When is it no longer an LS1?
05-15-2005, 04:43 PM
#41
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spartanburg, SC
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
first, to cyphur_traq, i said it was for the sake of argument only, and i think that was a tad uncalled for. Second, thanks 8KickassRS9. Personally, i'll always call it an ls1. ya'll can call it what you want.
05-15-2005, 05:23 PM
#42
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Quad Cities, IL
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I would call an LS1 with an LS6 block an LS1. Technically, it's an LS6 based LS1. But I started this thread because you can two guys say they have LS1's, one is bone stock. The other has nothing left but the block and is making 700rwhp. Just looking for people's opinions. What about Harlan's car? Most of us consider it an LS1 car but I think that he even has a different block. He was running the stock crank for a good while though.
Someone who knows more about his car can chime in.
Someone who knows more about his car can chime in. 
05-15-2005, 09:50 PM
#44
If you consider the sbc...they are all called sbc because they are based on the original architecture of the 1955 265 cu.in. engine. I have a 406 sbc that does not have one single part made by GM on or in it but it is still a sbc. I think ls1s, 2s, 6s, 7s, etc. will always be known as ls engines by us. The guys that mod them race and build them. What do you think?
05-16-2005, 04:58 AM
#46
11 Second Club
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NE PA
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bickelfirebird
OK, I got carried away and perhaps chose a bad example, but the idea still holds. You can't substitute non-LS1 parts and call it an LS1.
