New C7s

[popo8]

So, I just learned tonight that talks are out there that the new C7s will have their engine dubbed the LT1 for the NA, and LT4 for the supercharged version....

Will we be making accommodations if this is true??? This may be that thing to get us into LSX categories (meaning comperable to the popularity of LSXs), since it will be new, and will most prob be used for at least 5-10 years...

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c7-general-discussion/3135114-well-ok-here-is-some-more-info.html

[MeanTA]

i don't see us being allowed in ls events. we are to old on an architecture for them.

To be honest i don't like them being called LT1/LT4. there not being called that to pay homage to us. we got the LT1 call sign. because GM was honoring the gen1 LT1's and we shared similar architecture to them. sorry for ramble don't like people stealing my motors name or honor. lol

[popo8]

i don't see us being allowed in ls events. we are to old on an architecture for them.

To be honest i don't like them being called LT1/LT4. there not being called that to pay homage to us. we got the LT1 call sign. because GM was honoring the gen1 LT1's and we shared similar architecture to them. sorry for ramble don't like people stealing my motors name or honor. lol


I didnt mean to sound like I wanted us in LS events... Im comparing a new and growing platform by the name that we use.... being a benifit to us, to make an additional section and now have an additional platform that is not the "dying breed" that people are not making products for... but rather that sponsors will be anxious to join us because this new LT"X" will be the next hot thing....

[popo8]

I saw where it was that the confusion in my initial statement came from... I added a clarification statement to it.

[MeanTA]

ow ok. if it means for our motors getting put back on the map. that would be awesome.

mabe a company would get excited and build us a new block???

[CamaroZGuy]

well with how the LS plat form is going, it was time for them to make a new tag since i think LS1-9 are already used.
but i have to agree on not liking the idea, first there will more then likely be no resemblance to the LT or SBC platform and second, i really don't want the "other" crowd invading this site thinking its for the GenV "LT's" (if that is what they will be) and turning this site in to the "other" place.
but after doing some looking, i cant find any thing that actually says it will be "LT".

“The Gen-V small block is an all-new, state-of-the-art engine family that will offer more efficiency and refinement than any other small block in its more than half-century of production,” said Jordan Lee, chief engineer, in a press release. “For customers, that will mean cars and trucks (http://wot.motortrend.com/confirmed-gm-says-gen-v-small-block-v-8-will-have-direct-injection-140791.html#) that deliver more while using less gas to do it."

http://www.lsxtv.com/news/first-peak-at-the-gen-v-v8-from-gm/

[popo8]

Even if its just the site being put back on the map... some benifit may be sponsor products for us... but more importantly...events like the shootout could have another class...where vendors would want to come out (even if only focusing on the new gens)....but our evens would grow... could have bigger financial backing... more events... even if our old school stuff rides the coat tails of the new ones... we benifit one way or another..... and now when ls guys have probs with their cars we can tell them the LT1/LT4 MOD response...lol


Larry (Popo8) Co-owner
LTXtech.com

[EvilOpti94]

I take full credit for this discovery :)

Yes things like the shootout could be crazy with this new platform...

[popo8]

I take full credit for this discovery :)

Yes things like the shootout could be crazy with this new platform...

yes... credit is all urs bud.


Larry (Popo8) Co-owner
LTXtech.com

[meissen]

Didn't realize there were folks that didn't know this info yet. If you guys want to see what the C7 looks like go look at Jalopnik's renderings... :thumbsup: Although I thought the other engine was LT5 not LT4, either way the LT1 is definitely "back."

Hopefully GM will do the right thing and offer oil catch cans with these new direct injected engines or else the DI LT1 will suffer the "red headed step child" fate as the 90's LT1.


PS - Everything I stated in this post is rumor mill information that's readily available by reading websites like Jalopnik, GMI, etc. Nothing in my post is confidential information.

[Badbird_96]

I agree with Larry 100%. This could be a very good thing for the site. It will put us in the limelight one way or another and like stated the more interest in the site and sponsors we get the bigger our events and the more recognition we get the more interest we should be able to get for our "old" platform.

[popo8]

Keep in mind, Im by no means making any decisions.... just creating discussion... thoughts....etc.

[MeanTA]

I agree with Larry 100%. This could be a very good thing for the site. It will put us in the limelight one way or another and like stated the more interest in the site and sponsors we get the bigger our events and the more recognition we get the more interest we should be able to get for our "old" platform.

Don't get me wrong. i thank it will be great for the site. the lack of platform support is just a sore subject with me. it would be great if manufactures take notice and realized this platform is still around. and that it may be "old school" but still going strong.

like that thread the other day where a guy is putting down almost 1,000 HP. with a stock block!

Im hoping it will get people to realize its a awesome platform to dive into.

[meissen]

Considering we already have the site name, I really think we should run with it and embrace it. Some site is going to have to fill the niche, we already have the name.... let's do it IMHO.

[popo8]

Considering we already have the site name, I really think we should run with it and embrace it. Some site is going to have to fill the niche, we already have the name.... let's do it IMHO.


Thats the way I feel... I think it could make us explode.....

[Badbird_96]

And if not the only thing we have to invest is time. So its not really going to cost anything to test the waters. Plus a shirt with ltx cars and new vettes could look awesome.

[dzltek]

Here's some interesting reads on the new small block!

http://blogs.popularhotrodding.com/6787450/tech/new-small-block/

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle

[popo8]

....

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle


When I opened THAT^^^ I got:



"

Atkinson cycle



Thermodynamics (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamics)


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Carnot_heat_engine_2.svg/220px-Carnot_heat_engine_2.svg.png (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carnot_heat_engine_2.svg)



Branches

Classical (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_thermodynamics) · Statistical (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_mechanics) · Chemical (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_thermodynamics)
Equilibrium (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equilibrium_thermodynamics) / Non-equilibrium (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-equilibrium_thermodynamics)
Thermofluids (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermofluids)




Laws (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics)

Zeroth (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeroth_law_of_thermodynamics) · First (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics) · Second (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics) · Third (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_law_of_thermodynamics)




Systems (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_system)

State (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_state):
Equation of state (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_state)
Ideal gas (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas) · Real gas (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_gas)
Phase of matter (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_matter) · Equilibrium (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_equilibrium)
Control volume (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_volume) · Instruments (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_instruments) Processes (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_process):
Isobaric (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isobaric_process) · Isochoric (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isochoric_process) · Isothermal (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isothermal_process)
Adiabatic (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_process) · Isentropic (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isentropic_process) · Isenthalpic (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isenthalpic_process)
Quasistatic (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasistatic_process) · Polytropic (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polytropic_process)
Free expansion (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_expansion)
Reversibility (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_process_(thermodynamics)) · Irreversibility (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreversible_process_(thermodynamics))
Endoreversibility (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endoreversible_thermodynamics) Cycles (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_cycle):
Heat engines (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_engine) · Heat pumps (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_pump_and_refrigeration_cycle)
Thermal efficiency (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_efficiency)




System properties (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_thermodynamic_properties)

