motorboat pecs

Finally, I Can Motorboat a Man’s Pillowy Pectorals

You ever look at the heaving bosom of a man—say Michael B. Jordan or Chris Hemsworth—and think “I want to grind up in there with my face for years and years?” Japanese artist Shirane apparently has. The artist, a recent graduate of the Ochanomizu Institute of Art in Tokyo, has launched a crowdfunding campaign on the site Motion Gallery , for headless torsos in the shape of a hairless hunk.

https://twitter.com/embed/status/973440329499082752

With 56 days left, the campaign has already surpassed it’s goal of 450,000 yen ($4,288) and is now at 734,000 yen ($6,995). Presumably because everyone wants a fistful of fella.

According to the campaign’s page, Shirane created the pillow as part of her graduate project at art school. She was frustrated with the pillows currently available—which are all of busty anime women whose breasts share more in common with basketballs than the fleshy fat sacks human women lug about.

Shared images of her art project went viral in Japan and Shirane opted to create a crowdfund campaign. Now for as little as 10,000 yen ($95) you to can nestle in the sweet stuffy valley of man. Honestly, this pillow looks so good I can probably delete Tinder.

[ Motion Gallery , h/t Sora News 24 ]

• Best Free VPN
• Best Cheap VPN
• NordVPN Review
• ExpressVPN Review
• ProtonVPN Review
• Surfshark Review
• Super Bowl 2025
• US Open 2024
• Best Cloud Storage
• Best Web Hosting
• About Gizmodo
• How to Tip Gizmodo

• Register for a Workshop
• Product Shop
• PECS ® : An Evidence-Based Practice
• PECS ® Facts
• The Pyramid Approach
• Our Company
• Testimonials
• Training Schedule
• Trainings and Talks
• Host Your Own Training
• Pyramid Online Learning
• Continuing Education Credits
• Professional Support
• Family Support
• Pyramid Certification Program
• PECS ® Certification
• Product Instructions
• Order Forms and Service Directory
• Free Activities
• Fire and Burn Safety
• Free Materials
• Professional Organizations
• Environment Themed Pictures
• Downloadable Books
• Funding Resources
• PECS Videos & More
• Frequently Asked Questions
• All Research
• Latest Research
• Evidence-Based Practices

Select Page

Home » Blog » How to Modify PECS Pictures for Access and Success – Tips from an Occupational Therapist

How to Modify PECS Pictures for Access and Success – Tips from an Occupational Therapist

Ashley Battista MOT, OTR/L, and Anne Overcash, MEd, give practical tips on how to modify PECS pictures.

Your team has decided to teach PECS to a learner. Everyone agrees this is a perfect fit. Reinforcement assessment – complete! Pictures made and protected! Someone on the team, maybe you, voices a concern. How will the learner pick up and hold on to the picture (and later, the Sentence Strip) and exchange it with a communication partner? This learner has difficulty handling small items and a variety of learning materials.

Often, an Occupational Therapist (OT) is already part of the support team. This person will be a most valuable resource for recommendations and guiding the team through the development and modification of adapted PECS pictures. Picking up a picture, holding on to it, and then releasing it into someone’s hand requires fine motor, gross motor, and manipulation skills. There may already be a grasp and release profile developed for this person, if so, starting with this information will be most helpful in the creation of accessible pictures.

During the assessment of preferences, observe and consider carefully how this person interacts with the things they love the most. Are they able to manipulate some things with ease? Are there certain characteristics that those things have in common? Do they more frequently grasp with one finger to thumb, two fingers to thumb, or all four fingers to their palm? The OT will assess a range of skills within many functional activities including activities of daily living. General observations along with feedback provided by the OT will assist the team in providing optimal modifications and suggesting additional modifications if one does not work.

Phase I, no need to attach the picture (or adapted picture) with Velcro to the communication book/board. However, we do recommend adding Velcro to the back of each picture/symbol. This creates a bit of lift/separation between the surface and the picture and allows for ease in picking it up. Traditionally laminated pictures may be a bit too flimsy. Here are some ways to create a sturdier picture:

• Print the pictures on sturdier paper (ex: cardstock) before laminating
• Tape or glue the laminated picture to a square of cardboard
• Decoupage the picture onto a square of wood (lightweight like balsa wood works well)
• Glue the laminated picture inside a metal lid
• Attach the picture to a square bit of sponge
• Tape or glue the laminated picture to a blank stamp

Note: When assessing a specific modification, consider attaching pictures to the modified medium via Velcro initially. If a modification works well, then make an adapted symbol for each individual picture.

Pictured are images glued to various types of objects like blocks and sponges.

Pictures are glued to metal lids for mason jars or other glass containers.

Modified pictures ready to go? Teach Phase I with these.

Successful? Great! No need to eliminate the modification. All future symbols will be made the same way. However, the team may choose to begin to reduce or eliminate the modification for ease of access and/or to accommodate more pictures within a PECS communication book.

Two ways to reduce or eliminate modifications:

1. Probe skills with standard pictures

2. Reduce/eliminate modification

Probe skills : Periodically provide the standard laminated picture instead of the modified picture within a highly motivating activity. Document performance. If they are just as independent with the standard picture, proceed with these as you continue to teach the six phases of PECS. If not, continue to use the modified pictures.

Reduce/eliminate modification : How a tall stack became a short stack – a real world example. In classroom, a picture was glued atop 9 stacked and glued squares of craft foam. Input from the OT guided the team as they taught Phase I of PECS using stacks of varying heights. The team arrived at this number because this stack was the shortest stack required for success with Phase I. After a couple of days of independently exchanging these adapted symbols, the team removed 1 square from the stack and the PECS user remained successful! This method allowed for a stack tall enough for them to be successful yet a shorter and shorter stack over time. Ultimately, the stack was 2 squares tall. This material is virtually weightless. Each adapted picture weighed about the same as a traditionally laminated picture. These adapted pictures fit neatly inside a PECS book ready for easy transport.

Sometimes pictures are adapted only after beginning to teach PECS and we observe the learner is having difficulty picking up, holding onto, and/or letting go of the picture. Other times, teams adapt symbols prior to beginning. Either way, teams work diligently to increase independence and access for all PECS users.

What modifications to pictures have you made for your PECS users?

ADDITIONAL SUPPORT  

For ongoing support with communication skills, AAC implementation, the PECS protocol , and the Pyramid Approach , join our online community on Facebook. Search “PECS User Support” on   Facebook  and request to join. This active group of over 30,000 professionals, parents, and caregivers is monitored by our Pyramid Consultants from around the globe daily!

Ready to start PECS ? Visit our   training schedule ! Register for a   PECS Level 1 Training so you can see first-hand the 6-phase protocol backed by research. 

Our PECS Level 1 and PECS Level 2 Trainings are approved for AOTA CEUs !

Written By Ashley Battista MOT, OTR/L and Anne Overcash, MEd

© Pyramid Educational Consultants, LLC. 2023

• View All Blogs

What’s New

• Pyramid Educational Consultants Releases PECSTalk™ for Android
• A must read from the ASHA Leader Live
• Is your learner ready to transition from PECS to a Speech Generating Device (SGD)?
• Meet Molly Lingo, MEd, BCBA!
• Back to School Checklist!

Latest Blog Posts

• PECS ® Hacks: Sharing Tips from Consultant Travels  August 13, 2024
• Harmonizing Collaboration: Bridging Behavior Analysis and Speech Pathology in Education June 28, 2024
• Is PECS Compliance Based?…No! May 10, 2024
• Izzy Can’t Talk: An Interview with Author and Parent, Jennifer McGee March 22, 2024
• PECS Level 2 Training January 31, 2024

Pyramid uses cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. Some cookies are necessary to help our website work properly and can't be switched off, and some are optional but help Pyramid learn user habits to better improve customer experiences.

For instance, we and third party services such as Google Analytics use information about your devices and your online interactions with us to provide, analyze and improve our services.

By selecting "Manage Cookies," you can learn about and disable specific cookie and data tracking.

You can learn more by reviewing our Privacy Policy and manage your cookie setting options at any time by clicking on "Manage Cookies" at the bottom of any page.

Do you accept cookies on our website? By accepting cookies, you will accept and enable ALL cookies and data tracking. To manage what cookies to enable or disable, and to learn what data we track, click on Manage Cookies . Read More »

Do not sell my personal information

Yes, Accept Cookies Reject All Cookies Manage Cookies

Privacy Overview

Cookie	Duration	Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-advertisement	1 year	Set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin, this cookie is used to record the user consent for the cookies in the "Advertisement" category .
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
CookieLawInfoConsent	1 year	Records the default button state of the corresponding category & the status of CCPA. It works only in coordination with the primary cookie.
PHPSESSID	session	This cookie is native to PHP applications. The cookie is used to store and identify a users' unique session ID for the purpose of managing user session on the website. The cookie is a session cookies and is deleted when all the browser windows are closed.
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.

Cookie	Duration	Description
_hjSession_2769216	30 minutes	This cookie is set by HotJar to provide functions across pages for its data analytics.
prism_90980494	1 month	Set by ActiveCampaign to Store and track interaction of their mailing list system with our website.
woocommerce_recently_viewed	session	This cookie is set by WooCommerce to store performed actions on the website.

Cookie	Duration	Description
_ga	2 years	The _ga cookie, installed by Google Analytics, calculates visitor, session and campaign data and also keeps track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookie stores information anonymously and assigns a randomly generated number to recognize unique visitors.
_gat_gtag_UA_103057881_1	1 minute	Set by Google to distinguish users.
_gat_UA-103057881-1	1 minute	A variation of the _gat cookie set by Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager to allow website owners to track visitor behaviour and measure site performance. The pattern element in the name contains the unique identity number of the account or website it relates to.
_gcl_au	3 months	Provided by Google Tag Manager to experiment advertisement efficiency of websites using their services.
_gid	1 day	Installed by Google Analytics, _gid cookie stores information on how visitors use a website, while also creating an analytics report of the website's performance. Some of the data that are collected include the number of visitors, their source, and the pages they visit anonymously.
_hjAbsoluteSessionInProgress	30 minutes	Hotjar sets this cookie to detect the first pageview session of a user. This is a True/False flag set by the cookie.
_hjFirstSeen	30 minutes	Hotjar sets this cookie to identify a new user’s first session. It stores a true/false value, indicating whether it was the first time Hotjar saw this user.
_hjIncludedInPageviewSample	2 minutes	Hotjar sets this cookie to know whether a user is included in the data sampling defined by the site's pageview limit.
_hjIncludedInSessionSample	2 minutes	Hotjar sets this cookie to know whether a user is included in the data sampling defined by the site's daily session limit.
_hjSessionUser_2769216	1 year	Hotjar sets this cookie to store a unique user ID for its data sampling.
CONSENT	2 years	YouTube sets this cookie via embedded youtube-videos and registers anonymous statistical data.

Cookie	Duration	Description
test_cookie	15 minutes	The test_cookie is set by doubleclick.net and is used to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
VISITOR_INFO1_LIVE	5 months 27 days	A cookie set by YouTube to measure bandwidth that determines whether the user gets the new or old player interface.
YSC	session	YSC cookie is set by Youtube and is used to track the views of embedded videos on Youtube pages.
yt-remote-connected-devices	never	YouTube sets this cookie to store the video preferences of the user using embedded YouTube video.
yt-remote-device-id	never	YouTube sets this cookie to store the video preferences of the user using embedded YouTube video.
yt.innertube::nextId	never	This cookie, set by YouTube, registers a unique ID to store data on what videos from YouTube the user has seen.
yt.innertube::requests	never	This cookie, set by YouTube, registers a unique ID to store data on what videos from YouTube the user has seen.

Your browser is out-of-date!

Update your browser to view this website correctly. Update my browser now

Common Misconceptions About Picture Exchange Communication System

What is a Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS)? PECS is a form of Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) which uses a picture/symbol system to teach initiation of functional communication. PECS was developed by Lori Frost and Andy Bondy in 1985 to be used with preschool children on the autism spectrum who demonstrated little to no socially-related communication. Examples include: children who avoided interactions with others, did not approach others to communicate, and/or only communicated when prompted to do so.

Myth #1: The Picture Exchange Communication System is strictly used for nonverbal children or children on the autism spectrum.

A common misconception about the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) is that it is strictly used with nonverbal children. While PECS and other forms of AAC have proven very useful and successful with nonverbal children, the system services many other populations with the purpose of eliciting and initiating functional communication .

To fully understand the meaning of functional communication, a distinction must be made between actions directed to the environment vs. actions directed toward a person . A child may climb on a step stool to reach a toy car on a shelf. From this action, we could infer that the child wants to play with the car. However, this is not communicative. If this same child looks from the car to his mother, or leads his mother over to the car, this is considered communication. Neither interaction involved speaking, however the distinction is that communication occurs when an action is directed towards someone else to achieve a certain outcome.

Therefore, Picture Exchange Communication System is appropriate, not just with children or adults that are not verbally communicating, but with those who are verbal, yet lack person-directed communication.

Other populations where PECS might be appropriate (to name a few):

-late-talking children (research is showing benefits for the introduction of AAC as early as 12 months)

-adults with aphasia

-Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS)

-children with reduced speech intelligibility

-verbal children with reduced social language and initiating

Myth #2: Using PECS will deter my child from communicating verbally

For some children, verbal communication can be a challenge; speech and language are not developing as quickly as would be anticipated and, accordingly, result in accompanying frustration and associated behaviors. Introduction of an augmentative and alternative communication system like PECS can help bridge the gap for children who are not yet verbally communicating but need an accessible means of communication as speech and language develop. Without an effective means of communication, these children are at risk for social, emotional, and behavior problems, including feelings of frustration and isolation.

Often, parents are concerned that using an augmentative or alternative form of communication will replace or deter verbal communication. In fact, research has shown just the opposite:

“Research over the past 25 years has shown not only that use of augmentative communication systems (aided or unaided) does not inhibit speech development but that use of these systems enhances the likelihood of the development or improvement of speech.” (Bondy & Frost, 2004)

The PECS program mirrors the acquisition of typical language development; children are taught one-word labels for frequently requested items before transitioning to formulation of two-word utterances. Verbally requesting and labeling can be targeted in conjunction with the program. The PECS program also details modality transitioning (i.e., transitioning from PECS to verbal communication), if and when it is appropriate.

If your child is using PECS now, this does not mean that you are “giving up on speech”. It is a system that is being utilized to give your child a means of communicating and interacting with others while speech is developing.

Myth #3: PECS cannot be used with children who have visual impairments, fine motor, or gross motor difficulties.

PECS can be used with a wide range of age-groups and disabilities. Accommodations can be made for children and adults with visual impairments, fine motor, or gross motor difficulties, to name a few.

Pictures can be made in various sizes to accommodate visual impairments. Additionally, you or your child’s speech language pathologist can select and modify pictures to suit your child’s needs; photographs can be used instead of clipart or Boardmaker pictures, and images can be modified to create more contrast.

Pictures can also be put on objects (e.g., bottle tops) to make them easier to grasp and pick up from a table or book for children with fine motor difficulties.

Step 2 of PECS involves ‘distance and persistence’, meaning a child is taught to move across a room, multiple rooms, etc. to select a picture from his book and persist when giving it to his communication partner. Students that are non-ambulatory can use a voice switch or a button to request his communication partner in order to perform the exchange.

If you have questions about PECS and if it would be appropriate for your child, please consult with a licensed speech language pathologist.

Download our Guide for Families

Continue Reading

The Development of Gestures in Communication

Speech-Language Screening vs. Evaluation

What Parents Need to Know About Motor Speech Disorders

How to Use Visual Supports at Home for Language Development

5 Tips on How to Respond to Articulation Errors

Arlington Heights

Des plaines, lincolnwood, vernon hills, neuropsychology center, testimonials.

Our infant daughter was in physical therapy with Anna Zahn for about five months.  Anna was consistent, patient, and wonderful with our daughter.  Anna was also clear in her communications with us as parents which helped us understand our daughter's progress and needs, as well as how we could help our daughter at home.  While we are proud that our daughter graduated PT, we will miss Anna's warmth and kindness.

I love this place! Chista is an amazing person, so sweet and kind and very professional in her work. All staff are very kind with children. I feel happy to find this place for my daughter. Thank you!!!

Maria Di Rita

I cannot say enough nice things about the staff! My son worked with Khadija as his ABA therapist and is finishing up this week with his OT, Sabrina. They were really instrumental in helping us navigate a new diagnosis. Both were so easy to approach with questions. From Leeann at the front desk to the RBTs (Alex, Rabbia, Molly, and many others), we always felt so welcomed. It seems like the staff genuinely enjoy their jobs, consistently offering feedback and suggestions on how to help my son.

Jennifer Peyer

We have been working with the amazing team at NSPT for many years. They have been essential in understanding and supporting our child. I recommend their services to anyone looking for their specific type of support.Posted to

Monica Terése Carranza

They are so sweet and kinds persons with professionalism and really worried about the kids and how help they to get new skills and moving forward with knowledge.

Alejandra M.

NSPT is fantastic! All of the staff are wonderful, accomodating, and make you feel welcome and comfortable. Alan is fantastic - he has helped our family tremendously and has such patience and purpose in everything he does.

Alex Ehrhardt

North Shore Pediatric Therapy has been amazing.  They have done a great job adjusting to the specific needs of my autistic child.

Matt Nakanishi

My 12 yr old son has a lovely support team in Robert (Social Work) and Lindsay (OT)! He gains so much from his sessions & I gain so much from the communication and brainstorming! Thanks!

Jennie Meyer

Contact us to get started

Submit an inquiry form, we'll reach out to you, paperwork & insurance, treatment personalization, start making progress, thank you your submission has been received.

• ‍ For our clients, treatment hours are determined on an individualized basis, without predefined blocks.
• Our BCBAs weigh the priorities of the family, the availability of the child given other therapeutic services they may be receiving, and the level of support needed to facilitate the best outcomes.
• All of our treatment plans have terminal goals that are reported every 6 months and discussed every 3 months directly with the family, to ensure we are always moving towards fading the level of support needed and increasing daily independence.

