I don't. If its a domestic vehicle, it should be cubic inches. I have a Tahoe with a 5.3 Sounds like a number on the Richter scale Tahoe with a 327 sounds better
I thought the 5.3 is like a 331 (bored .030+ 327). Sounds like an old hemi. I think we oughta make all the chinaman cars go CUBIC INCHES. ws
The GM 5.3L engines are 325 cu in. I like calling it 5.3L better. And the 6.0L sounds better than 364 cu in.
Diesels too... A 6-71 Detroit was 6 bangers at 71 CUBIC INCHES PER CYLINDER, Guess what a 20-645 is? I get the temperature thing kinda.. 0 is freezing and 100 is boiling. Why couldnt the conversion be as simple as TEMP X 212??? ws
5.3L is actually 324.9987 CID or rounded up 325. It has a 3.779" bore with a 3.622" stroke. Looks like STEPHAN beat me too it.
Seeing it from another country, we don't always get you.. Ounces, foot, gallon, fahrenheit, inches, pounds and so on, where almost the rest of the world uses the same measurement units..
Ha.. just the other day I was being a smart ass at the auto parts store.. I could not recall the long oil filter number for my suburban, so I asked the parts clerks, there were 3 of them standing there, who are all young kids, and know me and that I work on old stuff.. He asked "what motor"... I said "325"... Got the glassed over eyeball look in response.. "What is that?.." With a smile, I said "It's how us old folks talk about engine size".. "is that a 5.3...? Me.. " a 5.3 what?" Clerk.. " I don't know".. one of the others chimes in "liters" Ya, Pontiac used the 6.5 liter thing with the GTO emblem... I think it was a stab at Enzo Ferrari, who was probably pissed that the stole the name.. so they "Europeanized" it.. to rub it in.. JW
1 liter = 61.0237441 cubic inches X 5.3 = 323.4258437 CID Looks like they missed 2 cubic inches or so.
That is because 5.3 liters is not an accurate number. The real displacement was rounded down to 5.3, just like a Buick 455s real number was rounded down to 455.
I don’t mind new engine displacement being designated by liters (or litres). I don’t like older engines listed that way (parts store thinks GSs have 5.6s, 5.7s, 6.6s, and 7.5s) What I mind is when my newspaper isn’t at the end of my driveway in the morning! (That’s my ‘old fart’ issue-I know I can read it online but don’t want to. And some people-young and old-what’s with never carrying any cash? Not even $20?...) Patrick
Yup, or using Derek's number, 324.9987/61.0237441 =5.325774496 liters And our 455 is actually ALMOST 456 CID, 455.7248299.
The usage of "Litre" for engine size was, for Pontiac, a marketing exercise in order to try to compare its cars more to European cars and car-speak. And that angle grew. Slowly, but it grew. Modernly, it's really a practicality. It's like the venerable 10mm socket and wrench (those of you who have worked on European or Japanese cars know what I mean). At first, you needed it, but did't like having to venture away from the standard ole' SAE set of tools. Then, the number of vehicles and mechanical things out there needing requiring a 10mm socket and wrench have exploded over the last 20 years. It is what is is - call it toolbox globalization as the OEM and aftermarket parts makers and supply chains all integrate. 455 c.i.d. or 7.5 liters/litres ... either way, the metric system is here to stay. An interesting question is really when will the US convert wholesale to the metric system. I remember in Junior High in the '80's there was a movement to switch .... it frankly is a much simpler system. The time might be closer than we realize.
Do you recall seeing all the references to "GS 500" model in the 1970 Buick Chassis Manual? More marketing ploy? Was Buick thinking of nomenclature like Shelby 500?
I don’t like it unless it’s on the old GTO’s, Ford 7 liter, or TA. I like that my Challenger says 392 instead of 6.4.
