LS1 or LQ4??
11-09-2008, 10:26 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS1 or LQ4?? hello everyone! 
Im giving it some thought about putting an LS in my 84 T type instead of a sbc 406.(the car already has a sbc instead of the 3.8). It seems like alot of the LS swaps go with the carb set up, but what about the FI? Is it the cost or the hassle or both that most don't retain the fuel injection? If you get a "drop out" it seems like the FI would be the way to go. just would have to do an electric fuel pump. And between the LQ4, (truck 6.0, and I've even seen LQ9..what makes this different from the LQ4)? and the LS1 which would be the better one to go with? I ask this because from the HP/TQ ratings the LQ4and LS1 (F-bodys) are close to the same. 300-310 HP. i know the LSI is all aluminum block..correct? so some weight saving, but other then that? and is it worth the extra work as oppose to just dropping in a Gen. 1 sbc or even a LT1? I'm still learning about the LS engines so for give my ignorance. and thanks for your time!!
Im giving it some thought about putting an LS in my 84 T type instead of a sbc 406.(the car already has a sbc instead of the 3.8). It seems like alot of the LS swaps go with the carb set up, but what about the FI? Is it the cost or the hassle or both that most don't retain the fuel injection? If you get a "drop out" it seems like the FI would be the way to go. just would have to do an electric fuel pump. And between the LQ4, (truck 6.0, and I've even seen LQ9..what makes this different from the LQ4)? and the LS1 which would be the better one to go with? I ask this because from the HP/TQ ratings the LQ4and LS1 (F-bodys) are close to the same. 300-310 HP. i know the LSI is all aluminum block..correct? so some weight saving, but other then that? and is it worth the extra work as oppose to just dropping in a Gen. 1 sbc or even a LT1? I'm still learning about the LS engines so for give my ignorance. and thanks for your time!! 
11-09-2008, 10:29 AM
#2
11 Second Club
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Springfield, Missouri
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hello everyone! Im giving it some thought about putting an LS in my 84 T type instead of a sbc 406.(the car already has a sbc instead of the 3.8). It seems like alot of the LS swaps go with the carb set up, but what about the FI? Is it the cost or the hassle or both that most don't retain the fuel injection? If you get a "drop out" it seems like the FI would be the way to go. just would have to do an electric fuel pump. And between the LQ4, (truck 6.0, and I've even seen LQ9..what makes this different from the LQ4)? and the LS1 which would be the better one to go with? I ask this because from the HP/TQ ratings the LQ4and LS1 (F-bodys) are close to the same. 300-310 HP. i know the LSI is all aluminum block..correct? so some weight saving, but other then that? and is it worth the extra work as oppose to just dropping in a Gen. 1 sbc or even a LT1? I'm still learning about the LS engines so for give my ignorance. and thanks for your time!!
Im giving it some thought about putting an LS in my 84 T type instead of a sbc 406.(the car already has a sbc instead of the 3.8). It seems like alot of the LS swaps go with the carb set up, but what about the FI? Is it the cost or the hassle or both that most don't retain the fuel injection? If you get a "drop out" it seems like the FI would be the way to go. just would have to do an electric fuel pump. And between the LQ4, (truck 6.0, and I've even seen LQ9..what makes this different from the LQ4)? and the LS1 which would be the better one to go with? I ask this because from the HP/TQ ratings the LQ4and LS1 (F-bodys) are close to the same. 300-310 HP. i know the LSI is all aluminum block..correct? so some weight saving, but other then that? and is it worth the extra work as oppose to just dropping in a Gen. 1 sbc or even a LT1? I'm still learning about the LS engines so for give my ignorance. and thanks for your time!!
11-09-2008, 10:33 AM
#3
) and prior LQ4 it has weaker rods than the LQ9 also. Other than those two things its basically the same motor.If it were me Id probably just do a 6.0, they are usually cheaper than the LS1s from what Ive seen. My LQ9 makes my 4800lb truck move out pretty well.
11-09-2008, 10:39 AM
#4
Most of the folks that I know personally have stayed with the EFI. It's not hard to do and if you take time to learn you can do a lot of tuning with it. Plus it is virtually trouble free if you are looking for a good driver and also will get good gas mileage. You will need to do some harness adjustments either way and have the ECU reprogrammed. You can do that yourself or there are a number of vendors that will do it for you. I recommend Speartech.com but there are other good ones too. Go for the new technology, you'll never look back!
Pat
Pat
11-09-2008, 11:18 AM
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i see. so try to stay with an '04 and newer LQ4? i was told by a friend that in '03 the LQ4 was rated at 345 HP, this true? And as for the LQ9, what trucks/SUV is this motor found? thanks for the info!!!!
Trending Topics
11-10-2008, 08:05 AM
#8
TECH Resident
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD.
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another thing to keep in mind is that GM wasn't always 100% truthful about horsepower ratings.
The LS1 in the Camaro was rated at 305hp.... Most stockers make that to the rear wheels, meaning that flywheel hp is alot closer to 350hp.
The LQ4 is a lower compression motor, and the hp ratings vary considerably depending upon year and application (SUV vs 1ton truck vs Van). Most of that is the tune and available transmission choices (some are detuned to keep the trans alive).
As far as which is better, you'll have to figure it out. The LQ4 and 9 should be cheaper, are newer, and alot more plentiful than an LS1 motor as a complete pullout. And the iron block motors can be overbored (.030" ot .060", whereas the alum motors only allow for a really minimal cleanup hone (.005" to .010" depending upon year and who you ask). But the alum motor is a significant bit lighter (80 to 100 lbs, again depending upon whom you ask). And the truck accessories certainly take more engine bay space (and don't fit in certain applications). And the truck intake is fugly. It can be swapped out for a car intake, but then you've got added expenses, and the truck access have to be modified to work with the car intake.
Lots of things to think about, aren't there?
'JustDreamin'
The LS1 in the Camaro was rated at 305hp.... Most stockers make that to the rear wheels, meaning that flywheel hp is alot closer to 350hp.
The LQ4 is a lower compression motor, and the hp ratings vary considerably depending upon year and application (SUV vs 1ton truck vs Van). Most of that is the tune and available transmission choices (some are detuned to keep the trans alive).
As far as which is better, you'll have to figure it out. The LQ4 and 9 should be cheaper, are newer, and alot more plentiful than an LS1 motor as a complete pullout. And the iron block motors can be overbored (.030" ot .060", whereas the alum motors only allow for a really minimal cleanup hone (.005" to .010" depending upon year and who you ask). But the alum motor is a significant bit lighter (80 to 100 lbs, again depending upon whom you ask). And the truck accessories certainly take more engine bay space (and don't fit in certain applications). And the truck intake is fugly. It can be swapped out for a car intake, but then you've got added expenses, and the truck access have to be modified to work with the car intake.
Lots of things to think about, aren't there?
'JustDreamin'
11-10-2008, 12:47 PM
#13
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was.. 