ABA Therapy, Multi-Disciplinary Therapies, and Neuropsychology in 10 Chicagoland Locations

Our Therapy Services

• ABA Therapy for Autism
• Speech Therapy
• Occupational Therapy
• Autism Testing & Diagnosis
• Physical Therapy
• Careers We're hiring!
• Arlington Heights, IL
• Chicago, IL (Bucktown)
• Deerfield, IL
• Des Plaines, IL
• Elmhurst, IL
• Evanston, IL
• Glenview, IL
• Lake Bluff, IL
• Lincolnwood, IL
• Naperville, IL
• Vernon Hills, IL
• Neuropsychology Testing Center

Special Educator Academy

Free resources, the picture exchange communication system (pecs): 10 reasons why i love it.

Sharing is caring!

I talked in an earlier podcast about important considerations in addressing and expanding expressive communication skills for individuals with autism .  In this post, I am focusing on one of my favorite methods of introducing communication for students who are either nonverbal or functionally nonverbal (they talk but don’t use language to get their needs met): The Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) .

PECS is a system for instructing students to communicate using pictures or symbols (pic/syms) in place of words.  Students physically exchange a picture to request an item, to comment on or describe something, and eventually to have a conversation.  The Picture Exchange Communication System encourages and models speech along with the picture exchange , but the picture is designed to serve in place of the words.

I can’t tell you how to implement PECS extensively in a blog post, but I will give you some resources for learning more about it and talk about the particular reasons that I think it’s such a good fit for kids with ASD.

1.  The Picture Exchange Communication System is a Teaching System

 Contrary to common belief, PECS is not an abbreviation for picture symbols .  Although we sometimes call the pictures we use in the PECS system and the book they are kept in is called a PECS book, PECS as a term is NOT synonymous with pictures, schedules, or symbols used for communication .  

I say this because it’s kind of a pet peeve of mine when people use it incorrectly, but more so because PECS is the SYSTEM that is used to teach communicating with pictures .  The system has specific phases (6 to be exact) that are based on the science of verbal behavior–a part of applied behavior analysis devoted to all types of verbal behavior including text, speech, and communication in all forms.  

There are specific stages of instruction and methods for teaching the initial exchange to request, to teaching students to discriminate between pictures, to travel to communicate, and later to comment and expand the functions of communication, all while modeling and encouraging speech. As such, the Picture Exchange Communication System serves as a low-tech AAC system.

2.  PECS Makes the Act of Communication Tangible

There is so much more to communication than just naming something or asking for something. Individuals with autism’s communication difficulties create barriers to understanding the process of communication.  

As Bates’ quote indicates, the individual has to know the messages, gain attention and deliver it, and persist in trying to send the message until it is delivered or it clearly has failed.  This ability to communicate information is critical for effective interactions, even if it just starts with simple requests.

Individuals with ASD often will deliver a message verbally without gaining attention and the message is lost.  Or they try once and give up when no one responds.  The act of giving the picture to someone means they can’t just say something while standing on one side of the room and expect someone to respond to them–the communication act becomes tangible in that way.

The great thing about PECS is that in order to deliver that message, students have to find the picture and get the communicative partner’s attention in order to make the exchange.  If the partner doesn’t take the picture, the communication is not completed.  

So the student has to capture attention of the communicative partner in order for the communication to be effective. This makes the act of communication tangible for the individual.  

3. PECS Focuses on Initiation

As I’ve noted in several other posts , individuals with autism often have difficulty initiating actions.  This means that they will sit and wait for someone to ask, “What do you want?” or hands them an augmentative communication system or AAC device in order to say something.  

I don’t know about you, but if I’m sitting at the table and I want more potatoes, I don’t wait for someone to notice that I want something and ask me what I want before asking.  Instead, I get the attention of the person sitting near the potatoes and ask them to pass them to me.  

Similarly, I don’t wait for someone to give me pictures to make that request if they don’t understand.  Instead, if I can’t speak the language they understand, I would get their attention and point or draw a picture or use some other strategy.  

This is initiating communication and is what we need to teach our students to do.  They need to be able to voice their needs, wants and opinions just like the rest of us.  To do that they have to initiate communication.  

The Importance of Teaching Initiation

For many that means we need to TEACH them to initiate.  PECS does this by not using the phrase / direction, “What do you want?”  Instead it sets up tempting situations so the individual wants to communicate. Then, it uses prompting from behind that is nonverbal and more easily faded to help them make the initiate exchanges with the communicative partner to access the reinforcers.

This teaches the individual to communicate when they want something and eventually they have steps to teach them to travel to where the pictures are and the communicative partner is to deliver their message.

4.  PECS Can Decrease Challenging Behavior

There is research that has found that the use of PECS to teach communication functions that serve the same need as challenging behavior can result in a decrease of the challenging behavior.  Essentially, if I am hitting someone to access something to drink or a favorite item based on a functional behavior assessment, and you teach me to independently request those items that I need or want, the communication strategy can replace the challenging behavior.  

This is a simple example and it is often more complex, but there is significant research that indicates that individuals (with and without autism) have fewer problem behaviors when they are better communicators. You can find more research specifically on PECS and behavior here .

The Picture Exchange Communication System provides a form of functional communication. It can be used for Functional Communication Training as I talk about it in this post. Functional Communication Training (FCT) has been effective in reducing challenging behavior through teaching replacement skills like communication skills that serve the same function.

5.  PECS Can Encourage Speech

Many parents (and teachers) are afraid of any type of augmentative communication will inhibit individuals from developing speech.  We have no research that has found this to be true.  

We do have research that shows that PECS (and some other forms of AAC) can increase speech over time.  Some individuals naturally drop using PECS when they become more proficient because using their speech is much more efficient.  

For those who don’t, PECS builds in reinforcement protocols and strategies for encouraging and reinforcing speech specifically.  As such, learning to communicate makes it more likely that individuals will use speech; and if they don’t use speech proficiently, it gives them a functional way to communicate.

6.  It’s Highly Interpretable

Pictures are easy to understand.  Sign language and some individuals’ speech is difficult to interpret, not used effectively, and can lead to many situations that an individual is not able to make him or herself misunderstood.  Pictures are easy to understand for everyone (because we usually have labels on them as well as the pictures), everywhere.  This makes communication efficient and successful across environments and encourages more communication.

7.  It’s Expandable

Once the student is able to use one picture and make the exchange, the system moves to teaching them to travel to the book and the partner.  It also begins to expand the length of a student’s communication using a sentence strip as well as increasing the functions of their communication to describing items in the requests and then to commenting.

8. It Builds on Strengths

Pat Mirenda makes the point that individuals with autism typically (not always) are weaker in motor imitation, fine motor ability, and representative memory.  Often they are stronger in visual discrimination or visual perceptual skills.  

Because PECS is a selection-based strategy it capitalizes on students’ strengths to teach to their weaknesses–their visual perceptual skills to address their weaker communication skills.  This is different than sign, for instance, that requires the student to imitate motor movements, execute with acceptable precision fine motor movements, and represent the motor movements learned for each word mentally.  Check out this post about this issue and choosing forms of communication , as there are pros and cons for each.

9.  Picture-based AAC is Cheap

While this isn’t a reason in and of itself, picture books are inexpensive to make and can be made more easily than ever with image searches on the computer and cameras on everyone’s cell phone.  All you need is a notebook, pictures, laminate and Velcro.  And you have those in your classroom already.  This means you can get a system up and running fast, while you wait for a full AAC evaluation or a device to be recommended or ordered.

This is not to say that every student should automatically start on a low tech AAC system, but it is a good way to get up and started with a research-based systematic approach with very little funding.  In other words, there is no excuse NOT to teach communication.

10. It’s Evidence Based

If you’ve read this blog for any length of time, you know how important this to me. PECS is a deeply researched evidence-based practice. You can read more specifics on their site here.

And grab the AFIRM module (sign up is free) for a tutorial and review of the research.

Additional Thoughts About PECS as an Autism Intervention for Communication

There are even more reasons I love PECS. Some of the things I hear about it indicate that people think PECS are used mostly to teach nonverbal autistic students. While it is very useful for students who are nonverbal, I’ve used it with students who have emerging verbal skills, or who are verbal but sometimes need visual cues to get started.

The use of a picture system is something that students will fade out on their own at times. And verbal students will quickly learn it’s faster to say the thing they want rather than find the picture and make the exchange.

Clearly, PECS aren’t all you need for effective communication in the classroom But, it can be a huge and inexpensive tool to help your students learn to successfully communicate a wide variety of functions of communication.

• Read more about: Communication

You might also like...

He Can’t Always Get What He Wants!

Autism Communication Strategies for Helping Students with ASD Tell You About Their Day

3 Things You Need to Know to Teach Students With ASD to Answer Questions

4 Ways to Teach Greetings to Your Students Now

Grab a Free Resource

(and get free tips by email)

Training & Professional Development

• On-Site Training
• Virtual Training

Privacy Policy

Disclosures and copyright.

• Core Beliefs

Unlock Unlimited Access to Our FREE Resource Library!

Welcome to an exclusive collection designed just for you!

Our library is packed with carefully curated printable resources and videos tailored to make your journey as a special educator or homeschooling family smoother and more productive.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Anal Verbal Behav
• v.24(1); 2008 Dec

Investigating the Acquisition, Generalization, and Emergence of Untrained Verbal Operants for Mands Acquired Using the Picture Exchange Communication System in Adults With Severe Developmental Disabilities

Megan m ziomek.

Southern Illinois University

Ruth Anne Rehfeldt

This study compared the total amount of training time and total number of trial blocks for individuals with severe developmental disabilities to acquire mands under control of unconditioned establishing operations and mands under control of transitive conditioned establishing operations for manual sign and for the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS). Also examined was the generalization of mands across settings and communicative partners, as well as the emergence of untrained tacts and intraverbals for mands acquired using PECS. Mands for preferred items and for items needed to complete a chained task were acquired more rapidly and in fewer training blocks for PECS than for manual sign. Moreover, mands established using PECS generalized across settings and communicative partners. Finally, untrained tacts and intraverbals using PECS were shown to emerge for some of the participants following PECS training. These results suggest that PECS may be a viable alternative communication system for adults with severe developmental disabilities who have little or no history of systematic instruction and limited imitative repertoires.

Adults with severe developmental disabilities often lack functional communication skills and are thus candidates for alternative communication systems. A number of issues warrant consideration when habilitation staff are faced with the decision of which system to select, including the individuals' fine motor skills and the amount of effort required by staff to maintain the system. Other important issues include the degree to which the individual's communication skills will be demonstrated in a variety of circumstances, as well as the degree to which verbal skills taught using a particular system are pivotal for the emergence of other verbal skills. Manual sign, which involves approximations of hand gestures used in American Sign Language, has been used frequently with individuals with developmental disabilities with considerable success. For example, Carr and Kologinsky (1983) found that children with autism acquired a requesting repertoire using manual sign following incidental teaching. Generalization of spontaneous requests was observed across communicative partners and settings, and self-stimulatory behaviors were shown to decrease (see also Miller, Collins, & Hemmeter, 2002 ).

A number of advantages of using manual sign have been noted, including the fact that materials external to the body, such as a communication book or voice output system, are not required, such that the system is always accessible ( Mirenda, 2003 ). In addition, when communicating via manual sign, the message can be delivered quickly, as would not be the case with a communication board or book which involves flipping through pages or scanning an array of pictures ( Miller, 1993 , p. 331). Manual sign is not without disadvantages, however, including the fact that a number of potential communicative partners may not be proficient in manual sign, thus restricting the size of the individual's verbal community ( Schwartz, Garfinkle, & Bauer, 1998 ). Manual sign may also be particularly challenging for individuals with limited fine motor skills, a common characteristic of individuals with severe developmental disabilities.

A second alternative communication system that has grown in popularity for children with autism, despite limited research on its efficacy, is the picture exchange communication system (PECS) ( Bondy & Frost, 1994 ). PECS teaches individuals to communicate by handing a picture of a desired item to a caregiver, in exchange for the preferred item itself. Often the pictures are contained in a three-ring binder that the individual keeps on his or her person. More advanced learners may be taught to construct sentence strips, in which “I want, “I see,” and “I have” sentences are exchanged with another person. The logic underlying the exchange of pictures and/or sentence strips is that the exchange parallels the social exchange that takes place over the course of regular conversation. A number of case studies have shown PECS to be successful in establishing rudimentary communication skills in children with autism and related disorders (e.g., Bondy & Frost, 1993 ; Bondy & Battaglini, 1992 ; Schwartz, Garfinkle, & Bauer, 1998 ). In one of the only methodologically rigorous investigations of PECS, Charlop-Christy, Carpenter, Le, LeBlanc, and Kellet (2002) examined the time for three children with autism to acquire communication skills using PECS, and also the effects of PECS instruction on the emergence of speech and frequency of challenging behaviors. Results showed that the children met criterion for each training phase in an average of 170 minutes and 246 trials, and spontaneous speech was shown to increase and challenging behaviors were shown to decrease.

PECS affords several potential advantages, including the fact that complex motor movements are not required, and it is easily understood by others ( Charlop-Christy et al., 2002 ). Possible disadvantages have been noted as well, including the necessity of a communication book which holds the individual's pictures, which may be laborious to carry at all times and time consuming for staff to maintain ( Mirenda, 2003 ). Sundberg (1993) suggested that the depiction of complex words in pictorial form, such as prepositions, may be particularly complicated using PECS.

Skinner's (1957) analysis of verbal behavior has provided a popular framework in which language training curricula for persons with severe developmental disabilities are currently delivered. Selecting the appropriate communication form for an individual might be aided with a consideration of how verbal operants, defined by Skinner (1957) , might be most readily established. The mand, or “a verbal operant inwhich the response is reinforced by a characteristic consequence and is therefore under the functional control of relevant conditions of deprivation or aversive stimulation” (pp. 35–36), is often made the target of early language training efforts. When teaching mands, careful attention must be paid to motivational variables or establishing operations (EOs). Michael (1988 , 1993) defined the EO as “an environmental event, operation, or stimulus condition that affects an organism by momentarily altering (a) the reinforcing effectiveness of other events and (b) the frequency of occurrence of that part of the organism's repertoire relevant to those events as consequences” (p. 192). Michael (1993) differentiated between two types of establishing operations, unconditioned (UEOs) or unlearned EOs and conditioned (CEOs) or learned EOs. Signing for a desired beverage when thirsty would be an example of a mand under UEO control. Michael further identified several types of CEOs, one being the transitive CEO. A transitive CEO involves a stimulus in which the effectiveness of a conditioned reinforcer is dependent upon another stimulus. Exchanging a picture of an inaccessible item needed to complete a daily living task would be an example of a mand under transitive CEO control. Using a technique called the interrupted chain procedure, Hall and Sundberg (1987) taught adolescents with severe mental retardation to mand for items, such as a quarter needed to complete the task of making a vending machine purchase, by signing for the needed item. Once the chained task was established in the participants' repertoires, contriving the transitive CEO proved to be an effective technique for establishing the particular mand. The mand is to be distinguished from the tact, which is also often granted early emphasis in language training efforts, defined by Skinner (1957) as “a verbal operant in which a response of given form is evoked by a particular object or event or property of an object or event” (pp. 81–82), and the intraverbal, “a verbal operant in which the form of the response is controlled by verbal stimuli that lacks point-to-point correspondence with the response” ( Skinner, 1957 , p. 71). Requesting is often viewed as a form of manding, while naming, labeling, and describing are frequently used synonymously with tacting ( Sigafoos, Doss, & Reichle, 1989 ). Answering simple questions or engaging in more complex conversation can be considered examples of intraverbal responding.

Potential advantages and disadvantages of PECS and manual sign that are inspired by Skinner's (1957) analysis of verbal behavior have been expressed, but not all of which have been put to rigorous experimental testing. Manual sign has been called topography-based verbal behavior because the form of each response differentiates one response from another, much like vocal speech ( Sundberg, 1993 ). PECS, on the other hand, consists of first scanning an array of pictures and then exchanging the picture, and can be called selection-based verbal behavior for this reason. This differs from vocal speech and manual sign in that two responses for a single communicative episode are required, and the response topography is the same for every response ( Sigafoos, 1998 ). While Sundberg (1993) maintains that the parallel between manual sign and vocal speech may make sign a more preferable communication modality, Sigafoos (1998) suggests that because the speaker need only learn one response topography using PECS, it may be acquired more rapidly than manual sign, which requires the recall of numerous topographies (see Chambers & Rehfeldt, 2003 ). Another potential concern with PECS is that the system teaches impure, or multiply controlled, verbal operants. This is due to the fact that throughout the early phases of training, each preferred item is present on a given trial. Thus, an individual learns to exchange a picture not only when deprived of a given item, but when in the presence of a preferred item itself. Because the response is controlled by both a nonverbal antecedent stimulus and an EO, Bondy, Tincani, and Frost (2004) refer to such a response as a multiply controlled mand, or a mand-tact. Similarly, later phases of PECS training teach the individual to respond to questions such as “What do you see?” and “What do you have?” while in the presence of a particular stimulus. Responses are thus brought under control of nonverbal antecedent stimuli and verbal antecedent stimuli, leading Bondy et al. (2004) to define such responses as tactintraverbals. That PECS establishes multiply controlled verbal operants need not necessarily be regarded as a drawback of the system, however. It is possible that PECS training may lead to the emergence of untrained tacts and intraverbals because multiply controlled mands are established during training. A number of studies have suggested that the verbal operants are functionally independent (e.g., Sigafoos, Doss, & Reichle, 1989 ), but if PECS facilitates the emergence of verbal skills in a repertoire that has not been directly trained, this may reflect an advantage of PECS relative to other communication systems. Moreover, one would be hard-pressed to identify strategies other than PECS for establishing an initial mand repertoire that does not involve antecedent control over manding.

