Did FORD design the LS engine?
09-15-2012, 10:19 PM
#61
GM built the LS motor.
Only so many ways to run oil/water passages/bore spacing, etc. on a block
the GM LS is a clean sheet design of a motor.
Dont see why so many ford guys are hungup on what they think is a ford design.
Its not and never will be, Sperry bros. Are credited with the actual original LS cylinder head designs.
The sbf was so great, yet fomoco, decided to crank out the overgrown underpowered 2v mod motor in massive quantities.
I actually use to overhaul engines for a minute, and have much exp. With sbf and all mod motors, prolly just as much as sbc.
I will say this though, i aint gonna lie, i charge a pretty coin to work on mod motors.
Cam swaps and valve train, mucho cha-ching$. mod motor labors have paid for many a ls goodies for my junk.
I actually got a h/g repair/cam swap/valvetrain upgrades on a 04 slobra. Thats gonna pay off a few bills
Only so many ways to run oil/water passages/bore spacing, etc. on a block
the GM LS is a clean sheet design of a motor.
Dont see why so many ford guys are hungup on what they think is a ford design.
Its not and never will be, Sperry bros. Are credited with the actual original LS cylinder head designs.
The sbf was so great, yet fomoco, decided to crank out the overgrown underpowered 2v mod motor in massive quantities.
I actually use to overhaul engines for a minute, and have much exp. With sbf and all mod motors, prolly just as much as sbc.
I will say this though, i aint gonna lie, i charge a pretty coin to work on mod motors.
Cam swaps and valve train, mucho cha-ching$. mod motor labors have paid for many a ls goodies for my junk.
I actually got a h/g repair/cam swap/valvetrain upgrades on a 04 slobra. Thats gonna pay off a few bills
09-17-2012, 04:25 PM
#62
Teching In
Join Date: May 2009
Location: mayfield, ky
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly you didn't read anything I wrote. GM's new pushrod motor shares virtually nothing with the old SBC that's been around for over 50 years. But what it does share, that it never used to, is the oiling system, cooling system, head bolt pattern, intake and exhaust runner, distributor location, even the firing order lol etc., right out of the pages of the old SBF.
It's clear you are a brand worshiper, which is ok I guess. I'm fairly loyal to GM, but I also know they build a whole lotta crap. Every company does. Just don't see the correlation between the SBF and the LS. You would have to be pretty narrow minded to think that this engine was based, even loosely on ONE particular engine. If the engineers that birthed the LS are as smart as I believe they are, they probably looked at a whole slew of engines from the past to see what worked well and what didn't.
09-18-2012, 10:00 AM
#63
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny, don't recall seeing a distributor on my car. Also, how is the oil system the same as a SBF? The LS is a crank driven gerotor, while SBF is a camshaft/distributor driven gear pump. Lastly, LS water pumps contain the inlet and outlet ports to the block, as well as the thermostat which allows the intake manifold to remain dry. SBF on the other hand has a conventional cooling system with a water pump that pushes coolant into the block and exits out through the intake.
It's clear you are a brand worshiper, which is ok I guess. I'm fairly loyal to GM, but I also know they build a whole lotta crap. Every company does. Just don't see the correlation between the SBF and the LS. You would have to be pretty narrow minded to think that this engine was based, even loosely on ONE particular engine. If the engineers that birthed the LS are as smart as I believe they are, they probably looked at a whole slew of engines from the past to see what worked well and what didn't.
It's clear you are a brand worshiper, which is ok I guess. I'm fairly loyal to GM, but I also know they build a whole lotta crap. Every company does. Just don't see the correlation between the SBF and the LS. You would have to be pretty narrow minded to think that this engine was based, even loosely on ONE particular engine. If the engineers that birthed the LS are as smart as I believe they are, they probably looked at a whole slew of engines from the past to see what worked well and what didn't.
And, please god, some of you people that fail to read and comprehend what's being said, for the last time, I never said the design was the same. I said what the design was based around - a SBF. Front oiling, Head to block cooling, 10 head bolts, front distributor (WITH A CARB - for the idiots), and standalone intake/exhaust ports.
There is no brand "worshiping". There is plain as day facts of how one push rod motor called a SBC completely changed up it's oiling, cooling, head design, head bolt displacement, from what it has been running for 50 plus years and just so happened to change it to what the SBF has been running for over 50 years. Are you people really this blind or just stupid?
Again, at least you can read the same thing from magazines, magazines such as car craft and hot rod who are generally Chevy bias. I guess they must be wrong as well?
Good god, I'm out of here lol.
09-18-2012, 11:28 AM
#64
The reason the distributor is up front is simple. And it obviously has nothing to do with the way Ford decided it should be...****, use your head.
Also, coolant does not flow into the heads first, it flows into the block, up to the heads And back down thru a small passage in the block back to the water pump. Just like the original small block Chevy.
