Who makes the most NA horsepower with an LT1?
03-26-2003, 04:46 PM
#61
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In a house by the bay
Posts: 2,985
Joe,
Thanks for sharing your perspective on the subject. I don't see any of this as "attacking", just good car talk.
You're right though, it all comes down to how much you're willing to tolerate on the street. My definition is as follows and obviously it differs from yours a bit but hey, it's all good:
1) Car must run on pump gas (I plan to make short trips and don't want to look for a VP or other high octane gas station)
2) Should have enough idle vacuum for accessories. Should idle at 900 rpm or less. I don't want the engine to sound like a race engine... I have race cars for that.
3) No overheating in traffic and not so cool that lubrication suffers.
4) Make the power at or under 7k (easier on everything... no need for big gearing, big stall speeds, big valvespring loads and all that jazz)
#4 covers alot of the problems I've tried to avoid with this build, hence the desire to make all the power below 6500 rpm and the use of such a mild camshaft. I already have three race cars, I wasn't necessarily looking for another, so this was a good compromise for me. This engine makes it's power in the same rpm band as a new Z06... just with some ~230 more hp.
-Mindgame
Thanks for sharing your perspective on the subject. I don't see any of this as "attacking", just good car talk.
You're right though, it all comes down to how much you're willing to tolerate on the street. My definition is as follows and obviously it differs from yours a bit but hey, it's all good:
1) Car must run on pump gas (I plan to make short trips and don't want to look for a VP or other high octane gas station)
2) Should have enough idle vacuum for accessories. Should idle at 900 rpm or less. I don't want the engine to sound like a race engine... I have race cars for that.
3) No overheating in traffic and not so cool that lubrication suffers.
4) Make the power at or under 7k (easier on everything... no need for big gearing, big stall speeds, big valvespring loads and all that jazz)
#4 covers alot of the problems I've tried to avoid with this build, hence the desire to make all the power below 6500 rpm and the use of such a mild camshaft. I already have three race cars, I wasn't necessarily looking for another, so this was a good compromise for me. This engine makes it's power in the same rpm band as a new Z06... just with some ~230 more hp.
-Mindgame
03-26-2003, 06:34 PM
#62
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 799
Originally posted by Joe O
I'm a lil confused here..I get a e-mail inviting to share in the topic...people state their opinions .I stated mine..
<snip>
Indeed this is about high end hp Lt1's ,and I'm glad to see people are still pushing the envelope.. I'm doing the same thing ,I just dont feel theirs any return for going to mcdonalds other than for a hot fudge sundae...not just to say I drove my car there..
I'm a lil confused here..I get a e-mail inviting to share in the topic...people state their opinions .I stated mine.. <snip>
Indeed this is about high end hp Lt1's ,and I'm glad to see people are still pushing the envelope.. I'm doing the same thing ,I just dont feel theirs any return for going to mcdonalds other than for a hot fudge sundae...not just to say I drove my car there..
When I listed running on pump gas, driving in stop-and-go traffic, and noise from stripped interiors, I wasn't talking about your car specifically. I don't know enough about your car to talk about it. I thought it was clear that I was speaking about those who often call their race cars street cars because they drive them on the street occasionally. I'm sorry that you assumed that I was picking on you individually.
The comment "Where did the 700 RWHP figure come from?" was in response to Trey's post about 700 RWHP. No one was talking about 700 RWHP, and then all of a sudden, he's talking about 700 RWHP. Where did the 700 RWHP figure come from??
Again, I wasn't talking about you, although reading the post, I can see where you drew that conclusion because I didn't mention Trey by name, and I used your car and the online calculator as an example to demonstrate the horsepower range we're talking about here.
03-26-2003, 06:58 PM
#63
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 799
Originally posted by SkarodoM
The other thing... if it doesn't have production style (not converted) LT1/LT4 heads on it, then IMO it isnt an LT1.. it's just another SBC. Not that there's anything wrong with that
The other thing... if it doesn't have production style (not converted) LT1/LT4 heads on it, then IMO it isnt an LT1.. it's just another SBC. Not that there's anything wrong with that
Now I can see why some people might draw that conclusion based on the layout and common firing order of the two blocks as well as the interchangability of many parts, but does an SBC have reverse coolant flow? Does an SBC use an Opti-spark? Does an SBC power the water pump with a cam driven drive shaft? No, LT1s do. So heads don't really change the identity of the block, do they.