The purpose of the present study was to compare the acquisition and generalization across settings and communicative partners of mands for preferred items (under UEO control) and mands for items needed to complete a chained task (under transitive CEO control) for manual sign versus PECS. Also compared was the degree to which untrained tacts and intraverbals, in each communication modality, would emerge following training in each modality. Importantly, this study was conducted with adults with severe developmental disabilities, each of whom had histories of limited systematic instruction in any area. This is a population that has been included very infrequently in studies on either PECS or manual sign (see Chambers & Rehfeldt, 2003 ).

Participants

Louie was a 51-year-old male diagnosed with severe mental retardation, intermittent explosive disorder, and blindness in his left eye. Louie had an IQ score of 24 and a mental age of 2 years and 8 months according to the Stanford- Binet Intelligence Scale, Form L-M. According to the Inventory for Client and Agency Planning (ICAP), Louie's adaptive behavior age equivalent was 3 years and 11 months and his social and communicative age equivalent was 1 year and 8 months. Louie took 10 mg of Zyprexa® once daily to help manage aggression throughout the duration of the study. Louie had been institutionalized for the majority of his life and had no history of direct or tabletop instruction of any kind. Louie was nonvocal and primarily communicated using gestures. Louie imitated a small number of one-step gross motor movements.

Bonnie was a 42-year-old female diagnosed with profound mental retardation, intermittent explosive disorder, seizure disorder and obesity. According to the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale Form L-M, Bonnie had an IQ score of less than 20 and a mental age of 24 months. Bonnie scored an age equivalent of 2 years and 5 months on the ICAP. In the social and communication domain, her age equivalent was 1 year and 10 months. Throughout the duration of the study Bonnie took 100 mg of Luvox® once daily for help managing aggression. Bonnie had been institutionalized for the majority of her life and had no history of tabletop or direct instruction of any kind. Bonnie was nonvocal and primarily communicated using gestures. Bonnie did not imitate any one-step gross motor movements.

Robin was 52-year-old female diagnosed with mild mental retardation, mood swings and depression. Despite her diagnosis of mild mental retardation, Robin's overall adaptive behavior age equivalent according to the ICAP was 3 years and 1 month. Her lowest score on the ICAP was in social and communicative functioning, in which she scored an age equivalent of 1 year and 10 months. For the duration of the study Robin took 1 mg of Haldol® daily and 20 mg of Celexa® daily for help managing aggression and depression. Robin had lived with family members for the majority of her life and had never attended school. Thus, she had received minimal instruction in any skill area. Robin vocalized approximately 4 unintelligible words and used pointing and gestures to communicate. Robin imitated a small number of onestep gross motor movements.

Setting and Stimulus Materials

Mands for preferred items were taught in one of two secluded classrooms at the participants' developmental training program center. The classrooms contained a teacher's desk, tables, and chairs. Instructional materials included a 1- in. three-ring binder for each participant. Each page of the binder, including the cover, consisted of three Velcro strips placed horizontally upon the binder. The binders contained 2 in. × 2 in. laminated photographs of preferred and distracter items. Preferred items for each participant consisted of edible and tangible items, as shown in Table 1 .

Preferred Items Used During PECS and Manual Sign Training for Each Participant

Participant	PECS	Manual sign
Louie	Lemonade	Diet Coke®
	Applesauce	M&M's®
	Cookie	Book
	Magazine	Paper&pencil
	Baseball cards	Radio
Bonnie	Cupcake	M&M's
	Paper&pencil	Radio
	Applesauce	Cookies
	Lemonade	Diet Coke
	Magazine	Book
Robin	Magazine	Book
	Deck of cards	Memory game
	Connect Four®	Paper&pencil
	Puzzle	Ball
	Beads	Radio

Mands under transitive CEO control were taught in the kitchen at the facility, which included a table, several chairs, a refrigerator, stove, oven, sink, and several small appliances. Instructional materials included the same binders that were used in teaching mands for preferred items, but the pictures included in the binder consisted of 2 in. × 2 in. laminated photographs of various items needed to complete the chained tasks of preparing pudding and preparing iced tea. Other materials used to teach mands under transitive CEO control are shown in Table 2 .

Materials Needed for the Interrupted Chain Procedure Tasks

Task	Response modality	Materials needed
Making pudding	PECS	Pudding mix, milk*, whisk* measuring cup, mixing bowl*, timer
Making iced tea	Manual sign	Iced tea mix, cup*, water, pitcher*, wooden spoon*

Note : * Denotes items that were inaccessible during the interrupted chain procedure

A stopwatch was used to ensure the accuracy of reinforcer access time and delay-to-prompt intervals. An additional stopwatch was used to record the length of each PECS and manual sign training session.

An alternating treatments design was used to compare the total number of training blocks and the total amount of training time to teach mands for preferred items using manual sign and PECS. Generalization of mands acquired using PECS across communicative partners and settings was evaluated, as was the emergence of untrained tacts and intraverbals for PECS. An alternating treatments design was also used to compare the total number of training blocks to teach mands for items needed to complete chained tasks using manual sign and PECS for Louie. Following this training, the generalization of mands acquired using PECS across communicative partners and settings was evaluated, as was the emergence of untrained tacts and intraverbals.

Training sessions were conducted at least three times weekly. Half of each session was allocated for PECS training and the other half was allocated for manual sign training. The order in which PECS and sign training took place during each session was randomly determined, with the stipulation that the training of one communication form first did not occur for more than three consecutive sessions. Communication binders were not available during sign training sessions, and the instructor was prepared to physically block any emission of a manual sign that might have occurred during PECS training, although none did. If a participant attained mastery criterion for one response modality but scored 50% correct per training session or below for the other response modality for two consecutive sessions, training for the second response modality was discontinued.

Teaching Mands for Preferred Items. Preferred items were identified via the administration of the Reinforcer Assessment for Individuals with Severe Disabilities (RAISD), which was conducted in interview format with direct care staff at the developmental training center. Ten items were selected on the basis of the results of the interview for each participant; those items were then included in a multiple stimulus preference assessment without replacement (see DeLeon & Iwata, 1996 ). Each participant would be taught five mands for preferred items using PECS and five mands for preferred items using manual sign.

Baseline. During baseline, each participant's ability to mand for five preferred items using PECS was assessed, as was his or her ability to mand for five preferred items using manual sign. Skills consistent with Phase 3 of PECS and manual sign training (as will be described below) were evaluated. Each participant had access to his or her three-ring binder during the PECS baseline condition, but not during the baseline condition for manual sign. The binder contained five photographs of preferred items and five photographs of distracter items. Baseline for both response modalities consisted of three blocks of ten trials, with mands for each of the preferred items being assessed twice per trial block. The presentation of a preferred item marked the onset of a trial, after which the participant was allotted 5 s to either exchange the picture or emit the correct sign. The next item was then presented. No feedback or prompts were delivered during baseline.

Generalization probes. Generalization of mand skills consistent with mastery of Phase 3 was assessed for mands acquired using PECS across both settings and communicative partners. Generalization probes occurred prior to training and immediately following mastery of five mands. Probes were conducted in one 10- trial block, with a score of 80% or higher being indicative of generalization across settings and communicative partners. The generalization setting was the kitchen of the facility, and the communicative partner was a person known to the participants who was not present during any other training or test sessions.

PECS training. Participants were taught to mand for five items using PECS. Training was conducted in 10-trial blocks. PECS training was performed largely according to the procedures developed by Frost and Bondy (2002) . PECS was designed to include six phases; in this study, skills consistent with the first three phases were targeted. The objective of Phase 1 is for the participant to hand a picture of a preferred item to the instructor while in the presence of a preferred item. Before beginning the trial block, the instructor allowed the participant access to a preferred tangible item for 2 s or provided a small piece of a preferred consumable item to assess the item's current reinforcing value. If the participant consumed the item or manipulated the item, the instructor took the tangible item back and began the trial block. If the individual did not consume the edible or gave the item back, the instructor identified a more preferred item by repeating the above steps. The presentation of one of the five preferred items marked the onset of each instructional trial. The instructor showed the item to the participant and as the participant reached for the item, the instructor opened her hand and physically prompted the participant to pick up the picture, reach toward the instructor and place the picture in the open hand. Once the picture was released into the instructor's hand, the item was immediately delivered and the instructor provided feedback such as “I want ( item )” or “( item ).” The participant was given 5–15 s to manipulate tangible items, and however long was necessary for the participant to consume edible items. Physical prompts were faded in accordance with a most-to-least prompting system that ranged from full physical guidance to a partial physical prompt, such as a gentle tap on the participant's elbow. An intertrial interval of 5 s separated each trial. If an error occurred during the trial, an errorless back step procedure ( Frost & Bondy, 2002 ) was used, in which the instructor went back in the sequence to the last step correctly completed and provided more assistance than the previous trial to complete the sequence. Instructional trials were initially presented in a mass-trial format (i.e., ten trials for one preferred item). As the participants mastered the mands, the five preferred items were eventually presented in a random order throughout a training block. Phase 1 of PECS was mastered when a participant manded independently for all five items with 100% accuracy per block. (It should be noted that the PECS manual explicitly recommends the use of an additional instructor during Phase 1 of PECS training, one to entice and deliver the reinforcer, and the other to deliver and fade the physical prompts.)

The objective of Phase 2 is for the participant to go to his/her communication binder, pull off the picture of the preferred item, travel to the instructor, gain the instructor's attention and release the picture into the instructor's hand. Thus, the distance between the learner and the communication binder and the learner and the instructor is to be increased. The instructor assessed the reinforcing value of each item prior to each trial, as was done in Phase 1. The presentation of a preferred item marked the onset of each trial. Once the participant placed the picture of the preferred item in the instructor's hand, the item was delivered, along with feedback identical to that used during Phase 1. If needed, the instructor provided physical guidance to remove the picture from the book only after the participant initiated by reaching for the item. The instructor systematically faded physical prompts until the participant was able to remove the picture from the book and exchange the picture independently. Once the participant was able to remove the picture from the binder and exchange the picture independently 9 out of 10 times during a trial block, the distance between the instructor and the participant increased. The error correction procedure used in Phase 2 was identical to that used in Phase 1. Once the participant independently manded for the five preferred items on 9 out of 10 trials per block, the distance between the individual and the book was increased. The instructor began this training by remaining close to the participant and moving the book a few inches away from the participant. Over several trials, the book was moved further away from the participant so the participant was required to get up and walk to the book. Once the participant was able to independently travel to the book across the room and complete the mand sequence on 9 out of 10 trials per block, the instructor moved away from the binder so that the participant was required to travel to the book and to the instructor in order to make the exchange. Phase 2 was mastered when the participant independently traveled to both the binder and the instructor with 90% accuracy within a trial block.

The objective of Phase 3 of PECS is for the participant to mand for a desired item by traveling to the communication binder, selecting the appropriate picture from an array, and traveling to the communicative partner and exchanging the picture. Participants were first taught to discriminate between pictures of preferred and distracter items. The presentation of a preferred item marked the onset of each trial. As soon as the participant reached for the correct picture, verbal feedback was provided. Once the picture was exchanged, the instructor delivered the corresponding item. If the participant reached for the picture of the distracter item, no verbal feedback was given and the nonpreferred item was delivered. If the participant's reaction to the distracter item was negative, the four-step error correction procedure described within the PECS manual was utilized. The four-step error correction procedure consisted of a model, prompt, switch and repeat. The model consisted of the instructor showing or tapping the target picture. The prompt consisted of the instructor holding an open hand near the target picture and physically or gesturally prompting the participant to give the correct picture. During the switch, the instructor asked the participant to complete a simple task in the participant's repertoire (i.e., gross motor imitation) or turned over the binder for 2 s. After the switch, the instructor repeated the trial by enticing the participant with both items. If the individual gave the correct picture, the instructor delivered the item and feedback. If the participant exchanged the incorrect picture again, the instructor cycled through the error correction procedure again. The mastery criterion for this portion of Phase 3 was for the participant to exchange the correct picture 9 out of 10 times within a trial block and to exchange the correct picture 9 out of 10 times within a trial block when the binder and the communicative partner were more than two feet from the participant. Participants were next taught to discriminate between pictures of preferred items. This training was conducted in a manner identical to that for teaching participants to discriminate between preferred and distracter items.

(The reader is referred to Frost & Bondy, 2002 for a more detailed description of the PECS protocol.)

Manual sign training. Manual signs were taught in three phases that were intended to approximate the three phases of the PECS protocol as closely as possible ( Chambers & Rehfeldt, 2003 ). Participants were taught to mand for five preferred items using manual sign. The five signs that were taught to each participant were simplified versions of the signs in American Sign Language. The signs were simplified according to the fine motor ability of each participant and the complexity of each sign. All of the signs were considered to be equivalent in response effort and difficulty and consisted of either one-step or two-step movements.

Phase 1 of manual sign training consisted of teaching the participant to emit the correct sign within 5 s of the presentation of the preferred item, which marked the onset of each instructional trial. If the participant correctly emitted the sign, the item was immediately delivered, along with feedback such as “( item ).” If the participant emitted an incorrect sign or did not respond, the instructor provided a model of the correct sign. If the participant emitted an incorrect sign or failed to respond within 5 s after the instructor modeled the correct sign, a physical prompt was provided. Prompts were gradually removed as the participant acquired the signs. Instructional trials were initially presented in a mass-trial format (i.e., 10 trials for one preferred item). As the participants mastered the signs, the five preferred items were eventually presented in a random order throughout a training block. The mastery criterion for this phase was 100% accuracy per trial block, with each of the five items presented twice per block.

Although a training protocol for Phases 2 and 3 was established, none of the participants mastered Phase 1 of manual sign training. Thus, Phases 2 and 3 were not conducted.

Teaching mands under transitive CEO control. Louie was taught three mands under transitive CEO control using PECS and three mands under transitive CEO control using manual sign. The items specified in each mand were inaccessible items that were needed to complete a chained task. This training was implemented following the conclusion of teaching mands for preferred items.

Baseline. During baseline, Louie's ability to mand for three inaccessible items needed to complete a chained task using PECS was assessed, as was his ability to mand for three items needed to complete a chained task using manual sign. One chained task was assigned to PECS while a second chained task was assigned to manual sign. The chained task used for PECS training was making instant pudding, where Louie was taught to mand for milk, a whisk, and a mixing bowl. The chained task used for manual sign was making iced tea, where Louie was taught to mand for a cup, a wooden spoon, and a pitcher. Louie had been taught these tasks prior to the study and was considered proficient in performing them, as evidenced by 100% accuracy on both tasks for three consecutive trials.

All of the items needed to complete the task were presented on a table except for the items shown in Table 2 , which were inaccessible and not visible to Louie. During the task assigned to PECS (making pudding), three pictures of items needed to complete the chained task and three pictures of distracter items were available in his binder. When he reached the step in the task for which the missing item was needed, he was allotted 5 s to give the instructor the correct picture of the necessary item. Baseline for manual sign was identical except that Louie was given 5 s to emit the correct sign for the missing item needed to complete the task that was assigned to sign (making iced tea). The binder was not available during this task. No feedback or prompts were delivered throughout baseline, nor were the needed items ever delivered. Rather, the instructor completed the step in the chain after obtaining the missing item, at which point the participant was allowed to continue with the task. One trial block, in which Louie had the opportunity to mand for each item twice, was presented for both PECS and manual sign.

Generalization probes. Generalization of mands under transitive CEO control across settings and communicative partners was assessed for mands acquired using PECS in the kitchen at Louie's group home. Probes were conducted in a manner identical to baseline test trials. The communicative partner was known to Louie but had not served in this role previously. Generalization probes occurred prior to training and immediately following the mastery of mands for three missing items.

Training. During training, all of the items needed to complete the chained task were available on the table except for the three items shown in Table 2 , which were inaccessible and not visible. When the participant reached the step in the task for which the missing item was needed, a correct mand for the missing item resulted in the presentation of the missing item along with feedback from the instructor, such as stating the name of the item. An incorrect response or no response resulted in a gestural prompt for the correct picture during PECS training, while an incorrect response or no response resulted in a modeled prompt during sign training. If Louie did not imitate the instructor within 5 s, a physical prompt was provided. Prompts were gradually removed over the course of training. Mastery criterion for each communication modality was 100% accuracy for two consecutive trial blocks.

Test Probes for Functional Independence of Verbal Operants

Prior to teaching mands for preferred items and mands under transitive CEO control, test probes were conducted to determine whether PECS or sign would be used to tact the items that would be used in mand training. Probes were also conducted to determine whether PECS or sign would be used to engage in intraverbal responding about those same items. Tact and intraverbal test probes involving preferred items were conducted in one 10-trial block each for each communication modality. Tact and intraverbal test probes involving items needed to complete the chained tasks for Louie were conducted in one 6-trial block each for each communication modality. The order of trials throughout all blocks was randomly determined. On tact test trials, the instructor held up the item and asked, “what is this?” (Because both the instructor's question and the presence of the item could have exerted antecedent control over responding, tact trials may also be regarded as intraverbals/tact trials.) On intraverbal test trials, the instructor presented a verbal antecedent stimulus (i.e., “tell me something that you read”) (see Table 3 ). No feedback or prompts were delivered on tact or intraverbal test trials. For both the tact and intraverbal probes, the participant was allotted 5 s to emit the correct response using either PECS or manual sign. When untrained tacts and intraverbals were tested using PECS, the participant's communication book was available to him or her, and the pictures of all of the training items were contained within. The communication book was not available on the manual sign tact or intraverbal test probes.