Property diagrams (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_diagrams)
Intensive and extensive properties (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_and_extensive_properties) State functions (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_function):
Temperature (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_temperature) / Entropy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy) (intro. (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_entropy)) †
Pressure (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure) / Volume (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volume_(thermodynamics)) †
Chemical potential (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_potential) / Particle no. (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_number) †
(† Conjugate variables (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjugate_variables_(thermodynamics)))
Vapor quality (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapor_quality)
Reduced properties (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced_properties) Process functions (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_function):
Work (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(thermodynamics)) · Heat (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat)




Material properties (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_properties_(thermodynamics))



Specific heat capacity (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_heat_capacity)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/3/5/4/354c808b3ac7ff5bd75faa26bcc36220.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/b/9/e/b9ece18c950afbfa6b0fdbfa4ff731d3.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/d/e/7/de71b72c4f62f20d117414dd2f33ca25.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/8/d/9/8d9c307cb7f3c4a32822a51922d1ceaa.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/f/7/af7e8a85df47250ffab736b7a8807488.png





Compressibility (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressibility)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/2/a/e/2aede3b55c027fe4392429d6474ec397.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/c/4/c/c4ca4238a0b923820dcc509a6f75849b.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/8/8/8/888fa252e9cde41ef196d5154cd7219c.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/2/0/5206560a306a2e085a437fd258eb57ce.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/f/5/1f58273c4161e57f62a95804c2ae961a.png





Thermal expansion (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_expansion)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/7/e/17eb927e31859ce116f5c64cbcc30d75.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/c/4/c/c4ca4238a0b923820dcc509a6f75849b.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/8/8/8/888fa252e9cde41ef196d5154cd7219c.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/2/0/5206560a306a2e085a437fd258eb57ce.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/f/7/af7e8a85df47250ffab736b7a8807488.png





Property database (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_databases_for_pure_substances)




Equations (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_equations)

Carnot's theorem (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot's_theorem_(thermodynamics)) · Clausius theorem (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clausius_theorem) · Fundamental relation (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_thermodynamic_relation) · Ideal gas law (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law) · Maxwell relations (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_relations) Table of thermodynamic equations (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_thermodynamic_equations)




Potentials (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_potential)

Free energy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_free_energy) · Free entropy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_entropy)

Internal energy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_energy)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/8/1/5/8153e779d69fe6c35dc2bc4dfb0f2a11.png


Enthalpy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/7/5/5758e3126ffd73977ec11d0c19d06692.png


Helmholtz free energy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmholtz_free_energy)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/6/7/5678e99000d8069acd323bb63d6376d4.png


Gibbs free energy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs_free_energy)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/2/0/5205e29e7201a0b009466036b40a34a6.png







History and culture

Philosophy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_thermal_and_statistical_physics):
Entropy and time (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(arrow_of_time)) · Entropy and life (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_and_life)
Brownian ratchet (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_ratchet)
Maxwell's demon (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon)
Heat death paradox (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_paradox)
Loschmidt's paradox (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loschmidt's_paradox)
Synergetics (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synergetics_(Haken)) History:
General (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_thermodynamics) · Heat (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_heat) · Entropy (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_entropy) · Gas laws (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_laws)
Perpetual motion (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_perpetual_motion_machines)
Theories:
Caloric theory (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caloric_theory) · Vis viva (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vis_viva)
Theory of heat (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_heat)
Mechanical equivalent of heat (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_equivalent_of_heat)
Motive power (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motive_power)
Publications (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_physics):
"An Experimental Enquiry Concerning ... Heat (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Experimental_Enquiry_Concerning_the_Source_of_t he_Heat_which_is_Excited_by_Friction)"
"On the Equilibrium of Heterogeneous Substances (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Equilibrium_of_Heterogeneous_Substances)"
"Reflections on the
Motive Power of Fire" (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflections_on_the_Motive_Power_of_Fire) Timelines of:
Thermodynamics (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_thermodynamics) · Heat engines (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_heat_engine_technology) Art:
Maxwell's thermodynamic surface (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_thermodynamic_surface) Education:
Entropy as energy dispersal (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(energy_dispersal))




Scientists

Bernoulli (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Bernoulli) · Carnot (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Léonard_Sadi_Carnot) · Clapeyron (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benoît_Paul_Émile_Clapeyron) · Clausius (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Clausius) · von Helmholtz (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_von_Helmholtz) · Carathéodory (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_Carathéodory) · Pierre Duhem (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Duhem) · Gibbs (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah_Willard_Gibbs) · Joule (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Prescott_Joule) · Maxwell (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clerk_Maxwell) · von Mayer (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Robert_von_Mayer) · Rankine (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_John_Macquorn_Rankine) · Smeaton (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Smeaton) · Stahl (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Ernst_Stahl) · Thompson (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Thompson) · Kelvin (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Thomson,_1st_Baron_Kelvin) · Waterson (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_James_Waterston)





v (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Thermodynamics)
t (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Thermodynamics)
e (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Thermodynamics&action=edit)




The Atkinson cycle engine is a type of internal combustion engine (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_combustion_engine) invented by James Atkinson (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Atkinson_(inventor)) in 1882. The Atkinson cycle is designed to provide efficiency (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiency) at the expense of power density (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_density), and is used in some modern hybrid electric (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_electric) applications.
Design


Ideal thermodynamic cycle


Modern Atkinson cycle engines


Rotary Atkinson cycle engine


Vehicles using Atkinson cycle engines


Summary of the patent


See also


References


External links








IT HURT MY HEAD.

[BlackWidowSS]

I could see and embrace this:

Original tribute small block LT1 style block......except aluminum instead of iron...
Capability to be stroked into the 400's to compete with the LSX's
LT1 Reverse Flow Cooling and higher compression ratio and higher low end torque numbers
LSX individual Coil-Pack Ignition Platform
LSX Style PCM to support the higher HP builds and better tuning

I think if they did all of this, the new LTX motors will be monsters! All the strengths of OUR LT1, without the weaknesses! :)

[94Blackbird]

If what the articles are saying about the new motors is true, that's going to be a really radical push rod motor. A direct injected small block? Yes please!

[popo8]

And just think about it.. a new motor, sharing the name... for a whole new generation of vehicles to start getting it... and we have the NAME....

[94Blackbird]

And just think about it.. a new motor, sharing the name... for a whole new generation of vehicles to start getting it... and we have the NAME....


I think it would be entirely appropriate, considering every LTx motor to date has been either a giant leap technologically or a radical departure from the norm or both (including the true redheaded stepchild, the LT5). I definitely think a dual cam in block variable valve timed, modified combustion stroke, direct injected small block v8 would be perfectly befitting of the LT1 moniker, considering nothing like it has been done before, and especially since it is rumored to be even more powerful than the current base motor with less displacement.

[meissen]

The direct injection opens all new doors for their motors. But if the direct injection V6 motors GM is currently making is any indication, GM MUST fix their PCV issues or include an oil catch can with these DI motors or else they're going to have even more serious problems. 1 quart of oil consumption every 500-1000 miles is not normal in my book, but within spec in GM's book. BMW is learning the hard way about direct injection while their dealership technicians are tearing apart heads to hand clean the oil sludge off of the valves. That's the biggest problem with crappy PCV systems and direct injection. With the standard injection we have now, the fuel flows over the valves and helps clean sludge and grime off of the valves. With direct injection, that gas is going right into the combustion chamber and hence nothing to clean the valves off... If you have a lot of oil going into the intake - which you definitely do with GM's crappy PCV system - you're going to get sludge build up and you will lose power over time unless you invest in an oil catch can or run Seafoam products through your engine on a fairly regular basis.

