I certainly don't disagree with you.

Oh...and Chevy definately low-balled the HP rating of the LS1 in the 98+ Fbody cars too. 305 HP? Ya righ!

 

To be honest, I don't think the engine is as remarkable as all the speculation...

You know why? Well, if the 5.0L was a '460 hp' engine, then Ford Oz wouldn't need a blower to make it perform better than the current 5.4L.

If that's silly logic, then please disregard this post!

 

I'm not sure they did low-ball the figures.

The dyno numbers seemed to match up to the 305 hp rating.

 

Check my sig. It dynoed 310 to the wheels stock. When you account for drivetrain loss it's quite obvious GM was majorly sandbagging on the "305 HP" rating (well, I believe the SS at the time was rated anywhere between 325 and 345 depending on options). It was still an underrated motor.

Remember that manufacturers don't measure HP at the wheels, they do so at the crank.

 

Maybe if you say it enough it will come true.

 

My LS1 certainly developed around 305hp (225kW at the fly), as did many others down here. So I can't comment on your ride.

 

For sure. My friend dyno'd his bone stock, barely broken in '02 and got 326 hp at the wheels.

 

'98 LS1, well, a good point. It was more a Corvette sort of thing rather than a gaming of the external competition. It DID make 305 at a certain RPM.

BTW, you going to make it to Atlanta this weekend?

 

The LS1 was underrated because it was built for the Corvette and in reality they all were 345-350hp from '98-2002 regardless of what car it was in. Its cheaper to just drop in the LS1 into the F-body and rate it lower because of a more restrictive exhaust than it is to actually detune it. There are other changes but none besides intake and exhaust had much of an effect on HP between the F-body and C5.

That is not the case post 2006 with GM deciding to SAE Certify all of their engines. The LS3 rated at 426 in the Camaro and rated at 430/436 in the C6 are accurate.

There is nothing to stop Ford from underrating the 5.0 as they do no SAE Certify their engines. But it just seems to me that if the engine is indeed this powerful then I would just think that for no other purposes than marketing because people do pay attention to HP numbers that they would have advertised it higher. Especially since the LS3 Camaro holding that advantage on the spec sheet.

 

Now that was a factory freak. I recall most folks getting anywhere between 295 with the autos to 310-315 with 6 speeds.

 

Maybe 360 in the '01-'02 models?

 

That was a while ago and the SAE standard actually should be reliable.

Bob reminded me of the LS1 Camaro rating, so I will admit there are times when it's been done. It doesn't make sense to me in this sales climate.

It isn't as if Ford has another hot seller using the same motor...

I can rationalize going with the lowest tested example if your motors are that inconsistant, but there really shouldn't be that large a swing in well designed and assembled engines... We are talking a 40HP - 50HP kind of inconsistancy between power results.

The facts will bear out what is what.

 

Yeah, he was the talk of the town. It was an M6, BTW.

 

Wooooo

I first heard of this engine It was said it was 478 on the engine Dyno. Just sayin.

 

There were various incarnations of the 'LS1'. GM had made running changes to the LS1s, which were effectively LS6 parts being carried over to LS1 builds.

For instance, there was the LS6 inlet manifold which gave a big increase in torque. Then there were some LS1's which were effectively LS6 blocks which had less parasitic losses that developed some 20 hp more.

Then there was the different engine (PCM) mapping that distiguished the original LS1 from later versions.

There is no definitive LS1 except the original and the one fitted to the C5 Corvette was the ultimate sample. The LS6 came in two different specs... the ultimate developing some 405hp and 400lb-ft of torque.