Antecedent Verbal Stimuli and Correct Responses for Intraverbal Test Probes

Discriminative stimulus	Correct responses
“Tell me something that is white.”	Milk
“Name something you mix with.”	Whisk
“What do you mix things in?”	Mixing bowl
“What do you drink from?”	Cup
“Tell me something you stir with.”	Wooden spoon
“What do you pour with?”	Pitcher
“Tell me something you drink.”	Lemonade, soda
“Tell me something you like to eat.”	Cookie, cupcake, M&M's
“What do you read?”	Book
“Tell me something you look through.”	Magazine
“What do you do with paper&pencil?”	Write
“What do you look at?”	Baseball cards
“Tell me something you listen to.”	Music
“Tell me something you eat with a spoon.”	Applesauce
“Tell me something you shuffle.”	Deck of cards
“Tell me something you put together.”	Puzzle
“What do you like to play?”	Memory game, Connect Four
“What do you put on a string?”	Beads

The test probes were repeated following mastery of mands for preferred items and mands under transitive CEO control (for Louie). These test probes were identical to those conducted before training. Also at this time a second block of tact and intraverbal test trials was presented, which were identical to the first block with the exception that generalized conditioned reinforcement (i.e., social feedback) was provided for correct tacts or intraverbals. Conducting test trials in the absence of reinforcement permitted for the evaluation of whether the tacts or intraverbals had emerged in the absence of training, while delivering generalized conditioned reinforcement for correct responses allowed for the emergent responses to meet Skinner's (1957) definition of the tact and intraverbal, both of which are held to be maintained by generalized conditioned reinforcement.

Dependent Measures and Interobserver Agreement

Dependent measures were the percentage of correct trials per block for both PECS and manual sign training for preferred items, the percentage of correct trials per block for mands under transitive CEO control for Louie, and the percentage of correct trials per block for tact and intraverbal test probes. Reliability was established by comparing two observers' independent documentation of the accuracy on each trial for each participant. An agreement was defined as both observers recording the same instance of behavior as either a correct response or an incorrect response. Disagreement was defined as one observer recording an occurrence of a correct or incorrect response when observer agreement was calculated on 41% of the sessions for mands under transitive CEO control. The mean interobserver agreement for mands under transitive CEO control for all conditions was 100%.

Mands for Preferred Items Using PECS and Manual Sign

Baseline. Figure 1 shows that Louie did not mand for preferred items using PECS or sign during baseline in either the classroom or the kitchen at the developmental training center.

The percentage of trials correct per block during baseline, training, and generalization probe sessions for mands for preferred items for Louie.

Pretest probes for tacts and intraverbals. Figure 2 shows that Louie did not emit tacts or intraverbals using either PECS or manual sign prior to training.

Test probes for tacts and intraverbals prior to and following PECS training for Louie.

Training. As shown in Figure 1 , Louie met mastery criterion for Phases 1–3 of PECS in a total of 34 trial blocks. Phase 1 required 2 blocks for mastery, Phase 2 required 4 blocks for mastery, and Phase 3 required 28 blocks for mastery. A total of 236 min was required for Louie to master the entire three phases. Phase 1 required 15 min of training time, Phase 2 required 34 min of training time, and Phase 3 required 187 min of training time. Figure 1 also shows that Louie scored 90% on the generalization probe for PECS conducted immediately following training. Thus, Louie demonstrated the generalization of mands for preferred items using PECS across settings and communicative partners.

Manual sign training was discontinued after the 67 th training block due to the fact that PECS had been mastered and Louie's manual sign scores fell below 50% for at least two consecutive sessions. Louie's total training time for manual sign before discontinuation of training was 365 min and 62 trial blocks for Phase 1 of sign training.

Emergence of untrained tacts and intraverbals. Figure 2 shows that following PECS training Louie scored 90% on the nonreinforced block and 100% on the reinforced block of test probes for untrained tacts. Louie scored 40% on both the nonreinforced and reinforced block of test probes for untrained intraverbals. Thus, Louie showed the emergence of untrained tacts for the items used in mand training, using PECS, following the mastery of Phases 1–3 of PECS. On all test trials for both tacts and intraverbals, Louie pointed at the picture of his choice rather than exchanging it with the experimenter.

Baseline. Figure 3 shows that Robin did not mand for preferred items using PECS or sign during baseline in either the classroom or the kitchen at the developmental training center.

The percentage of trials correct per block during baseline, training, and generalization probe sessions for mands for preferred items for Robin.

Pretest probes for tacts and intraverbals. Figure 4 shows that Robin did not reliably emit tacts or intraverbals using either PECS or manual sign prior to training.

Test probes for tacts and intraverbals prior to and following PECS training for Robin.

Training. As shown in Figure 3 , Robin met mastery criterion for Phases 1–3 of PECS in a total of 15 trial blocks. Phase 1 required 1 block for mastery, Phase 2 required 7 blocks for mastery, and Phase 3 required 7 blocks for mastery. A total of 160 min was required for Robin to master the entire three phases. Phase 1 required 12 min of training time, Phase 2 required 80 min of training time, and Phase 3 required 68 min of training time. Figure 3 also shows that Robin scored 90% on the generalization probe for PECS conducted immediately following training. Thus, Robin demonstrated the generalization of mands for preferred items using PECS across settings and communicative partners.

Manual sign training was discontinued after the 25 th training block due to the fact that PECS had been mastered and Robin's manual sign scores fell below 50% for at least two consecutive sessions. Robin's total training time for manual sign before discontinuation of training was 205 min and 20 trial blocks for Phase 1of sign training.

Emergence of untrained tacts and intraverbals. Figure 4 shows that following PECS training Robin scored 10% on the nonreinforced block and 0% on the reinforced block of test probes for untrained tacts. It is worth noting that Robin emitted unintelligible vocalizations on tact test trials, which had not been observed at any other time during the study. Robin scored 100% on both the nonreinforced and reinforced block of test probes for untrained intraverbals. Thus, Robin showed the emergence of untrained intraverbals involving the items used in mand training, using PECS, following the mastery of Phases 1–3 of PECS. On all test trials for both tacts and intraverbals, Robin pointed at the picture of her choice rather than exchanging it with the experimenter.

Baseline. Figure 5 shows that Bonnie did not mand for preferred items using PECS or sign during baseline in either the classroom or the kitchen at the developmental training center.

Pretest probes for tacts and intraverbals. Bonnie did not emit tacts or intraverbals using either PECS or manual sign prior to training.

Training. As shown in Figure 5 , Bonnie mastered Phase 1 of PECS in 1 training block and 6 min. Phase 2 of PECS was discontinued after block 29 due to her unwillingness and difficulty traveling to the communicative partner andcommunication binder. PECS and sign training were discontinued after block 53 after staff expressed concern about Bonnie's increasing aggression. A medical evaluation conducted at this time suggested that Bonnie was suffering from early-onset dementia. Phase 1 of manual sign training was not mastered.

Mands Under Transitive CEO Control

Baseline. Figure 6 shows that Louie did not mand for items needed to complete a chained task using PECS or sign during baseline in either the kitchen at the developmental training center or the kitchen in his group home.

The percentage of trials correct per block during baseline, training, and generalization probe sessions for mands under transitive CEO control for Louie.

Pretest probes for tacts and intraverbals. Louie did not emit tacts or intraverbals for the items to be used in the interrupted chain procedure using either PECS or manual sign prior to training.

Training. As shown in Figure 6 , Louie met mastery criterion for mands under transitive CEO control using PECS in 17 training blocks. At this time, manual sign training was discontinued. Figure 6 also shows that Louie scored 83% on the generalization probe for PECS conducted immediately following training. Thus, Louie demonstrated the generalization of mands under transitive CEO control using PECS across settings and communicative partners.

Emergence of untrained tacts and intraverbals. Louie did not emit tacts or intraverbals using PECS, scoring 0% on all test blocks. On all test trials for both tacts and intraverbals, Louie pointed at the picture of his choice rather than exchanging it with the experimenter.

The results of this study suggest that for two participants, Louie and Robin, teaching mands for preferred items was effective using PECS. For both participants, PECS was acquired in a shorter amount of training time and the communicative responses readily generalized to novel settings and communicative partners than mands acquired using manual sign. However, neither participant had completed a formal assessment prior to the study to determine whether or not they had the prerequisite skills necessary to be successful with manual sign training. Moreover, with so many variables, such as the prompting and prompt reduction techniques differing between the two procedures, it is difficult to set up a fair comparison of PECS versus manual sign. Thus, while these results do not necessarily suggest that PECS was more effective, they do nonetheless add to the body of evidence for the efficacy of PECS in establishing functional communication skills in individuals with severely limited verbal repertoires (e.g., Chambers & Rehfeldt, 2003 ; Charlop-Christy et al., 2002 ). Importantly, this seems to be the case for adults with little history of systematic instruction and limited imitation skills. A likely reason that manual sign instruction was not effective in this study is that modeled prompts were used throughout sign training, which may not have been appropriate given the participants' limited imitation repertoires. What seems vital is a prior assessment and identification of an individual's skills in a number of areas when determining which form of alternative communication system to implement. For instance, fine motor skills, picture discrimination, visual acuity and imitation skills may all be important factors in determining the most appropriate system. Future research should explore the prior assessment of the prerequisite skills necessary for each system ( Gregory, DeLeon, & Richman, 2005 ).

Another reason that PECS may have been more readily acquired is that PECS is a selection-based communication system. With PECS, participants are only required to discriminate between the pictures and exchange the correct picture for the preferred item, regardless of the item. Manual sign, in contrast, is a topography-based communication system, meaning that the participants must learn a different response topography for each item. For the participants in this study, the recall of the correct manual sign for each item may have been more challenging than the recognition of the correct picture ( Chambers & Rehfeldt, 2003 ). Another reason that PECS may have been more readily acquired may be due to the fact that the communication binder was available during PECS sessions and may have served as a discriminative stimulus (in addition to the preferred items) for exchanging the pictures, whereas in manual sign training, no such additional discriminative stimuli (other than the preferred items) were present.

Following mastery of mands for preferred items using PECS, Louie met criterion for the emergence of untrained tacts and Robin met criterion for the emergence of untrained intraverbals. These results differ somewhat from results from other studies showing that training in one repertoire does not necessarily produce concomitant changes in another repertoire ( Lamarre & Holland, 1985 ; Hall & Sundberg, 1987 ; Sigafoos et al., 1989 ; Watkins, Pack-Teixeira, & Howard, 1989 ). An explanation for this finding is based upon the acknowledgement that PECS training establishes multiply-controlled verbal operants ( Bondy et al., 2004 ): When the mands are initially trained, the responses are actually under the control of both establishing operations and prior antecedent stimuli, those being the respective preferred items present on a given trial, such that the responses trained may actually best be regarded as “mand-tacts” ( Bondy et al., 2004 ). Therefore, tacts and intraverbals may have emerged as a result of the multiple stimulus control established during PECS training. PECS may thus be an efficient means of teaching verbal operants to individuals with severely limited verbal repertoires. Interestingly, during the test probes for the emergence of untrained tacts and intraverbals using PECS, Louie and Robin used a different topography than that which had been established during mand training. Rather than exchanging pictures, as they had been directly taught during mand training, both pointed at a picture in their binder on both tact and intraverbal test trials. This suggests that the emergent tacts and intraverbals were indeed under different sources of stimulus control han the previously established mands.

The second portion of this study used an interrupted chain procedure to establish mands under transitive CEO control for Louie. Teaching Louie to mand for items needed to complete the chained tasks ensured that the mands were exclusively under the control of establishing operations and not prior antecedent stimuli. Such a repertoire was establishing using PECS for Louie; moreover, the mands generalized across settings and communicative partners. However, after teaching Louie to mand for preferred items using PECS, it is somewhat surprising that so much additional mand training within the context of the chained tasks was necessary, as PECS as a communication system had already been acquired. It is possible that the different sources of control in each context may account for this discrepancy: In teaching mands for preferred items, responding may have been under the control of both establishing operations and the preferred items, but in teaching mands for items needed to complete the tasks, responding was likely exclusively under the control of establishing operations. In addition, individuals with more significant levels of mental retardation may simply require more extensive training in manding for items out of view than is currently delineated in the PECS training protocol. Interestingly, following the training of mands under transitive CEO control for Louie, tacts and intraverbals did not emerge, thus supporting Skinner's (1957) notion of the functional independence of the verbal repertoires and results from previous studies ( Lamarre & Holland, 1985 ; Hall & Sundberg, 1957; Sigafoos et al., 1989 ; & Watkins et al., 1989 ). It is quite possible that neither untrained tacts or intraverbals emerged because the repertoire trained in this portion of the study was not multiply controlled.

As previously noted, the major limitation of this study concerns the feasibility of comparing PECS and manual sign, given that different prompting and prompt reduction strategies were used for the two modalities. Certain prompting hierarchies may be more effective for certain learners, thus making instruction in one communication system more effective than instruction in the other. A dilemma facing clinicians is the fact that a comprehensive training manual, such as that which has been established for PECS, is not available for manual sign, thus leaving many of the components of training up to the judgment of the clinician. Future research should focus on the identification of prerequisite skills that appropriate candidates for each communication system should have, efforts that have already been initiated by Gregory et al. (2005). Future research should also continue to focus on the degree to which untrained operants will indeed emerge following training in either modality ( Bondy et al., 2004 ).

Contributor Information

Megan M Ziomek, Southern Illinois University.

Ruth Anne Rehfeldt, Southern Illinois University.

• Bondy A. S, Battaglini K. A public school for students with autism and severe handicaps. In: Christenson S, Conoley J. C, editors. Home-school collaboration: Enhancing children's academic and social competence. Silver Spring, MD: NASP; 1992. pp. 223–242. (Eds.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Bondy A. S, Frost L. A. Mands across the water: A report on the application of the picture exchange communication system in Peru. The Behavior Analyst. 1993; 16 :123–128. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bondy A. S, Frost L. A. The picture exchange communication system. Focus on Autistic Behavior. 1994; 9 :1–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bondy A, Tincani M, Frost L. Multiply controlled verbal operants: An analysis and extension to the picture exchange communication system. The Behavior Analyst. 2004; 27 :247–261. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carr E. G, Kologinsky E. Acquisition of sign language by autistic children II: Spontaneity and generalization effects. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1983; 16 :297–314. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chambers M, Rehfeldt R. A. Assessing the acquisition and generalization of two mand forms with adults with severe developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2003; 24 :265–280. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Charlop-Christy M. H, Carpenter M, Le L, LeBlanc L. A, Kellet K. Using the picture exchange communication system (PECS) with children with autism: Assessment of PECS acquisition, speech, social communicative behavior, and problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2002; 35 :213–231. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DeLeon I. G, Iwata B. A. Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1996; 29 :519–533. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frost L, Bondy A. The Picture Exchange Communication System Training Manual. Newark, DE: Pyramid Educational Products, Inc; 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gregory M, DeLeon I. G, Richman D. M. Structured assessment to predict ease of acquisition for manual sign and picture exchange communication systems. 2005, May. Paper presented at the 31 st Annual Convention of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Chicago, IL. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hall G, Sundberg M. L. Teaching mands by manipulating conditioned establishing operations. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior. 1987; 5 :41–53. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lamarre J, Holland J. G. The functional independence of mands and tacts. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1985; 43 :5–19. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Michael J. Establishing operations and the mand. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior. 1988; 6 :3–9. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Michael J. Establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst. 1993; 16 :191–207. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller J. Augmentative and alternative communication. In: Snell M.E, editor. Instruction of Students with Severe Disabilities. 4th ed. New York: MacMillian; 1993. pp. 319–346. (Ed.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller C, Collins B. C, Hemmeter M.L. Using a naturalistic time delay procedure to teach nonverbal adolescents with moderate to severe mental disabilities to initiate manual signs. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities. 2002; 14 :247–261. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mirenda P. Toward a functional augmentative and alternative communication for students with autism: Manual signs, graphic symbols, and voice output communication aids. Language, Speech and Learning Services in Schools. 2003; 34 :203–216. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwartz I. S, Garfinkle A. N, Bauer J. The picture exchange communication system: Communicative outcomes for young children with disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education. 1998; 18 :144–159. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sigafoos J. Assessing conditional use of graphic mode requesting in a young boy with autism. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities. 1998; 10 :133–151. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sigafoos J, Doss S, Reichle J. Developing mand and tact repertoires in persons with developmental disabilities using graphic symbols. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 1989; 10 :183–200. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Skinner B.F. Verbal Behavior. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1957. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sundberg M. L. The application of establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst. 1993; 16 :211–214. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sundberg M. L. Selecting a response form for nonverbal persons: Facilitated communication, pointing systems, or sign language. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior. 1993; 11 :99–116. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Watkins C. L, Pack-Teixeira L, Howard J. S. Teaching intraverbal behavior to severely retarded children. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior. 1989; 7 :69–81. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Corvette: Year by Year

Corvette specs, options: year by year.

