Arnie:

"The intake ports were raised 0.100", too." This is a quote from the LT-4 section in that article. If you would have read the LT-4 section you would have seen that. Or try this link http://www.grandsportregistry.com/lt1vslt4.htm

ZMAN

 

cool ZMAN, I just stopped replying to arnie, since he thinks he is always right

machine work can be done to the LT4 intake to use it on LT1 heads, but why?, you gain nothing over the LT1 intake, other then the red powdercoat, it is the same reason you can't use a LT1 intake with LT4 heads as cast

 

I can read, 'Z'. Like you 'Z', I got past the 3rd grade. If you observe closely, the wording is used to describe the HEADS. NOTHING stated regarding the manifold itself. YOU are the one that chose to believe wording was IMPLYING the intake as well. Have you searched out the posts I've requested? It may not be intended, but you are really wasting my time, by making me guilty of redundancy.
I am very familiar with that link. Are you? Before you encourage ME to read it, know and become familiar with link yourself.

Just a little backround on link above. 'Hutch' didn't have the present info on his site from the beginning. He made some 'alterations' to the int. manifold text in Nov. of '04. Although not what I would liked to see, it IS an improvement. Understand that info on sites of this nature, is 'canned' GM released data. Accurate? It is fine to accept such info. But be prepared to 'change course' when someone with actual hands on experience, tells you different.

BTW, there are other links available with similar subject matter. You'd be hard pressed to post a site I'm not familiar with.

ALWAYS?.... Thanks for the complement, but I know better. A little too wise for that.
Again, Dave... what is your source of the info you've presented in previous posts? By doing a search here (and in 'advanced'), you stand to gain lots on the subject. It be a shame to see the info previously posted (in archives) go to waste.

P.S. To moderator; by any means moderate, but I'm under control here.
I've no problem giving the 'detractors' some slack in what they post, even 'Dave89'.

 

I've read over and over that the LT4 intake ports were raised .100" to .200". However, when I put them side-by-side, I may be crazy but they look identical to me. Actually, the LT4 ports look smaller (narrower at the top). I think it would bolt in place without issues, but it definitely wouldn't gain any power.

Mike

 

Mike, your observations put you ahead of most clueless guys here. BTW, no it won't bolt up without modification.

Ah, the amount of info that could be accessed just by using the search tool.
Moderators, is it possible to get the 'search' icon to flash in different colors?

Even though I'm a lifelong student of human psychology, still amazed at the number of minds that will read something, absorb it, but then REFUSE to accept conflicting info based on actual hands on experience. Obviously, my (accurately accounted) experience makes me an idiot (or maybe even a liar) to others. It begs the question; whom is the real idiot? Yes, da.. da mind... can be a terrible ting.

If it is any consolation, guys here are far more receptive and open minded to info/issues that conflict with established reasoning (this includes the LS1 CNP topic, BTW. The one lone site I attempted, that actually embraced it. Good group!) Sure, I get beat up now and then, but you guys don't leave me unconscious. I've attempted to straighten out the LT4 head/intake issue on a different model specific forum, not only without success, I went down for the count. Talk about a forum with more than it's share of primadonnas.

 

Mike you probably won't be able to physically see the difference of .100". My crank was just turned .010/.010 under. The machine shop gave me regular bearings sized bearings. If I wouldn't have checked for clearances, I wouldn't have gotten oil pressure when I started the motor. So I took the bearings back and got the correct 10 under bearings. If I would have visually looked, I wouldn't have seen the difference untill it was too late. You cant compare 2 items with similar specs, and be able to tell if they will work or not.

ZMAN

 

To get a little philosophical and possibly assist those closed minded individuals that REFUSE to accept info based on experience, I present the following.

It is very possible, AFAIC, that the text in most related links was originally submitted by the GM engineering corp. At that point, the info was accurate. However, before any production could be approved, the accountants would have 'revised' the production plans, and altered the final product. The problem being; the data/printed info GM released to the public was not edited.

 

Those darn decimal points, aye? We are talking almost an 1/8", Z.

 

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

It would be so easy if everyone had the opportunity to look at, and measure an LT4 intake manifold and an LT1 intake manifold side by side. The differences become very apparent. In fact it would be interesting if everyone looked at the early LT1 intake manifold next to a late LT1 intake, and saw what happenened to the cross-section. And the ports on the LT4 intake manifold replicate the poorer "late" LT1 ports. Those of us who have done it can talk 'til we're blue in the face.

But I've given up even debating the issues, because its not worth the investment of time to argue with people.

 

I suck when it comes to eyeballing stuff. So yeah it should be visible to the non ZMAN eye , in which case Mike might have been looking at 2 of the types of intakes. I know people who have powder coated LT-1 intakes red.

ZMAN

 

My LT4 was bought brand new from GM. The LT1 intake was stock on my '95.