Midnight02

iTrader: (8)

I'm going to echo Darth's comments here in response to the above LS7 clutch recommendation. Yes, the LS7 clutch is a durable and cost effective replacement for the stock clutch, however it is VERY heavy. My H/C/I/N20 car felt like a dog with it in. When it was ready to be replaced, I went with a McLeod RST + aluminum flywheel (38 pounds all in) and it feels like a completely different car. The throttle response is lightening fast and "tip in" in amazing -- honestly feels like there's an extra 50 rwhp in there (although I know that isn't the case). The cost of the twin disc might scare you off, however it's FULLY rebuildable and cost effective to do so.

Compression will help you too. I went with budget PRC Stage 2.5 5.3L heads because it works well with the same Spartan CamMotion cam you noted above (I run a variant of that same stick). I'm sure I could squeeze more power out of a nice set of AFR's however I used the cost savings from the PRC heads to fund my nitrous kit.

Finally, you'll want to change the rear gear. As an automatic you have either a 2.73 or 3.23 in the rear. I've run the stock 3.42, 3.90 and 4.10 on my setup and there's a noticeable difference changing from one to another. Just another component that will wake up that sluggish LS1.

The LT1 was a GREAT motor -- stock for stock, I like the torquey feel of the LT1 better, however you will find that a beast that lies within the LS1....just takes a little work to tap into that potential.

99 Black Bird T/A

iTrader: (4)

IIRC - Regarding throttle response being poor on the 98 LS1, GM changed the throttle body "cam" in 2000 or 2001 (I forgot) to improve this and create a "torque-ier" feel at part throttle.

JD_AMG

No, its correct because you are going by false ratings. The LS1's would make 325ft.lbs at the wheels at just 2400RPMs. Peak numbers at the flywheel were 350hp/375ft.lbs.

JD_AMG

Sorry to go off topic but what flywheel were you using with the LS7 clutch?
I used a RAM lightwei ght flywheel and noticed no difference with that setup vs stock.

Darth_V8r

iTrader: (4)

I couldn't tell you which flywheel my buddy had. Just that the motor felt "truckish" compared to mine. Slow to rev, slow to come back down.

Stopyobytchen

I know the feeling about the ls1, I have the same year car and same trans, but mine has had some work done to it. Anyways I agree with you on that for the ls1... I think I'm gonna do a cam and possibly headers. Great question though! I never really thought to ask it but it's good to know!

ahritchie

iTrader: (1)

You're full of
I've had my LS1 dynoed and it was not making 325TQ at 2400 C5 LS1 was rated at 350LB FT at 4400 RPM at the FLYWHEEL NOT at the wheels .....So you are the one spewing false ratings!

This has been documented for years, the LS1 has a higher torque curve and higher HP.....it cannot have both the best low end TQ and top end given the same displacement and lower CR than a LT1, it's impossible by simple math!
http://www.camaroz28.com/forums/f-bo...-proof-500438/

Darth_V8r

iTrader: (4)

Stock LS1 will generally dyno 285-310 at the wheels, with the 97 and 98 coming in lower, and the 01-04 coming in higher. Sometimes you get lucky, but this is what they get.

Throttle response on the later ones is better, and again, it is the heads and cam. The 806 heads were the worst. Second to that is the cam. The 98-00 had a very wide LSA - 119.5 degrees. The 01+ had a narrower LSA - 116. Gave it a bit better dynamic compression in addition to the slightly better flowing 241 heads - and (I think?) 2.3cc smaller combustion chamber as well for higher CR. Heads on the LT1 were 54cc vs 66.7cc (possibly 69cc on the 806 heads but not positive)

If you did something as simple as a 218/224 on a 112 with no advance on modern lobes, it would raise your dynamic compression from 6.9 to 7.9, and really wake the low end of that motor up. With a 3 degree advance, you'd be at 8.1. you wouldn't gain much top end, but you'd pull hard off idle to about 4500.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

Can you say converter spike? If that were a real number my cam only LT1 made 509tq,...........