Nice #'s jim, I'm sure it'll be impressive once it's worked out.
03-26-2003, 09:19 PM
#64
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11
no biggie on the confusion ..happens easily on the internet...
mindgame, I can understand what your doing and why, if your gunning for the best of everything and drivability.. you can however have vacuum to run accessories and power brakes with a much larger cam however. I ran power brakes up till this past jan when i switched over for weight savings. And the sad thing is I had great brakes for the cam I run..with tuning ability and some timing at idle.It can do wonders I am curious why you mentioned a vacuum pump on a street engine...would not simple gas porting achieve what you after rather than add another accessory? Your making me think the rings your going to use isnt for street and I think you know what i mean..
Jim,...people do things differently for different reasons...I'm not downing you for the goals your trying to achieve and best of luck.My feeling if your going to invest the time and effort in such a task..what in the world you need that much power on the street for..I mean I use to drive mine with my old 381 just about anywhere I wanted to go on pump gas and ran 10.9's n/a at the 3574 weight you must have saw on a old board or forum ,back then it had power leathers seats basically not gutted at all. So I know what your after..but at the same time I had no need for any of that power.It was fun to drive it to the track knock down a time however and drive home.
As far as classifying a engine by bolting on heads ,intakes etc. there was a very interesting thread on ls1 tech about the same thing..except it was about the block itself being switched which turned into a lengthy discussion about "like" in design etc etc. I'm sure if you venture over and read through it ,if you havnt already..I think it comes down to the block being used that designates what a engine is.... thanks for the props on the 9's however..
mindgame, I can understand what your doing and why, if your gunning for the best of everything and drivability.. you can however have vacuum to run accessories and power brakes with a much larger cam however. I ran power brakes up till this past jan when i switched over for weight savings. And the sad thing is I had great brakes for the cam I run..with tuning ability and some timing at idle.It can do wonders
I am curious why you mentioned a vacuum pump on a street engine...would not simple gas porting achieve what you after rather than add another accessory? Your making me think the rings your going to use isnt for street and I think you know what i mean..Jim,...people do things differently for different reasons...I'm not downing you for the goals your trying to achieve and best of luck.My feeling if your going to invest the time and effort in such a task..what in the world you need that much power on the street for..I mean I use to drive mine with my old 381 just about anywhere I wanted to go on pump gas and ran 10.9's n/a at the 3574 weight you must have saw on a old board or forum ,back then it had power leathers seats basically not gutted at all. So I know what your after..but at the same time I had no need for any of that power.It was fun to drive it to the track knock down a time however and drive home.
As far as classifying a engine by bolting on heads ,intakes etc. there was a very interesting thread on ls1 tech about the same thing..except it was about the block itself being switched which turned into a lengthy discussion about "like" in design etc etc. I'm sure if you venture over and read through it ,if you havnt already..I think it comes down to the block being used that designates what a engine is.... thanks for the props on the 9's however..
Last edited by Joe O; 03-26-2003 at 09:33 PM.
03-26-2003, 09:32 PM
#65
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 786
Well thats where my opinion differs really. Since we're talking about the most power, I'm not worried about the block or coolant path. Whether it's an LT1 or a gen1, it's still got 8 holes and they're all the same size (assuming we're all talking production stuff anyway). The power is in the topend, so that's what I look at.
When someone on the street tells me it's an LT1, most infer IMO, that they arent running a $10,000 set of sb2's or any other converted sbc race head. As far as the ls6 example.. well duh
, that's a production GM head, of course that's still an LSx, just like an AFR lt4 is still an LT4 head, though those 215rr's may be borderline . All I'm saying is that I don't think you can take a drastically revised cylinder head (valve angle, diff intakes required, etc.) and say it's an LT1 just because that's what the block originally was. Dunno, it's obviously subjective and nowhere near a simple black and white yes or no answer. The whole, "it didn't say you couldn't" thing .
