You have only been a member here for a short time, and you come in here spewing this B.S. to a guy that is looking for advice? What are you, 12??
Once you have actually put an LS in a truck and can show us the pictures, then you might actually have a (small amount) of knowledge that is worth sharing with the masses here.
I made much of my money driving LS powered trucks, and prefer an L31 in my own vehicle. The LS is an improvement, but it comes at a bit of a cost. No improvements come without a compromise.
Get a clue, than come back - with pictures of your running/driving swapped truck.
I am right there with you on preferring the L31 and I have a 6.0L swapped vehicle too. Then again the 496 Mag HO cammed 8.1 in my 1999 Tahoe is more fun to drive than either of the small blocks.
The 6.0L is in an 87 G20 van. Low mileage LQ4 with LLoyd Elliot ported 862s that have 2.00/1.55 valves and BTR Dual springs, chambers were worked and they were milled 0.020". It is at 10.5:1 static compression with GM 0.53 MLS head gaskets. It has a Comp XR269HR in it. It has a TBSS intake manifold and 5.3L flex fuel injectors with a 90mm DBW throttle body and a pair of Speed Engineering C10 swap 1-3/4" primary long tubes into a dual 2.5" to single 3.5" exhaust using a merge Y. It has electric fans and a 25% underdrive crank pulley. It has a 4" air intake and 100mm MAF as well.
My L31 based engine is in my 1997 Express. It is an 11:1 383 with 6" rods. Off-shore cast Assault Racing aluminum heads that have 215cc intake ports, 2.02/1.60 valves, also ported by Lloyd Elliot. It has a Comp Custom grind 218/228 @ 0.050 cam cut on a 108 LSA. It has 1.7 roller rockers on it for 0.578 lift. It has Rhoads V-Max lifters cold lashed at 0.016" off the bottom of the lifters travel. It has a hand ported L31 truck intake with a 48 lb/hr AUS Injection spider. It has Thorley Tri-Y headers that are 1 5/8" primary, to 2" secondary to a 2.5" collector that flow into the factory 3" dual to the muffler piping from the Express using high flow 3" cats and a dual in/single out bus muffler with a 4" tailpipe. The 383 has an 80mm BBK throttle body and a custom 4" air intake. The 383 was not cheap to build but absolutely DESTROYS the 6.0L at every rpm point from idle to 6,500 rpm. The 6.0L build and swap was also not a cheap one. The 383 cost probably $800 more than the 6.0L, but is a 100% new build vs a used short block, used injectors, used coils, sensors, etc. Naturally aspirated in a heavy vehicle the 383 L31 all the way.
The 383 is a little monster, idles like it means business and not at all afraid to leap to redline (6,200 rpm fuel kill) when the throttle is opened.
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
1987 G20 with a 6.0L
You must be registered for see images attach
1997 Express with a L31 based 383
You must be registered for see images attach
You must be registered for see images attach
I was actually playing around with cam specs in the 6.0L on engine analyzer today. Wanted to see how much if any better Truck Norris would do than the Comp cam currently in the thing. BTR sadly does not provide enough information for an informed buyer to even consider their products!!!! The few specs they provide do not provide enough information to make heads or tails out of the cam for a modified application. BTR should fix this because I for one am not shelling out a penny for their cam without proper specs. That being said, best guestimate that there is not enough power difference on the table to open the 6.0L up. I had previously built the 383 to exact specification on it as well. Both engines are modeled down to bearing sizes, ring type, exact compression ratio, valvetrain and camshaft specifics, plenum and runner dimensions and all kinds of small details. It takes several hours a piece to plug in all the details and input the dimensions on the program from a build sheet. As it also does in real life, the 383 DESTROYS the 6.0L everywhere in the model. I find it interesting that the overall power curve spits out looking similar, with the L31 383 curve shifted to the lower rpm range and higher overall. The intake port sizes, intake runner length difference and larger cross-sectional area, smaller plenum volume as well as fewer cubic inches, shorter stroke, and longer rod length all hurt the low-speed torque of the 6.0L.
383
You must be registered for see images attach
6.0L
You must be registered for see images attach