LT1 vs LS1
#21
08-22-2007, 10:20 PM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
ORIGINAL: whammer3024
you missed the point of slvr saying the hemi comment. he was saying that hemi was the motor chrysler fans fell in love with and "the motor to have" in a chrysler and people still talk about them and they're very desired. if people don't get excited over the past then why did dodge bring the hemi back? just cause you dont care about either of the engines doesn't mean everyone else can't have a chat about it. you just wanted to stir up drama and get people pissed off
you missed the point of slvr saying the hemi comment. he was saying that hemi was the motor chrysler fans fell in love with and "the motor to have" in a chrysler and people still talk about them and they're very desired. if people don't get excited over the past then why did dodge bring the hemi back? just cause you dont care about either of the engines doesn't mean everyone else can't have a chat about it. you just wanted to stir up drama and get people pissed off
Let's see here. "What motor's better, the LS1 or the LT1?" Everyone knows that this 9 year old dead horse starts up debates that take a turn for the worst, yet it's still brought up. It's been discussed over 1000 times. What can possibly be said that hasn't already been said?
Why did Chrysler bring the Hemi back? They brought it back because they were going broke and figured that they could make a profit off of the Hemi name. Today, "Hemi" is nothing more than the name of the engine.
#22
08-22-2007, 10:24 PM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
yeah i realize that but everyone wants it because it still means something to people
#23
08-22-2007, 11:28 PM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
ORIGINAL: whammer3024
yeah i realize that but everyone wants it because it still means something to people
yeah i realize that but everyone wants it because it still means something to people
#24
08-23-2007, 01:17 AM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
ORIGINAL: RatedZ
Hmmm, tell me about the last time you heard of an LT1 throwing its rods. Isn't that what a REV LIMITER is for?
Wow, Inever mentioned that the LS1 head flows better than an LT1 head, did I? Oh, that's right, I did, didn't I?
High flow helps at high RPMs? Really? No way!
Over-revving an enginecausesthrown bearings? Wow! That's news to me!
Thanks for stating everything above,"Captain Obvious."I amnow that much wiserfor having read your above statements.
My turn:
While you were on your soapbox, you failed to mention that while Top Fuelengines employ an old design, theyhave more technology designed into them than any other racingengine on the planet.
You mentioned that Chrysler designed the Hemi design. It disappoints me to have to point out your failure tomention and/or realizethat Ford was the first company to employ a hemispherical design, not Chrysler. It's a good thing that I'm here to correct you, because there may have been some other members that would have otherwise been painfully misinformed.
ORIGINAL: 95slvrZ28
Just because an engine is not the most recent powerplant in a car doesn't mean that people stop talking about it, GM hasn't put a big block into a factory Camaro since 2nd gens, but people still talk about them, and people definately still care about them. Mopar came up with hemi technology in the era of classic muscle, are you suggesting that just because it's old technology makes it something that nobody cares about? Go talk to the drag racing industry and ask the top fuel guys what style of motor they run...antiquated technology makes the fastest accelerating vehicle on the planet, but it doens't matter 'cause it's old right? Everyone likes to talk about the powerplant that they have, plain and simple. Some other things that I'd like to address from your previous post is the fact that, sure in thoery an aftermarket head for an LT1 can have similar flow numbers to that of an LS1 head, but this still does not make up for the fact that you can still get better flow velocity out of the LS1 head, high flow will only help you at high rpms, high velocity helps you in the low end. Ah yes, and of course if you overrev the car isn't going to break, thank you captain obvious...if you overrev an LT1 you can kiss your berrings goodbye too...what's your point? Obviously nothing is a flawless design, unless it's made of unobtanium...
ORIGINAL: RatedZ
Just wait until the 2009 Camaro debuts. Nobody's even going to care about the LS1 anymore. The only reason people care about it now is because it's the last engine (for the time being) to be put under the hood of an F-Body. Hell, if the L98 was the last engine put under the hood of the F-Body, people would probably still be carrying on about thatengine...
ORIGINAL: RS.Camaro.SS
^ Who peed in his cheerios?
^ Who peed in his cheerios?
Wow, Inever mentioned that the LS1 head flows better than an LT1 head, did I? Oh, that's right, I did, didn't I?
High flow helps at high RPMs? Really? No way!
Over-revving an enginecausesthrown bearings? Wow! That's news to me!