That's how I see it (this week, lol) anyway
-Phil
Edit: Typo
When someone on the street tells me it's an LT1, most infer IMO, that they arent running a $10,000 set of sb2's or any other converted sbc race head. As far as the ls6 example.. well duh
, that's a production GM head, of course that's still an LSx, just like an AFR lt4 is still an LT4 head, though those 215rr's may be borderline . All I'm saying is that I don't think you can take a drastically revised cylinder head (valve angle, diff intakes required, etc.) and say it's an LT1 just because that's what the block originally was. Dunno, it's obviously subjective and nowhere near a simple black and white yes or no answer. The whole, "it didn't say you couldn't" thing .That's how I see it (this week, lol) anyway
-Phil
Edit: Typo
Last edited by Ai; 03-26-2003 at 09:58 PM.
03-26-2003, 11:25 PM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11
Phil I myself dont consider altered flow paths or making heads work not intended for a lt1 either ,but if someone takes the time to do it I cant fault them either in search for more.. I'm not even gonna begin to get into a discussion on it....Thats why I said block determines rather than get into personal opinions...I run reverse cooled heads so I know exactly what your saying... I tried to stay as true to lt1 design as possible right down to the use of the opti spark.I do run a intake not lt1 design but gm makes a LT1 carb intake for the engine so I dont see a prob with that...there again its basically up to the one owning the car thats the decision maker,however.If I were going to use sb2 heads or any other non applicable head I surely wouldnt keep the lt1 block..I'd build a totally different engine all together..but alot of people have money to burn i guess and willing to try somethin nobody else has..For me I'll just do the best i can with my lowly 23 degree head
03-27-2003, 12:54 AM
#67
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 15
Originally posted by Joe O
I mean I use to drive mine with my old 381 just about anywhere I wanted to go on pump gas and ran 10.9's n/a at the 3574 weight you must have saw on a old board or forum
I mean I use to drive mine with my old 381 just about anywhere I wanted to go on pump gas and ran 10.9's n/a at the 3574 weight you must have saw on a old board or forum
Thats my boy . I wonder what those heads are going to do on my car. 
Nice to see people gettting all the facts straight here though.Still 9's N/A is very impressive.
Congrats
03-27-2003, 12:56 AM
#68
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 799
Originally posted by SkarodoM
an AFR lt4 is still an LT4 head, though those 215rr's may be borderline
an AFR lt4 is still an LT4 head, though those 215rr's may be borderline
http://www.airflowresearch.com/pages/215sbc_rr_lt1.htm
Dunno, it's obviously subjective and nowhere near a simple black and white yes or no answer. The whole, "it didn't say you couldn't" thing
Believe me, if I'd known that I was going to eliminate the Opti-spark, the water pump driveshaft, and have a custom intake manifold and headers made, I definitely wouldn't have started with an LT1 block.
03-27-2003, 01:28 AM
#69
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: looking for a flow bench so Brook and I can race
Posts: 3,505
Originally posted by jimlab
AFR now offers the 215cc RR in an "LT4" configuration, so I'm safe. They even have part numbers and everything!
http://www.airflowresearch.com/pages/215sbc_rr_lt1.htm
The only reason I make a distinction is because there are limitations that go along with using an LT1 block that an SBC wouldn't necessarily impose.
Believe me, if I'd known that I was going to eliminate the Opti-spark, the water pump driveshaft, and have a custom intake manifold and headers made, I definitely wouldn't have started with an LT1 block.
AFR now offers the 215cc RR in an "LT4" configuration, so I'm safe. They even have part numbers and everything!
http://www.airflowresearch.com/pages/215sbc_rr_lt1.htm
The only reason I make a distinction is because there are limitations that go along with using an LT1 block that an SBC wouldn't necessarily impose.
Believe me, if I'd known that I was going to eliminate the Opti-spark, the water pump driveshaft, and have a custom intake manifold and headers made, I definitely wouldn't have started with an LT1 block.
whats wrong with the waterpump?
03-27-2003, 01:39 AM
#71
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: looking for a flow bench so Brook and I can race
Posts: 3,505
Originally posted by jimlab
Nothing, but it does sort of get in the way of running a double roller timing set.
