LS1, bad forced induction motor? 
LS1, bad forced induction motor?
There is a really shallow ringland, mostly for emmissions, which makes the stock piston more prone to crack the ringland during detonation. Aftermarket pistons usually move the first ring down and help strengthen it up. As long as you have a good tune, the LS1 will handle boost all day.
-Geoff
-Geoff
Originally Posted by CaMaRoZ28LS12000
I have heard that the LS1 can't take forced induction as well as an LT1 can because it has poorly designed piston rings. Is this true?
TECH Apprentice
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
I'm not an LT1 expert, but I would venture to say that the above post could be a little biased about the lt1 being able to run more cylinder pressure on pump gas. Cooling is only a small part of the detonation equation and the ls1 has a very good chamber design for eliminating detonation (probably much better than the lt1). Reverse cooling is not a bad idea, but GM found better ways to run high compression on the ls1.
The ls1 can be a great boost motor.
The stock motor responds very well to moderate boost (7-8psi) with the right tune and proper preperation (like keeping the PCV from putting oil back in the intake)..
At higher boost levels, you really have to change out the pistions, rings, rods, and lower compression a bit (but this is true for any high compression OEM motor).
The ls1 can be a great boost motor.
The stock motor responds very well to moderate boost (7-8psi) with the right tune and proper preperation (like keeping the PCV from putting oil back in the intake)..
At higher boost levels, you really have to change out the pistions, rings, rods, and lower compression a bit (but this is true for any high compression OEM motor).
Last edited by QuickSilver2002; Feb 9, 2004 at 12:42 AM.
Trending Topics
QS,
If we are talking about at the extreme end of the boost scale the LS1 will NOT hold up to it as well as LT1, older small blocks and even god forbid our ford small block buddies. It simply will not stay together as well as the others I mention here and it is a design limitation, pure and simple.
If we are talking about at the extreme end of the boost scale the LS1 will NOT hold up to it as well as LT1, older small blocks and even god forbid our ford small block buddies. It simply will not stay together as well as the others I mention here and it is a design limitation, pure and simple.
Originally Posted by QuickSilver2002
I'm not an LT1 expert, but I would venture to say that the above post could be a little biased about the lt1 being able to run more cylinder pressure on pump gas. Cooling is only a small part of the detonation equation and the ls1 has a very good chamber design for eliminating detonation (probably much better than the lt1). Reverse cooling is not a bad idea, but GM found better ways to run high compression on the ls1.
The ls1 can be a great boost motor.
The stock motor responds very well to moderate boost (7-8psi) with the right tune and proper preperation (like keeping the PCV from putting oil back in the intake)..
At higher boost levels, you really have to change out the pistions, rings, rods, and lower compression a bit (but this is true for any high compression OEM motor).
The ls1 can be a great boost motor.
The stock motor responds very well to moderate boost (7-8psi) with the right tune and proper preperation (like keeping the PCV from putting oil back in the intake)..
At higher boost levels, you really have to change out the pistions, rings, rods, and lower compression a bit (but this is true for any high compression OEM motor).
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo TECH Apprentice
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by sr71bb
QS,
If we are talking about at the extreme end of the boost scale the LS1 will NOT hold up to it as well as LT1, older small blocks and even god forbid our ford small block buddies. It simply will not stay together as well as the others I mention here and it is a design limitation, pure and simple.
If we are talking about at the extreme end of the boost scale the LS1 will NOT hold up to it as well as LT1, older small blocks and even god forbid our ford small block buddies. It simply will not stay together as well as the others I mention here and it is a design limitation, pure and simple.
I would like to here others opinions on this. I seem to remember hearing about a few people who are hoping to hit 900-1000 hp pretty soon.
Anyway, the original post did not seem like it was referring to the extreme end of the boost scale to me (but perhaps he was). I just assume most ls1 owners are looking at a multi purpose street/track car and would be happy with 500RWHP.
This particular statement is what I thought was somewhat misleading:
Additionally LT1's have reverse cooling where the HEADS receive water BEFORE the block. This allows you to run higher compression on an LT1 compared to an LS1 and still stay on pump gas.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,339
Likes: 3
From: NYC metro area
The LT1's iron block and belt slippage problems on LS1 blower setups play small parts as well.
