Payton Mitchell
Member
I'm kinda up in arms on what to do with my Yorker. Has anyone swapped a ls into a Yorker ? I'm sure I'm gonna catch alot of flack over this . Just curious really considering it.
LS motor in NYB
- Thread starter Payton Mitchell
- Start date
MJF
Member
I've seen a few sbc fuselages, so it is possible without too much hassle. Don't know any build details though.
bluefury361
Old Man with a Hat
This is a joke ....... Right ?
75LandYacht
Yank Tank
Wash your mouth out with Soap young man!! You can’t say “LS” and NYB in the same conversation.. better yet! Sell US the car so you won’t have that terrible thoughts again. 
Last edited:
mopar_4life
Well-Known Member
If you have the parts, time ,money and skills. Do it. Why not, it will be unique and different. And if you do it right and clean then It will be alright. You will still have fun in the car.
Waste of time and money......
Rwc
Senior Member
What problem dies an LS swap solve?
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
Every 16 year old's fantasy. Enough already, Payton.
jct
Senior Member
Why not use a Lincoln 460, Pontiac 455, or a Cadillac 500
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
Why not a Cummins diesel.
Last edited:
barnfind
Old Man with a Hat
With a 10 speed behind it
MJF
Member
Why not? 440/455/460/500 are all from stoneage. Way better fuel economy, much more power. I would use 3rd gen hemi rather than LS engine, but it is done many times. Here is one 68 Belvedere with LS engine too.
Is this another "put a Chevy in it and make it worth more" deal???
Why not the Gen III Chrysler Hemi, as that swap is known and has been done by a few people in here??? Certainly NO tissue rejection issues that way!!
The ONLY advantage to the LS architecture might be the electronics to run it? I understand that IF you take a Gen III Hemi, change the crank and cam, such that the firing order matches that of the Chevy LS motor, you can then use GM electronics to run the Chrysler engine.
Why? Allegedly more flexible electronic software to better tune it for modifications?
As neat as the Gen III Hemi does in front of the ZF/Chrysler 8-speed, that would make one great performing older C-body! ONCE you put a 3.55 gear in the back (so you can use OD at highway speeds). Last time I checked, which might have changed since then, there was no interest by FCA is doing a controller for non-OEM uses of that transmission (i.e., street rods and such). Perhaps somebody's changed that by now?
I suspect the LS controllers to run the engine and trans will be quite more than you might be saving, even if the engine is a freebie. Plus the need to replace the existing TorqueFlite and what mounts it to the engine and body.
The other side of things is that the cars will be "collectible" to a small number of people, comparatively. Value will be depressed, as a result. So "modifying" one as you propose can result in an "oddball" that's worth even less money, except to that Chevy guy that doesn't want to drive a Chevy.
Your car, your money, your investment. The Chrysler Gen III Hemi seems to be the more appropriate way to go that will probably cost less AND keep "everything within the family".
CBODY67
Why not the Gen III Chrysler Hemi, as that swap is known and has been done by a few people in here??? Certainly NO tissue rejection issues that way!!
The ONLY advantage to the LS architecture might be the electronics to run it? I understand that IF you take a Gen III Hemi, change the crank and cam, such that the firing order matches that of the Chevy LS motor, you can then use GM electronics to run the Chrysler engine.
Why? Allegedly more flexible electronic software to better tune it for modifications?
As neat as the Gen III Hemi does in front of the ZF/Chrysler 8-speed, that would make one great performing older C-body! ONCE you put a 3.55 gear in the back (so you can use OD at highway speeds). Last time I checked, which might have changed since then, there was no interest by FCA is doing a controller for non-OEM uses of that transmission (i.e., street rods and such). Perhaps somebody's changed that by now?
I suspect the LS controllers to run the engine and trans will be quite more than you might be saving, even if the engine is a freebie. Plus the need to replace the existing TorqueFlite and what mounts it to the engine and body.
The other side of things is that the cars will be "collectible" to a small number of people, comparatively. Value will be depressed, as a result. So "modifying" one as you propose can result in an "oddball" that's worth even less money, except to that Chevy guy that doesn't want to drive a Chevy.
Your car, your money, your investment. The Chrysler Gen III Hemi seems to be the more appropriate way to go that will probably cost less AND keep "everything within the family".
CBODY67
bluefury361
Old Man with a Hat
Sad to say the Ls1 swap is the new SBC trend. A step up, but a small one. same outcome. It's like fat & lazy people parking in the handicap area.
65sporty
Old Man with a Hat
I read your other thread about this, I love the LS and have thought about putting one in my 98 Chevy 2500(read the Chevy part). Like others have mentioned a late model Hemi may be better suited for your swap, still which ever way you go lots of fab involved. You better be committed to it or it will end up on Craigslist being sold missing it's Heart as a unfinished project.
Carmine
Old Man with a Hat
You know, I want to like this kid because he has a big Trump sign in the garage, just like me (I wasn't going to keep it on the lawn forever).
But it's endemic of this generation that just wants to point n' click on everything vs. learn something (like how to tune a carb). But whatever.
And BTW, a 440 is not exactly a Stanley Steamer. There are still plenty of BB Mopars in daily use as regular cars in climates much worse than Texas. Oh my! Further... a New Yorker is a retarded choice to build into some kind of rally-car-pro-touring-blah-blah. In 2006 I drove a regular ol' 73 Imperial cross-country twice and 6 weeks in between as my only car. I'm sure that's a feat I could do today, except gas would be cheaper and my cell phome would be better. And when the trip was over, the car was no worse for it.
If other people want to spend their time swappin' engines and tranz'z and blah blah in pursuit of ?? God bless 'em. I'll be enjoying my car while you're turning wrenches and throwing cash into a big hole.
But it's endemic of this generation that just wants to point n' click on everything vs. learn something (like how to tune a carb). But whatever.
And BTW, a 440 is not exactly a Stanley Steamer. There are still plenty of BB Mopars in daily use as regular cars in climates much worse than Texas. Oh my! Further... a New Yorker is a retarded choice to build into some kind of rally-car-pro-touring-blah-blah. In 2006 I drove a regular ol' 73 Imperial cross-country twice and 6 weeks in between as my only car. I'm sure that's a feat I could do today, except gas would be cheaper and my cell phome would be better. And when the trip was over, the car was no worse for it.
If other people want to spend their time swappin' engines and tranz'z and blah blah in pursuit of ?? God bless 'em. I'll be enjoying my car while you're turning wrenches and throwing cash into a big hole.
bluefury361
Old Man with a Hat
LS engines do have a place, just not in a Mopar.
LocuMob
Fluid Technician with a hat
Get any Mopar engine and put it in the New Yorker, buy a GM for an LS swap.
Similar threads
