Talk:General Motors LT engine

message: The first paragraph makes it sound like GM didn't have a smallblock before 1970.  this needs to be corrected or clarified.--Pqdave 16:33, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right.  That was old junk text.  What do you think now? --SFoskett 19:13, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
Much clearer, good job. --Pqdave 15:09, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  First smallblock in 1970? 

message: It looks like the GM Small-Block engine page and this one have a lot of overlap.  The Small Block page is already as unwieldy as it is—can someone move the information over here and appropriately link in? --Milkmandan 22:51, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
:I disagree.  This page is for the Generation II small-block.  That page is for the Generation I engine.  The GM LS engine page is for the Generation III and IV.  The overlap was intended to be a intro to this article.  --SFoskett 23:31, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
::Gotcha—I didn't realize that.  Since the connection between the engines seems to be a complex one, maybe this should be stated more clearly in the introduction paragraph for each article? --Milkmandan 01:33, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)
:::i am late to get on this band wagon seeing how the last post was in 2005.  i am in favor of merging the Gen I and Gen II pages together.  why is a simple question. Generation II engines are basically Generation I engines with some block mods in them.  if you wanted to you could take the rotating assemble out of an LT1 and put it into a 95 or new 350 with ease.  Gen IIs aren't that different from Gen Is, but more a further refinement of a Gen I.  it's like having two different pages for the Gen III and IV engines, and all a Gen IV is just a further refinement of a Gen III.  i have since reorganized the Gen I page so its very neat with good flow.  if the merger were to be done it would be fairly easy to do.  But that leaves only one question, what to name the merged page?  the Gen III and Gen IV page is called LS-based series, so what you would you call a Gen I and Gen II page....Ed Cole series or classic SBC series?Gulielmi2002 (talk) 14:50, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: The LT1 and LT4 are readily modified to increase their horsepower, and many owners do so.  I believe mention of this aspect would be beneficial, especially considering the rather thorough existing discussion of rated horsepower.  The mention of the poorly designed intake and exhaust is true, but seems to detract from the performance aspects of the LT engine applications, and a counterpoint seems appropriate.  But, I don't want to be too specific or off-topic.  I think something like the below text is a good start, but I would appreciate feedback or editing clean-up, of course:
-- new text added...
It has already been noted that the LT engine's reverse cooling system enables high compression, and the factory exhaust system and air inlet systems are not well optimized for performance.  The intake manifolds and cylinder head castings are capable of supporting much higher horsepower than factory-equipped engines produced.  Even more readily than the typical Gen 1 small block, these aspects of the LT1 and LT4 enable their horsepower to be significantly increased by the addition of high-performance air intake ducting and exhaust systems. Further, upgrading the cylinder head porting and camshaft design with appropriate supporting modifications can enable these engines to produce in excess of 400 naturally aspirated horsepower at the rear wheels, or about 500 horsepower at the flywheel.
--
Sources:  Various documented engine builds with dyno graphs and race timeslips were reviewed on discussion groups such as camaroz28.com, and the unofficial Z28 forums. The 400 HP number is conservative, especially for the LT4.  Drivetrain losses of 15 to 20% are commonly accepted, so with the conservative 400HP number, 500 HP at the crankshaft is a very feasable number.
Example engine build refrence for HP capability:
http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/4496_500_hp_na_chevrolet_lt1_engine/index.html
Example reference documenting factory cylinder head capability:
http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/4606_chevrolet_lt1_engine_info/index.html
----
*Hilarious. Why do you guys need all those litres? The standard 5.0L Ford block of the same era is also good for 400hp+ flywheel, normally aspirated, IF YOU DO THE RIGHT BUILD, i.e new bottom-end, pistons, heads. Heck a whole new engine is needed for either GM or Ford. Its not exactly a LT1 then is it? 192.197.71.189 16:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  LT series engines respond well to modification 

message: there should be something mentioned that the 4.6L NorthStar evolved from the LT5.  i know that this is said in the 4.6L northstar section and perhapse something needs to be said about this in the LT5 section with some links.Gulielmi2002 (talk) 20:09, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely! Could you add it? —Mrand Talk • C 21:30, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  LT5 connection to the 4.6L NorthStar