PDA

View Full Version : The great LT1 vs LS1 debate....


RC45
04-25-2004, 03:17 AM
There ya go.. ;)

Let's have contributions.

If given the choice between the LT1 and LS1... which would it be - and why?

Please feel free to use personal experience, real and internet research, anectdotes and even good old personal opinion.

Have at it :)

Nocturn
04-25-2004, 05:00 AM
Well as said before I have driven both in Camaro's and the LT1 felt as if it had more TQ/low end power.

Fleischmann
04-25-2004, 05:42 AM
Maybe a poll would be good... :)

nthfinity
04-25-2004, 01:06 PM
with 0 money spent on modification, i choose the LS1. nothing wrong with more power, and better efficiancy to start off with.... oh, and its faster, unless the magazines, and GM decided to make a car go slower then its immediate predisessor. :wink:

Schwalbe
04-25-2004, 03:13 PM
Me, I voted for the LT1 because I loved this motor in my Impala SS 1995. I never carried out repair with this motor. Currently this is my brother that has my former SS and the motor always goes great well.

1996 Caprice/Impala SS - Engines (LT1)
5.7 Liter SFI V8 Engine (LT1)
http://www.impalasuperstore.com/naisso/resource/images/lt1.gif

Minacious
04-26-2004, 11:56 AM
Sadly, I can't compare the two with first hand driving experience. I have owned an LS1, but never an LT1. I have sat passenger in a friends C4 and down low it seems to have more torque than the LS1, but the LS1, to me at least, pulls harder when it gets in the meat and potatoes of the RPM band. Hard for me to really say though since sitting passenger in a car has a completely different sensation than driving one.

RC, which would you choose and why?

nthfinity
04-26-2004, 12:36 PM
minacious, look for the member named 'nocturn' and check his replies in some of the other threads in this section... he was 'highjacking' them a bit... but i think that will clear things up

RC45
04-26-2004, 01:22 PM
Yep - I chose the LS1 - my reason - if it is half as nasty as the LS6 it can still only be good.... :P

Nocturn
04-27-2004, 09:20 PM
Rc ever drive an LT1/4/5 vette?

coloradosilver
04-27-2004, 09:34 PM
Forget the Camaros! I have driven both the LT1 and LS1 corvettes. I've owned both and would choose the LS1 any day over the older less powerful LT1. It seems smoother, more reliable, better milage, and more powerufl. In my opinion, the LS1 makes the LT1 obsolite. 8)

graywolf624
04-27-2004, 09:46 PM
Ls1- aluminum rather then iron and higher output wins every time.

My car is an l98 though, so Id be happy with either.

RC45
04-27-2004, 09:57 PM
Rc ever drive an LT1/4/5 vette?

Have driven an LT4 auto and a 94 LT5. The LT4 felt less brutal than both the LS1 and the LS6. The very brief LT5 run proved the engine is very capable - and pulls very well - but in light of the $4000 LS6(price for a long block crate from GM) , the performance of the LT5 does not justify it's price... ;)

nthfinity
04-28-2004, 12:28 AM
Have driven an LT4 auto and a 94 LT5. The LT4 felt less brutal than both the LS1 and the LS6. The very brief LT5 run proved the engine is very capable - and pulls very well - but in light of the $4000 LS6(price for a long block crate from GM) , the performance of the LT5 does not justify it's price...

except for the few who own them :) the guy i know with one paid 77,000 for his back in 95.... and drives it hard everyday its on the road... he hasnt done extensive modifications, but seems that he is runing about 450ish @ the wheels.
i love this motor, and why i think its the best vette yet

RC45
04-28-2004, 12:37 AM
It doesn't take much (except a little money ;)) to get 450ish-rwhp from an LS6 either... ;)

nthfinity
04-28-2004, 12:42 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^god i love vettes :)
today i found a 91' C4 with new intake, exhaust, and cam for 12,000..... soooo tempting, but i dont think i could afford the insurance... i should try and test drive it i think...

