My friend thinks LT1s are one of the crappiest motors ever. He is one of those guys who think LS1s were crafted by the hand of god and nothing can touch them. Anyways let me get to the point.

He said to me, that any 350 SBC with 10.4:1 compression will make more power then the average Lt1. Now I don't think thats true. I mean, a stock 350 from the 70s had 9:1 compression and had a net rated 170 horsepower. Basically hes saying if you did nothing but bump the compression up to 10.4:1, you would gain 105 horsepower(I don't see how thats possible). I don't think his statement istrue.

Also it got me to thinking, a stock L98 made 245 hp, and had 9.3:1 compression, that weak TPI system, iron heads, and a traditional HEI distributor. A lt1 makes 275 horsepower, but doesn't the LT1 have more accurate igntion(although not as reliable or simple), a better intake system, aluminum heads(which I heard are supposed to be better then the l98 heads), 10.4:1 compression, yet it only makes 30 horsepower more. With all these improvements, shouldn't it be alot more powerful? I know L98s had speed density and LT1s(exception of 93) had MAFs, which is better? Anybody want to help clear up this argument me and my friend have and help provide some insight and answers to my questions?

 

You mean late 1970's? because i know that 350s made more like 300hp until around like probly 73-74... but if it was a 1970 i am pretty sure they made more then a stock lt1....

 

The ratings were different, prior to the mid 70s they used gross ratings, no accesories, and usually threw headers on it, after that they used net ratings, which was with all accesories, threw the stock manifolds with a cat and muffler. A stock lt1 would make just as much hp as those motors. I think the conversion for a f-body lt1 gross rated would be 330.

 

Heres my 2 cents.

The LT1 is a fabulous motor that is capable of making good horsepower. However, compared to an LS1, modifications are much cheaper on and LT1. LT1s have been proven to be very reliable. A few members on the board have had theirs last past 300k! Check peoples signature's and you will see that many people have LT1s cranking out more than 400rwhp. Not bad.

The LS1 is another really good motor. The LS1s in the Camaros and Corvettes are absolutely wicked. Their is not much comparison stock LT1:LS1. Bolt-ons and a cam and LS1s are in the 11's. (Im not trying to stir the LT1 vs LS1 debate)

In the 60's muscle cars were getting 300-400 hp out of these SBC's. This was with no emissions tuning and all that other crap, yes. The statement and SBC with 10.4:1 compression will make more power than an LT1 isnt really true or fasle. This all depends on what is put in to it. A bolton LT1 can be in the high 12's. So can a Gen I SBC.

In the end it all comes down to this: Speed costs money, how fast do you want to go?

 

Well, LT1's were the stepping stone to the LS1 from Gen I SBC's. They had many improvments over a Gen I SBC. A stock LT1 is not THAT far off from a stock LS1. LT1s are also VERY durable, as was stated before. Also, as was stated before, any engine, with enough money, could be VERY powerful. And trying to compare stock Gen I SBC's with stock Gen II SBC's is tough because of the difference in ratings, emissions, and such. Im not saying LS1's arent awesome, cuz they are, but they arent Gods motor either.









(The best part about Gen I and II SBC's is that they sound WAY better than LS1's!!! Gotta love that iron block and firing order )

 

I love my LS1, but your friend is on drugs if he believes that it's all in the compression. LT1s can be just as potent as any other motor out there.

 

Well lets say you take one of those 350 SBCs that was smogged out, that came in the 1977 camaro. It was rated at 165 net hp. Lt1s are rated at 275 net hp. It had 8.5:1 compression. If you did nothing but mill the heads/thinner head gaskets/flycut pistons etc. etc. to get 10.4:1 compression, would you have gained 110 horespower?

Also with all the "improvments" made on the LT1, why wasn't it more powerful then an L98?

I guess compared to the real old 350s(1970s), it makes sense that the LT1 is just as powerful, or maybe alittle weaker, but it makes all that power while meeting emissions and getting more then 10 mpg, and it also turns AC compressors and power steering pumps, etc. I mean, take away the cats/restictive exhaust manifolds/mufflers, the accesories, and give it a performance tune instead of an economy tune, and I would think it would make more power then any factory 350 before it.