1961 Corvette Specs

Front Track

Wheelbase	102.00 inches
57.00 inches
Rear Track	59.00 inches
Length	176.7 inches
Width Including Bumpers / Moldings	72.8 inches
Width Not Including Bumpers / Moldings	70.4 inches
Front Overhang	33.0 inches
Rear Overhang	42.2 inches
Height	52.2 inches
Height (Hard Top)	52.1 inches
Hood Opening	Front (reverse alligator)
Finish (paint type)	Lacquer
Turning Diameter	38.5 feet (right); 39.0 feet (left) wall - wall 36.5 feet (right); 37.0 feet (left) curb - curb
Steering gear ratio	16:1
Steering Wheel Turns	3.25
Tire Size	6.70-15 4 Ply Rating
Tire Type	Rayon
Three Speed Transmission	1st Gear 2.21:1 2nd Gear 1.32:1 3rd Gear 1.00:1 Reverse Gear 2.51:1
Four Speed Transmission	1st Gear 2.20:1 2nd Gear 1.66:1 3rd Gear 1.31:1 4th Gear 1.00:1 Reverse Gear 2.26:1
Automatic (Powerglide) Transmission	Drive 1.82:1 and 1.00:1 Low 1.82:1 Reverse Gear 1.82:1
Axle Ratio	3.36:1 (Three Speed Manual) 3.70:1 (Four Speed Manual) Optional: 4.11:1, 4.56:1 Automatic: 3.55:1
Transmission Synchromesh	Three Speed: 2nd and 3rd Gears Four Speed: All Four Gears
Shipping - Powerglide (Automatic) Transmission	3,000 lb.
Curb - Powerglide (Automatic) Transmission Shipping + fuel (107 lb.), water (38 lb.)	3,135 lb.
Loaded - Powerglide (Automatic) Transmission (Two Passengers @ 150 lb. each)	3,435 lb.
Shipping - Three Speed (standard) Transmission	2,905 lb.
Curb - Three Speed (standard) Transmission Shipping + fuel (100 lb.), water (32 lb.)	3,035 lb.
Loaded - Three Speed (standard) Transmission (Two Passengers @ 150 lb. each)	3,335 lb.
Optional Hard Top	55 lb.
Hardtop	-2 pounds (Without Folding Top)
Hardtop	+57 pounds (With Folding Top)
Radio	+16 pounds
Power Top	+35 pounds
Four Speed Transmission	+12 pounds
Automatic (Powerglide) Transmission	+100 pounds

-->

Type:	V8
Valve Location:	In Head
Bore / Stroke:	3.875" / 3.00"
Displacement:	283 Cubic Inches
Compression Ratio:	9.5 : 1
Crankshaft Material:	Forged Steel
475 (In Drive, Neutral)
Camshaft Material:	Cast Alloy Iron
Oil Pump Type:	Gear
Normal Oil Pressure	35 psi @ 2,000 RPM
Oil Pressure Gauge	Electric
Crankcase Oil Capacity (less filter)	5 Quarts
Recommended Oil Grade	Above 32°: SAE 20W, SAE 20 or SAE 10W-30 To 0°: SAE 10W or SAE 10W-30 Below 0°: SAE 5W or SAE 5W-20 Sustained high speed over 90°F - SAE 30 may be used
Fuel Tank	16.4 Gallons
Fuel Tank Code 1625A (Hardtop Only)	24.0 Gallons (Fiberglass)
Carburetor	Carter 3756676 Single 4 barrel
Carburetor. Optional dual four barrel carburetors Code 469	Carter 3744002 (front) / 3744004 (rear)
Carburetor, Optional dual four barrel carburetors Code 469 Special Camshaft	Carter 3741089 (front) / 3741090 (rear)
Fuel Filter	Strainer
Fuel Pump	Mechanical
Fuel Pressure	5¼ - 6½ PSI
Cooling System Capacity	16.5 Quarts (with heater) 15.5 Quarts (without heater)
Thermostat Type	Choke
Radiator Cap Relief Pressure	6 ¼ - 7 ¾ PSI
Battery	Delco 1980458 (12 volt) 53 Amp hr. @ 120 hr.
Thermostat Opening	167° - 172° F
Compression Pressure	160 PSI (Engine Hot)
Standard Engine	230 hp @ 4,800 RPM; Torque: 300 lb-ft @ 3,000 RPM
Code 469A (Two Four Barrel Carburetors)	245 hp @ 5,000 RPM; Torque: 300 ft-lb. @ 3,800 RPM
Code 469C (Two Four Barrel Carburetors, Special Camshaft)	270 hp @ 6,000 RPM; Torque: 285 lb-ft @ 4,200 RPM
Code 579A Fuel Injection	275 hp @ 5,200 RPM; Torque: 305 lb-ft @ 4,400 RPM
Code 579B Fuel Injection (Special Camshaft)	315 hp @ 6,200 RPM; Torque: 295 lb-ft @ 4,700 RPM
Manufacturer	Rochester Products
Model	7017320 (Code 579) 7017310 (Code 579D, Special Camshaft)
Recommended Fuel	Premium
Fuel Pump	Mechanical
Fuel Pressure	5 ¼ - 6 ½ PSI
Inlet Manifold	Cast Aluminum
Air Cleaner Type	Dry
Air Meter Location	Engine Left Side
Plenum Chamber	Integral With Inlet Manifold
Ram Pipe Length	12 Inches
Fuel Induction	Metered as Function of Air Flow
Air / Fuel Ratio Control	Vacuum Sensitive Diaphragm Located on Air Flow Meter
Fuel Meter Pump Type	Gear
Fuel Meter Pump Location	In Fuel Meter Assembly
Fuel Meter Pump Drive	Gear Driven by Flexible Shaft From Distributor
Fuel Meter Pump Pressure	300 PSI
Injection Nozzles Quantity	8
Injection Nozzles Material	Brass
Injection Nozzles Location	Mounted on Inlet Manifold Above Intake Ports
Injection Nozzles Orifice Size - Fuel	.0118 inch
Injection Nozzles Insulation	Bakelite
Automatic Choke Type	Electric, Time Temperature Type
Automatic Choke Location	On Air Meter Assembly
Automatic Choke Current Draw	1 amp @ 70°
Automatic Choke Fast Idle Cam	Yes
Coil	Delco-Remy 1115091 (FI Engines: 1115107)
Coil current rating	4 amps (engine stopped) 1.8 amps (engine running)
Breaker Gap	.019"
Ignition Timing	4° BTDC @ 600 RPM idle (Standard Engine) 12° BTC (Dual Four Barrel Carburetor) 8° BTC (Fuel Injection) 18° BTC (Fuel Injection, Special Camshaft)
Ignition Timing Centrifugal Advance	0 ° @ 600 RPM 5 ° @ 1,000 RPM (Fuel Injection, Special Camshaft) 14 ° @ 1,500 RPM 5 ° @ 1,500 RPM (Fuel Injection, Special Camshaft) 28 ° @ 3,700 RPM (Maximum) 22 ° @ 6,000 RPM (Maximum, Fuel Injection, Special Camshaft)
Ignition Timing Vacuum Advance	15° @ 15.5 inches Hg (Standard Engine) 24° @ 13.5 inches Hg (Fuel Injection)
Spark Plug	AC 44 AC 44 FF (Fuel Injection)
Spark Plug Thread	14 mm.
Spark Plug Torque	25 lb.-ft.
Spark Plug Gap	.033 - .038 inch
Firing Order	1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2

1961 Corvette Options

RPO	Description	Production	Price
101	Heater	10,671 (97.55%)	$102.25
102	AM Radio, Signal Seeking	9,316 (85.16%)	$137.75
1408	Blackwall Tires, 6.70x15 nylon	n/a	$15.75
1625	24 Gallon Fuel Tank	n/a	$161.40
242	Positive Crankcase Ventilation	n/a	$5.40
276	Wheels, 15x5.5 (5)	337 (3.08%)	n/a
290	Whitewall Tires, 6.70x15	9,780 (89.40%)	$31.55
313	Powerglide Automatic Transmission	1,458 (13.33%)	$199.10
353	283 cu. in. 275 hp fuel injected Engine	118 (1.08%)	$484.20
354	283 cu. in. 315 hp fuel injected Engine	1,462 (13.37%)	$484.20
419	Auxiliary Hardtop	5,680 (51.92%)	$236.75
426	Power Windows	698 (6.38%)	$59.20
440	Two-Tone Exterior Paint	3,351 (30.63%)	$16.15
468	283ci, 270hp Engine (2x4 carburetors)	2,827 (25.84%)	$182.95
469	283ci, 245hp Engine (2x4 carburetors)	1,175 (10.74%)	$150.65
473	Power Operated Folding Top	442 (4.04%)	$161.40
675	Positraction Rear Axle	6,915 (63.21%)	$43.05
685	4-Speed Manual Transmission	7,013 (64.11%)	$188.30
686	Metallic Brakes	1,402 (12.82%)	$37.70
687	Heavy Duty Brakes and Suspension	233 (2.13%)	$333.60
10,939 10,939 (100.00%) Base Corvette with 283 cu. in. 230 hp engine and three speed manual transmission: $3,934.00.

Code	Exterior	Quantity	Interior	Soft Top	Wheels
	Tuxedo Black	1,340 (12.25%)	Blue / Black / Fawn / Red	Black / White	Black
	Ermine White	3,178 (29.05%)	Blue / Black / Fawn / Red	Black / White	White
	Roman Red	1,794 (16.40%)	Black / Red	Black / White	Red
	Sateen Silver	747 (6.83%)	Blue / Black / Red	Black / White	Silver
	Jewel Blue	855 (7.82%)	Blue / Black	Black / White	Blue
	Fawn Beige	1,363 (12.46%)	Black / Fawn / Red	Black / White	Beige
	Honduras Maroon	1,645 (15.04%)	Black / Fawn	Black / White	Maroon
1961 was the only year Jewel Blue interiors were available.

A320 Family

• Articles coming soon

How to master B787 Electrical System

It is highly refined and automated aircraft, with automatic system configuration and load balancing. All systems of the aircraft are electrically powered, the only system pneumatically powered is the engine anti-ice.

Most of the electrical system components use the traditional 115 Vac or the 28 Vac power, however some limited components require 235 Vac.

The fwd E/E bay is the main location for the 115 & 28 Vac’s, and the aft E/E bay is the main location for the 235 Vac’s, Conversion from one type of power to another is handled automatically. (E/E stands for Electrical and Electronic)                                                                             

Ground operation

On the ground the aircraft is powered by 115 Vac external power, fwd external power is normally used.

If the APU is not available, Aft external power may be used, to reduce electrical load shedding.  (Engine start with external power is accomplished by use of the supplementary procedures)

A significant reconfiguration and load shedding to be expected during external engine start, such as first officer EFB, right CCR, MCP and numerous cabin equipment

Main System

The system consists of four main 235 Vac buses (L1-L2-R1-R2).

General notes

• Note : The 235 Vac power is used to operate high load electrical components such as Hydraulic pumps, Engine starts and the Nitrogen Generation System.
• Note : The 115 Vac & 28 Vac buses power some primary loads directly, approximately 25 AC loads & 200 DC loads.
• The electrical system uses two types of distribution methods: Primary & Secondary, primary power is used for high loads directly from the main buses AFT & FWD E/E bays.
• Main wheel brakes are electrically powered. Powered by 4 supply units and regulate power to the brakes. Each unit has two separate 28 Vac inputs, one extracted from the primary power source, and a secondary back power system from the main 28 Vac battery.

Load Shedding

• The aircraft is equipped with load inhibits and load shedding features.

Load Inhibit	Inhibits certain loads that are not required for that operational phase or if another system needs the power.
Load Shedding	Shedding in a priority order, to shed loads as necessary to maintain the capacity of available power sources to operate higher priority items. Example, Is the shut down of the CAC’s during ground engine start.

Engine generators notes

Two Starter/Generators 235 Vac (L1-L2-R1-R2)

• Each engine, two starter/Generators are directly connected to the Engine gear box, producing variable frequency power proportional to the Engine rotor speed.
• Both engine starters are used for engine start, but nevertheless the engine may be started with only one generator. The start will be slower than the normal start.
• Power for engine start may be provided by the APU, opposite engine generators or external power.
• Both generators on each side will provide a variable frequency of 235 Vac to the AFT E/E bay, were power is distributed. Four main buses (L1-L2-R1-R2) each powered by its respective generator line. Automatic protection ensures that only one source is applied to the main bus at a time.
• Each generator has a drive disconnect mechanism that allows the generator to be mechanically disconnected from the engine. Depending on the fault condition, can be disconnected manually or automatically. (DRIVE DISC), once disconnected cannot be reconnected.

APU generators notes

Two Starter/Generators 235 Vac (L-R)

• The two generators are directly connected to the APU gearbox, producing variable frequency power proportional to the APU speed.
• Only one starter is used for APU start.
• APU battery, external power or engine generators may start the APU, indication to start the APU on battery only is both CDU’s available.
• The APU start is fully automatic and sequenced as follows
• A DC powered fuel pump in the L, main tank comes ON
• The APU inlet door opens
• Starter activation and Ignition

Note: If APU started on battery power, the Right starter is always used.

• In case of the loss of three generators or more, the APU will start automatically regardless of APU selector position.

Large Motor Power System

Provides power to the Large Motor Power System

• The electrical system uses two types of distribution methods: Primary & Secondary, primary power is used for high loads directly from the main Buses AFT & FWD E/E bays.
• Automatic protection ensures that only one source is applied to the main bus at a time, the system automatically determines the power source priorities for the current condition for best efficiency.

PECS (Power Electronics cooling system): Dissipates or in other words clears the heat by cooling the systems, from these high voltage motor controllers.

RPDU (Remote Power Distribution Unit): Is used for lower amps loads through a decentralized network, of 17 Remote Power Distribution Units.

Two 28 Vac batteries, the Main battery is in the FWD E/E bay and the APU battery is located in the AFT E/E bay.

Once the battery is selected ON, the ON- Ground Battery Only Mode is energized, it takes the LEFT CCR between 2 and 3 minutes to boot up. And becomes online when the captains inboard and lower display are available.

• The main battery is used as a backup 28 Vac power for the brakes.
• The main battery provides standby power for RAT deployment.
• Main battery indications
• Low voltage, will show an advisory message (MAIN BATTERY LOW) on EICAS
• AMPS (white value), shows rate of charge or discharge
• CHG (white), shows battery charging
• DISCH (white), shows battery discharging, and indicated by an EICAS message (MAIN BATTERY DISCH)

RAT (Ram Air Turbine)

Deploys Automatically or Manually and can provide standby electricity for an unlimited time with no altitude or airspeed restrictions, it also generates hydraulic pressure.

Automatic deployment of the RAT

• Both engines failed
• All three hydraulic system pressure are low
• Complete electrical loss of the Captain’s and First officer’s flight instruments.
• Loss of all four electrical motor pumps (EMPs), including faults in the flight control system during approach.
• Loss of all four EMPs, with an engine failure during take-off or landing.

28 Vac Permanent Magnet Generators

(L1-L2-R2) generators are the primary source of power to the flight controls, that ensures power independent from rest of the electrical system.

This independed power system ensures that regardless of the electrical system status, the flight control power remains available if one engine is still Rotating .

BPCU (Bus Power Control Unit)

It manages electrical dynamic loads (Load Management and protection)

It provides flight deck control and indications also, (transfers power functions).

Power Modes

The electronic controllers determine which group of loads are to be powered for any Mode.

Types of Modes

Towing power Mode

The Towing Panel allows for Battery testing, indicating current battery state verses time (HIGH-60/MEDIUM-30/LOW-15 min’s) before selecting the Power ON.

(Available is the Captains ACP & Flight interphone, Dome lights, Aisle stand flood lights, NAV lights and Brakes)

On Ground Battery only Mode

( Available is the Captain & First officers ACP, flight interphone, Captain inboard DU, lower DU, MCP, APU start, Wing fuelling panel, Left (VHF/TCP/DSP/MFK/CCD/CCR), FMC, AHRU L&R, Ground crew horn, Engine/APU fire detection, Miscellaneous lighting and Brakes).

Ground handling Mode

• Has priority over On-Ground Battery Only

This Mode is active with the first FWD external power being connected and NOT SELECTED ON. (No other power source).

(Available is the lower DU, left MFK & CCD, L&R CCR, APU start, Equipment cooling fans, Engine & APU fire detection, ( Cargo lighting and loading lights, Service compartment lights and the Actuation & handling system), Wing fueling panel and Battery chargers, most of the items are service and cargo related, the battery switch ON is not required.

Ground service Mode

• Is active when switching the GROUND SERVICE to ON from the Master attendant switch panel, while in Ground handling Mode.
• In addition to all loads energized by the Ground handling Mode, two additional significant loads are energized.
• Cabin system (limited operation)
• Cabin lighting (limited operation)

External Power on Mode

One FWD External Power Connected & selected ON

Active is Flight deck equipment, controls and indications, cabin systems & lighting limited operation and the PECS single loop only.

Two FWD External Power Connected & selected ON

In addition to the above active systems is the NGS limited operation, HYD limited operation, IFE limited operation, cabin system and lighting basic operation and PECS both loops.

(Packs & Cargo heat are INOP with only FWD external power)

In-Air Rat only Mode (Standby Power)

Is active with the loss of all electrical power to the Captain’s & First officers flight instruments, in that case the RAT will energize the captains flight instruments with some essential equipment including flight controls, navigation and communications.

Energized equipment by the RAT are as follows.

Captains inboard & outboard DU’s, lower DU,MCP, PFC, ECL, FMC limited operation, Autopilot limited operation, Autoflight system, Captain’s & First officer’s ACP’s and the flight interphone,        LEFT( VHF/TCP/DSP/MFK/CCD/CCR), LEFT & RIGHT (IRU/AHRU/INR), Centre pitot heat, Engine/APU fire detection and miscellaneous lighting.

INOP systems include TAT, Autothrottle, LNAV/VNAV, FMC predictions and thrust limits, TAP, Flaps & Slats, Stabilizer trim, Packs, HUD’s, HF, SATCOM, TCAS, GPWS, Transponder, WX radar, External lighting, Wipes, and Window heat.

In-Air battery Only Mode (Standby Power)

The IN-AIR battery Mode energizes the same equipment as the RAT Mode, with exception of the Centre Pitot heat.

Circuit Breakers

Two types of CB’S

Electronic Circuit Breakers ECB’s	Provides indication and remote control, can be open or closed using CBIC.
Thermal Circuit Breakers TCB’s	Provides indication ONLY

Reset of CB’s is Not recommended by Boeing, unless instructed by a NNC or maintenance During flight, decision should be based on EICAS Amber Alerts only, and not just status messages.

Conditional Situations

One Engine running and the other engine shut down with the APU online.	The APU Generator powers the 235 Vac two main buses on the side of the none running engine, and the running engine powers both buses on its respective side.
During flight, generator fails	The system will automatically reconfigure to maintain power to all Four 235 Vac main buses, with the remaining generators.
During flight, generators fail	The system will automatically reconfigure to supply power to the essential components but expect to see a list of LOAD SHED items.
In case of all generators fail and the APU is not available	The RAT will deploy automatically
Flight on battery Only	It would power the same components as the RAT, except for the centre pitot heat, and is time limited.