[Dave357LT1]

I think GM needs to stop reusing names of shit. The design team must be a bunch of unoriginal bastards. I dont think it will help or hurt our platform. Tho everytime you say lt1 you will have to explain I have the old one but not the really old one. They will have the ltxshootout and we will be allowed to be in the car show for museum type qualitys.

[popo8]

I think GM needs to stop reusing names of shit. The design team must be a bunch of unoriginal bastards. I dont think it will help or hurt our platform. Tho everytime you say lt1 you will have to explain I have the old one but not the really old one. They will have the ltxshootout and we will be allowed to be in the car show for museum type qualitys.

So you don't feel that added intrest in the same name (whether reminiscent of its predecessor) will help to put the NAME back on the map?

And if so, do you feel that our engines being named after its 1970s predecessor was a bad move?

[Dave357LT1]

I believe every engine should have its own name. Did we put the old school tl1 on the map? No. Hoping to ride another engines coat tails is sad.

[popo8]

I believe every engine should have its own name. Did we put the old school tl1 on the map? No. Hoping to ride another engines coat tails is sad.


Pretty sure the old school eng didnt have a website

[MeanTA]

GM brass gave our engine its call sign to honor the original LT1. Because at the time it was the ultimate sbc. And when we hit the streets we was the ultimate sbc for the generation.

I don't see how the new LT1 should qualify for the ls competition. its a total different animal. and in many ways will make the ls platform "obsolete". based on design and function.

[popo8]

GM brass gave our engine its call sign to honor the original LT1. Because at the time it was the ultimate sbc. And when we hit the streets we was the ultimate sbc for the generation.

I don't see how the new LT1 should qualify for the ls competition. its a total different animal. and in many ways will make the ls platform "obsolete". based on design and function.

Ok, well with all of the upgrades to what is being referred to as "the LS competition" would you still say the new motor has that much in common with the LS motors?

[Dave357LT1]

me
Pretty sure the old school eng didnt have a website

Again hoping the site gets more traffic because the new motor has the same name is sad! That's like the ugly girl in school hoping she gets attention by wearing the same clothes as the cute popular girl. We have a small community and its only gonna get smaller with time. Thinkin otherwise is delusional.

[Dave357LT1]

me
Pretty sure the old school eng didnt have a website

Again hoping the site gets more traffic because the new motor has the same name is sad! That's like the ugly girl in school hoping she gets attention by wearing the same clothes as the cute popular girl. We have a small community and its only gonna get smaller with time. Thinkin otherwise is delusional.

[popo8]

me

Again hoping the site gets more traffic because the new motor has the same name is sad! That's like the ugly girl in school hoping she gets attention by wearing the same clothes as the cute popular girl. We have a small community and its only gonna get smaller with time. Thinkin otherwise is delusional.


I think to say definitely say ONE WAY or ANOTHER is what is delusional... after all, none of us here are Miss Cleo....

Had the same debate with another member on the facebook page... there is one thing to have a good debate about something, but no need to put down the thoughts of others, especially with any type of name calling no matter how "soft."

Because you believe in one thing... and someone else believes in the opposite, does not make either of you right or wrong, so who are you to call the other thoughts WRONG?

[Dave357LT1]

Name calling?....

Has nothing to do with being Mrs Cleo. Our cars are getting older and not holding much value. More and more are getting scrapped. We are a dying breed of car. It's a nitch platform. I like it. You like it. And a handfull of others. Sorry if I don't sing the ltx fight song every morning but I do enjoy beating cars that should beat me. That's where my pride is.

[popo8]

Name calling?....

Has nothing to do with being Mrs Cleo. Our cars are getting older and not holding much value. More and more are getting scrapped. We are a dying breed of car. It's a nitch platform. I like it. You like it. And a handfull of others. Sorry if I don't sing the ltx fight song every morning but I do enjoy beating cars that should beat me. That's where my pride is.


ITs fine, I respect your angle, and you dont need to sing the LTX fight song everymorning....


Thank You for your enthusiastic support of what so many of us are so passionate about...


*delusional is "soft" name calling....

[GreenZ96]

we'll be the weird sbc guys with a front mount distributor

[popo8]

we'll be the weird sbc guys with a front mount distributor

We always have been... lol

[firebird_1995]

Wait, wait, wait..... what's the ltx fight song?

[Ashley]

Wait, wait, wait..... what's the ltx fight song?

I know. must've missed it myself. gotta tell Jesse there's one! lol.

[BIG CAT]

lol i see a lot of mad ls owners in the coming future. and that puts a smile on my face.11723

[MeanTA]

Name calling?....

Has nothing to do with being Mrs Cleo. Our cars are getting older and not holding much value. More and more are getting scrapped. We are a dying breed of car. It's a nitch platform. I like it. You like it. And a handfull of others. Sorry if I don't sing the ltx fight song every morning but I do enjoy beating cars that should beat me. That's where my pride is.

The LTX platform is a awesome design. And percentage wise we lay waste to more ls1's then they do t us. We are putting down close to triple digits at the wheels. with 20 year old blocks, and doing so reliable. I am a strong suporter of getting big bore blocks. if we had a aftermarket block. i thank more people would use our platform. its great design but since we aint the new kids on the block we suffer. And soon the LSX platform will experiance it to some degree. because they will now be a old design.

I love the LTX platform and will own and support it till my last breath.

And i sing the LTX fight song evertime i drive my car. its 3 fast revs followed by a short idle the 3 more revs. in a galoping rythem:)

[popo8]

The LTX platform is a awesome design. And percentage wise we lay waste to more ls1's then they do t us. We are putting down close to triple digits at the wheels. with 20 year old blocks, and doing so reliable. I am a strong suporter of getting big bore blocks. if we had a aftermarket block. i thank more people would use our platform. its great design but since we aint the new kids on the block we suffer. And soon the LSX platform will experiance it to some degree. because they will now be a old design.

I love the LTX platform and will own and support it till my last breath.

And i sing the LTX fight song evertime i drive my car. its 3 fast revs followed by a short idle the 3 more revs. in a galoping rythem:)


MY NICCA!!! YOU MAKE ME PROUD... I think that brought a tear to my eye!

[popo8]

Wait, wait, wait..... what's the ltx fight song?


I know. must've missed it myself. gotta tell Jesse there's one! lol.


lol i see a lot of mad ls owners in the coming future. and that puts a smile on my face.11723

BIG SMILES!11723

[Dave357LT1]

The LTX platform is a awesome design. And percentage wise we lay waste to more ls1's then they do t us. We are putting down close to triple digits at the wheels. with 20 year old blocks, and doing so reliable. I am a strong suporter of getting big bore blocks. if we had a aftermarket block. i thank more people would use our platform. its great design but since we aint the new kids on the block we suffer. And soon the LSX platform will experiance it to some degree. because they will now be a old design.

