Ls2 vs Ls3

[Bingo BIlly]

What is the difference between how the ls2 and how the ls3 drives? Responds to mods?

I know the ls3 is a 6.2 as opposed to a 6.0 but in stock form offers the same torque and 10 more kw??

What are the real advantages? Is one more tunable/detuned?

A friend is trying to justify the $10k differential buying used between the two VEs

[vyls1wa]

bigger better heads and the extra cubes, although for the extra 10g, i dont know if its worth it just on the engine alone, depending on the year, he could be missing out on the newer version of the manual.

[troytroy]

It certainly isn't a 10k difference - if that's what you're asking!

I wouldn't worry about stock figures either - it's relatively meaningless as a comparison between the capabilities of the two engines. HSV tuning is based on marketing rather than potential. The LS3 is not struggling for power in stock form.

The real cost diference between the two engines - is the cost it would take to get the LS2 the same amount of power and torque of the LS3 engine - in real terms. The LS2 is probably losing 15-25kw and 30nm of torque over the LS3 in tuned form. The L98 is probably losing 10kw and 10nm of torque over the L98. Obviously these pluck figures are for comparitive purposes. The Torque production will also be lower down in the rev range in the LS3.


You would have to make up for the LS2's lesser heads and lesser Torque potential. The sliding scale of comparison dies after about $3-5k investment - from that point modifying them or adding superchargers/turbos changes the game altogether.

So in summary if you're paying more than 3k for two cars with exactly the same km's, same options etc - then don't pay more than 3k for the LS3 over an LS2. Ussually the cost difference reflects age and Km's difference.

It's not all about power either. The new LS3 with LPI weighs in at nearly two tons - so an LS1 HSV of six years ago can give it a run for its money. ;)

[Wonky]

I've seen lots of both stock and tuned/modded LS2s and LS3s at Chev's and also a few at Heathcote (in particular Bouka's LS2 R8 and LS3 Senator) and if I was ever able to afford one would absolutely want to get an LS3. Both in stock form and how it responds to minor mods like tune/exhaust/OTR it seems a much better engine.

[Mikey]

I've seen lots of both stock and tuned/modded LS2s and LS3s at Chev's and also a few at Heathcote (in particular Bouka's LS2 R8 and LS3 Senator) and if I was ever able to afford one would absolutely want to get an LS3. Both in stock form and how it responds to minor mods like tune/exhaust/OTR it seems a much better engine.
It's funny you say that Wonky, I have had a VZ 297 (ls2), VE E1 307 (Ls2) and now I have an E2 317 (Ls3) and the one that made the most power from HSV was the Z series (Ls2), making 231 RWK then the E1 307 (Ls2) 228 RWK and then last the E2 (Ls3) which made 225 RWK. The E2 is the only one I have gone mafless with and it is barely making 280 with an exhaust and tune now, which is a huge improvement considering the low base figure I started with. Everyone told me that it should have made 240-250 RWK standard but I checked mine on two different dynos and they were within 2 RWK! There is nothing wrong with an Ls2 imho, and there would not be 10k difference between them either.

Cheers Mikey

[Bingo BIlly]

naturally all of the 10k isnt the motor car is also 2 years newer but theres only 14000km difference between the two.

The ls2 hsv in the vz must be a screamer with the light weight. but my friend is looking at the ve series

[Wonky]

It's funny you say that Wonky, I have had a VZ 297 (ls2), VE E1 307 (Ls2) and now I have an E2 317 (Ls3) and the one that made the most power from HSV was the Z series (Ls2), making 231 RWK then the E1 307 (Ls2) 228 RWK and then last the E2 (Ls3) which made 225 RWK. The E2 is the only one I have gone mafless with and it is barely making 280 with an exhaust and tune now, which is a huge improvement considering the low base figure I started with. Everyone told me that it should have made 240-250 RWK standard but I checked mine on two different dynos and they were within 2 RWK! There is nothing wrong with an Ls2 imho, and there would not be 10k difference between them either.

Cheers Mikey

:eek: You must have a Fri built LS3. :bawl: The 240 - 250 figure is what I'd expect judging from those I've seen.

naturally all of the 10k isnt the motor car is also 2 years newer but theres only 14000km difference between the two.

Agree - that would account for much of the 10k difference. :yup:

[haffa]

There is no comparison.The LS3 rocks.I run a VZ R8 which started life with the 6.0 and a few mods.best I could achive was 380rwhp.The workmanship on the 6.0 was pretty poor to the point where I had todo an engine change.In went a 6.2 and I haven't looked back.Pretty much the same mods but it is now running 445 rwhp with more to come over the next couple of months.Upshot is you will get better bang for your buck with the LS3.

[Vulture]

I've had LS1, LS2, L98 and LS3 - LS3 the winner pick!

[RED R8]

My ve ls2 runs 463rwhp with good exhaust,Otr, tickled Higgins heads and 233/233 cam so I don't see the Ls2 as too far behind but the ls3 starts out with better heads and slightly more cubes. The 10k difference would set up some nice forced induction.

[VYSHSV8]

hey Daz b ring it down to the chrissy party this sunday @ Actives and have a run it up I will pay for it :):)

i will be down there :)

[Uwish]

I've had LS2 E1 R8 and a LS3 E1.5? R8.
The LS3 is a better motor at every point.
Buy the one with an LS3