Progress in Motor Control

Theories and Translations

• © 2016
• Jozsef Laczko 0 ,
• Mark L. Latash 1

Department of Information Technology and Biorobotics, Faculty of Science, University of Pécs, Pecs, Hungary

You can also search for this editor in PubMed   Google Scholar

Department of Kinesiology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA

• Includes perspectives from multiple disciplines
• Explores specific translations of theoretical advances
• Includes a sections on the equilibrium-point hypothesis
• Includes supplementary material: sn.pub/extras

Part of the book series: Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology (AEMB, volume 957)

73k Accesses

245 Citations

29 Altmetric

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

About this book

Similar content being viewed by others.

Biomechanics and neural control of movement, 20 years later: what have we learned and what has changed?

From Parametric Representation to Dynamical System: Shifting Views of the Motor Cortex in Motor Control

Motor and Kinesthetic Imagery

• motor cortex
• motor learning
• human-machine interface
• motor impairment
• rehabilitation
• equilibrium-point hypothesis
• motor recovery
• neurophysiological
• spinal cord

Table of contents (21 chapters)

Front matter, theoretical motor control, modularity for motor control and motor learning.

• Andrea d’Avella

Synergies in Grasping

• Jeroen B. J. Smeets, Eli Brenner

Encoding Temporal Features of Skilled Movements—What, Whether and How?

• Katja Kornysheva

Predictability and Robustness in the Manipulation of Dynamically Complex Objects

• Dagmar Sternad, Christopher J. Hasson

Fifty Years of the Equilibrium-Point Hypothesis

Fifty years of physics of living systems.

Mark L. Latash

The Relationship Between Postural and Movement Stability

• Anatol G. Feldman

Principles of Motor Recovery After Neurological Injury Based on a Motor Control Theory

• Mindy F. Levin

Neurophysiological Mechanisms of Motor Control

What do tms-evoked motor potentials tell us about motor learning.

• Richard G. Carson, Kathy L. Ruddy, Emmet McNickle

Motor Control of Human Spinal Cord Disconnected from the Brain and Under External Movement

• Winfried Mayr, Matthias Krenn, Milan R. Dimitrijevic

Anticipation in Object Manipulation: Behavioral and Neural Correlates

• Thomas Schneider, Joachim Hermsdörfer

Learning of Skilled Behavior

Brain plasticity and the concept of metaplasticity in skilled musicians.

• Eckart Altenmüller, Shinichi Furuya

The Coordination Dynamics of Observational Learning: Relative Motion Direction and Relative Phase as Informational Content Linking Action-Perception to Action-Production

• John J. Buchanan

Rethinking the Study of Volition for Clinical Use

• Elizabeth B. Torres

Impaired Motor Control and Rehabilitation

Motor lateralization provides a foundation for predicting and treating non-paretic arm motor deficits in stroke.

• Robert L. Sainburg, Candice Maenza, Carolee Winstein, David Good

Editors and Affiliations

Jozsef Laczko

About the editors

Bibliographic information.

Book Title : Progress in Motor Control

Book Subtitle : Theories and Translations

Editors : Jozsef Laczko, Mark L. Latash

Series Title : Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47313-0

Publisher : Springer Cham

eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences , Biomedical and Life Sciences (R0)

Copyright Information : Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Hardcover ISBN : 978-3-319-47312-3 Published: 09 January 2017

Softcover ISBN : 978-3-319-83707-9 Published: 29 April 2018

eBook ISBN : 978-3-319-47313-0 Published: 30 December 2016

Series ISSN : 0065-2598

Series E-ISSN : 2214-8019

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : XX, 388

Number of Illustrations : 46 b/w illustrations, 48 illustrations in colour

Topics : Neurosciences , Sport Science , Biomedical Engineering/Biotechnology

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Submit Your Quote

Selected products, determine motor specs.

Input Power Source

Voltage: Do you need AC or DC voltage? What voltage do you need your motor to run at?

Frequency: Do you need to operate at 60 Hz, 50 Hz or both 50/60 Hz?

Current (efficiency): Does the overall efficiency or current draw need to be under a certain value?

Control: Will your application need to vary speeds? What type of control will you need?

Environment

Ingress protection (IP): Will the environment of the motor be harsh and need protection from the elements—dust and water?

View IP Ratings Table

Temperature: What is the ambient temperature of the application’s environment? Do you need to touch the motor?

View Temperature Classification Table

Gearmotor Specs

Weight: Do you have any restrictions for weight within your application that the motor must meet?

Life expectancy: How long of a life does your motor need? Is it in a location/application where maintenance is feasible?

Noise: Is noise an important factor in your application or industry?

Efficiency:  How important is the efficiency of your motor? This is especially important for gearmotors.

Gearmotor Performance

Speed (RPM): Does the application have high or low speeds? Are the speeds continuous or varying?

Power (W or HP) : What are your HP or watt requirements? If using a control, do you have amperage limitations?

Torque (in-lb or Nm): Do you need high start or stall torque? What are your running torque requirements?

Duty cycle: Will your motor be operating continuously or in short bursts with time to cool down in between?

General Requirements

Mounting orientation: How does the motor need to be mounted within the application?

Overhung and side loads: Does the application have additional loads (radial or axial) putting stress on the motor?

Package size: Is there a size restriction within your application that the motor must meet?

Lubrication: Does your application require the use of either grease or oil? Do you need high or low temp lubrication?

Agency approvals: Are their any agency approvals your application must meet—UL, CE, RoHS, CSA or others?

Partnering with Groschopp means working with a small electric motor and gear motor manufacturer that strives for the American standard of quality. It means having a team of motor experts to find the best standard or custom solution for your application.

How to use the Motor Search Tool

Narrow your search by selecting motor type, gearbox, voltage, and phase options for your desired motor.

• Yellow represents selected option.
• Dark gray represents available options.
• Light gray represents options not available with previously selected criteria.

Select a dominant variable: choose one of the three parameters to narrow your search. The selected variable determines which slider bar you will be able to manually move.

Use the slider corresponding to your dominant variable to further narrow your motor selection. The other sliders will automatically move to show available ranges based on the range of your selected variable.

Results will upload as your search criteria changes. If you have any questions regarding your results or how to use the search tool, you can chat with us using the green tab on the left-hand side of your screen.

Note: Groschopp Universal motors are custom built to fit your application so no additional options are available to narrow the search. Selecting the Universal motor type will prompt a message taking you to the Universal product page.

Not sure what you need?

One of our team members would be happy to help. Contact us at 800-829-4135 or by email at [email protected] . You can also chat with us using the green tab on the left side of your screen.

Universal Motors

Groschopp Universal motors are custom built to fit your application so no additional options are available to narrow the search. Standard frame sizes and motor features can be found on the Universal page.

All Boat Brands

Ab inflatables, abati yachts, abeking & rasmussen, action craft, active thunder, alfastreet marine, altinel shipyards, american marine, american tug, angler qwest, apex marine, arcadia yachts, archambault, argos nautic, arno leopard, atlas boat works, atx surf boats, austin parker, baha cruisers, beneteau america, benetti sail division, bentley pontoons, black pepper, black watch, bluewater sportfishing, bluewater yachts, boarncruiser, boston whaler, brix marine, bruce roberts, bruno abbate, buddy davis, californian, camper & nicholsons, canadian sailcraft, cantiere delle marche, cantieri di pisa, cantieri di sarnico, cantieri estensi, carolina classic, carolina skiff, carrera boats, cerri cantieri navali, chris-craft, christensen, classic craft, coastal craft, colin archer, cormorant yachts, cornish crabbers, correct craft, cruisers yachts, custom carolina, custom line, custom-craft, dalla pieta, dalpol yacht, de antonio yachts, de vries lentsch, deep impact, dellapasqua, delta powerboats, doggersbank, dubbel & jesse, dutch barge, enterprise marine, famic marine, ferretti yachts, forest river, fountaine pajot, fratelli aprea, front runner, glacier bay, grady-white, grand banks, grand soleil, gulf stream yachts, hallberg-rassy, hans christian, harbor master, harris flotebote, helmsman trawlers, hh catamarans, high performance, hinterhoeller, holiday mansion, hunt yachts, hydra-sports, ijlstervlet, innovazione e progetti, intercruiser, intermarine, international, island gypsy, island packet, jan van gent, jarrett bay, jersey cape, judel and vrolijk, kadey-krogen, laser boats, latini marine, latitude 46, laurent giles, lazzara yachts, legacy yachts, little harbor, lyman-morse, mano marine, marine projects, marine trader, marine yachting, marlow-hunter, mastercraft, maverick yachts costa rica, maxi dolphin, mediterranean, mestral marine works, midnight express, misty harbor, mochi craft, mondomarine, monte carlo, monte carlo yachts, motor yacht, motorsailer, mystic powerboats, naca marine, native watercraft, nautor swan, naval yachts, nordic tugs, north river, northern bay, nuova jolly, ocean alexander, ocean craft marine, ocean master, ocean sport, ocean yachts, offshore yachts, oldambtsloep, outback yachts, outer reef trident, outer reef yachts, outerlimits, pacific craft, pacific mariner, pacific seacraft, palm beach motor yachts, palmer johnson, performance, perini navi, pieter beeldsnijder, pikmeerkruiser, planus nautica, polar kraft, princecraft, queens yachts, quicksilver, ranger tugs, reichel/pugh, robert clark, royal denship, royal huisman, sasga yachts, sea-doo sport boats, seaswirl striper, selection boats, sessa marine, seven seas yachts, shallow sport, shallow stalker, silver wave, skipperliner, smoker craft, solaris power, southern cross, southern ocean, sparkman & stephens, sport-craft, stardust cruisers, steiger craft, stilecatalini, stumpnocker, sun tracker, sundeck yachts, super van craft, sweden yachts, tahoe pontoon, tecnomarine, terra nauta, terranova yachts, thunder jet, tiara sport, tiara yachts, trinity yachts, tullio abbate, valhalla boatworks, valkkruiser, van de stadt, van den hoven, van der heijden, van der valk, versilcraft, viking princess, volvo penta, voyage yachts, webbers cove, west marine, white shark, wide beam narrowboat, willard marine, william fife, williams jet tenders, wright performance, xplor boatworks, yachting france, yamaha boats, yamaha waverunner, zar formenti.

• 7622 Pécs, Alsómalom utca 11. | Nyitva tartás: H-P: 9 - 16 SZ: 9 - 12
• +36 72 314 866
• [email protected]

Bemutatkozás

Mivel foglalkozunk.

• MZ alkatrészek
• Simson alkatrészek
• Babetta alkatrészek
• Kínai robogó alkatrészek
• Bukósisakok
• Gumiköpenyek
• Pocket bike
• Elektromos kerékpár

Főbb termékkategóriáink

• Berúgó alkatrészek (robogó, moped, quad)
• Bowdenek, spirálok
• Csapágyak, szimeringek
• Dobozok, boxok, csomagtartók
• Elektromos alkatrészek
• Fékrendszer és alkatrészei
• Gumik, belsők (robogó, quad, moped)
• Gyertyák, pipák
• Idomok, burkolatok, ülések
• Izzó (robogó, quad, motor)
• Karburátorok és alkatrészeik
• Kenőanyagok, tisztítók, ápolók
• Kiegészítők

Még az 1980-as években kezdtünk keleti motorok alaktrészek gyártásával foglalkozni. Az 1990-es évek elején hengerfúrással és hasonló megoldásokkal foglalkoztunk a Felsőmalom utcai első üzletünkben. Ezekben az években kezdtünk el forgalmazni Simson és Babetta alaktrészeket is, amelynek köszönhetően hamar ki is nőttük azt az üzlethelyiséget.

1994-ben költöztünk a mostani helyünkre, az Alsómalom utca 11. szám alá. Kínálatunkat igyekszünk azóta is az igényeknek megfelelően folyamatosan változtatni.

Információk

Kérjük, vegyék figyelembe, hogy az otthon, házilag beszerelt termékekre nem vállalunk garanciát, ezért kérjük, hogy a visszzhozott hibás termékek garanciajegye mellé legyenek szívesek csatolni a beszerelést végző szakműhely által kiállított szakvéleményt is.

Üzletünkben lehetőség van bankkártyás fizetésre.

A megrendelt termékeket akár csomagként is el tudjuk küldeni., egyszeri 50 000 ft feletti vásárlás esetén 5% kedvezményt biztosítunk., egyszeri 100 000 ft feletti vásárlás esetén 10% kedvezményt biztosítunk..

Kérem, hogy a [email protected] címre írjanak, arra 1 munkanapon belül reagálok!

Elérhetőségek:

Cím: 7622 Pécs, Alsómalom utca 11. Telefonszám:   +36 72 314 866 E-mail: [email protected]

Nyitva tartás: Hétfő - Péntek: 9:00 - 16:00 Szombat: 9:00 - 12:00 Vasárnap: ZÁRVA

Bejelentkezés

Az ön földrajzi helye.

Milyen messze van Öntől a meghirdetett jármű? Kérjük, adja meg irányítószámát, így a találati listájában láthatóvá válik, mely jármű milyen távolságra található az Ön lakhelyétől közúton!

Találjon meg automatikusan!

Kérjük, várj, amíg ellenőrizzük, hogy nem vagy robot.

Kiemelések a találati oldalon

Ati motor pécs hirdetései, ati motor pécs adatai, ati motor pécs hirdetései (0 db).

• Kereskedés adatai
• Kereskedés járművei

Akihez fordulhat

Pápai Attila

Pápainé Tóth Adrienn

• Találati lista (0 db)

Suzuki márkakereskedés és szerviz

Suzuki gyári alkatrész rendelés itt.

Kényelmes, gyors, biztonságos és olcsóbb.

Készleten lévő új motorjaink:

Típus	Szín	Évjárat	Bruttó ár
GSX-S 1000 GT ABS	Világoskék	2023	5.399.000.-
GSX-8S DL 800DE (V-Strom) DL 800DE (V-Strom) DL 650A	Kék Sárda-lila Szürke-sárga Fekete	2023 2023 2023 2024	3.799.000.- 4.699.000.- 4.699.000.- 3.399.000.-
DL 1050DE (V-Strom) DL 1050DE (V-Strom) DL 650XT ABS (V-Strom)	Fekete Kék-fehér Kék-fehér	2023 2023 2024	5.899.000.-. 5.899.000.- 3.599.000.-
DL 650XT ABS   (V-Strom) Address 125	Kék-fekete Kék	2023 2023	3.599.000.-   999.000.-
Avenis 125	Fehér	2023	1.049.000.-

Készpénzes motorfelvásárlás! Eladó motorját 

Megvesszük ,  vagy beszámoljuk motor vásárlás esetén., m inden vizsgáztatható új suzuki motorra  , lizing lehetőséget biztosítunk 20% befizetéstől max. 72 hónaps futamidővel., teszt motorok:      suzuki dl 800de, suzuki dl 650xt.

• Új Suzuki motorok
• Suzuki extrák
• Peugeot motorkerékpárok
• Super Soco elektromos motorok
• Használt motorok
• Szolgáltatások
• Alkatrész rendelés
• Motorbérlés
• Endurosport eredmények
• Arhív modellek

Elérhetőség

Enduro Motorosbolt

Bemutatóterem és szervíz Nyitva: H-P. 8,30-12,30 13,30-17,00 Sz.-V. Zárva

Tel.: 72/516-185 Fax.: 72/516-186

enduromotorosbolt@gmail.com

Látogatók száma:

• Summit Racing Equipment

Search Form

Recent searches.

• Hot Rods and Muscle Cars
• Old Motorcycles

Trending Searches

• Ford Bronco
• Record Setting
• Fuel Injection

LM7 5.3L Vortec 5300 Engine Specs: Performance, Bore & Stroke, Cylinder Heads, Cam Specs & More

The LM7 is a 5.3L, Gen. 3 small block engine used in GM trucks between 1999 and 2007. For marketing purposes, it was also known as the Vortec 5300. The information listed here is for the stock LM7 engine.

Mechanically similar,  General Motors’ LS and LS-based Vortec engines  wound up on almost every branch of the GM family tree: Chevy, Pontiac, GMC, Cadillac, Buick—heck, even Saab, Hummer, and Isuzu got some LS love.

Since LS and Vortec engines are so common, they’ve become the go-to performance and swap engines of the modern era.

These motors are capable of making a lot of horsepower, and respond well to upgrades like turbos, superchargers, high-flow cylinder heads, intake systems, cams, and nitrous oxide.

The aftermarket is strong,  crate engines  are available, and used motors are often cheaply sourced through junkyards.

[ Trying to find an LS engine? Check out  Part 1  and  Part 2  of our LS Spotter’s Guide . ]

Summit Racing has created a series of comprehensive guides for each engine in the LS family, so engine builders and tuners can have a handy reference for their projects.

This specific guide is for the Chevy LM7 LS truck engine.

( Summit Racing’s  Paul Spurlock and Brian Nutter contributed to this article.)

GM LM7 Engine Specs

LM7 Engine Ratings
	9.5:1
	270-295 hp
	315-335 ft.-lbs.

T	1999-2007	Chevrolet	Silverado 1500
T	1999-2007	GMC	Sierra 1500
T	1999-2006	Chevrolet	Tahoe
T	1999-2006	Chevrolet	Suburban 1500
T	1999-2006	GMC	Yukon
T	1999-2006	GMC	Yukon XL 1500
T	2002-2005	Cadillac	Escalade (2WD)
T	2002-2006	Chevrolet	Avalanche
T	2003-2007	Chevrolet	Express
T	2003-2007	GMC	Savana

LM7 Block Specs
	12567392, 12567393, 12551358
	Iron
	5.3L / 325 c.i.d.
	3.780 in.
	3.622 in.
	9.230-9.240 in.
	4.400 in.
	#3 Main
	6-Bolt
	2.751 in.
(1999-2003)	Bore 1/5 = 2.326, Bore 2/4 = 2.317, Bore 3 = 2.307
(2003-07)	Bore 1/5 = 2.346, Bore 2/4 = 2.326, Bore 3 = 2.307
	4.914 in.