I love the LTX platform and will own and support it till my last breath.

And i sing the LTX fight song evertime i drive my car. its 3 fast revs followed by a short idle the 3 more revs. in a galoping rythem:)

I know it is a good platform or wouldn't have dumped close to 20k in this thing. Again my point was about the site getting traffic due to the name of the engine. I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens.

[MeanTA]

I know it is a good platform or wouldn't have dumped close to 20k in this thing. Again my point was about the site getting traffic due to the name of the engine. I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens.

i thank this site would be more open to them in the long run. then the other site. i have a feeling a lot of them will be butt hurt when this new motor hits the street.

[popo8]

I know it is a good platform or wouldn't have dumped close to 20k in this thing. Again my point was about the site getting traffic due to the name of the engine. I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens.


FAIR ENOUGH.

[popo8]

i thank this site would be more open to them in the long run. then the other site. i have a feeling a lot of them will be butt hurt when this new motor hits the street.


I agree.

[Fastbird]

lol i see a lot of mad ls owners in the coming future. and that puts a smile on my face.11723

This. My oh my this.

[popo8]

This. My oh my this.

LOL... and this coming from a former LS owner... shit...with my escalade, Im one also...

[Fastbird]

Here's my take. The new LT1/LT4 will have exactly nothing in common with our beloved Gen II LT1/4 motors, save for being a corporate GM motor. And even that's stretching it because our motor was a "General Motors" and the new one is under "Government Motors." All joking aside, I can go two ways with this.

One, we could be sitting on a GOLD MINE here, already having the LTx domain and website set up. The financial potential is tremendous, as is the possibility of the website population exploding, etc. BUT.... and this is the big BUT.......

That's now what OUR community HERE and NOW is about. We are the community for the Gen II LT1 and LT4 motors. The red headed step child, the underdog, the little motor that could. This site has no bearing on the fifth gen architechure. I do NOT think that the designation of the new Gen V motors being LT1/4 is going to give any boost to OUR aftermarket at all. Personally, I do not see those new motors having a place here. But I dno't make all the decisions, and if the other site owners/staff want to take it that direction, then I'll support. But my vote is to not open up those gates.

[popo8]

Here's my take. The new LT1/LT4 will have exactly nothing in common with our beloved Gen II LT1/4 motors, save for being a corporate GM motor. And even that's stretching it because our motor was a "General Motors" and the new one is under "Government Motors." All joking aside, I can go two ways with this.

One, we could be sitting on a GOLD MINE here, already having the LTx domain and website set up. The financial potential is tremendous, as is the possibility of the website population exploding, etc. BUT.... and this is the big BUT.......

That's now what OUR community HERE and NOW is about. We are the community for the Gen II LT1 and LT4 motors. The red headed step child, the underdog, the little motor that could. This site has no bearing on the fifth gen architechure. I do NOT think that the designation of the new Gen V motors being LT1/4 is going to give any boost to OUR aftermarket at all. Personally, I do not see those new motors having a place here. But I dno't make all the decisions, and if the other site owners/staff want to take it that direction, then I'll support. But my vote is to not open up those gates.


And those are both perfect explainations of the same points.... and exactly why I was hoping our entire community could discuss it... because it would have major affect on our family one way or another.

Yes, I know it wont be an opti driven 25 year old iron engine... but all the engine differences aside.... if the NAME is there... and it is no longer LSX that is the newest... we can create a section for them specifically.... yet we are all still together.

I agree with Sean, that the aftermarket will not jump up for our old machines... but.. the aftermarket will jump up for the new LTX....

AGAIN THIS IS ONLY THINKING OUT LOUD, but think of this....

The LTX SHOOTOUT, having the kind of financial backing that has drifting, and autox... a multiple day track event with vendors every where (even if they are not geared to our old motors)... Those contests where you can win a new LTX engine like they do at LS fest, where two teams do a SWAP race...

I know it will intrude, and I am very happy keeping us the way we are, but if we dont at least discuss and consider it, we are doing a big dis service by just not thinking about it...

THink of opening the magazines, and seeing the LTX SHOOTOUT 2 page spreads....

Think about the TV commercials, the SUPER SIZE event sponsors... the multiple events EVERYWHERE in the US.... so when the 40 of us that gtg in KY cant make it, we go to the more local ones... or we have opportunities to go to more....

Just an exciting option that I would ask all of our FAMILY members to think about the possibilities, and in the end.... if our small community is what we want to stay with.... then so be it...

IN FACT, we are bigger than we ever have been, and smoother than ever as well (at least I thinks so)

[94Blackbird]

And those are both perfect explainations of the same points.... and exactly why I was hoping our entire community could discuss it... because it would have major affect on our family one way or another.

Yes, I know it wont be an opti driven 25 year old iron engine... but all the engine differences aside.... if the NAME is there... and it is no longer LSX that is the newest... we can create a section for them specifically.... yet we are all still together.

I agree with Sean, that the aftermarket will not jump up for our old machines... but.. the aftermarket will jump up for the new LTX....

AGAIN THIS IS ONLY THINKING OUT LOUD, but think of this....

The LTX SHOOTOUT, having the kind of financial backing that has drifting, and autox... a multiple day track event with vendors every where (even if they are not geared to our old motors)... Those contests where you can win a new LTX engine like they do at LS fest, where two teams do a SWAP race...

I know it will intrude, and I am very happy keeping us the way we are, but if we dont at least discuss and consider it, we are doing a big dis service by just not thinking about it...

THink of opening the magazines, and seeing the LTX SHOOTOUT 2 page spreads....

Think about the TV commercials, the SUPER SIZE event sponsors... the multiple events EVERYWHERE in the US.... so when the 40 of us that gtg in KY cant make it, we go to the more local ones... or we have opportunities to go to more....

Just an exciting option that I would ask all of our FAMILY members to think about the possibilities, and in the end.... if our small community is what we want to stay with.... then so be it...

IN FACT, we are bigger than we ever have been, and smoother than ever as well (at least I thinks so)


Personally I think the community is fine the way it is. Though I am not necessarily against welcoming the new LTx'rs, I do think that initially we would see a divide between the hard core of our community and the new kids. Sure, there would be those who genuinely are enthusiasts who would respect their elders (so to speak) and be cool with the oldsters (so to speak) and recognize that at one time, our platform was the cutting edge of technology. And then there will be the hop along nutswingers moving from fad to fad who say the same thing the LS nutswingers say now, that our platform is junk.
I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea, but I do think that we should all be prepared for some tension if not outright hostility from the newbies.

[popo8]

Personally I think the community is fine the way it is. Though I am not necessarily against welcoming the new LTx'rs, I do think that initially we would see a divide between the hard core of our community and the new kids. Sure, there would be those who genuinely are enthusiasts who would respect their elders (so to speak) and be cool with the oldsters (so to speak) and recognize that at one time, our platform was the cutting edge of technology. And then there will be the hop along nutswingers moving from fad to fad who say the same thing the LS nutswingers say now, that our platform is junk.
I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea, but I do think that we should all be prepared for some tension if not outright hostility from the newbies.

