5.7L engine ?

I'm looking to buy a 95 Sierra 4X4 with the above engine. However it looks just like a 307 that I had in a 72 malibu. Is GM still using that same engine? What have they done to modernize it? I can't believe that it's not
fuel injected! I'm replacing an 87 Ranger with a 2.3L which appears much more modern than the 95 Sierra engine. No wonder GM is having financial problems. Comments please. TIA Tom C
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The 5.7 is a 350 c.i.
It is TB fuel injection...and is basically the same small block that you had in your 72, and your 72 had basically the same small block that were in the 50's Chevrolet V8's.
What's wrong with sticking with what works?
No wonder GM is having financial problems? Now I'm sorry I even attempted to answer your question...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I agree with Advocate, the chevy 350 is a masterful engine. It has not needed to change. In my opinion it was one of the worst things they could do was stop the production of the 350 in favor of the 5.3 and 6.0l engines. What I believe is causing the problems is the fact that the auto makers want 35 40 thouseand dollars for trucks, and cars. The economy thing is still going strong but gm is not going with the flow. And the autoworkers have done a wonderful job of demanding to much money for their services. They simply made gm go over seas due to the cost of keeping the workers going. just my $.02
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
For My .02: Product will not sell for any less whether built overseas or North America. The real issue is reliability (sound engineering) vs gimmicks which could have used less of. Less money spent on gimmicks would freed up resources to really FIX what needed fixing. Discounting for market share and with added gimmicks are what ails GM. Imports are not fancy, are fairly well built and run reliably to boot. To save money, cutting gimmicks would seem to me, a place to start the turnaround don't ya all think? Rolf
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

looks
not
much
had

the

If gasoline was still under $1.00 per gallon, nothing would be wrong.

to

Jeeez, don't take it personally....
Maybe a little more clarification for my post would help. I'm looking to replace my Ranger. I want to buy a boat and the Ranger isn't big enough to trailer it. So, I started looking for a bigger truck. This Sierra looked promising even though it has 155,000 miles on it. But, I was suprised to see this engine when I popped the hood. Initially, I thought that the engine must have been replaced because....well, it just looked so old. Admittedly, I've been away from GM for some years and wasn't aware of the state of technology in this vehicle. Sorry if I offended you, but it seems that a lot of other people (investors) aren't too pleased with GM.....Not to mention the thousands that are going to lose their jobs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I didn't take anything you said personally. You made a stupid statement in your first post, that's all. If one needs to explain to you why General Motors offered the small block basically unchanged for nearly 50 years, you really don't get it so the explanation falls on deaf ears. I like GM pickups.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Advocate wrote:

There is nothing wrong with the small block engine or design even today. Any problem with one is due to quailty control, not design. It is quite likley the best eninge of its type ever built even today.
--

-----------------
www.thesnoman.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TomC wrote:

I have the same truck & engine combo. Excellent engine - still strong after 257,000 miles.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:03:47 -0500, Stephen Young

the 5.7 (350) Chevy engine has always been a reasonably good performer. If you ask me its only gotten better.
Like one of the other guys said I don't follow why GM needs three versions of the small block in the pickup. I'm not even sure what they are.... something like a 4.8, a 5.3, and a 6.0 ....
--
elbert.clarke@**adelphia.net
remove ** to email
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I love my 350. 377,xxx kilometers on it and it still runs strong. :)

----------------------------------------------------- users trucks from this group listed below ----------------------------------------------------- http://users.eastlink.ca/~mikemcneil/index.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Michael McNeil wrote:

It has TBI (Throttle Body Injection) and there is nothing wrong with the 350 design. I was ahead of its time when it first came out and has no design flaws that need improving. THe 350 was scrapped in 02 not because it was bad but because they could build the modular 4.8/5.3/6.0 engine cheaper. The old GM small block is a tuff act to beat.
--

-----------------
www.thesnoman.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TomC wrote:

    Sure the 2.3 is more modern. The pinto didn't come out till the 70's. Where as the Small Block Chevy First Debuted in 1955, with a displacement of 265 CID.
    Where as Chevy has made improvements to the block, and changed things since 1955. Ford uses a pretty much unmodied Pinto Block, with a 1989 and up cylinder head. The reason your 2.3 has 8 spark plugs is, ford could not get the engines to run clean enough. So their solution was to add another 4 spark plugs to get a more compleate burn.
    As for a 86 UP 350 being the same as a 307, it's a far stronger engine. 307's 262 V8's, 70's 265 V8's are the weakest SBC's ever made. Charles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The GM 5.7 (350) is NOT the same as your old chevelle 350`s...In 1986 GM made a 2nd generation 5.7..which is externally balanced (like the 400 sbc and the 454 bbc) also the valve covers are held down by center mounted hold down bolts compared to the 1/4" edge of valve cover mounted bolts...but all in all still one hullava strong running motor,...Sid

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
damn right it is. :)

----------------------------------------------------- users trucks from this group listed below ----------------------------------------------------- http://users.eastlink.ca/~mikemcneil/index.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.