Thanks for stating everything above,"Captain Obvious."I amnow that much wiserfor having read your above statements.
My turn:
While you were on your soapbox, you failed to mention that while Top Fuelengines employ an old design, theyhave more technology designed into them than any other racingengine on the planet.
You mentioned that Chrysler designed the Hemi design. It disappoints me to have to point out your failure tomention and/or realizethat Ford was the first company to employ a hemispherical design, not Chrysler. It's a good thing that I'm here to correct you, because there may have been some other members that would have otherwise been painfully misinformed.
#25
08-23-2007, 03:09 AM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
ORIGINAL: 95slvrZ28
hmm...I believe that you stated that in an aftermarket head you will see similar flow numbers. Flow numbers are advertised as how much gets through, not how fast it's going, I was talking about flow velocity and you never mentioned that. I would also like to appologize for missing the fact that Ford made the first technology, although I would be willing to bet that Chrysler's was better seeing as how they were successful with it and Ford wasn't, but regardless, I can see that nothing will deter you from your argument here, which happens to be not to argue, ironic isn't it? So since my motor is old, I'm going to stop talking about it now, 3 pages about something nobody cares about. I think you should change your argument to "I no longer care which one is better" because it's obvious that some people still do care. Hell, the Camaro hasn't been produced since 2002, we may as well just stop caring about it too...it's 5 years old, what's left to talk about?
hmm...I believe that you stated that in an aftermarket head you will see similar flow numbers. Flow numbers are advertised as how much gets through, not how fast it's going, I was talking about flow velocity and you never mentioned that. I would also like to appologize for missing the fact that Ford made the first technology, although I would be willing to bet that Chrysler's was better seeing as how they were successful with it and Ford wasn't, but regardless, I can see that nothing will deter you from your argument here, which happens to be not to argue, ironic isn't it? So since my motor is old, I'm going to stop talking about it now, 3 pages about something nobody cares about. I think you should change your argument to "I no longer care which one is better" because it's obvious that some people still do care. Hell, the Camaro hasn't been produced since 2002, we may as well just stop caring about it too...it's 5 years old, what's left to talk about?
#27
08-23-2007, 08:19 AM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
ORIGINAL: RS.Camaro.SS
Someone here needs some McDonalds so they can Put a Smile On
Someone here needs some McDonalds so they can Put a Smile On
For the record, I ate McDonalds the other day and it did not bring a smile to my face.Instead it brought me to the bathroom with major poops and a painedfrown on my face. :/
#28
08-23-2007, 01:19 PM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
^^^
LOL.. youhad bad luck with McD's, i always get it after a long night of drinking and i always get a smile (i would love nothing more than a McD's right now, there is only KFC around here that we can go to 
bad deal)
LOL.. youhad bad luck with McD's, i always get it after a long night of drinking and i always get a smile
(i would love nothing more than a McD's right now, there is only KFC around here that we can go to bad deal)
#29
08-23-2007, 01:29 PM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
ORIGINAL: RS.Camaro.SS
^^^
LOL.. youhad bad luck with McD's, i always get it after a long night of drinking and i always get a smile (i would love nothing more than a McD's right now, there is only KFC around here that we can go to bad deal)
^^^
LOL.. youhad bad luck with McD's, i always get it after a long night of drinking and i always get a smile
(i would love nothing more than a McD's right now, there is only KFC around here that we can go to bad deal)
#30
08-23-2007, 01:31 PM
RE: LT1 vs LS1
ORIGINAL: RatedZ
Nobody peed in my Cheerios. I just can't believe that after 9 years this debate is still carrying on. I don't even hear the Ford boys crying about the 4.6L Vs. the 5.0L anymore.
Just wait until the 2009 Camaro debuts. Nobody's even going to care about the LS1 anymore. The only reason people care about it now is because it's the last engine (for the time being) to be put under the hood of an F-Body. Hell, if the L98 was the last engine put under the hood of the F-Body, people would probably still be carrying on about thatengine...
ORIGINAL: RS.Camaro.SS
^ Who peed in his cheerios?
^ Who peed in his cheerios?
Just wait until the 2009 Camaro debuts. Nobody's even going to care about the LS1 anymore. The only reason people care about it now is because it's the last engine (for the time being) to be put under the hood of an F-Body. Hell, if the L98 was the last engine put under the hood of the F-Body, people would probably still be carrying on about thatengine...
