Popularity of LT1 swaps to surge??

[Wasted Income]

LOL. Looks like the LT1 is cool again...

[Wasted Income]

http://blogs.hotrod.com/chevrolet-de...ine-38589.html

[Mr. 250r]

What in the....... lol why did they talk about the 5.5 for so long and put it in the vette race car.... maybe this was there way of hiding their true engine release although i prefer a 5.5 making 440 or a 6.2 making 450, i also don't understand the name idea why not an lt2 or ls4 or 5 or something that makes sense because this does not share anything with the lt1 from the looks of it

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted by Mr. 250r

What in the....... lol why did they talk about the 5.5 for so long and put it in the vette race car.... maybe this was there way of hiding their true engine release although i prefer a 5.5 making 440 or a 6.2 making 450, i also don't understand the name idea why not an lt2 or ls4 or 5 or something that makes sense because this does not share anything with the lt1 from the looks of it

The belt routing is exactly the same as a LT1

[Mr. 250r]

I'm still upset about the 5.5 hopefully it will get a full release and see more than just the C6.R maybe they just want to keep the big litre #s in the vette since its such an icon

[Wasted Income]

I wouldn't be surprised to see a 5.5L variant make its way into the trucks, or camaro in a couple years.

Just like the LS1 was released as a 5.7, and 2 years later, there were 4.8, 5.3, and 6.0 versions that were essentially the same.

[BR3W CITY]

i agree it shound't be the lt1.....why do I feel like craigslist will light up with morons thinking they have gold when the "lt1" becomes desired again. At least it doesn't look like reverse flow cooling

[68GMCCustom]

Twice was enough to confuse me....now they've gone and named a 3rd of 5 generations of small block an "LT1". And I agree....they should have come up with something unique vs re-using a popular engine code for the 3rd time.

I'm just glad there's no opti-spark!

[Super73]

They have been recycling the LS7 name for a while now. Two completely different motors other than cubic inches. Neither move makes sense to me.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Wasted Income]

Originally Posted by 68GMCCustom

Twice was enough to confuse me....now they've gone and named a 3rd of 5 generations of small block an "LT1". And I agree....they should have come up with something unique vs re-using a popular engine code for the 3rd time.

I'm just glad there's no opti-spark!

I think instead of naming the new camaro ZL1, they should have designated them Z/28. They should have reserved RPO ZL1 for the new engines. It hasn't been used in awhile, and there is no stigma like there is with the LT1 name.

Originally Posted by Super73

They have been recycling the LS7 name for a while now. Two completely different motors other than cubic inches. Neither move makes sense to me.
Posted via Mobile Device

Yep...LS6 also.

[GCncsuHD]

Forget the engine code designations, they've all been repeated it seems.

What I can't wait for is all of the possibilities of direct injection. Can you say high boost, high compression, high combustion temps and no risk of detonation?

[clinebarger]

I get the feeling nobody likes the Gen II LT1, Why?

[BR3W CITY]

I feel the same about the lt1 as I do the 4l60e and 700r4......and we've had that discussion before

The lt1 imo was a cool design that just never really got "all the way" there. The reverse flow cooling (wasn't there a massive breach of patent with that?) had its problems. The optispark was a bad design and since COP existed they could have easily done that. They took more work and more money to modify than the regular ol' sbc, and the gains were often less impressive. And tuning them.....icky.

[ls1nova71]

Originally Posted by Wasted Income

I think instead of naming the new camaro ZL1, they should have designated them Z/28. They should have reserved RPO ZL1 for the new engines. It hasn't been used in awhile, and there is no stigma like there is with the LT1 name.



Yep...LS6 also.

The original engine in my truck as listed on the SPID is an LS9!! Sadly it's not the supercharged GenIV Vette motor.

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted by BR3W CITY

I feel the same about the lt1 as I do the 4l60e and 700r4......and we've had that discussion before

The lt1 imo was a cool design that just never really got "all the way" there. The reverse flow cooling (wasn't there a massive breach of patent with that?) had its problems. The optispark was a bad design and since COP existed they could have easily done that. They took more work and more money to modify than the regular ol' sbc, and the gains were often less impressive. And tuning them.....icky.

Ive owned several LT1's & swaped Many more, They dont have cooling problems, They run 210 degrees all day long.
160 degree stat's cause problems.

The Optispark can have issues, Most last at least 100K, Keep up on maintenance (plugs,wires, cap, rotor & check the harness).....They will last untill the bearings fail.

There are tuners that can tune LT1 & LT4's.

Ive built some VERY hard running LT's with ported iron heads, Then you have LT4 heads & AFR heads. They can make just as much HP as any other production block 350.