Nothing, but it does sort of get in the way of running a double roller timing set.
but then i thought u impied there was some kind of power problem with it or something
03-27-2003, 07:00 PM
#72
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In a house by the bay
Posts: 2,985
Joe,
I'm following you loud and clear. I'm using a low tension oil ring and 1.2 mm rings. Nothing too out of the ordinary. The vacuum pump is an afterthought otherwise I might have opted for lateral ports right from the get go. Of course the goal here is long term oil control and better ring seal. We obviously have good ring seal now or this engine would be a stone but we'd most likely pick up a few ponies with a vacuum pump to help things out a bit. If it does nothing then I'll use it somewhere else, so I'm not overly concerned on this issue.
There's a fine line here in the choice of street and race but I would ask these questions..... If deciding against the use of pump gas and more compression, why run marginal compression? Why not just run 14-15:1 (depending on your level of intake restriction) like the rest of us race guys do?
Why run a marginal cam instead of one with 270* or more?
Keep in mind that these are rhetorical questions... I can see your reasoning in this too but it just demonstrates my point.
There are always questions from both sides of the fence. Personally, I would not build a race engine that hovers on the edge of streetability and I won't build a street engine on the same scale. Everyone is out for something different... obviously.
-Mindgame
I'm following you loud and clear. I'm using a low tension oil ring and 1.2 mm rings. Nothing too out of the ordinary. The vacuum pump is an afterthought otherwise I might have opted for lateral ports right from the get go. Of course the goal here is long term oil control and better ring seal. We obviously have good ring seal now or this engine would be a stone but we'd most likely pick up a few ponies with a vacuum pump to help things out a bit. If it does nothing then I'll use it somewhere else, so I'm not overly concerned on this issue.
There's a fine line here in the choice of street and race but I would ask these questions..... If deciding against the use of pump gas and more compression, why run marginal compression? Why not just run 14-15:1 (depending on your level of intake restriction) like the rest of us race guys do?
Why run a marginal cam instead of one with 270* or more?
Keep in mind that these are rhetorical questions... I can see your reasoning in this too but it just demonstrates my point.
There are always questions from both sides of the fence. Personally, I would not build a race engine that hovers on the edge of streetability and I won't build a street engine on the same scale. Everyone is out for something different... obviously.
-Mindgame
03-27-2003, 07:58 PM
#73
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11
mindgame, thanks reply on the vacuum pump .And i can understand why in every since.. As far as why i kept modest comp. When I began building I kept it under 13:1 since I had a fogger in mind...I didnt know on the onset that the engine would perform so well N/A otherwise I would have opted for more comp .which I may do come refreshen time..The engine has alot more in it and it shows...As far as cam, when Jim e-mailed I was very general about cam specs when he inquired .I will say it is bigger than posted here.. You can understand I'm sure why I do not relish anymore than that.. ..Hope this enlightens the other side of the fence a little goal in the beginning was p/a 8's now its changed into lil of both might as well have fun with it..not to often you can succeed in both N/A and P/A at the same time..next time out however, I'll have a clear road in what I want to do and not deviate in plans .But like i said right nowI can run either or at any f-body event and hold my own..
goal in the beginning was p/a 8's now its changed into lil of both might as well have fun with it..not to often you can succeed in both N/A and P/A at the same time..next time out however, I'll have a clear road in what I want to do and not deviate in plans .But like i said right nowI can run either or at any f-body event and hold my own..
Last edited by Joe O; 03-27-2003 at 08:04 PM.
03-27-2003, 08:10 PM
#74
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In a house by the bay
Posts: 2,985
Ah, I see where you're coming from there Joe. A bit of a change in mind is not too out of the norm, especially when considering nitrous.
Joe, no qualms about keeping the specs to yourself. I know we've all been urged to keep a few things to ourselves when dealing with engine builders and trying to keep some kind of edge on the competition. Best of luck to ya.
-Mindgame
Joe, no qualms about keeping the specs to yourself. I know we've all been urged to keep a few things to ourselves when dealing with engine builders and trying to keep some kind of edge on the competition. Best of luck to ya.
-Mindgame