JD_AMG

01+ C5 LS1 is rated at 350hp/375ft.lbs, look it up, its the same LS1 we got in the 01+ Fbodies.
http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/...2001specs.html

If you read the thread you will see that the dyno graph is a Corvette LT4, not LT1, and a 98 LS1.
Unfortunetly its near impossible to find a bone stock LS1 dyno that was done under 3000rpms nowadays, but heres a close one:
http://www.ericohlsen.com/FBODY/CamaroDyno.jpg
Definitely more than what an LT1 makes on the low end.

M6's don't have converters

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

Learn to read, that says at 4400rpm or 4000rpm depending on the tranny that aint 2400rpm and you still don't seem to grasp rwhp vs fwhp
The b-body LT1 made 330tq at 2400rpm.

Dyno can have all kinds of spikes or intermittent rpm readings etc that need be ignored. EVERYONE who has experience with both agrees the LT1 torque comes in sooner.

Deeohgie69

iTrader: (3)

^^^This
My car ran 13.4's @106 bone stock (slp lid so not bone stock) with 2.73's. Put a 3600 stall, full exhaust, cam and ran 11.85 @116.

I've got borla and with a stall, my car never fell below 5000rpm's after it shifted, so it'll roar just fine. A stall will make it feel like a complete new animal, most people pick up at least .5 tenths of a sec in the quarter mile just from it alone. But I understand wanting to row through the gears, either way you'll be happy.

JD_AMG

Read what I wrote, I said peak, no where did I say 375ft.lbs at 2400rpm. He said the LS1 made a peak of 350ft.lbs, but that was for the early year models, he either didn't know or forgot that the later years made more.
And you tell me to read... NO ONE is arguing the LT1's torque curve peaked earlier, the argument is HOW MUCH torque vs the LS1 it made at those lower RPMs.
Found another graph here, unsure of the original source, but you can see that this shows the LT1 and LS1 being dead nuts even on the low end until 2400RPMs where the LS1 starts to make more until redline.

ahritchie

iTrader: (1)

No, but you did say it makes 325 RWTQ at 2400 RPM which is wrong. Anyone who's driven a stock LT1 and LS1 M6 back to back can attest to the TQ curve coming on sooner and stronger below 2500 RPM in the LT1, not unlike a TPI 350 makes a ****-ton more TQ at 2000 RPM than a LT1 or LS1 at the same RPM but then quickly runs out of breath. It's what this thread is about! The later C5 corvette LS1 is a best case scenario with a better flowing CAI and better flowing true dual exhaust f-bodys never came with....

MonmouthCtyLS7

iTrader: (6)

Who cares about 2400 rpm lol, think the L98 has more low end then a LT1 at a similar Rpm and that motors a major turd.

ahritchie

iTrader: (1)

I don't care....I'm just calling out the BS when I see it No one is arguing the L98 is a turd or not...

Higher RPM HP made by LSs is a good thing However no engine even "god's engine" LS1 can beat the laws of physics: HP=TQ x RPM/5252

This topic has been beaten to death over and over and over like a dead horse; it's common knowledge LT1s are torquier below 3K RPM then get stomped as RPMs climb....https://ls1tech.com/forums/lt1-lt4-m...-torque-7.html

KCS

iTrader: (20)

Good God man! It's 2015 and you all are still comparing the old LT1's to the LS1's?

MonmouthCtyLS7

iTrader: (6)

Well aware been driving both since 1998 just saying those older motors can keep they're low end grunt lol.

TT427

iTrader: (1)

Weren't some of theF-Bod LT1 M6 trans geared real short, not sure if thats part of the comparison here? Also, I understand the LT1 being setup from the factory as a torquey engine, but how does an LS1 with better cam/head flow and better/longer intake fall short on anything but off idle torque? The only thing it lacks is a small amount of compression against the LT1

NowhereFast

Only the 93 t56 had different gearing, but those are junk anyway.