Also, coolant does not flow into the heads first, it flows into the block, up to the heads And back down thru a small passage in the block back to the water pump. Just like the original small block Chevy.
(ingenuity) was not done at Ford, thats for sure.
09-20-2012, 09:53 AM
#67
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Just This Side of Damnation
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I recall a somewhat lengthy exploration of the development of the LS1. It is still available.
Since it is "No use without permission" I'll simply supply a link to it.
THIS link.
Take the time to read the entire thing. It'll be good for you.
Since it is "No use without permission" I'll simply supply a link to it.
THIS link.
Take the time to read the entire thing. It'll be good for you.
09-20-2012, 10:32 AM
#68
TECH Fanatic
Ford stopped using pushrod motors almost completely in the early 90's. In 97 when the LS1 came out, Fords equal was making - what 225 horse? If they designed the LS1 you bet your *** they would have kept it.
09-20-2012, 06:25 PM
#69
the f150's/250's and broncos got the 5.0/5.8 till 96... the f250 till 97...
the mountaineer and exploders till 99 could come with a 5.0...
just letting ya know...
also ford offered the 460 big block in 97... they also ran the 4.6 as early as 94 iirc in the mark 8's and 91 in the town cars
09-25-2012, 03:43 AM
#70
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-06-2012, 11:57 PM
#71
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Altoona, PA
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wish I was a fly on the wall at Ford or GM to hear what they're working on but at the end of the day we should look to AMG from Mercedes Benz to show us what's going to happen in the future. The new Twin Turbo V8s with direct injection and multi injectors per piston and no need for a starter motor technologies are years ahead of everyone else.
10-07-2012, 01:38 AM
#72
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Altoona, PA
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason the distributor is up front is simple. And it obviously has nothing to do with the way Ford decided it should be...****, use your head.
Also, coolant does not flow into the heads first, it flows into the block, up to the heads And back down thru a small passage in the block back to the water pump. Just like the original small block Chevy.
Also, coolant does not flow into the heads first, it flows into the block, up to the heads And back down thru a small passage in the block back to the water pump. Just like the original small block Chevy.
FrontDizzy spun his head too much and hasn't been around enough to know that the ls1 went back to traditional cooling as opposed to the lt1's reverse cooling he is hung up on.
Head bolt placement is strictly due to block distortion to an aluminum block. The old SBC layout would have played hell on the aluminum block. I guess that could be a page from ford making this layout so as not to distort their iron blocks which would lead me to believe they were using the same inferior metals to produce their blocks as they used for all those quick to rust out stang bodies for so many years.
Lets not forget those intakes the sbf used that required no coolant passages, oh wait, thats the ls engine.
In the end, the ford boys have always reached way out there to try and take credit for anything another manufacture made superior to anything they designed and they are really reaching on this issue. So be it. Guess it's a great excuse to their ford brethern as to why the ls is becoming such a popular swap into fox bodies. Wander how many sbf's are swapped into F-Bodies? I'm betting very few.
Look at Sperry(sp) and his past creations for GM heads and his accomplishments. He finally got to do what he knew needed done and it wasn't ideas from ford.
As for front oiling. It's crank driven. A system that has become common place among many manufactures and is more cost effective. Isn't ford sbf in the pan?
Keep reaching, it's all you have
Last edited by Violatorno1; 10-07-2012 at 01:49 AM.
10-07-2012, 01:11 PM
#74
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,291
Likes: 0
Received 1,723 Likes
on
1,235 Posts
Is reading and comprehension lost in the world today? Or is everyone just a complete imbecile? I clearly stated the distributor location was up front with a carb motor. Have you not been around long enough to see an LS1 carb setup and where the distributor would go? Wow.
And, please god, some of you people that fail to read and comprehend what's being said, for the last time, I never said the design was the same. I said what the design was based around - a SBF. Front oiling, Head to block cooling, 10 head bolts, front distributor (WITH A CARB - for the idiots), and standalone intake/exhaust ports.
There is no brand "worshiping". There is plain as day facts of how one push rod motor called a SBC completely changed up it's oiling, cooling, head design, head bolt displacement, from what it has been running for 50 plus years and just so happened to change it to what the SBF has been running for over 50 years. Are you people really this blind or just stupid?
Again, at least you can read the same thing from magazines, magazines such as car craft and hot rod who are generally Chevy bias. I guess they must be wrong as well?
And, please god, some of you people that fail to read and comprehend what's being said, for the last time, I never said the design was the same. I said what the design was based around - a SBF. Front oiling, Head to block cooling, 10 head bolts, front distributor (WITH A CARB - for the idiots), and standalone intake/exhaust ports.