	Hypereutectic Cast Aluminum Alloy
	Dished
	+8cc
(1999-2004)	0.9447 in., 0.9448 in. (Pressed)
(2005-07)	0.9429 in., 0.9431 in (Floating)
	Powdered Metal
	I-Beam
	6.098 in.
	M9 x 1 x 43
	Cast Iron
	2.559 in.
	2.100 in.
	24X
	0.857 in.

	862, 706
	Aluminum
	61cc
	Cathedral
	200cc
	Oval
	70cc
	1.890 in.
	1.550 in.
	Torque to Yield (TTY)
(1999-2003)	(8) M11 x 2 x 155, (2) M11 x 2 x 100, (5) M8 x 1.25 x 45
(2004-06)	(10) M11 x 2 x 100, (5) M8 x 1.25 x 45

LM7 Camshaft Specs
	191°/190°	191°/190°
	0.457 in./0.466 in.	0.457 in./0.466 in.
	115.5°	114°
	3-Bolt	3-Bolt

	Hydraulic Roller
	Plastic Lifter Tray
	0.842 in.
	7.385 in.
	Pedestal
	Die-Cast, Roller Fulcrum
	1.7
	None
	Beehive
	Natural
	15 Degrees
	Steel, Solid Stem
	1.890 in.
	Steel, Solid Stem
	1.550 in.

	Truck Style
	78mm, 3-Bolt
(1999-2002)	Throttle Cable
(2003-04)	Electronic, Drive-by-Wire (most models)
(1999)	21.8 lbs./hr.
(2000)	24.8 lbs./hr.
(2001-07)	25.2 lbs./hr.
	1.9 in.
	Mini-Delphi / Multec2
	Warren
	24x
	Rear Mount, 1x on cam
	Deep Rear Sump
	Standard Volume

NOTE: You can find engine specs and detailed engine upgrade advice for every LS and LS-based Vortec truck engine in one place: The Definitive Guide to LS Engine Specs and LS Engine Upgrades .

64 responses to “LM7 5.3L Vortec 5300 Engine Specs: Performance, Bore & Stroke, Cylinder Heads, Cam Specs & More”

[…] LM7 5.3L Vortec 5300 Engine Specs: Performance, Bore & Stroke, Cylinder Heads, Cam Specs & M… […]

I have a 2003 vortec with 2 different casting numbers, behind top intake on block it has 12559767 on rear of block behind fly wheel is 12551358 with 862 heads. Mexican build gm plant motor, which is it , 4.8 or 5.3

What type & year 4L60 tranny is best for my 5.3 1999-2007 12551358 on block

My truck is 1999 Silverado with 8 inch lift, my engine is 12551358 possible from 2003-2007 what 4L60 tranny is best (any one)

Hey Kerry, click here to contact the Summit Racing tech folks. They’ll ask you some specifics on your truck and help you figure out the best transmission option.

It has 862 heads

[…] It’s is very similar to the LM7, except that it’s built on an aluminum block, and the LM7 is an iron-block engine. […]

just want to know what my 2003 lm7 5.3 1500 ls truck horsepower rating is. I think it is 285hp ?

It really depends on your specific vehicle application–but your 285 estimate is certainly right in the ballpark. Our table above says, depending on the vehicle, it’s between 270 and 295 hp.

I Getafe the same model truck, and the owner manual said 285 hp

Ya, but is this to the rear wheel hp or to the crank?

I am doing a cam delete plate moving the cam sensor to the front and putting in a custom cut zo6 cam with a single bolt cam gear. Unfortunately I ported and polished the 706 cast heads before I learned of their suseptability for cracking. so now i have to re do the 50 hours of hand to head work on the set of 862s i collected. My inquirey has a feew parts to it. 1; will the cam gear mate up with the crank as I want it to with conventional instalation? Ive heard that the two have different amounts of teeth and have been told I need to change the crank. Fingers crossed that I dont. 2; im putting this back into an 02 avalanche. Is it gonna start or will I have to have the ECU reprogramed? 3; Will I need to obtain a stall torque converter, and finally 4;Ive come across a set of H beam rods but there only 6 inch. Will a set of 4.8 flat top pistons make up the difference in lost compression? Any other advice or suggestions are welcome. To be in the know, Ive upgraded the trunions, added a hi flow oil pump, added 3/8 pushrods, added heavier valvesprings, and port matched all the gaskets.

Hi Casper, we’re not quite sure what engine type you’re starting with so we’ll address both.

If you have a Gen. 4 engine, nearly all of them came with 58x reluctors and won’t be compatible with the ECM in a 2002 Avalanche (24X reluctor ring). You are correct that you would need to swap the crank or reluctor itself.

If you have a gen. 4 intake and throttle body, be aware they aren’t wired like the Gen. 3s that were cable driven or used TAC module and different pedal assembly. You may need something like the Torquerush X-Link module to convert, but there’s a chance you could use a straight harness with a 90mm LS2 TB and have it be compatible with your 2002 ECM. Knock sensor extensions would also be required, but some leave them unhooked…which is a little dicey.

Now, Let’s talk about you starting with the LM7 or other Gen. 3 engine. The good news is you already have some pretty good stuff to work with. Definitely check out our LM7 upgrade article for some good tips. Most of the aftermarket cams out there are built on a 3-bolt core, so you can keep the top and bottom timing gears from what you have and just throw a stronger LS2 spec timing chain on it . The rear mount cam sensor is fine, so that saves you a bit of headache. Knock sensor locations too.

The ECM will start and run, but anytime you’re adding horsepower…you will want to have it tuned…there’s big power there anyway. The biggest injectors that came in LM7s came in the 2001-07 versions. At 25 lbs., they support about 380 hp (to the wheels) which may be enough depending on how big you go with the cam.

As for converters, the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Summit Racing Pro LS Truck cams will work with a stock converter. The stage 3 cam would like a 2,500 converter and the Stage 4 would like a 2,800 converter. You can check out those cam specs on the Summit Pro LS Cam article to get an idea of the duration numbers etc. for comparison.

The 6 inch rods you found are probably made for gen. 1 or 2 small block Chevy. The problem is they have an offset in the beam that makes them un-centered under the piston…this causes side loading. Gen. 3/4/5 rods are on-center, so definitely stick with them or aftermarket. Lastly, flat tops would not help enough to recover the compression of having a piston .100 in. farther down in the cylinder with a short rod.

The 1999-04 LM7 rods used a press fit .9449″ pin vs. the 2005-07 models which switched to the beefier Gen. 4 rods and .9431″ full floating pins. If you aren’t running over a 150 shot of nitrous, one possible combination includes these Scat connecting rods . These are press-fit, stock length rods that would be compatible with Keith Black UEM-2482HC-5MM ( .010 in. overbore) flat top pistons with .9449″ pins. That would get you up to 10.7:1 with the 61cc chambers on the LM7 heads. If you are making more power, then the aftermarket rods are 6.125″ long and have a .927″ pin usually. There are lots of forged pistons available and a flat top version with 2 valve reliefs is pretty easy to find.

The rest of your combination sounds pretty good, but the 3/8″ pushrods are going to require clearancing on the outside of the intake runner. Commonly available .080″ wall 5/16″ like these from Summit Racing are a good choice. Hopefully the information above helps. If we didn’t answer everything, give the folks at Summit Racing a call (330-630-0240) and they can guide you through the process.

I have a stock 5.3L in a 2002 Silverado truck. It has 200,000 on it and I want to build a replacement engine for it. I have built several small blocks over the years but never an LS. I fell in love with this LS and want to build one for this truck with more horsepower but keep it for daily driving. What is your recommendation for Crank, cam, intakes, pistons, rods, and whether to start with a 5.3L or 6.0L ?? I would like to have 350-400 hp.

Mike, find a 6.0 and rebuild it to your needs, there’s no replacement for displacement as the saying goes.

Yeah there is…it’s called boost. The same reason Hondas on 15psi put bus lengths on everything, while having a 1.8l.

Displacement + Boost is all the doctor ordered!

I have a 2000 chev silverado 5.3L 200K miles.

Looking for best replacement engine. Any legal cam change for better performance? Any other recommendations?

[…] workhorses like the Chevrolet Express Van, Silverado, Tahoe, Suburban and that weird Avalanche. OnAllCylinders.com did a nice run-through of what this engine […]

[…] LR4 was introduced in 1999. Along with the LM7 and LQ4, they were the first LS truck engines. The LR4 was available in GM pickups, vans, and SUVs […]

2002 suburban 5.3 292000 no issues other than knock sensors my question is how big of a lift and duration cam can I go without having to change anything other than the cam and lifters

Can this engine hold a 6.0 transmission. My transmission is going out and my uncle has a 6.0 transmission from a 98 version of my 2000 suburban truck

How much boost can the LM7 take?

I’m running 15 psi boost on A stock Ls7 motor and have run 65 quarters with it. Low octane of course.. But..I am losing some antifreeze out the tail pipes now tho!!! Most likely head gasket.

Can I use my stock pedal if the throttle body is cable or does the ecm still look for pedal position? I have a 95 2 door tahoe

I have a 200q gmc sierra 1500 5.3L 2wd and my rear end went out on me. I want to go with a beefier rear end and would like to know what specs I should go by, I’m trying to get more torque out of it instead of speed

I did used a dial indicator on a stock cam and came up with 0.270″ lift and I’ve bin reading and it should have 0.457″ intake lobe what cams did get used this makes no sense

The cam lift is just that, lift at the cam lobe. You have to multiply the cam lift by the rocker arm and then you’ll have the actual lift of the valve from it’s seat. A quick run down is say you have .320 lift on the cam lift, and your rocker arm ratio is 1.5. Multiply the lift times ratio like this: .320 X 1.5 = .480 lift from the valve seat. I hope this helps clear up the lift question you had.

I have a 2005 gmc sierra. I am trying to convert my Gen 3 block to an aluminum Gen 4 block. I have purchased the block.

Here are my questions….

1) I understand I have to relocate the knock sensors. From my valley to the side of the block. Is there a place already there that they won go in? I have read that is a no. Where do I put them?

2) the valley cover has the DOD stuff on the gen 4, and mine does not. When I relocate the knock sensors, what do I do about the 2 large holes in the valley cover?

3) gen 4 cam sensor is in the front timing cover where as mine is in the top of the valley cover? What do I do about the hole in the block if I move mine to the front where the gen 4 is, and what do I have to do in order to make this work with the cam from gen 3?

4) I am putting a 24x crank in this 58x motor….. I assume this will be fine? I’m not changing the wheel, but the whole crank.

5) is there anything else I need to be aware of with this swap????

Thank you so much in advance for the help.,

I am trying to find out if I have a DoD engine. I need to do a lifter job. I have been told that if is is DoD I will have to remove the heads to do this.

I just pulled the info from the SILVERADOSIERRA.com forum: The active fuel management I believe has the DOD as part of it or is it.

2007+ New body style 5.3L engines have AFM. The 6.2L engine thru the 2013 model year was not AFM in the 1500 trucks. The 6.2L in the SUV did have AFM though.

Do some more checking on the forums or go directly to GM and they’ll have all the info you need without any questions on the veracity of it.

[…] past updates we freshened up this LM7 V8 by installing a mix of quality replacement parts and Summit Racing’s Pro LS Series high […]

What is the cylinder bore angle is it the same as a gen 1 or gen 2 block can it be bored with the same tooling as the old blocks And what is the head and valve angle on the ls motorsv?

Will a 6.0 engine from a 2005 hummer h2 fit into a 2002 avalanche 1500? If so does the tranny need to be changed out with the engine?

Aonde consigo a bomba da direcao hidraulica para ser enviada para o Brasil

Olá! A Summit Racing embarca para o Brasil, clique aqui para saber mais.

does a 2003 chevy silverdo 1500 4×4 truck with 5.3 engine have a egr valve? My truck idles rough after I googled the problem it points to a egr valve so I went to Auto Zone the gentleman looks in the book and said there is a gasket but shows no egr valve. Being a Sunday all the mechanic shops are closed and you help me? Thanks

I purchased a 383 stroker from Summit, it is a 1996 chev block. I am wandering if I can use the vortec heads, intake and all the rest of it to put on it so I can install it in my 2009 chev silverado 4×4?

That’s the wrong engine for that truck. The truck uses a Gen IV LS type engine, and you bought a Gen I small block. Nothing interchanges between them. Sell it and buy an LS Vortec engine.

Could this motor be swapped with a 6.0 liter L76 motor? I am trying to get a 2007 chevy Silverado duramax running and I don’t know how to find information on transmission bolt patterns or motor compatibility. It says that the 6.0 liter has a computer of E38 but I don’t see a computer on this motor so does that mean it would not work.

What is the valve stem diameter of the stock lm7 valves?

Hi. Great web site thanks. Can i put any 5.3L in any 5.3L ?as the list shows 99 to 2006. Suburbans. Without new harness and computer adjusting. (2000 Suburban LT 5.3 1500 to 2004 or 2006 sub ) Thanks. Pat

I have an ‘03 Avalanche with the original 5.3. My question is this, and I hope simple. I am planning to do a mild rebuild of the 5.3. Cam, thermostat, tune, and possibly under drive pulleys…is it worth the expense, for what I see as minimal gains, to upgrade the intake to the TBSS and all that would entail?

[…] on a smaller 5.3L. In fact, we broke the 500-horsepower mark with that cam on the little LM7, so we naturally had high hopes for the larger […]

[…] [Every engine spec you’ll need can be found here: LM7 5.3L Vortec 5300 Engine Specs: Performance, Bore & Stroke, Cylinder Heads, Cam Specs & M….] […]

[…] It’s is very similar to the LM7, except that it’s built on an aluminum block, and the LM7 is an iron-block engine. […]

[…] It was known as the Vortec 5300 and made a little less power than its aluminum-block brother, the L33. This was due to the LM4’s smaller intake valve Cathedral port heads, lower compression, and a slightly smaller cam. With the exception of the block material, it had more in common with the iron-block LM7. […]

[…] The L59 engine is a 5.3L Gen. III iron-block engine used in GM trucks and SUVs between 2002 and 2007. It is essentially the flex-fuel version of the LM7. […]

[…] L59 (along with the LM7) is a Gen. III, 5.3L iron block truck engine you can pick up in wrecking yards for about $600. The […]

my yukon has got a few miles on it but to be fair im 3rd owner and actually knew the 2nd owners and know the engine has been kept serviced and driven moderetly at the harshest word to use to describe its use.i want to up the performance of the vehicle and not go wild with just add a few horsepower and go pretty good if neede to do that Im a rookie with some basic knowlege of mechanicin on my car.all i really want to do is swap out the camshaft and get that good throaty lick and know somethin is in ole gramps big ole 4×4 yukon. honestly need to know what to do first out of the chute.

Just getting started in the Ls world have a 5/3 swap in 74 nova i no they make power would like to do cam swap but realy thinking about a single turbo set up.whst cam can i use to make good sound an power now but work good when i make the leap into turbo. That way im not nacking up

How much HP can a LM7 handle?

LM7 5.3 can handle about 750 hp but after that you need performance parts. after 750 the pistons and rods can get dicey. if you do it right and get all the right parts an LM7 can handle over 1,000hp

so then in regaurds to that 1000 hp conversation about the lm7 a 3rd gen 5.3 is good for 750 stockish prepapred and 1000 with what crank rods and pistons from the aftermarket, or can you offer some knowledge that i can put to use in my current experiment? i already have a turbo setup a clean std bore block that was in a running truck elgin 1841p cam pac1218 springs/btr66o’s also and a couple sets of heads but im looking for a reason to call up the fellas at trick flow i want the 255x’s.

Looking for a 3rd gen lm7 engine with wiring harness with around 80k miles. Need pricing and availability please

Very hard to find in n.c. Check Tennessee lots rusted cars there

With the Brain Tollie cam truck noris need injectors or any other up grades to get it to work.

I have a 2005 chevy silverado 5.3l iron block w/862 aluminum cathedral heads. I want to upgrade the intake and I came across a 2010 5.3l cathedral intake manifold complete. Only thing is it has flex fuel injectors. My question is can I install this intake on mine? If I need parts to install it could you list what’s needed i appreciate it.

I have a 1999 5.3 Ls(LM7) that I got for $200 I want to turn it in to a 363 stroker. I’ve found a rotating assembly for it on CNC Motorsports… is there any way you would be able to tell me wat would I need to bore the block to nd no im not trying to get a motor bc I’m using this 1 for a project motor not worried about spending

I have a 2004 Avalanche with a 5.3L that has an electrical problem. It can sit for days and it will start right away all day. Other times it will start great most of day but then it may happen that I need to jump it. From all indications there is a parasitic draw. Having gone through the fuses 3 times, I began to figure it was on the other side of the fuse box perhaps. I’ve replaced the alternator, spark plugs & wires, ignition coils and traced the wiring to ensure there were none damaged. I’m at a loss as to what to check or replace next. Any ideas?

Glove box light

Apologies for the late reply, but here’s a handy guide for troubleshooting a mystery electrical drain in a car that may help you out: Tracking Down a Phantom Battery Voltage Drain

GREAT DAY I PICKED UP A 5.3 SL THE BLOCK CASTING NUMBER IS 12569573 IT IS AND ALL ALUMINUM ENGINE BUT I DO NOT FIND A YEAR FOR THIS ENGINE CAN SOME ONE HELP ME I NEED THE YEAR TO GET THE RIGHT CAM BEARING . YOU CAN TEXT ME AT 520 240 7744 E MAIL IS HIT AND MISS WHERE I LIVE THANK YOU ALL BE SAFE

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Similar Stories

How to eliminate the multiple displacement system in your gen. iii hemi with a summit racing pro hemi non-mds camshaft, ford 7.3l "godzilla" engine guide: block, camshaft, cylinder head specs & build info, 5.3l ls engine guide: block specs, swap resources & build info.