Head lift seems to be the biggest problem I've seen/read about with forced induction LS1 setups, but everybody whose posted so far has made good points. I find this thread very interesting, since I've enjoyed reading about this subject before... I can't wait to see what PSJ, BIGBOS, forcefed, raymer, and others have to say on this subject...
IMO, SR71BB I think was most accurate. The LT1 may be "better" (I'm using this term relatively) than the LS1 for f/i, but there is truely no motor that performs as well with minor bolt-ons (cai/catback/headers) as the LS1. The LS1 is truely the best street motor available, and therein lies it's strength. It's just too bad that everybody is into all this import garbage, otherwise the F-Body would have insane sales. These same kids bolting on CAIs and Catbacks to their Hondas and seeing 7 RWHP gains could do the same with an LS1 car and make 20+ more RWHP... It's a shame, it really is.
However, all you need to do is take a good look at some of the turbo LS1s. Granted, there aren't many of them with huge horse numbers, but there definitely are some insane ones... LS1 or LT1, I love both motors and I'd mod either one. However, had I bought an LS1, I'd probably do either a nitrous or big cube setup rather than Forced Induction. Just my $.03
Head lift seems to be the biggest problem I've seen/read about with forced induction LS1 setups, but everybody whose posted so far has made good points. I find this thread very interesting, since I've enjoyed reading about this subject before... I can't wait to see what PSJ, BIGBOS, forcefed, raymer, and others have to say on this subject...
IMO, SR71BB I think was most accurate. The LT1 may be "better" (I'm using this term relatively) than the LS1 for f/i, but there is truely no motor that performs as well with minor bolt-ons (cai/catback/headers) as the LS1. The LS1 is truely the best street motor available, and therein lies it's strength. It's just too bad that everybody is into all this import garbage, otherwise the F-Body would have insane sales. These same kids bolting on CAIs and Catbacks to their Hondas and seeing 7 RWHP gains could do the same with an LS1 car and make 20+ more RWHP... It's a shame, it really is.
However, all you need to do is take a good look at some of the turbo LS1s. Granted, there aren't many of them with huge horse numbers, but there definitely are some insane ones... LS1 or LT1, I love both motors and I'd mod either one. However, had I bought an LS1, I'd probably do either a nitrous or big cube setup rather than Forced Induction. Just my $.03
Last edited by Super Mario; Feb 10, 2004 at 03:11 AM.
We'll know more about how much the LS1 will take come spring time.
There's a few setups that come to mind than just may prove/disprove a lot of rumors this year.
Resurection of this post might be in order say, april time frame
There's a few setups that come to mind than just may prove/disprove a lot of rumors this year.
Resurection of this post might be in order say, april time frame
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by y2khawk
There's a few setups that come to mind than just may prove/disprove a lot of rumors this year.
SR71BB: Do you really think that 4-bolt cylinders are the deciding factor? Bring it on. There are one, or two (million), examples that prove you wrong. Case in point: Cylinder head breathing is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT factor in HP production. Five-bolt heads interfere with the intake port, though the exhaust is better in traditional SBCs. I can keep the heads seated in an LSx or Ferd application for 30 pounds of boost (as proven on the engine dyno). But can you flow the same numbers in an SBC? Answer: No. Port as you might the SBC falls short (at the stock 23*) due to the valve inclination, and ESPECIALLY the pushrod interference, due solely to the 5-bolt head. O-Rings solve my head seating problem, but the LT1/SBC intereference problem can only be solved by a custom valve angle (18* or less) with a mega-bucks valve-train.
The LS1 IS well-suited for a high-boost applications... even stock. It just takes $120 in machining to do it. The LSx heads outflow the early 90s SBC NAS(h)CAR heads, right from the factory.
The LSx surely WILL hold up better than the LT-old/SB-retired, you simply don't have the experience to understand that. In the 50 years of the SBC, it still can't match the prowess of the LSx after only 7 years.
Ignorance is bliss... at least on the net.
