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

Those wanting a big cube LTX get in here ASAP!!!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 11, 2009 | 12:48 PM
  #1  
jpack24's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 329
From: Sugar Grove, ILLINOIS
Those wanting a big cube LTX get in here ASAP!!!

Those folowing this thread, https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=678840 ,I am putting this up to make sure it doesn't get missed in the middle of a thread.

If you want it, Dart needs to hear from you. On their forum, they now have a topic and poll. http://www.dartheads.com/dartboard/showthread.php?t=930 If you have a LTX and even if you don't plan building one now, this is huge news for us. My block I had is already dropped off to be shipped to Dart for measurements as well as the front cover. Please pass this information on to anyone that you know has an LT engine. The more response to this, the faster it will be made. We are really close to this and we can all thank my engine builder Jerry Clayton for getting this to this point. It is all up to you guys now. This is not a bench racing idea anymore, it is now a reality. Thanks.
Old Apr 11, 2009 | 01:50 PM
  #2  
bombebomb's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,855
From: Ohio
If they make this, I will

Not saying its not great news, but I personally would not do it.

Going to vote now, they have an option for almost anyone, so I suggest everyone votes.
Old Apr 11, 2009 | 08:02 PM
  #3  
Boostwhat's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 111
From: SC
Although some may see it as a waste of time I personally am pretty f'in excited about this. Imagine a 440" LTX....
Old Apr 11, 2009 | 08:06 PM
  #4  
whyrun's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 198
From: Abingdon,VA
I'm all for it going there to post my vote right now!! And of course you always got the Debbie downers
Old Apr 12, 2009 | 12:32 AM
  #5  
mad95z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 177
From: Coon Rapids
I would be very interested. I dont want to register on there site though.
Old Apr 12, 2009 | 09:07 AM
  #6  
Injuneer's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 71,110
From: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Going to be interesting to see what the legal issues are. GM had to stop using the "reverse flow" cooling (ever wonder why the LT1 is the only engine to use it?) because the inventor of Evans coolant has the patent on reverse flow cooling, and won his battle with GM in court. Can someone now build and sell a "new" block that violates the court settlement with GM, or is this just considered a "replacement" block?
Old Apr 12, 2009 | 11:05 AM
  #7  
87bandit's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 660
From: Palm Harbor, FL
Originally Posted by Injuneer
Going to be interesting to see what the legal issues are. GM had to stop using the "reverse flow" cooling (ever wonder why the LT1 is the only engine to use it?) because the inventor of Evans coolant has the patent on reverse flow cooling, and won his battle with GM in court. Can someone now build and sell a "new" block that violates the court settlement with GM, or is this just considered a "replacement" block?
well technically if that were an issue wouldn't there be an issue with companies selling "reverse flow" cylinder heads?
Old Apr 12, 2009 | 11:54 AM
  #8  
bombebomb's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,855
From: Ohio
Originally Posted by Injuneer
Going to be interesting to see what the legal issues are. GM had to stop using the "reverse flow" cooling (ever wonder why the LT1 is the only engine to use it?) because the inventor of Evans coolant has the patent on reverse flow cooling, and won his battle with GM in court. Can someone now build and sell a "new" block that violates the court settlement with GM, or is this just considered a "replacement" block?
That is a good question, I never realized it was patented. I always wondered why no one else ever did it. This should pan out to be interesting no matter what happens.


Never got my activation email from Dart forums
Old Apr 12, 2009 | 11:55 PM
  #9  
Injuneer's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 71,110
From: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Originally Posted by 87bandit
well technically if that were an issue wouldn't there be an issue with companies selling "reverse flow" cylinder heads?
I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know the answer. I was just trying to raise a relevant question.
Old Apr 13, 2009 | 01:02 AM
  #10  
JD311's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 80
GM used reverse cooling on Pontiac V8's 55-59. They then went to the standard cooling like a sbc in 60-up. Of course when they did it on the sbc in 92 it became the LT1 we all love/hate.
Old Apr 13, 2009 | 03:18 PM
  #11  
whyrun's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 198
From: Abingdon,VA
Originally Posted by cardo0
Good point folks.
I see the real marketing compitition as the $1600 LT1's now from GMPP. Heck why buy a $2000 block when u can buy the long block for a lot less. Granted these LT1's GMPP is selling now are likely old stock and supply is limited.

cardo0

The whole point of this block is to run a big bore, were not wanting them to build a factory replacement block. why would I want a factory short block with cast componets? I had an item patented back in 96' and my lawyer told me then that all a compeditor would have to do is change my design by 20% and be with the law, to put it in perspective 20% would equal a change in color..
Old Apr 13, 2009 | 04:20 PM
  #12  
96capricemgr's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,800
cardo0 you keep talking about a waterpump pulley bypass. Sure some tow package b-bodies got a belt driven fan some of them Roadmasters, BUT they have the same waterpump as all the rest of the LT1s so you are repeately using bad information to try and press your point. That fan is on a seperate bracket, not the pump. Here is the mechanical fan setup, the large black pulley there is a duplicate of in the pic. http://s120.photobucket.com/albums/o...t=DCP_0500.jpg

You state the opti is great for firewall clearance(you are right), BUT this market if full of people who think they need to get rid of the opti to run 11s. I don't agree with them but that is what this market thinks.

It would be nice to see this made but I don't think it is anywhere near as "necessary" as folks want to believe it is. Bad combos are the norm around here and that holds the platform back way more than the block.
Old Apr 13, 2009 | 04:55 PM
  #13  
slowride94z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 746
From: Bennett N.C.
aluminum????

wouldnt that be some mud in the ls eye
Old Apr 13, 2009 | 06:16 PM
  #14  
kgkern01's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,332
From: Louisville KY
I'm wondering something about the stroke. Looking at the SHP SBC block specs on Dart's website is says this:

Bore & stroke: 4.165” x 3.750” max recommended

Now does this mean that the largest you could go with this would be a 409ci, or maybe 422ci if clearancing for using a 3.875" stroke? Or would it be able to be safely clearanced for 4" or more stroke? I'm wondering if the cam position will limit the stroke to below 4"??? If this block is capable of a 4" stroke, and becomes a reality, then my 385ci build parts will go on sale to help fund building a 427 from this block instead.

Last edited by kgkern01; Apr 13, 2009 at 06:32 PM.
Old Apr 13, 2009 | 07:20 PM
  #15  
boosted-lt1's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 657
From: Farmington Hills, MI
4" should work

http://www.dartheads.com/dartboard/showthread.php?t=895



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:13 AM.