Ok, good points... would it be an ok solution to say... if they get out of hand, they get tossed... that would only put us back to where we were, or even ahead, because not everyone will be a problem...

Just brainstorming.

[Fastbird]

Here's the problem though Larry. The new vs. old motor all in teh same classes at a shootout? I can't see it happening. You're talking about integrating a vastly superior motor architechure into the same races we compete in, with the only relation being the moniker given to the motor. I can't see it happening.

[MeanTA]

if there is some hostility from the young bloods. some of us big boys can take them to the track and show them what up:) (included me because my surcharger build will be done by then)

and a auto x event would be awesome. i would be all over that!!!!

[popo8]

Here's the problem though Larry. The new vs. old motor all in teh same classes at a shootout? I can't see it happening. You're talking about integrating a vastly superior motor architechure into the same races we compete in, with the only relation being the moniker given to the motor. I can't see it happening.


And I had thought about that... but why not have separate classes for it....

With maybe the exception of OUTLAW, where everything may be able to come together with the run what ya brung....?


EDIT: and any other class that is based on times...INDEX, I think is what its called....

Anything that is time related, or bracket related would work ...dont ya think?
Im really enjoin discussing this...

[Fastbird]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the new LT1 is going to be more closely related to the LSx platform than our LT platform. It's merely an engine name. I understand the excitement but those are going to be integrated into the LSx shootout classes before they can be integrated into our race. It's a apples to oranges comparison, I.E. there is none. I can't see us trying to capitalize on a name only when that's the only thing to latch on to.

[popo8]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the new LT1 is going to be more closely related to the LSx platform than our LT platform. It's merely an engine name. I understand the excitement but those are going to be integrated into the LSx shootout classes before they can be integrated into our race. It's a apples to oranges comparison, I.E. there is none. I can't see us trying to capitalize on a name only when that's the only thing to latch on to.

SO you think there will be a NEW GEN LTX catagory in the LS FESTs?

[Fastbird]

Yeah, that's what I see happening. I don't see us capitalizing on the name even if we try. We're small potatos compared to the LSx domain, and I'm sure there's going to be a lot of interchangeability between the Gen V and the Gen III-IV.

That said.......would we be banished from here for putting a "new" LT1 into our car? :D

[popo8]

Yeah, that's what I see happening. I don't see us capitalizing on the name even if we try. We're small potatos compared to the LSx domain, and I'm sure there's going to be a lot of interchangeability between the Gen V and the Gen III-IV.

That said.......would we be banished from here for putting a "new" LT1 into our car? :D


LOL...

Banished, no.... but if your saying its the LSX family... it would go to FEST rather than the SHOOTOUT. :(

[Dave357LT1]

Ya if you think the Ls guys are cocky assholes these guys will be worse. Us with our cars that are 1-5k to their 50k cars. Our cars came with 285 hp their will have 500ish? Nothing in common. They will have big name sponcers that will host their own FEST or shootout.

[94Blackbird]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the new LT1 is going to be more closely related to the LSx platform than our LT platform. It's merely an engine name. I understand the excitement but those are going to be integrated into the LSx shootout classes before they can be integrated into our race. It's a apples to oranges comparison, I.E. there is none. I can't see us trying to capitalize on a name only when that's the only thing to latch on to.

I think that if the articles I have seen are anywhere near accurate, then the new LT1 will have a lot in common with our LT1. Not in the physical architecture, but more in being on the bleeding edge of technology.

While the LS1 was a huge step forward in terms of efficiency, they still took a step backwards as well, at least as far as I see it. They went back to standard flow cooling and basically only put a trick ignition system on an otherwise unremarkable engine other than it's increased power potential. Our motors were the first to have the capacity for pulling timing from an individual cylinder. the first LS motors weren't really all that more powerful than the LT motors.

The new LT1 engine is supposedly going to use a new modified combustion cycle, direct injection and is rumored to possibly have dual in block cam set up or concentric cam lobes. There is plenty of new technology supposedly going into the new motors, and I don't think it would be all that bad to have a reincarnation of the LT1, being that is supposedly going to be on the cutting edge of cam in block V8 technology.

For that reason, I could see welcoming the new LTx.

[Fastbird]

I think that if the articles I have seen are anywhere near accurate, then the new LT1 will have a lot in common with our LT1. Not in the physical architecture, but more in being on the bleeding edge of technology.

While the LS1 was a huge step forward in terms of efficiency, they still took a step backwards as well, at least as far as I see it. They went back to standard flow cooling and basically only put a trick ignition system on an otherwise unremarkable engine other than it's increased power potential. Our motors were the first to have the capacity for pulling timing from an individual cylinder. the first LS motors weren't really all that more powerful than the LT motors.

The new LT1 engine is supposedly going to use a new modified combustion cycle, direct injection and is rumored to possibly have dual in block cam set up or concentric cam lobes. There is plenty of new technology supposedly going into the new motors, and I don't think it would be all that bad to have a reincarnation of the LT1, being that is supposedly going to be on the cutting edge of cam in block V8 technology.

For that reason, I could see welcoming the new LTx.

Now this is debateable. Personaly, the Gen II was NOT a radical step forward. It used reverse flow cooling (not a tremendous advance really IMO), an out of the box and notoriously buggy ignition design. But in the end, it's 85% your old school small block chevy, 23* heads and all.

The LSx motor. Factory six bolt mains. 18* heads from the get go. 4-7 swap on the cam. Composite intake manifold bridging the gap betwen the TQ of the L98 and the upper end of the LTx. Redesigned valvetrain. Coil on plug ignition. Everything new from the ground up. How is that NOT a radical advance forward. Step backwards nothing. Everything was forward with this motor. Oh, and the first LS1's were laying 300 at the wheels, or just shy of their "rated" flywheel horsepower and about 50 more than the LT1 to the ground. That's significant when you consider it's another 20% of an LT1's output higher stock for stock.

This is turning into a hell of a debate.

From what I'm seeing, the new LT1 is going to be what the LS1 was to the Gen II LT1. The younger brother set to dish up an ass whoopin.

[94Blackbird]

Now this is debateable. Personaly, the Gen II was NOT a radical step forward. It used reverse flow cooling (not a tremendous advance really IMO), an out of the box and notoriously buggy ignition design. But in the end, it's 85% your old school small block chevy, 23* heads and all.

The LSx motor. Factory six bolt mains. 18* heads from the get go. 4-7 swap on the cam. Composite intake manifold bridging the gap betwen the TQ of the L98 and the upper end of the LTx. Redesigned valvetrain. Coil on plug ignition. Everything new from the ground up. How is that NOT a radical advance forward. Step backwards nothing. Everything was forward with this motor. Oh, and the first LS1's were laying 300 at the wheels, or just shy of their "rated" flywheel horsepower and about 50 more than the LT1 to the ground. That's significant when you consider it's another 20% of an LT1's output higher stock for stock.

This is turning into a hell of a debate.

From what I'm seeing, the new LT1 is going to be what the LS1 was to the Gen II LT1. The younger brother set to dish up an ass whoopin.

It sure is, and I'm enjoying the hell out of it lol.