SC-
Last edited by SS00Blue; Feb 10, 2004 at 03:52 PM.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,339
Likes: 3
From: NYC metro area
Originally Posted by SS00Blue
Yup. Having run N/A cars quicker than the above poster, all on 4-bolt Ferd cylinders, I'd say that the LSx is PLENTY stout with FI, N2O or N/A. It's about cylinder pressure, no matter how it is developed. Anyone that would discount an engine simply because it has a 4-bolt block obviously doesn't know much. Certainly, that one is completely ignorant about Ferd and LSx turbo/N2O/N/A cars of present.
SR71BB: Do you really think that 4-bolt cylinders are the deciding factor? Bring it on. There are one, or two (million), examples that prove you wrong. Case in point: Cylinder head breathing is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT factor in HP production. Five-bolt heads interfere with the intake port, though the exhaust is better in traditional SBCs. I can keep the heads seated in an LSx or Ferd application for 30 pounds of boost (as proven on the engine dyno). But can you flow the same numbers in an SBC? Answer: No. Port as you might the SBC falls short (at the stock 23*) due to the valve inclination, and ESPECIALLY the pushrod interference, due solely to the 5-bolt head. O-Rings solve my head seating problem, but the LT1/SBC intereference problem can only be solved by a custom valve angle (18* or less) with a mega-bucks valve-train.
The LS1 IS well-suited for a high-boost applications... even stock. It just takes $120 in machining to do it. The LSx heads outflow the early 90s SBC NAS(h)CAR heads, right from the factory.
The LSx surely WILL hold up better than the LT-old/SB-retired, you simply don't have the experience to understand that. In the 50 years of the SBC, it still can't match the prowess of the LSx after only 7 years.
Ignorance is bliss... at least on the net.
SC-
SR71BB: Do you really think that 4-bolt cylinders are the deciding factor? Bring it on. There are one, or two (million), examples that prove you wrong. Case in point: Cylinder head breathing is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT factor in HP production. Five-bolt heads interfere with the intake port, though the exhaust is better in traditional SBCs. I can keep the heads seated in an LSx or Ferd application for 30 pounds of boost (as proven on the engine dyno). But can you flow the same numbers in an SBC? Answer: No. Port as you might the SBC falls short (at the stock 23*) due to the valve inclination, and ESPECIALLY the pushrod interference, due solely to the 5-bolt head. O-Rings solve my head seating problem, but the LT1/SBC intereference problem can only be solved by a custom valve angle (18* or less) with a mega-bucks valve-train.
The LS1 IS well-suited for a high-boost applications... even stock. It just takes $120 in machining to do it. The LSx heads outflow the early 90s SBC NAS(h)CAR heads, right from the factory.
The LSx surely WILL hold up better than the LT-old/SB-retired, you simply don't have the experience to understand that. In the 50 years of the SBC, it still can't match the prowess of the LSx after only 7 years.
Ignorance is bliss... at least on the net.
SC-
SC...........Hmmmm...."Ignorance is Bliss"
Tell you what take an LS1 to a ford mustang shootout with all those turbos on the MOOSESTANGS and see how well you fare. We have quite a ways to go before we catch up to those guys. Don't see any LS1's in the "world's fastest street car" competitions. Doesn't make ANY difference how well the heads breathe if you can't keep the damn things on the block!!!!
Seen any 1000 HP LS1's around????? I sure the hell haven't. No I beleive I DO have the facts straight. The LS1 is NOT the ultimate drag motor and it never will be and that is a FACT. Know of any 6 or 7 second Ls1's???? I didn't think so.
Rumour has it that the ARE car (fastest LS1 around or close) has an enclosed trailer so that when they blow the head gaskets off their car on ONE of those 8 second runs, they can do repairs immediately without anyone else knowing the COST of going FAST.
Plus I wouldn't make any assumptions about what level of experience I have because you don't know me from Adam. I hung around with the Blue Max boys back in the "good ole days" so once again you are incorrect in your assumptions.
So who is the "ignorant" one now????
Tell you what take an LS1 to a ford mustang shootout with all those turbos on the MOOSESTANGS and see how well you fare. We have quite a ways to go before we catch up to those guys. Don't see any LS1's in the "world's fastest street car" competitions. Doesn't make ANY difference how well the heads breathe if you can't keep the damn things on the block!!!!