There is no brand "worshiping". There is plain as day facts of how one push rod motor called a SBC completely changed up it's oiling, cooling, head design, head bolt displacement, from what it has been running for 50 plus years and just so happened to change it to what the SBF has been running for over 50 years. Are you people really this blind or just stupid?
Again, at least you can read the same thing from magazines, magazines such as car craft and hot rod who are generally Chevy bias. I guess they must be wrong as well?
Good, because those of us that are already "blind and stupid" will end up even more stupid if we follow your "facts"
All this talk about carbs and distributors.....Have you not been around long enough to realize that no LS1 ever came this way from the factory? If you want to compare original OEM designs, then why all this focus on aftermaket/non-original conversions?
You know, Cadillac and Buick were using front mount distributors many decades ago. So was Mopar. This concept is not exclusive to Ford.
10-13-2012, 08:33 PM
#75
I recall a somewhat lengthy exploration of the development of the LS1. It is still available.
Since it is "No use without permission" I'll simply supply a link to it.
THIS link.
Take the time to read the entire thing. It'll be good for you.
Since it is "No use without permission" I'll simply supply a link to it.
THIS link.
Take the time to read the entire thing. It'll be good for you.
10-14-2012, 10:44 AM
#76
On The Tree
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wilmywood NC
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since everybody is giving their opinion; do I think that Ford designed the LS engine? No, but I think the design of the LS is very close to the design of the SBF.
I remember in the mid 90's when the SB2 first came out (Nascar), a local drag racer got his hands on one for his 1st Gen Camero race car. It had a modified Roush SBF intake on it,when asked about it he was telling people that sometimes when you have to beat someone, you have to join them
I remember in the mid 90's when the SB2 first came out (Nascar), a local drag racer got his hands on one for his 1st Gen Camero race car. It had a modified Roush SBF intake on it,when asked about it he was telling people that sometimes when you have to beat someone, you have to join them
10-14-2012, 12:21 PM
#77
TECH Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Magnolia, Texas
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To put it as nicely as possible, you guys who think they are so much alike or that GM took cues from the SBF when designing the LS are just goofy. They are no more alike than any other small block V8 compared to it.
1. They don't have a front mounted distributor, they have a crank triggered, micro-processor controlled, distributorless ignition, period. The distributor kits that do exist for LS engines have nothing to do with what the engineers were planning for these engines. To say that because a part made to adapt an engine to run a conventional switched ignition ends up mounted on the front of the engine makes it a copy of another that was designed with the distributor in front some 40 years prior is dumb. Like said before, if this is true how do know that they weren't copying the Mopar small-block? Just dumb.
2. They don't have a similar oil pump or lubrication system. SBF's have a front pan sump mounted, distributor driven, spur-gear pump. The LS has a rear sump pick-up, front of block mounted, crank driven, gerotor pump. What's the similarity? That they both have an oil pump mounted forward of the center of the block? Who cares, what does that matter in comparison? If anything the LS is more like a Mazda Rotary, just as dumb to say even.
3. The bore spacing is very close. So? The bores are very close too, does that mean every engine with a bore at or about 4" is copying Ford's SB? That covers a lot of engines. Both companies were building a 90* V8 with 3.9-4" bores in the least amount of space. So they ended up very close. Yeah, that means they were out of ideas and started pulling 40 year old SBF's out of the junk yard to learn from because they were universally recognized as the pinnacle of engine efficiency design. NOT.
4. The head bolt pattern. Yeah I'm sure nobody ever though of just putting a head bolt in every corner before to save space and make the head smaller. Never mind that until recent advances in sealing technology the old Gen I SBC with five head bolts per cylinder was considered superior to 4 bolt designs because they held up better. So GM already had what allowed them an advantage for many years and yet now that gaskets were stronger we can admit that Ford had it right all along and just copy them. Retarded. So if the racing distributor kits are evidence of succeeding to Ford's engineering dominance in SB design then why are the GM LSX blocks and heads with extra head bolt holes not evidence that Ford never had it right? Damn man it's all about saving space and reducing costs at an acceptable quality point. Now that the gaskets are strong enough they were able to reduce the amount of fasteners while still retaining a strong seal. Now why did Ford never use the extra bolts even when the gaskets sucked? Because they didn't feel it was important enough to spend the money that's why. Oh and by the way there were V8 engines from the very beginning that used four corner head bolts, not just the SBF. How about the Studebaker V8 or Pontiac V8 just to name two. Get over it, it's not evidence of GM copying all mighty Ford by any stretch of your over active imagination.
5. Nascar V8's. Really? I bet you're watching that rubbish right now even though there's good football on aren't you. Here's a news flash: Nascar regulates so much of the engine designs that are allowed to compete that I would be willing to bet you could stick Mopar Nascar heads and a Toyota Nascar SB intake on your Ford Nascar block and have more similarity's to point out as reasons why Ford copied them than you can find comparing street SBF's and street LS V8's. And yet nobody else cares.
