LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

lt1 with 345 hp in 1997?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 04:33 PM
  #1  
mrmint69's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,731
From: Post Falls, Idaho
lt1 with 345 hp in 1997?

There is an auction on Ebay and they claim to have a 1997 lt1 with a factory 345 HP motor. I didn't know they made anything with that kind of power except for the lt4 in the SS. Can someone tell me if im wrong.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevr...spagenameZWDVW
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 04:44 PM
  #2  
joeSS97's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,781
From: Detroit area
You are right.That car still has the stock air cleaner.It should say 285HP.

Last edited by joeSS97; Dec 29, 2007 at 04:57 PM.
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 04:48 PM
  #3  
Projectz28's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,713
From: Cinnaminson, NJ
Looks stock, its not an LT4... and no 345 hp "option" was ever available. Thats is a stock 285hp rated LT1 that every F-body came with.

Nice car but not 345 hp.
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 05:07 PM
  #4  
n2ceptor's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,456
Originally Posted by Projectz28
Looks stock, its not an LT4... and no 345 hp "option" was ever available. Thats is a stock 285hp rated LT1 that every F-body came with.

Nice car but not 345 hp.
93~early 95 was rated at 275hp.... When dual cat converters came out, it went to 285hp...
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 07:06 PM
  #5  
Projectz28's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,713
From: Cinnaminson, NJ
Originally Posted by n2ceptor
93~early 95 was rated at 275hp.... When dual cat converters came out, it went to 285hp...
Yeah I guess I should have mentioned that. I was refering to the 96-97 since it was a 97 in the listing.
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 07:09 PM
  #6  
ssbowtie1's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 631
From: LA/SD, CA
Weren't the ram air firebirds and ss's rated at 305hp?
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 07:59 PM
  #7  
ForceFedZ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 112
that SOB is clean!
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 08:03 PM
  #8  
ForceFedZ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 112
I once read in an issue of GMHTP that the 97 SS was making around 345 but was only rated at 300 so it wouldnt knock the sales of the corvette since the vette is always supposed to be a step ahead
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 08:05 PM
  #9  
Projectz28's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,713
From: Cinnaminson, NJ
Originally Posted by ssbowtie1
Weren't the ram air firebirds and ss's rated at 305hp?
yes but they were not standard stock ratings. They were options but still not rated at 345...

IMO they were lucky to see the 285 in stock trim no matter what option.
Old Dec 29, 2007 | 08:08 PM
  #10  
Projectz28's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,713
From: Cinnaminson, NJ
Originally Posted by ForceFedZ
I once read in an issue of GMHTP that the 97 SS was making around 345 but was only rated at 300 so it wouldnt knock the sales of the corvette since the vette is always supposed to be a step ahead
engine wise the only difference between the SS and a Z28 was the ram air. A 20 HP gain was probably still over rated. Nothing else was different. There are lots of people out there who bought a hood and new air box and made their own ram air Z28's/Birds.
Old Dec 30, 2007 | 11:14 PM
  #11  
robb4964's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,130
From: Kentucky
Originally Posted by Projectz28
engine wise the only difference between the SS and a Z28 was the ram air. A 20 HP gain was probably still over rated. Nothing else was different. There are lots of people out there who bought a hood and new air box and made their own ram air Z28's/Birds.
I dont think so. The K&N cold air intake adds that much. The ram air is more effecient then the K&N .


Plus, The breather on the stock LT1s is a frickin joke. Between the headers and the tiny entry area for air the LT1 was produced so low below its means and potential.

My buddy mikes 97 WS6 pulled off a 13.6@102 M6 bone stock.
I would think 20 HP is reasonable. IMO.
Old Dec 30, 2007 | 11:44 PM
  #12  
n2ceptor's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,456
I see the person corrected the mistake..... Atleast the seller seems honest??????

On Dec-29-07 at 21:54:11 PST, seller added the following information:

THE CAR WAS LISTED AS 345 HP BY MISTAKE,THESE MOTORS MADE 285 HP STOCK !!

Old Dec 31, 2007 | 12:00 AM
  #13  
BTC's Avatar
BTC
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,027
From: Lansing, MI via Bowling Green, KY: Dalton, GA: Nashville, TN & Atlanta, GA
Is it really true that a cold air intake is good for 20 HP? I hope so because I'm putting a SLP intake on my car, but I have trouble believing it would make that big of a difference on a stock motor.
Old Dec 31, 2007 | 12:02 AM
  #14  
BTC's Avatar
BTC
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,027
From: Lansing, MI via Bowling Green, KY: Dalton, GA: Nashville, TN & Atlanta, GA
That's a very nice looking car.
Old Dec 31, 2007 | 03:33 AM
  #15  
JBird33's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 237
From: Redding, CA
Originally Posted by robb4964
I dont think so. The K&N cold air intake adds that much. The ram air is more effecient then the K&N .


Plus, The breather on the stock LT1s is a frickin joke. Between the headers and the tiny entry area for air the LT1 was produced so low below its means and potential.

My buddy mikes 97 WS6 pulled off a 13.6@102 M6 bone stock.
I would think 20 HP is reasonable. IMO.
Sorry, but you're wrong. There is no way in hell the K&N adds 20 horsepower, and the ram air is marginally better, at best, than the K&N. Anyone who tells you different doesn't really know what they're talking about. One would be happy to get 20 horses out of long tube headers...I mean, I would love it if the K&N gave that much, I have the K&N kit, but it just isn't realistic. More like 5-7 horsepower, I would say.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:07 PM.