I would still argue that the LT motors were a massive leap, the ignition system is a missing link so to speak. The packaging of a distributor with the (at least in theory) accuracy of a coil near plug. Also, the development cycle wasn't that long for the LT motors either, GM basically used the LT5 to shame their engineers and they had to scramble to put together something homegrown that had some serious output. The LT motor was basically a stop gap design, and yet they still pulled a few magic tricks from their hats. The LTCC kit has been proven to increase output by up to 20 wheel horsepower, which makes me wonder what the output of the LT motors would have been from the factory if they had a coil near plug or even a waste spark style ignition rather than the super advanced distributor we got.

The LS motor really followed a natural progression. Technology is going to advance, there's no denying that. But I don't Personally believe that the LS really brought that much more to the table when the differences between the two motor's outputs can be summed up in the difference of an ignition system. I had heard rumor that the early LT prototypes had DIS, but I haven't seen any concrete proof.

I'm not denying that the LS1's aren't a technological progression. They are amazing motors. I just don't see anything radical about the motors to warrant that label. In my opinion, all I see is the natural progression of technologies and theories being applied with more powerful computing technology and improved manufacturing techniques.

How I wish the discussions in my class where this interesting!

[Featherburner]

Are you sure you want this associated with your beloved LT1? Not a fan so far...

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u3/jdhawk93/c7trinityrevb_zps0001891c.jpg

[94Blackbird]

Are you sure you want this associated with your beloved LT1? Not a fan so far...

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u3/jdhawk93/c7trinityrevb_zps0001891c.jpg

Ugh, looks too much like the new camaro from this angle lol.

Our discussion is focusing more on the motor though lol

[popo8]

Are you sure you want this associated with your beloved LT1? Not a fan so far...

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u3/jdhawk93/c7trinityrevb_zps0001891c.jpg


LOL... Im all about the growth of the community, so even if the new member isnt the prettiest, but still wants to hang out and hear (when I was your age stories), I welcome it.... even with its own section of the site... however if what Fastbird said is true, and they will be adopted by the LSX crowd, then that is a moot point in and of itself

And I love how 99% of us can have a debate...without putting anyone or their ideas down.. that is what I love here...


Finally, Sean, wasnt the reverse cooling of the LT1s so that the higher compression could be run on pump fuel, cooling the heads first before heating the water in the engine???

[94Blackbird]

LOL... Im all about the growth of the community, so even if the new member isnt the prettiest, but still wants to hang out and hear (when I was your age stories), I welcome it.... even with its own section of the site... however if what Fastbird said is true, and they will be adopted by the LSX crowd, then that is a moot point in and of itself

And I love how 99% of us can have a debate...without putting anyone or their ideas down.. that is what I love here...


Finally, Sean, wasnt the reverse cooling of the LT1s so that the higher compression could be run on pump fuel, cooling the heads first before heating the water in the engine???

haha, at least they won't be able to so easily say "LT1's are junk" lol

[Featherburner]

LOL... Im all about the growth of the community, so even if the new member isnt the prettiest, but still wants to hang out and hear (when I was your age stories), I welcome it.... even with its own section of the site... however if what Fastbird said is true, and they will be adopted by the LSX crowd, then that is a moot point in and of itself

And I love how 99% of us can have a debate...without putting anyone or their ideas down.. that is what I love here...


Finally, Sean, wasnt the reverse cooling of the LT1s so that the higher compression could be run on pump fuel, cooling the heads first before heating the water in the engine???You say adopted by the LSX crowd, what makes you think the new LT1 crowd will want anything to do with the LSX crowd? They may look down on the LSX crowd like the LSX crowd looked down on the LTX crowd. No?

[popo8]

You say adopted by the LSX crowd, what makes you think the new LT1 crowd will want anything to do with the LSX crowd? They may look down on the LSX crowd like the LSX crowd looked down on the LTX crowd. No?

YOU MAKE A GREAT POINT there... so would you believe that the new motor may have its own event and following all of its own.. and LTX FEST if you may???

[Fastbird]

Yes Larry, to my knowledge the reverse flow cooling was adopted as a safety measure given the rather high static compression ratio of the LTx platform.

94blackbird, I have to disagree with your statement about the difference of the LT and LS being an ignition system. It's FAR beyond that. First off, I don't believe any LT1 will pick up 20 HP from a LTCC unless something is being fixed in the process. It most likely gained back what was being lost on a weak ignition system to begin with.

But, let's look at some things. First up, the intake manifold design. Lets look at some progression there. The L98 sported massively long runners at about 22". Incredible torque, but no top end. The LT1 went opposite, with IIRC about a 4.7" runner. With the head revisions, you got really good torque and a vastly improved top end. The LSx bridged the gap with about a 14" runner, which maximized both torque and top end, especially coupled with the heads. And speaking of heads, how about them LS1 heads. Out of the box, a stock LS1 241 casting is better than an out of the box LT4 casting, and the 18* design means improved velocity into the combusion chamber due to the straighter angle going in. The motor is an will always be a volumetric efficiency monster when compared to a 23* LT1. But the bottom end........six bolt mains from the factory? The thing is a damn built stroker. A cam with a larger journal size, increasing the overall strength. standard 1.7:1 valvetrain, high lift, yet stable.

I'm sorry, but you'll never convince me that the LSx wasn't a far larger advancement than the LTx was over the SBC. You hit the nail on the head when you said it, but I think the essence of the phrase was lost. The LT1/4 was a stop gap motor, but that's because the LSx platform was already in development in the very early 90's, but wasn't progressing fast enough and they needed a change. So they said "how can we improve on THIS (SBC) in the interim? Voila! You have the LTx. Great for what it was, the final revision of the venerable SBC.

Read "All Corvette's are Red." It goes into the history of the C5 program, how it started in the late 80's, and how the LSx platform was born with it at the same time. Good stuff.

I'm not a motor nut hugger. Someone on my facebook posted about the LT1/4 for the new motors (Tyler Wheat I think) and some nuthugger cam in just talking trash. I can't stand people like that, ignorant e-knowitalls about whatever motor is in their car. I Love the LSx based motors, and plan to get into one again at some point when the right car presents itself at the right time. The LSx is refined and docile, the LTx is raw and gnarly. They both have their place. There's a few LTx cars making 1000 HP. There's a TON of LSx cars doing it too, and on factory pieces (heads, valvetrain, etc). It takes a LOT more to get an LTx there. But all in all, you can do pretty much anything with each motor and match each other, one just takes a bit more than the other. Work with what you've got, there's always someone more powerful/faster. I have an LT1, and I'll always have an LT1 of some kind. ;)

[94Blackbird]

Yes Larry, to my knowledge the reverse flow cooling was adopted as a safety measure given the rather high static compression ratio of the LTx platform.

94blackbird, I have to disagree with your statement about the difference of the LT and LS being an ignition system. It's FAR beyond that. First off, I don't believe any LT1 will pick up 20 HP from a LTCC unless something is being fixed in the process. It most likely gained back what was being lost on a weak ignition system to begin with.