Seen any 1000 HP LS1's around????? I sure the hell haven't. No I beleive I DO have the facts straight. The LS1 is NOT the ultimate drag motor and it never will be and that is a FACT. Know of any 6 or 7 second Ls1's???? I didn't think so.
Rumour has it that the ARE car (fastest LS1 around or close) has an enclosed trailer so that when they blow the head gaskets off their car on ONE of those 8 second runs, they can do repairs immediately without anyone else knowing the COST of going FAST.
Plus I wouldn't make any assumptions about what level of experience I have because you don't know me from Adam. I hung around with the Blue Max boys back in the "good ole days" so once again you are incorrect in your assumptions.
So who is the "ignorant" one now????
Originally Posted by SS00Blue
Yup. Having run N/A cars quicker than the above poster, all on 4-bolt Ferd cylinders, I'd say that the LSx is PLENTY stout with FI, N2O or N/A. It's about cylinder pressure, no matter how it is developed. Anyone that would discount an engine simply because it has a 4-bolt block obviously doesn't know much. Certainly, that one is completely ignorant about Ferd and LSx turbo/N2O/N/A cars of present.
SR71BB: Do you really think that 4-bolt cylinders are the deciding factor? Bring it on. There are one, or two (million), examples that prove you wrong. Case in point: Cylinder head breathing is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT factor in HP production. Five-bolt heads interfere with the intake port, though the exhaust is better in traditional SBCs. I can keep the heads seated in an LSx or Ferd application for 30 pounds of boost (as proven on the engine dyno). But can you flow the same numbers in an SBC? Answer: No. Port as you might the SBC falls short (at the stock 23*) due to the valve inclination, and ESPECIALLY the pushrod interference, due solely to the 5-bolt head. O-Rings solve my head seating problem, but the LT1/SBC intereference problem can only be solved by a custom valve angle (18* or less) with a mega-bucks valve-train.
The LS1 IS well-suited for a high-boost applications... even stock. It just takes $120 in machining to do it. The LSx heads outflow the early 90s SBC NAS(h)CAR heads, right from the factory.
The LSx surely WILL hold up better than the LT-old/SB-retired, you simply don't have the experience to understand that. In the 50 years of the SBC, it still can't match the prowess of the LSx after only 7 years.
Ignorance is bliss... at least on the net.
SC-
SR71BB: Do you really think that 4-bolt cylinders are the deciding factor? Bring it on. There are one, or two (million), examples that prove you wrong. Case in point: Cylinder head breathing is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT factor in HP production. Five-bolt heads interfere with the intake port, though the exhaust is better in traditional SBCs. I can keep the heads seated in an LSx or Ferd application for 30 pounds of boost (as proven on the engine dyno). But can you flow the same numbers in an SBC? Answer: No. Port as you might the SBC falls short (at the stock 23*) due to the valve inclination, and ESPECIALLY the pushrod interference, due solely to the 5-bolt head. O-Rings solve my head seating problem, but the LT1/SBC intereference problem can only be solved by a custom valve angle (18* or less) with a mega-bucks valve-train.
The LS1 IS well-suited for a high-boost applications... even stock. It just takes $120 in machining to do it. The LSx heads outflow the early 90s SBC NAS(h)CAR heads, right from the factory.
The LSx surely WILL hold up better than the LT-old/SB-retired, you simply don't have the experience to understand that. In the 50 years of the SBC, it still can't match the prowess of the LSx after only 7 years.
Ignorance is bliss... at least on the net.
SC-
Last edited by sr71bb; Feb 12, 2004 at 07:43 PM.
Teching In
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by SS00Blue
I can keep the heads seated in an LSx or Ferd application for 30 pounds of boost (as proven on the engine dyno).
Originally Posted by SS00Blue
Ignorance is bliss... at least on the net.
SC-
SC-
“What you just said, is one of the most insanely idiotic things I’ve ever heard. At no point, in your rambling incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room, is now dumber for having listened to it.”
I ruin the end of films...
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,545
Likes: 0
From: Taking back some video tapes
I have yet to see a true LS1 forced induction motor that has impressed me with it's track times. Sure, Duke's C5R/F-1R car is impressive, but there's not much LS1 left on that motor. I'm talking about using the stock castings (LS1/LS6/6L) and either an iron or tin can block. Maybe it's tuning, maybe it's belt slippage, maybe it's in the design of the head. Who knows?