FREE SHIPPING FOR ORDERS OF TWO (2) HANDLE ATTACHMENTS! SEE HOMEPAGE FOR DETAILS.

FREE SHIPPING will be an option at checkout. THIS IS ONLY VALID FOR ORDERS OF TWO (2) HANDLES. ORDERS OF ONE (1) OR MORE THAN THREE (3+), DISCOUNT WILL NOT APPEAR. Only for lower 48 states in the USA.

Want four (4) handles, and still qualify for FREE SHIPPING? Consider placing two (2) separate orders, or reach out to our team to place the order!

Valid Starting June 02, 2023. Will be valid until further notice.

Our current lead time for a one (1) machine order is approximately 20 to 24 weeks. 

Current lead time for handles / attachments is approximately 2 to 4 weeks. 

We provide discounts on orders of three (3) or more machines, discount does not include ECON SERIES! Email us to get a custom quote! Discount only valid for payment plans, paid during manufacturing.

Please check your SPAM FOLDER if you have placed an order with us. Sometimes your order updates may not go to your INBOX.

Updated On July 08, 2024

Cable Handle Attachments

Additional Customer Feedback

"... so as far as @rawmotiveworks goes first and foremost their customer service is absolutely second to none, family owned and operated and you can tell they appreciate their clients and love what they do..." Owner of Lubischer's Burn & Blast Training

"The members are really loving this piece! Nothing but positive feedback. " Owner of Armbrust Pro Gym

"... I have to be 100% honest, you guys are making phenomenal pieces of equipment..." Owner of Valley's Gym

"... gym loves the pieces" Owner of Flex Fitness

"Love the equipment..." "Better than ________ strength imo" "... best iv used" Visitor @ Bulter Pro Gym

"... your work is awesome!!! Both feel great and love the padding design on the incline..." Owner of Powerhouse Gym Hanover, MD

Payment Plans | Financing

If you'd like a payment plan for your order, please email us at [email protected] or fill out our Contact Us Page . Payment plans are installment payments that are paid throughout the manufacturing time.

Check out our FAQ Page for more information!

We are now offering a financing option. This process will be first come first serve. There is a limited number of customers who can finance at a time. Once a financing slot is open and a customer is on the waitlist, we will contact those next in line. Please email, DM us on Instagram, or fill out our Contact Us Page to be added to the waitlist or to see if a slot is open.

Video : "The Journey" With Raw Motive Works

Our company is a small family owned business that manufactures specialized gym equipment. All of our products are made in the USA. They are designed, and tested by everyday gym goers.

We continue to evolve our designs to ensure that someone who is 5 feet tall will be able to comfortably utilize a machine that is also suitable for someone who is 6 feet tall. We strive to provide high quality products with undeniable details and designs. Realizing that each and every person is unique, we design products with multiple adjustments.

We always do our best to help our customers. Whether they've lost bearings, broken some bearings, need new end caps, etc. Customers who have purchased from us know that we do all we can to take care of them. We continue our customer service even after an order has been paid for and delivered. We typically respond to emails and messages within hours, or less than a day. We also tend to respond 7 days a week, not just during the work week.

We are here to change the fitness equipment industry.

We take pride in our products and value our customers! Thank you for supporting our small business!

RMW Death Row

Traditionally, T-Bar Rows are on a fixed movement path. Our swiveling handle keeps the unused grip out of the way for a full contraction. The pivoting handle allows freedom to target different parts of the back. 

Standing ISO Row

This standing chest supported row has independent arms and adjustability everywhere! 

Incline Chest Fly

Most incline chest fly machines on the market don’t allow you to perform a  true  incline chest fly! The arms of our machine are angled up to target your upper chest. As opposed to others that are essentially a flat fly on an incline bench. With our heim joints on the handles, it allows you to rotate your grip slightly in or out for the perfect squeeze!

Raw Flat Press

Need a chest press machine that requires minimal space? Look no further!

Have you purchased from us before? Email us a review to receive a discount on your next order! Email us for more details!

ECON SERIES

The problem with inexpensive gym / fitness equipment is it typically never works as well as it should, if at all. Also, it is almost never made in the USA. We are now offering a line of American Made equipment, that won’t break the bank, but will function properly. A “base model” so to speak. We have stripped the adjustments and “luxuries”, etc. to provide the most affordable version of our equipment.

Still great angles, weight curves, and movement paths. No extra fluff. 

Looking for demo videos or walkthroughs.

Click Here!

Motorcycle VIN Check and Lookup

Lookup Motorcycle VIN Number and get Full VIN History Report

If you're a motorcycle enthusiast, you know how important it is to find the perfect ride. One way is to get the facts from the seller. But not everyone is forthcoming with the critical details about the bike's history that can allow you to make an informed decision.

It’s difficult for all the information to trickle down from the original owner. Then comes the challenge of dealing with dishonest sellers looking to get rid of the bike after it has been stolen , involved in accidents or crimes. Luckily, you have the best tool in your arsenal as a buyer, and that’s our motorcycle VIN check tool!

What is a Motorcycle VIN Check?

You check motorcycle VIN to find out the history of a motorcycle based on its Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) , which is a unique 17-digit code that identifies each motorcycle. Looking up the VIN can tell you things like:

• Year, make, model, and original motorcycle shade.
• Number of previous owners and how long they owned it.
• Reported mileage and maintenance records.
• Accident and damage history.
• Title and registration status.
• Theft and recovery incidents.
• Past recalls .

Note that by itself, the VIN number is static and doesn’t change throughout the motorcycle’s history. The reason you can obtain information about past accidents or theft records is that it’s used by DMVs , repair facilities, and law enforcement agencies to track all incidents associated with the motorcycle throughout its history, even across borders.

Why is a Check Important?

Knowing the full history and specifications of a motorcycle by ordering a bike VIN check can help you protect your investment and enjoy your motorcycle for many years to come. You get peace of mind knowing that you are buying a reliable and trustworthy unit that has no hidden problems or risks.

Here are some audits conducted when you check motorcycle VIN and their importance:

Specification

Unlike cars, motorcycles may not have easily visible indicators of their brand, model, or engine capacity. Sometimes, only avid enthusiasts can tell the difference between various models and years.

The VIN provides a way for anyone despite their knowledge of motorcycles to find out the exact specifications of the model . Just run the VIN through the bike serial number checker to learn about the manufacturer’s specs, which can aid in determining if it has been modified in any way or if the identifier belongs to the unit.

Title Check

The serial number bike check can reveal the status of the title from DMV entries. You can determine if you’re buying a motorcycle with a clean or branded title.

Titles branded as salvage or rebuilt indicate that the unit was heavily damaged in the past. The title may be branded as recovered signaling that it was recovered after theft. The branded status generally increases the insurance premiums and can make units difficult to resell.

Stolen Check

Our VIN number lookup tool can help you avoid buying a stolen motorcycle, which can attract potential legal trouble and financial losses.

That said, some sellers may try to hide the fact that the motorcycle has been reported stolen by changing the VIN. So, be on guard for any inconsistencies in the bike’s specifications and title documents.

Additionally, review the registration records in the VIN Check report to determine when ownership changed hands. It should be consistent with the year the seller claims to have bought the motorcycle.

Odometer Records

Before selling the bike, some sellers may tamper with the odometer or falsify the service records to make the motorcycle appear more valuable than it is. A bike VIN lookup will contain past reported odometer readings. While it may not show the current mileage, you can use past readings along with the anticipated usage to determine if the mileage reading is consistent.

DMV VIN Check

With our motorcycle VIN report, you can obtain records from all DMV jurisdictions where the motorcycle was registered. These records are crucial because they can show you the status of the unit’s title , such as clean, salvage, rebuilt, etc. You can also see any accident records, reported mileages, outstanding liens, and specifications.

As the information comes from multiple DMV records, you can better avoid incidences of title-washing, where motorcycles are registered in different jurisdictions to ‘wash’ their previous title status.

Motorcycle Value by VIN

A motorcycle VIN search can reveal detailed information about the features, specifications, model and year. This info serves as a starting point for additional research into what similar models are currently selling for. You can also better compare different motorcycles under consideration to find the one that suits your needs and budget.

Where Is the VIN on a Motorcycle?

A method that always works when trying to find the position of the VIN is to check the motorcycle's manual . In the preface, you may find a diagram with the location of the VIN.

If you don’t have the paper manual, just search for PDF versions online. Another trick is to carry out searches on related forums.

We’ve done most of this work for you, and here are known locations for VINs for popular brands:

The VIN location for Honda motorcycles varies depending on the model and year. However, a common place to look for it is on the steering head , which is the metal frame that connects the front fork to the rest of the bike. Turn the handlebars to the left and look at the right side of the steering head.

Ducati motorcycles have two identification numbers: one for the engine and one for the frame.

You’ll find the stamped VIN on the right side of the steering head that connects the steering head to the front fork. The engine number is located on the left side of the engine, just below the rear carburetor.

If you need to locate the VIN number on your Yamaha motorcycle , you can check the following places:

• On the head tube that connects to the front forks. It should be stamped on the left side.
• On the steering head that holds the steering stem and bearings. Check on the left side of the steering head, but some models may have the number on the right side.
• On the engine housing underneath the radiator, or behind the attachment for the left shock. On some models, the engine number may match the VIN number on the frame when the bike is new and will differ when the engine has been replaced or modified.

To locate the VIN number on your Suzuki motorcycle, you can check one of the following places:

• The cycle’s frame, where it is stamped directly on the metal. Check the right side of the steering head.
• One the VIN decal or identification plate, which is attached to the cycle’s frame. It may be in the same location as the stamped VIN number or a different spot.
• A plate riveted to the neck of the cycle, which also displays the VIN number. Turn the handlebars to the left or right to make it visible.

On Kawasaki motorcycles, the VIN can be found in different locations depending on the model and year. Here are some possible placements on Kawasaki motorcycles:

• On the frame neck or steering header from the right side. It’s the most common location for most Kawasaki models.
• On a metal plate attached to the frame near the front fork or on the side of the frame for older models or custom bikes.
• On an engraved sticker or label on the frame or under the seat for newer models of bikes with special features.

Here are some possible placements for the VIN number on BMW motorcycles:

• On the steering head bearing/front forks. It’s where the handlebars connect to the frame of the bike. You may need to turn the handlebars to see the VIN clearly.
• On a metal plate attached to the frame near the engine. The plate may also have other information such as the engine number and the production date.
• On a sticker on the rear wheel swingarm. It’s the part that connects the rear wheel to the frame and allows it to move up and down. The sticker may be on either side of the swing arm or the bottom.

You can find the VIN on the chassis plate of your bike, located in the headstock area where the front fork and handlebar attach to the frame. You may need to remove some parts or use a flashlight to see the VIN.

The location of the VIN on the KTM motorcycle varies depending on the model and year. However, some common places to find it are:

• On the steering head tube behind the front number plate.
• Right side of the frame, near the foot peg or brake pedal.
• On a metal plate attached to the frame, under the seat, or near the fuel tank.

Indian Motorcycle

The VIN on most Indian motorcycles is located on the left side of the frame, near the steering head. You can also find the VIN on a sticker on the right side of the engine case, below the oil filter.

Harley-Davidson

The VIN can be found on different parts of the HD motorcycle depending on the model and year. Some common locations are:

• On a metal plate attached to the frame near the steering head;
• On the engine case on the right side;
• Left side of the frame near the rear wheel;

How Can I Check a Motorcycle VIN for Free?

To compare different units, you can start with a free Motorcycle VIN check report that shows some basic facts . However, if you want to know the complete history of the motorcycle, it is recommended that you get a full paid report that reveals all the important details from its past.

A free report will help you narrow down your options, and the paid motorcycle VIN report can help you make the final decision.

Dirt Bike VIN Check

While dirt bikes are motorcycles designed for off-road use, they also have a 17-digit identification number like other motorcycles. The VIN number can be used to perform a VIN check, allowing you to obtain a specification and full history report that contains information from various vehicle databases. For instance, the dirt bike VIN lookup can allow you to verify the bike's ownership, mileage, accident history, and other important details that will make your purchase safer.

How to Do a Check?

Our VIN check tool is responsive and fully updated with the latest database entries. You don’t need any special automotive knowledge to use it. Simply complete your search in four simple steps and obtain a full history report from the motorcycle VIN lookup tool:

• Click on the link and find the VIN search bar at the top of the page.
• Enter the VIN of the motorcycle you are interested in the search field.
• Press the " Check VIN " button.
• A detailed report of the motorcycle’s specifications will appear on your screen in an instant.

Note that this is the preliminary free report from the VIN information. The screen will display categories of paid information that will be available if you decide to order the full report. You can choose from several payment packages and receive the entire record going back to the first moment the motorcycle was registered.

Never in history has it been so fast and easy to obtain such information. It’s like using a time machine that reveals hidden details about past accidents, damages, repossessions, loans/liens, reported odometer readings, and more. What’s more, the data comes from trusted and official sources.

Buying a motorcycle can be risky if you don't know its history and specifications. You might end up with a stolen, heavily modified, or damaged bike that could cost you more in the long run.

To avoid this, you should always request a thorough check on the bike from a motorcycle VIN lookup service before you buy it. This will help you verify its authenticity, condition, and value.

So, don't miss this opportunity to get a complete motorcycle VIN number lookup from us. FAXVIN has through the years saved buyers from serious issues, ensuring that they always end up with the best value for their money.

Frequently Asked Questions

Was this article helpful?

Begin twilight

Sunrise time

Sunset time

End twilight

The time difference between: Pecs (Hungary) and Dublin (Ireland)

• Time difference
• Meeting Planner
• Difference table with other cities
• Additional Information

Welcome! On this page you can find out what is the time difference between Pecs and Dublin. If you are planning a trip, keep in mind that the time difference between Pecs (Hungary) and Dublin (Ireland) is −1 hour 00 mins. It means when in Pecs it’s 01:42:15 , in Dublin it’s 00:42:15 . This data can be explained by the distance between the cities. It’s 1,196 miles. If cities have air links, direct flight Pecs — Dublin will last approximately 2 hours 16 mins. If you are planning a tour, please note that when it is midnight in Pecs, it is 11:00:00 of the next day in Dublin.

• tabsAdvertisement
• tabsDifference
• 12 September 2024
• Thursday, Night
• Sunrise: 06:23:01
• Sunset: 07:06:28
• Timezone difference between Pecs and Dublin is −1 hour 00 mins
• Sunrise: 06:55:17
• Sunset: 07:50:00
• tabsDifference Table

Time Difference Between Multiple Cities (Time Zone Converter, Appointment Planner)

Dublin	Pecs
Th 12:00 AM	Th 01:00 AM
Th 01:00 AM	Th 02:00 AM
Th 02:00 AM	Th 03:00 AM
Th 03:00 AM	Th 04:00 AM
Th 04:00 AM	Th 05:00 AM
Th 05:00 AM	Th 06:00 AM
Th 06:00 AM	Th 07:00 AM
Th 07:00 AM	Th 08:00 AM
Th 08:00 AM	Th 09:00 AM
Th 09:00 AM	Th 10:00 AM
Th 10:00 AM	Th 11:00 AM
Th 11:00 AM	Th 12:00 PM
Th 12:00 PM	Th 01:00 PM
Th 01:00 PM	Th 02:00 PM
Th 02:00 PM	Th 03:00 PM
Th 03:00 PM	Th 04:00 PM
Th 04:00 PM	Th 05:00 PM
Th 05:00 PM	Th 06:00 PM
Th 06:00 PM	Th 07:00 PM
Th 07:00 PM	Th 08:00 PM
Th 08:00 PM	Th 09:00 PM
Th 09:00 PM	Th 10:00 PM
Th 10:00 PM	Th 11:00 PM
Th 11:00 PM	Fr 12:00 AM

• tabsCapitals list

Time difference between Pecs (Baranya, Hungary) and the capitals of the world

03:42 +02:00

00:42 −01:00

23:42 −02:00

02:42 +01:00

02:42 00:00

01:42 −01:00

04:42 +03:00

04:42 +04:00

19:42 −06:00

11:42 +10:00

07:42 +06:00

06:42 +05:00

17:42 −08:00

05:42 +04:00

18:42 −07:00

20:42 −05:00

01:42 00:00

09:42 +08:00

00:42 −02:00

19:42 −07:00

04:12 +02:30

05:27 +03:45

05:12 +03:30

12:42 −13:00

10:42 +09:00

22:42 −03:00

08:42 +06:30

20:42 −06:00

08:42 +07:00

03:12 +01:30

19:42 +02:00

Additional information about cities Pecs — Dublin

• Coordinates: Latitude +46°04′31″ , Longitude +18°13′58″
• Cities which has same time zone as Pecs : Aba , Abony , Agárd , Ágfalva , Ajka , Albertirsa , Alsóörs , Alsópáhok
• Sunset and sunrise times in Pecs
• Moon phase in Pecs
• Lunar day in Pecs
• Namaz prayer times in Pecs
• Exact local time in Pecs
• Weather in Pecs
• Location of Pecs
• Earthquakes in Pecs
• Coordinates: Latitude +53°19′59″ , Longitude −6°14′56″
• Sunset and sunrise times in Dublin
• Moon phase in Dublin
• Lunar day in Dublin
• Namaz prayer times in Dublin
• Exact local time in Dublin
• Weather in Dublin
• Location of Dublin
• Earthquakes in Dublin
• Timezone difference between cities Pecs and Dublin is 1,196 miles
• In Pecs is 1 hour 00 mins longer than in Dublin

Photos of Pecs

This place has no photos yet. You can improve its page by submitting your photos on [email protected]