But, let's look at some things. First up, the intake manifold design. Lets look at some progression there. The L98 sported massively long runners at about 22". Incredible torque, but no top end. The LT1 went opposite, with IIRC about a 4.7" runner. With the head revisions, you got really good torque and a vastly improved top end. The LSx bridged the gap with about a 14" runner, which maximized both torque and top end, especially coupled with the heads. And speaking of heads, how about them LS1 heads. Out of the box, a stock LS1 241 casting is better than an out of the box LT4 casting, and the 18* design means improved velocity into the combusion chamber due to the straighter angle going in. The motor is an will always be a volumetric efficiency monster when compared to a 23* LT1. But the bottom end........six bolt mains from the factory? The thing is a damn built stroker. A cam with a larger journal size, increasing the overall strength. standard 1.7:1 valvetrain, high lift, yet stable.

I'm sorry, but you'll never convince me that the LSx wasn't a far larger advancement than the LTx was over the SBC. You hit the nail on the head when you said it, but I think the essence of the phrase was lost. The LT1/4 was a stop gap motor, but that's because the LSx platform was already in development in the very early 90's, but wasn't progressing fast enough and they needed a change. So they said "how can we improve on THIS (SBC) in the interim? Voila! You have the LTx. Great for what it was, the final revision of the venerable SBC.

Read "All Corvette's are Red." It goes into the history of the C5 program, how it started in the late 80's, and how the LSx platform was born with it at the same time. Good stuff.

I'm not a motor nut hugger. Someone on my facebook posted about the LT1/4 for the new motors (Tyler Wheat I think) and some nuthugger cam in just talking trash. I can't stand people like that, ignorant e-knowitalls about whatever motor is in their car. I Love the LSx based motors, and plan to get into one again at some point when the right car presents itself at the right time. The LSx is refined and docile, the LTx is raw and gnarly. They both have their place. There's a few LTx cars making 1000 HP. There's a TON of LSx cars doing it too, and on factory pieces (heads, valvetrain, etc). It takes a LOT more to get an LTx there. But all in all, you can do pretty much anything with each motor and match each other, one just takes a bit more than the other. Work with what you've got, there's always someone more powerful/faster. I have an LT1, and I'll always have an LT1 of some kind. ;)


I had figured the conversation had about reached it's it's limit. I do agree with you, the LS1 is a major leap over traditional sbc architecture. BUT, as I stated before, all I see is a natural progression of technology and theory. We could debate back and forth all day, but I think agreeing to disagree is about as far as either one of us is going to get in convincing the other lol. Damn, this sounds like I'm getting heated when I'm not. I suppose I'll put this disclaimer in then. I am not getting angry, I just don't see the point in carrying the conversation further when we are starting to spin in circles!

You can ask Larry, once I'm done with my current car, I want to get into a fairly radical LSx build at some point in the future. I do like the motors, I just don't see the radical leap in technology. The leap is there, I just wouldn't label it as radical is all. I see the lessons of the past coming together in one fantastic package.

I do agree with the core of your statements, because you are correct. I personally just don't see anything that justifies giving the LS1 the label of radical leap in technology rather than how I see it, as a logical leap forward, given where the theory, design and technological improvements where headed.

I am sure that I'll wind up getting into the LSx more as time goes on, but for now I have to concentrate on school and what I need to finish up my current build. But trust me, I've got a doozy of a LSx build waiting in the wings, or even one of the new motors if they are old enough/I am rich enough by the time I am ready to jump into that build.

Ok, at this point I'm going to revert back to the Hemi bashing and Mod Motor tinker toy joke :D

[MeanTA]

Im a former LS owner. having owned a 02 SS. Its is a total different monster compared to our LT platform. And yes it was a stop gap between engines. But it will go down as the greatest engine built to have "no future".

LTX platform is based on the sbc which is the greatest selling and most built motor of all time. It just took it one step further by focusing on its weakest part. the cooling, it gave us a motor that is its happiest at high compression ratios. And the opti! No matter what some may thank of it. Its a giant leap in ignition design. put with the ecu gives a great operating system. In turn its true potential is endless!

LSX platform gave us a much more efficient head/valvetrain design. and because of that it can breath very well in the top end. off the floor the ls1 took advantage of the top end. that why the out run us stock to stock at the end of the track. and we beat them off the line.

new gen LTX will be a much different animal that only time will tell what it is able to do.

I always had a soft part for the LTX. For how crude and brutal it is by its nature. there like a like a rabid pitbull, may look cute and cudely when sleeping. But piss it off and wake it up. You better run. Plus the sound they make out the exhaust. No ls1/gen5 can compare to it. People just know when they hear a camed lt1/sbc.

[Chased]

I want one!!

[Neil350]

I figured it would be only a matter of time till those RPO codes were reissued on some thing other than a trim code package. I would say I want one but, I bought the C6 and I like the car but I don't love it.

[firebird_1995]

Another example is the 4.3L V8 "L99" also used in the 2010 camaro as a 6.2L V8 "L99"

[Fastbird]

Just an FYI, I was not getting irritated or anything. Everyone was having an adult your side his side discussion.

[popo8]

BUMP...lol

[BLK95-Z]

Im 100% ALL FOR a new section and class for the Gen 5 lt1 in our community.

[JCzNova]

So can they run street stock at the shootout then?

Where will the line be drawn?

[popo8]

So can they run street stock at the shootout then?

Where will the line be drawn?


I think they would have their own catagories..... with the exception of like outlaw or something like that...

[Tyler Wheat]

The direct injection opens all new doors for their motors. But if the direct injection V6 motors GM is currently making is any indication, GM MUST fix their PCV issues or include an oil catch can with these DI motors or else they're going to have even more serious problems. 1 quart of oil consumption every 500-1000 miles is not normal in my book, but within spec in GM's book. BMW is learning the hard way about direct injection while their dealership technicians are tearing apart heads to hand clean the oil sludge off of the valves. That's the biggest problem with crappy PCV systems and direct injection. With the standard injection we have now, the fuel flows over the valves and helps clean sludge and grime off of the valves. With direct injection, that gas is going right into the combustion chamber and hence nothing to clean the valves off... If you have a lot of oil going into the intake - which you definitely do with GM's crappy PCV system - you're going to get sludge build up and you will lose power over time unless you invest in an oil catch can or run Seafoam products through your engine on a fairly regular basis.

Agreed on the crappy PCV system. Our CTS eats a lot of oil (3.6L) but it is all in spec according to GM. I just changed the plugs again on Monday and it runs much smoother. I understand and like the idea of upper cylinder lubrication but I feel bad for those who have to take their cars to GM for these problems. I especially feel sorry for those who have one and don't keep a tight watch on oil levels.

I don't know if that 3.6L is DI or not but I do not it has an oil consumption problem. Annoying more than anything. Its not anything hard- plugs are just a matter pulling the intake and an hour and a half out of my day. It just seems silly to have such an issue involving arguably the most important part of the engine.

[Tyler Wheat]

Do know*

[meissen]

Agreed on the crappy PCV system. Our CTS eats a lot of oil (3.6L) but it is all in spec according to GM. I just changed the plugs again on Monday and it runs much smoother. I understand and like the idea of upper cylinder lubrication but I feel bad for those who have to take their cars to GM for these problems. I especially feel sorry for those who have one and don't keep a tight watch on oil levels.