EFI Connection has front covers to run 24X or 58X LS engine management on LT engines http://www.eficonnection.com/eficonn...Components.jpg http://www.eficonnection.com/eficonnection/24x.aspx

58X http://www.eficonnection.com/eficonnection/58x.aspx

[BR3W CITY]

^^^yikes, I could damn near do another swap for the cost of the those LT to LS pcm conversions.

[Wasted Income]

Thats for stubborn people who want some of the technology of the LS (CNP ignition, SFI, the LS PCM) but refuse to "join the herd" with an LS. lol.

[Mr. 250r]

Here's another article http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...1_small_block/ it appears they are keeping the bell housing pattern nearly the same except one bolt which i wonder how much this will affect an old transmission

There's also another video with it running on the tilt dyno

[68GMCCustom]

the more I look at that head and block...the more excited I get about this motor.

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted by BR3W CITY

^^^yikes, I could damn near do another swap for the cost of the those LT to LS pcm conversions.

Ive done one of these the only thing I bought from them was the Crank reluctor, Cam reluctor & Cam sensor adaptor, Everything else can be sourced cheap.

Originally Posted by Wasted Income

Thats for stubborn people who want some of the technology of the LS (CNP ignition, SFI, the LS PCM) but refuse to "join the herd" with an LS. lol.

I do LS & LT swaps, There are vehicles that a LS WILL NOT fit into, Namely Jaguars & Some narrow hood 30's vehicles.
Im not stubborn, I cater to different kinds of people & vehicles.
Ive made more money by NOT being so narrow minded.

Done a few Hemi & Mod motors too, But I guess those are junk to because their not LS engines??

BTW 94-97 LT1,s are SFI.

[Mr. 250r]

Im interested in actual dyno #s and how well the aftermarket can do with DI as well all know current LS motors respond well to a head and cam combo i wonder if the DI will have any affect on this

[78bronzechariot]

I can understand the disgust at using the LT1 RPO code again, my daily driver is a 96 impala ss with the gen II LT1. I haven't worked for GM, but I have worked for another large, multinational corporation. And we still used MSDOS based computing and archiving systems, mainly becuaswe they were very simple and ALOT of data could be stored and searched very quickly since there is not "gloss" on the user interface to waste memory space. I simply think that it would take GM billions of dollars to revamp the RPO code system with another digit in order to stop recylcling RPO codes, there are many that have meanings to the general public, like Z28, Z06, ZL1, LS1, etc etc, but there are many that dont mean anything, for instance the 2.2 ecotec that comes in front wheel drive compacts like the cobalt and cruze, is an LSJ. It has absolutetly nothing to do with what we consider an LSx engine even though the RPO code could be construed that way. Lastly many of the current LSX engines are already using recylced RPO codes from once "famous engines."

However, name aside this should be another line of amazing smallblock V8 engines, "version one" is already over 500 horespower wothout any help. Remeber that the LS1 was only 305 horse in the Camaro and 345 in the Vette, and by the end of Gen III the LS6 was 385, by the end of Gen IV the LS9 (another recylced RPO code) is 638 horsepower, and if you dont want to consider supercharged versions the then the LS7 (Another ecycled RPO code) at 505 hp, which is about what the new LT1 makes, and the new LT1 is about 45 cubes smaller. I am fully expecting to see 850 HP available from the showroom floor by the time the Gen V engines are replaced. Looking forward to more of these!

[68GMCCustom]

...except we're running towards a regulations cliff.....just like late 60's early70's.

And just an FYI... the LS6 made 405hp in final years.

[19seventeeCustom]

long live the LT1!!!

for real though. I'm kinda concerned about the tuning issue
with gen5....also with 11.5:1 compression, no more just throwing
a charger on it and makin 600 hp....
Posted via Mobile Device

[BR3W CITY]

Originally Posted by 19seventeeCustom

long live the LT1!!!

for real though. I'm kinda concerned about the tuning issue
with gen5....also with 11.5:1 compression, no more just throwing
a charger on it and makin 600 hp....
Posted via Mobile Device

not necissarily true. DI has the natural benefit of lowering combustion temps since the fuel can has a cooling effect, and reducing the risk of detonation at higher compression. MOST of the DI motors coming out these days run a power adder on top of 11+ compression. Not to mention that with the emissions issues, and economy issues, car companies are in the habit of selling cars "handicapped".

The big issue to me is the cost when you finally outrun the flow rate of the DI injectors, aftermarket pieces are VERY expensive, and there are bound to be quality issue with cheap replacements....a dangerous problem with it being positioned right in the combustion chamber.