I only opened this forum because this post was listed on the main page last night. I wasn't going to say anything because it looked like the biggest dummy gave up but I found another has taken up this cause based on the worlds most popular spec racing series. Now I know why I don't waste time here. In the words of Davy Crockette, "You can all go to Hell. I will go (back) to Texas.", and Football, F a bunch of Nascar.
Vernon
1. They don't have a front mounted distributor, they have a crank triggered, micro-processor controlled, distributorless ignition, period. The distributor kits that do exist for LS engines have nothing to do with what the engineers were planning for these engines. To say that because a part made to adapt an engine to run a conventional switched ignition ends up mounted on the front of the engine makes it a copy of another that was designed with the distributor in front some 40 years prior is dumb. Like said before, if this is true how do know that they weren't copying the Mopar small-block? Just dumb.
2. They don't have a similar oil pump or lubrication system. SBF's have a front pan sump mounted, distributor driven, spur-gear pump. The LS has a rear sump pick-up, front of block mounted, crank driven, gerotor pump. What's the similarity? That they both have an oil pump mounted forward of the center of the block? Who cares, what does that matter in comparison? If anything the LS is more like a Mazda Rotary, just as dumb to say even.
3. The bore spacing is very close. So? The bores are very close too, does that mean every engine with a bore at or about 4" is copying Ford's SB? That covers a lot of engines. Both companies were building a 90* V8 with 3.9-4" bores in the least amount of space. So they ended up very close. Yeah, that means they were out of ideas and started pulling 40 year old SBF's out of the junk yard to learn from because they were universally recognized as the pinnacle of engine efficiency design. NOT.
4. The head bolt pattern. Yeah I'm sure nobody ever though of just putting a head bolt in every corner before to save space and make the head smaller. Never mind that until recent advances in sealing technology the old Gen I SBC with five head bolts per cylinder was considered superior to 4 bolt designs because they held up better. So GM already had what allowed them an advantage for many years and yet now that gaskets were stronger we can admit that Ford had it right all along and just copy them. Retarded. So if the racing distributor kits are evidence of succeeding to Ford's engineering dominance in SB design then why are the GM LSX blocks and heads with extra head bolt holes not evidence that Ford never had it right? Damn man it's all about saving space and reducing costs at an acceptable quality point. Now that the gaskets are strong enough they were able to reduce the amount of fasteners while still retaining a strong seal. Now why did Ford never use the extra bolts even when the gaskets sucked? Because they didn't feel it was important enough to spend the money that's why. Oh and by the way there were V8 engines from the very beginning that used four corner head bolts, not just the SBF. How about the Studebaker V8 or Pontiac V8 just to name two. Get over it, it's not evidence of GM copying all mighty Ford by any stretch of your over active imagination.
5. Nascar V8's. Really? I bet you're watching that rubbish right now even though there's good football on aren't you. Here's a news flash: Nascar regulates so much of the engine designs that are allowed to compete that I would be willing to bet you could stick Mopar Nascar heads and a Toyota Nascar SB intake on your Ford Nascar block and have more similarity's to point out as reasons why Ford copied them than you can find comparing street SBF's and street LS V8's. And yet nobody else cares.
I only opened this forum because this post was listed on the main page last night. I wasn't going to say anything because it looked like the biggest dummy gave up but I found another has taken up this cause based on the worlds most popular spec racing series. Now I know why I don't waste time here. In the words of Davy Crockette, "You can all go to Hell. I will go (back) to Texas.", and Football, F a bunch of Nascar.
Vernon
10-14-2012, 12:57 PM
#79
ahh! i love this thread!!!
ford didnt help gm...but gm helped ford with the coyote motor....gm finally said "we will send some people to help out....a lot of gm guys are wondering why there has been no competition for the last 40 years...."
lmao
ford didnt help gm...but gm helped ford with the coyote motor....gm finally said "we will send some people to help out....a lot of gm guys are wondering why there has been no competition for the last 40 years...."
lmao
10-14-2012, 02:36 PM
#80
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,291
Likes: 0
Received 1,723 Likes
on
1,235 Posts
Manic Mechanic is completely correct. How does being correct make someone "butt hurt"?
Perhaps the truth is just hard to accept for some people in this thread.
The LS1 is an LS1; not a redesign of a small block Ford. If you don't want to accept that, or if disbelieving it makes you happy, then you are living in your own world of ignorance. And that's not an attack on anybody, it's just the simple truth and fact of the matter.
The end.
Perhaps the truth is just hard to accept for some people in this thread.
The LS1 is an LS1; not a redesign of a small block Ford. If you don't want to accept that, or if disbelieving it makes you happy, then you are living in your own world of ignorance. And that's not an attack on anybody, it's just the simple truth and fact of the matter.
The end.