If I was building a late-model GM car for a blower, it'd be an LT1. If I was building a late-model GM car to run on the gun, it'd be an LS1 hands down. There's absolutely no comparision between an LT1 w/ bolt-ons and a 150-shot and an LS1 w/ the same mods/shot.
If I was building a late-model GM car for a blower, it'd be an LT1. If I was building a late-model GM car to run on the gun, it'd be an LS1 hands down. There's absolutely no comparision between an LT1 w/ bolt-ons and a 150-shot and an LS1 w/ the same mods/shot.
Teching In
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Not Impressed??? Iam running a stock bottom end LS1 with GWP's cam and ported heads. I just had my car retuned at corvette conection and she put down 556RWHP and 596RWTQ. Thats up from last years 531/503. I dont know what they did to my car as far as tuning but Iam dying to get the car back and read the CPU. Last year I ran a 10.69 in 50 degree weather with 531-503, I cant wait to see what I run now with 90+ more torque. (oh, and they only took the engine to 5200RPM) My torque curve starts coming down at about 5100 so they stopped the run. I would have loved to see my HP at 6000RPM Iam guessing close to 580-590RWHP...
Iam verry impressed with the stock bottom end, Ive been running boost for over 6k miles and its still running strong. total miles 36000.
New track times will be coming soon.
Iam verry impressed with the stock bottom end, Ive been running boost for over 6k miles and its still running strong. total miles 36000.
New track times will be coming soon.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 11,603
Likes: 0
From: Chi-Town, IL
The stock motor itself treated right can handle boost all day long with a good tune, the main thing that kills these motors is bad tuning and people getting greedy with the boost along with not taking the right precautions at that level......
My stock motor had 16,000 on it when it went...............it was one of those loud cold knockers from the factory, always burned oil etc.......I never really thought anything of it because back in the day buring a QT in 500-600 miles wasn't unheard of, it was fine for the heads/cam setup.....the first thing I would of done if I had to do it over again would of been to lower the comp of the motor right away before I got the blower put on.......I decided to see what 6psi and 10.6:1 comp does on pump gas........#7 headgasket didn't like it too much, and I had more blow by after that I didn't know what to do.......
I was going to do a 348c.i. build up, but I chose to go with the LQ4 block for that extra peace of mind.........
To top it all off, do the research before you get into it................SERIOUSLY....
I want to see how Raymers formula performs at the track with the current old mans motor in it.......
My stock motor had 16,000 on it when it went...............it was one of those loud cold knockers from the factory, always burned oil etc.......I never really thought anything of it because back in the day buring a QT in 500-600 miles wasn't unheard of, it was fine for the heads/cam setup.....the first thing I would of done if I had to do it over again would of been to lower the comp of the motor right away before I got the blower put on.......I decided to see what 6psi and 10.6:1 comp does on pump gas........#7 headgasket didn't like it too much, and I had more blow by after that I didn't know what to do.......
I was going to do a 348c.i. build up, but I chose to go with the LQ4 block for that extra peace of mind.........
To top it all off, do the research before you get into it................SERIOUSLY....
I want to see how Raymers formula performs at the track with the current old mans motor in it.......
Originally Posted by CaMaRoZ28LS12000
I have heard that the LS1 can't take forced induction as well as an LT1 can because it has poorly designed piston rings. Is this true?
I don't recall the LS1 being not as good as the LT1 when it comes to boosting a stock longblock. Then again, it's 2004 and the LT1 has not be produced in a car since 1997, I think that's... 7 years?
I bet if I took a low mile LT1 car, and an low mile LS1 car, and boost them hard, and used C16 and an aftermarket ECU, that the LS1 would make more power solely based on the fact that LS1 heads are better. No other reason.
Stand alone ECU. Very few people in the ls1 community seem to actually realize how important this piece of the equation is. The import people have been all over this for a few years now.
Compare a "ls1 edit" style computer mod made 375 hp. Changed to an AEM and made 515 hp.
AEM will put this discussion to rest.
Compare a "ls1 edit" style computer mod made 375 hp. Changed to an AEM and made 515 hp.
AEM will put this discussion to rest.