronger tranny like a 4L65E.

< Message edited by ZX1100F1 -- 7/3/2007 9:39:34 AM >

(in reply to dragondad)

Post #: 4