He asked for help. I gave him all the info I was aware of in a non-judgemental manner. I saved my editorial comment for the end. I suspect there are numerous people who are under the impression that if they install an LT4 engine, their 4th Gen will be miraculously tranformed into some sort of power monster. Just wanted to be sure that the OP didn't fall into that category. How many people are even aware that the LT4 engine didn't leave the factory with the LT4 HOT cam. I've seen people ask about swapping in the stock LT4 cam.... because they never bothered to even look at the specs.

There are some negatives associated with the LT4... it is not a purely UPWARDS evolution.

 

LT4 stuff was big back in the 90s when the aftermarket for the LT1 was limited. Since then the technology has come a LONG way. It was a LATERAL evolution, if anything.

 

Lol, I looked at my post this morning and I really came across as a jerk, my apologies! I agree though...there are many ways to make more power more efficiently and for less money than swapping to an LT4. However, if he comes into a complete LT4 for whatever reason, and his budget dictates an engine replacement vice a build than I would certainly encourage this path, if for nothing less than a good bottom end to build in the future. I am certainly no expert, just a disgruntled Navy guy. Good info put out by all!

Charlie

 

If you bothered to understand the differences rather than be blindly faithful you would know the internal LT4 intake is the same as the late LT1 intakes a trapezoid which is actually a SMALLER port than the early LT1 intakes which were more rectangular port. Just keep pushing the missinformation.

By the time the 4-bolt mains become a meaningful difference you should be looking at aftermarket caps anyway which means a line bore $$$$$$. IMO the things like 4-bolt mains and the pretending the Vette LT1 had more power than an f-body was to appeal to the person writing the check for a Vette. It isn't anything meaningful.

Here is a comparison pic late LT1 and LT4 the difference in the LT4 is more material above the runner to seal to the head which did have a larger port.
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k5...1/DCP_1456.jpg

 

guys it's not about HP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

it is all about cloning a car i have want since i have laid my eyes upon it,

at chevorlet dealership when i was only 18.

1997 30th anniversary Camaro

this will be #101

 

Understandably. I have not yet ventured into this arena therefor what I have to contribute is far less technically significant, so please do not take offense. I am not a brand purist by any means and this often lends me a slightly different perspective than that of someone with whom concerns themselves with nothing but(insert engine here). I do, however, consider my mechanical knowledge base to be relevant enough to debate the physics/efficiency advantages of any given engine system or component thereof. That said, the Corvette has always been a product of a synergistic engineering approach. Analyzed individually and aside from the C6, each Corvette generation is comprised of average to slightly above average global manufacturing techniques and components. The LT4 was just a product of that mindset...more is not necessarily better, but better can often equate to more.

This product is greater than the sum of its parts, even if greater in this instance means less crank deflection and torsional vibration due to the extra strength associated with the main caps, or a longer engine life cycle due to the blue-printing and balancing, or truer piston ring to cylinder relationship due to torque plate honing. Or less interpreted engine harmonics due to a de-tuned false knock detection system, even with better less frictional and cooler operating roller rockers. All said, there is much more to everything than what is commonly discussed. All too often we concern ourselves with numbers and how we arrive at those numbers becomes less and less significant.

I would wager that all of these variables were less products of who can make the most power, and more so associated with providing for a more three dimensional vehicle architecture...because lets face it...a Corvette of any like generation or year group IS a superior vehicle.

Just my .02 again...might not even be worth that!

 

You really think the 4-bolt mains was a longevity thing? Why did they not use it on the fleet vehicles then? I have heard ita few times from good sources and it makes sense that the Vette and f-body had a 200K target service life but let's face it that wont cut it for a Caprice destined to be a cop car or taxi which supposedly had a 300K target, and iron heads that expand with the block and don't scrub out the gasket.

The Vette absolutely is used as a debut/test platform for new technologies for mass production like the roller rockers which quickly found their way into everything.
That doesn't mean they don't throw some stuff out there just to inflate the egos of perspective buyers. Go back to the fact the Vette and f-body got the same engine but different power ratings.


To the original poster, far as your clone idea and wanting to be #101, you are kidding right. I know how you came up with that number and you are far from the first to think about that, so maybe add a zero to your target serial number.

I had a LOT of ideas about vehicles when I was 17-20yo, thankfully I lacked the funds to make the catastrophic mistakes I would have if I had the funds. Lack of money made me wait, and learn which, allowed me to do things right later.

 

4 bolt main caps have multiple obvious advantages, one of them is a distinct reduction of torsional flex within the crankshaft. Torsional flex...among other really bad things...contributes to the premature deterioration of any horizontal rotating mass (like a crankshaft) and/or the bearing surfaces that come into direct contact with it. Obviously this benefit is amplified and the argument becomes easier to make when you add revolutions per minute (which for your argument is manifested when you add horsepower). So yes, 4 bolt main caps contribute to a longer, more predictable life cycle in stock engines...there is no doubt. Furthermore, this configuration lends an obvious advantage to higher horsepower applications. I have not even delved into the acoustics associated with torsional flex at high RPMs...

HP ratings, you are right. I think it is a fair estimate that 15-20K is worth an extra 20hp though...