And by the way, I am not regretting my purchase in an LT1, I love its sound, its torquey feeling, and its not slow by any means, whenever a friend gets in, and I feel like having a good laugh, I just mash the go pedal, and the look on their face is priceless.

And my friend doesn't think its all in the compressions, he was just saying that LT1s were such an incredibly poor design(the heads and intake, I think he knows the actual block/internals are the same, with exception of reverse cooling), that any 350 small block with the same compression would make more power then a stock LT1, regardless, because LT1s were so crappy(in his opinion, I beg to differ).

 

So, what does your friend drive?

The LT1 in the Corvette was rated in 1992 at 300 hp, not 275. Compare that to the 245 hp 10:1 compression L98 from the 1991 Corvette..

55 hp difference is not too shabby. The L98 in the Corvette did have D-port aluminum heads. So the real differences are intake, reverse flow cooling, a different cam profile and the new distributor design and a very slightly increased compression.

I'd say the LT1 intake and the new cam profile were responsible for the majority of that 55 hp increase.

Then there is the LT4, a slightly tweaked LT1 that made 330 HP. That's 85 hp more than the L98.

Now, compare the 345 hp LS1 to the 300 hp LT1.

That's only a 45 hp increase. Now go tell your friend the LS1 is a piece of crap because it's only 45 hp better than the LT1, but the LT1 is 55 hp better than the L98.

 

The real power difference is in LS1 heads and manifold. the heads are angled differnent and spaced different also if you look at the manifold it looks like elongated l98 tpi runners and thats it. that is a major improvement over the lt1 manifold and in my opinion a NECCESSITY for an aftermarket lt1 manifold that isnt g*y. this is why major racing lt1 guys go with a carb setup and do well with it. now the ls1 has some other designs that i like and some other ones that i dont. like for instance the lifters are not in the valley anymore that are on the head and are not easy to get out. as far as the block and sub internals go there isnt a problem on either side, only that when you start modding you ls1 alot your block doesnt like it and leads to issues. all my ls1 freinds want the iron lsx block for strength.

 

if you do an internet search you will find that a 1996 LT1 has 10.4:1 compression and 285 STOCk hp

 

Tracez thanks for clearing that stuff up, :-) BTW he drives a 2000 WS6, it has full bolt ons and a cam, he put down 364 rwhp with a 12.3:1 a/f ratio. I am not really bothered by how much more power his makes, because I have a 6 speed, and hes ultra jealous of it(hes actually looking to convert it), and he and I both know his trans and rear are a ticking time bomb with all that power going throught it. Another thing(i need to vent alittle) he thinks everything ls1s got was better, he thinks the tremec 6 speed was stronger, but everyone else has told me the borg warner t56s were stronger, he thinks because the motor is better so is everything else. I realize the 96s had 285 hp stock, and I knew that all LT1s had 10.4:1 compression.

Did all LT1s make the same power, I mean, did the corvette lt1 really make 20-30 hp more? The corvette had a better exhaust and such, but aren't the cams and everything else the same? Maybe the only other thing is the motor is tuned differently for less power? Or should I be asking, was the f-body rating of 275 hp low, and it actually made more closer to corvette. I know the f-body LS1s were the same as the corvette LS1s, but I don't know about the lt1s.

Anyways I appreciate all you guys helping answer all my questions and everything. And long live the LT1

 

I though that all 93-02 M6's were T56s??

 

94-02 were t56s, but made by different companies, LT1s, borg warner, LS1s, tremec

 

The differences in hp between the LT1 in the Vette and F-body were due to the fact the Vette had dual exhaust and the intake was a strait shot in.

 

The HP ratings ranged from 275 to 330 from 92-97 with the Vette and Firwhawk being the top-rated at 330 I believe (The 330 might be off, correct me if I'm incorrect).

I know the 96-97 standard LT1s were rated at 285 with the SS & WS6 rated at 305. I believe the 93-95 LT1s were rated at 265 or 275.

** These number are from memory, the only one I'm completely sure of is the WS6 rating for 97... because I own one.