jon944lee
04-28-2004, 06:23 PM
LS1. i have driven both and i feel that the LS1 is more neck-snapping and fun to drive.

gtrxu13:16
05-30-2004, 06:14 AM
In Aus we have only had LS1 so i cant really compare but the only real drama we have down under is they have oil consumption problems and piston slap. i have driven a few LS1's and make all there power at 3000 rpm and above. So they can be economic and be heaps of fun when you get into them

DanielW
05-31-2004, 12:32 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^god i love vettes :)
today i found a 91' C4 with new intake, exhaust, and cam for 12,000..... soooo tempting, but i dont think i could afford the insurance... i should try and test drive it i think...
that's pretty pricey for an L98 car.

I would pick the LS1 btw. it pulls eally nice, didn't really have a lot of seat time in an LTx car.

nthfinity
05-31-2004, 12:31 PM
that's pretty pricey for an L98 car.

I would pick the LS1 btw. it pulls eally nice, didn't really have a lot of seat time in an LTx car.


yes, i didnt end up getting it primarily due to the studpidly high cost... but i did drive it, and it honestly changed my life :wink:
if/when i do get one, it will be an LT1, likely... unfortunately, i dont exactly have enough money to pick up a newer C5 w/LS1

peacenriot69
05-31-2004, 03:40 PM
Depends on how you look at it. In terms of torque, the LT1 was a marvel because it could produce its peak torque at an incredibly low RPM - 325 ft/lbs @ 2400 RPM in the F-Bodies, 330 ft/lbs @ 4000 in the C4's, and was tooled to produce even more low-end TQ for GM's trucks.

Thats the thing about the LT1 - it was designed to be the workhorse for GM. It powered not only the F-Bodies & Vettes, but also the Caprice/Roadmaster/Impalla, and was an option or standard engine on nearly all of GM's mid-full sized trucks & SUV's from '93-'97.

The LS1 in contrast had the benefit of being designed specifically for the new C5 Corvette. Like the LT1 it was slighly downtuned for the F-Bodies, but did not find its way into any GM trucks.

The LT4 engine which was available in 1996 was perhaps the greatest incarnation of the LT1. It was basically a factory hot-roded LT1 which produced the same tire shredding low-end torque but now had the horsepower curve that charged right up to the 6300 RPM redline (whereas the normal LT1's horespower curve tended to back down after about 5000 RPM).

In the long run, the biggest advantage the LT1 has over the LS1 is its cast iron block. GM experimented with aluminum V8's in the '60's only to watch them melt themselves. Even the new aluminum LS1 block has steel sleeves inserted into the piston chambers to prevent the block from warping/cracking. The LT1 block has the advantage when it comes to not only the availability but also the possibility of major modifications because of its durability. True, they are now figuring out ways to really bore and stroke out an LS1 by inserting better/stronger sleeves into the piston chambers, but based on its aluminum block I think it will only be a matter of time before we start seeing a number of these motors coming back with the same kind of serious structural failures that occured to aluminum blocks forty years ago.

This is a Quote from another Fourm on the web with the same topic.

graywolf624
05-31-2004, 03:49 PM
True, they are now figuring out ways to really bore and stroke out an LS1 by inserting better/stronger sleeves into the piston chambers, but based on its aluminum block I think it will only be a matter of time before we start seeing a number of these motors coming back with the same kind of serious structural failures that occured to aluminum blocks forty years ago.

See... theres some major problems with that. The ls1 is not a new engine. It was in camaros starting in 98 for example. Ive seen 1000 hp versions that are durable, and the ls6(which is basically an ls1 with alluminum heads).
Its frankly better to have an alluminum engine. The lt1 engine weighs 100 lbs more then the ls1 engine. Parts for the lt1 are cheaper, which really is the only real advantage the lt1 has anymore. You want a lighter engine for racing, hell its almost as important as the hsp itself.