LQ4 Power

[Fast355]

[sarcasm]Yes, obviously the engineers at GM are complete retards because they set back their engine development by 80 years when they abandoned the more powerful and better on fuel small block for their LS engines. Everyone else who's swapping them must be retards too.[/sarcasm]

Sorry, but a bunch of your claims are BS. You're not taking a $2600 budget and putting together a small block and running circles around this engine below 5k rpm with a 215* duration cam. If you put together the right combo then you could approach the same power with that size of cam, but that's about it. You're probably also one of the people that claim the 90's LT1's had more torque and was faster than the LS1 too....

Skinny Pedal showed a very potent engine you can build on a budget. I give him a big thumbs-up for that and an even bigger one once the cam info is available so others can duplicate what he did.

Actually I am and doing it with a stock 12cc dished piston shortblock and ~9.5:1 compression ratio. The old Gen1 engines INCLUDING LT1 make more low-end and midrange grunt than stock LS engines.

215/220 cam is more like a 218/224 with the 1.6s.

[lionelhutz]

The old Gen1 engines INCLUDING LT1 make more low-end and midrange grunt than stock LS engines.

Yup, I knew that you'd even have to argue that one. The stock LT1 torque curve is lower than the LS1 torque curve through the whole rpm range. You are completely delusional.

Oh wait, you're probably comparing a stock LS1 vs a built LT1....

[Fast355]

Yup, I knew that you'd even have to argue that one. The stock LT1 torque curve is lower than the LS1 torque curve through the whole rpm range. You are completely delusional.

Oh wait, you're probably comparing a stock LS1 vs a built LT1....

You are mistaking on the LT1 vs LS thing atleast LT1 Vette vs LS1 Vette. The LT1s put down a better 60' because they make peak torque at a lower RPM.