I don't know if that 3.6L is DI or not but I do not it has an oil consumption problem. Annoying more than anything. Its not anything hard- plugs are just a matter pulling the intake and an hour and a half out of my day. It just seems silly to have such an issue involving arguably the most important part of the engine.

Yeah the 3.6L V6 in the CTS is DI.

[Tyler Wheat]

Well that certainly makes sense then

[popo8]

http://www.corvetteblogger.com/images/content/2012/120312_6.jpg



by Keith Cornett
CorvetteBlogger.com (http://www.corvetteblogger.com/?p=12623)
If you can’t wait until Jan. 13 for the official unveiling of the C7 Corvette, Car and Driver magazine (http://www.caranddriver.com/), in its January issue that arrived in many folks’ mailboxes last week, claims to have “All the Details on Chevy's Halo Car, One Month Early.”
Car and Driver even says Corvette engineer Tadge Juechter “kindly agreed to check this story for accuracy using a 10-point report card we supplied. Check back in March for a fully authorized rundown on the 2014 Corvette and the grades we earned from the ultimate authority on the subject.”
The story doesn't really break any new ground, though it does offer hope for fans of the split window and the Stingray name. Those features which were previewed on a 2009 concept car “won't appear at C7's christening,” the magazine asserts, “but don't rule them out. When the Corvette needs a pick-me-up and a fuel-economy boost later in the decade, the iconic tail treatment and name combo could add luster to a 30-plus-mpg (highway) model powered by a 400-hp 5.5 liter V-8.”
Car and Driver also claims that the hydroformed aluminum main members of the frame currently used just for the Z06 and ZR1 will become standard fare for all C7s. The sheet-molded exterior panels will also all be made of carbon fiber, thanks to “streamlined manufacturing processes implemented by supplier Plasan Carbon Composites,” which have cut costs by 60 percent.
The magazine also reports that the C7 will indeed have the square-cornered tail lights so familiar on Chevrolet products these days, i.e., the Camaro and Malibu. They also expect the car to be priced at or below $55,000 for a base coupe, “a 9-percent price hike over a 2013 Corvette, entirely reasonable given the ultralight construction, more powerful engine, and significantly better gas mileage.”

[popo8]

http://www.corvetteblogger.com/images/content/2012/120312_7.jpg

http://www.corvetteblogger.com/images/content/2012/120312_8.jpg

http://www.corvetteblogger.com/images/content/2012/120312_9.jpg

http://www.corvetteblogger.com/images/content/2012/120312_10.jpg

[jaysz2893]

Not feeling it... too much Viper mixed with 5th gen camaro. Engine is OK just cause of the name .. where does GM come up with designs?

Sent from my ThunderBolt using Tapatalk 2

[popo8]

Not feeling it... too much Viper mixed with 5th gen camaro. Engine is OK just cause of the name .. where does GM come up with designs?

Sent from my ThunderBolt using Tapatalk 2


I see Ferrari California in that....

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRxODtIt3hDvKKfgEmH7ziz0F7UIjyJl lkANNvKJg_dVVRnpsVk1433cO91

[jaysz2893]

I see Ferrari California in that....

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRxODtIt3hDvKKfgEmH7ziz0F7UIjyJl lkANNvKJg_dVVRnpsVk1433cO91

I see that too.. you know what i dont see?? Corvette in it.. LOL

[popo8]

I see that too.. you know what i dont see?? Corvette in it.. LOL

Very true....

U think this is how people felt back im 83 when they were showin pics of the "all new 84 c4?" lol.


Larry (Popo8) Co-owner
LTXtech.com

[CamaroZGuy]

from the side looks like a Ferrari, from the back looks like a 5th gen, and the front....well its something....

if this is truly going to be the C7 then GM just runined the Corvette....but i guess it was time since they have runined every other car....

[blackbird1084]

Ugh!!! My favorite car ruined!

[94Blackbird]

You know, I'm going to reserve judgement until I have seen one in person. I didn't care for the new camaro's when they were announced, and I definitely won't be buying one any time soon, but I believe that they are much better looking cars in person.

[CamaroGirl]

from the side looks like a Ferrari, from the back looks like a 5th gen, and the front....well its something....

if this is truly going to be the C7 then GM just runined the Corvette....but i guess it was time since they have runined every other car....
QFT

[meissen]

I like that they went for something different than the previous years. While the C6 is extremely nice, I hated the C4s and C5s.

[popo8]

...I hated the C4s and C5s.

:(

[blackbird1084]

My sons middle name is corvette (not joking) and I pray there are some design changes before the production models come out.

[popo8]

My sons middle name is corvette (not joking) and I pray there are some design changes before the production models come out.

Thats like the coolest mid name


Larry (Popo8) Co-owner
LTXtech.com

[meissen]

:(

:laugh: Whoops forgot you have a C4! :lolsign: S'all good - tons of people hate 5th gens too.

[popo8]

:laugh: Whoops forgot you have a C4! :lolsign: S'all good - tons of people hate 5th gens too.

Its ok....i was just bustinf ur stones...they are not for everyone.




Larry (Popo8) Co-owner
LTXtech.com

[Badbird_96]

Its ok....i was just bustinf ur stones...they are not for everyone.




Larry (Popo8) Co-owner
LTXtech.com

I'm one of those Larry. For me its because everyone thinks its the best thing ever because it says Corvette on it. Although there are certain models I would rock

C4 ZR1
C4 GS
C2 427
C2 Split window
C3 early stingray when they had metal bumpers
Any C1
C5 Z06
C6 ZR1 - oooooh yeah...

[popo8]

Your right... but I gotta say, there is something fun about the simplicity of it...

tucked in the car...sitting sooooo low in it, feeling like the cockpit is wrapped around you and with NO mods, the biatch handles.... Now my dream car was always the C4 GS... and thats why I got it... but I wouldve gotten a C4 at some point for a DD to save the camaro...

[CamaroZGuy]

all i can hope for is that ugly thing to cause the price of C5's to drop in to my price range.

[Sahara54]

I really want an 83' ...:rotfl:. But seriously, I would rock an ordinary 6spd C5.

[rdx]

Check this links:

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/12/more-c7-corvette-owners-manual-leaks-ahead-of-january-debut/

http://www.boldride.com/blog/2012/12/2014-chevrolet-c7-corvette-five-reasons-why-its-going-to-suck/19630/

It looks like the car is going to look just like the car and driver article... if that's the case I think it will suck style wise...

It's been a long wait to see this car and now my expectative is low on this car... but who knows... we'll see on January 13th

[meissen]

I think with any new car it's hard to get the full scope of how it looks when you're only seeing these leaked pictures. That's why GM (and the rest of the auto manufacturers) hate when people leak pictures because the leaked pics don't allow GM to control your first impression of the car. Instead the first impressions are from drawings that may have proportions wrong, renderings that may or may not be accurate, etc.

That said - being in the Detroit area and working for GM, well all I can say is that I know someone who has seen the pre-production C7 with his own eyes and although he wouldn't share much he did say that he thought it was drop dead gorgeous. Grain of salt, but I'm holding my opinions of the car until I see it in person.

Edit: Wow I just read that Boldride.com blog article - that was one of the most poorly written articles I've read in a long time.