Drove dad's LT1 today, again. Those things are torque monster compared to the weak 4.6. The 4.6 is good from 4000+ rpm, but the LT1 is clearly superior from idle to 4000 rpm. Ford sucks for not putting a bigger motor into the Stangs. They should have gone with a 5.4 2v minimum in the GTs. Idiots.

 

Hey, we agree on something.

A 5.4L, 32v Cobra would have been da shiznit too. With a 6 speed I might even have bought one.

 

Ford decided to take the "high road" of technology with the mod motor. I don't know the thinking behind that approach but I would have used the 351 Windsor platform and put more development into the cylinder head. Maybe a head very Cleveland-like with canted valves, revised ports and combustion chambers, updated with the latest in lightweight valvetrain components. The engine would cost less to produce, modify and it'd be more compact and lightweight.
I can see a few plusses to the modular engine in terms of integrating technology, but much of the same is being done by GM in other ways. Anyhow, the 351 pushrod motor would have been a great platform for their high performance Mustang.

-Mindgame

 

Torque = LT1 = SWEET...

Torque is GOOD!!!

I love knowing that I have plenty of Torque to fly by most on the street...

I love my LS1 as well...but it's a whole different beast!

Respect the LT1...

-TDOG

 

I got to ride in an LS1 car ... And I have to agree. They feel TOTALLY different. Down low, my car

After about 4800RPMs, the LS1

Their top end is crazy, bottom end is decent.

LT1 Bottem end is crazy, top end ok.

Still though, I cant justify trading in mine to make payments on a LS1 that ouwld surely have at least twice the mileage as mine so I get to stick with old LT1 technology for a long time.

I rode in a 4.6 car once before too ... The kid floored it once, but didnt wind it up much past 4500? So I didnt really get to tell how their top end is, but I know from what Id seen, I was disapointed. I would put my LT1 up against any stock 4.6 prior to 02 ( I think ) in a second.

 

the LS1
Their top end is crazy, bottom end is decent.

LT1 Bottem end is crazy, top end ok.

Complete and total internet myth, based on "seat of pants" feel. The reason why the LT1 FEELS strong down low is that it falls on its face on the top end. The LS1 bottom end torque is essentially identical to the LT1 bottom end torque. Just compare dyno graphs and it becomes obvious.
LT1 (nearly stock) dyno: http://www.ws6.com/mod-2.htm

LS1 nearly stock dyno: http://members.tripod.com/ls1_pwr/website/Dyno.htm

At 2000 rpm: LT1 ~310 lb/ft, LS1 ~290 lb/ft
At 2500 rpm: LT1 ~310 lb/ft, LS1 ~305 lb/ft
At 3000 rpm: LT1 ~310 lb/ft, LS1 ~305 lb/ft

Where's this supposed low end torque of the LT1? It's a myth.

At 5000 rpm: LT1 ~275 lb/ft, LS1 ~305 lb/ft
At 5500 rpm: LT1 ~260 lb/ft, LS1 ~290 lb/ft

The top end drop off is why the bottom of the LT1 "feels" stronger. The LS1 continues to pull, and my Z06 feels like it "gets on the cam" at 3K or so. Below that it feels kind of flat compared to my wife's C5 -- but measured times in the 1/8 mile (on G-Tech) says the Z06 is quicker everywhere. "Seat of pants" is totally unreliable.

 

Damn good thing I don't race between 1000 and 4000 rpm, huh?

 

Has anyone seen that 5.0L DOHC "Cammer" motor Ford Racing is selling?

 

Is that LS1/LS6 dyno graph at the flywheel, because those numbers look pretty high? I beleive that the LT1 dyno graph is rear wheel numbers and LS1 is flywheel. Just making sure your comparing apples to apples.

I just had my car dynoed yesterday and got the numbers in my sig. When I had my car dynoed stock it made 306 rwtq from 2200-4500. With my mods now the torque from 2000-4500 is dead flat @ 325rwtq. LS1's tend to have more of a peak tq, while LT1's stay flat and fall off around 4500 rpm.

 

I went back and edited, using a RWHP dyno graph. Not much different, just lower across the board, but no data for anything under 2K rpm.

All the "evidence" I've ever seen for the purported better low end of the LT1 (vs. LS1) is all from Butt-O-Meter response. Dyno graphs show otherwise.

 

You dont race on a Dyno though

Otherwise Supra's would own us all.


However, im not doubting your #'s ... Dont get me wrong. I think its maybe something to do with the way the engines make the power of something ... Seems like a LS1 doesnt come on as hard down low as a LT1 ... Like maybe a LT1 makes more power comparitively at part throttle or something I dont know ... I just know that it definatly feels "faster" down low ...

 

True enough, we don't race on a dyno. Can you show LT1 A4 and LS1 A4 60' times or 330' times or 1/8th mile times that can substantiate that the LT1 has more low end grunt?

I doubt that you or anyone out there can do it... as I've said, the basis for all the claims that I've seen are strictly based on it "feels" faster. Nobody can show dyno graphs that substantiate the claim, or track times, or G-Tech times, etc. In other words, absolutely *nothing* that's scientific... it's all touchy feely, subjective opinion.

When LS1 Z28's came out, MANY guys with LT1's that rode in them swore up and down that they weren't going to be that much quicker because they didn't "feel" fast.

 

How many miles on your LT1? In '99 the 4.6 got a lot stronger, but with your mods you should beat a stock 99+ 'GT.

 

You just proved that the LT1 is torquier down low than the LS1. 20 lb/ft is definately noticable and the difference is probably greater at 1000 rpm. From idle to about 3000 rpm the LT1 is better, above 3000 rpm the LS1 is better.

 

Oh yeah! How do you get the extra 5 mph of trap speed out of your cars compared to most others?