Trevor @ Texas Speed & Perf.

iTrader: (3)

Just and update - We are completing some dyno testing on a 6.2L LSA today, and then we will get the LT1 on the dyno. So, it won't be much longer!

badazz81z28

iTrader: (6)

You also have to consider the environmental conditions. That will play a part in dyno numbers. IMHO production engines are not maxed out and conservative for reliability and street manners. I feel they are getting to the area with an NA 6.2l where there probably isn't much more to squeeze out of it without sacrificing. I'm sure porting the heads, maybe a little better cam will improve the performance, but I don't think you will see the gains like the previous LS engines until they up the cubes

TurbopigB4C

iTrader: (5)

This is a good thing though. You buy a car and have the ultimate street car with no mods. I know it takes the fun out of modding but who wouldn't want reliable race engines for the street without paying anything extra.

SSCamaro99_3

iTrader: (1)

No doubt. If cold air/headers/tune will get you into the 470/470+ rw area without having to open up the motor, you can sign me the f@%& up.

badazz81z28

iTrader: (6)

No doubt far cheaper than building one. I don't think you get 470rwhp out of it though with just those mods. The LS7 puts down that stock..that's why I haven't jumped on the C7 band wagon just yet. I need 550RWHP!!!

TurbopigB4C

iTrader: (5)

When GM can build a 100 hp per liter 6.2 that passes emissions and the grandpa daily driver test you will get 550whp stock. Unlikely that GM would take the steps necessary for that though. Could you only imagine how far they would have to change there winning engine design to reach that. I would see 8 - 8.5k rpm with some type of variable valve timing with lift adjustment and overhead cams.

I just realized though that it will exist if GM does a supercharged LT1.

badazz81z28

iTrader: (6)

Its by far easier to push high HP numbers with more cubes. For an engine that has to spin to 9K just screams expensive parts. Its going to be tough to produce stout #s and maintain fuel economy and emissions with small cubes.

GM will probably start experimenting with Turbos on the LS/LT

TurbopigB4C

iTrader: (5)

A turbo LT based engine would be a dream but likely never happen. They think about warranty costs too much and turbos are way to easy to push the engine past stock, break and then put back to stock to get it warrantied. I would be first in line to sell everything I own and work two jobs to buy one though if it was around 3500 lbs and not 4000. I owned a Buick GN back in the day and if GM were to pull some miracle car out of its hat that was not a vette and resembled either a rwd monte carlo or grand national with a turbo lt engine I could see it doing the same thing it did in the 80's. The new vette and when the newer camaro comes out they would be hailed as second and third best to a Buick.

I am personally hoping and praying GM will do a small sport truck with a 5.3 or 6.2 new gen motor and either 6 or 7 speed manual option. I would have bought a 5.3 Colorado or Canyon in a heartbeat if they had a tr6060 option.

Trevor @ Texas Speed & Perf.

iTrader: (3)

We have been busy yesterday and today tearing down one of our 6.2L LT1's! We have one on the dyno engine stand, ready to be bolted into place. We have another that we have torn down to a bare block. We have been taking various measurements as we tear it down, and we are already working on some prototype camshafts to test on the dyno. As you will see in some of the new pictures, the factory pistons have a dome on the intake side. So, it is going to further restrict the piston-to-valve clearance for larger camshafts. VVT cannot be disabled, but AFM can. You honestly would not want to disable VVT anyways because it gives you the best of both worlds! You can advance a cam in the lower RPM's for better low-end power and retard the cam in the upper RPM's for better top-end power. We have seen excellent results with our VVT line of cams for the L99 2010+ Camaro SS, so we expect the same great results! Some random things we have noticed: no gaskets used for the front cover, oil pan, or rear cover; complete new oil pump design; the fuel pump is mechanically driven via a lifter that rides on a separate lobe on the rear of the camshaft; crank and rods are very similar to the LSA design; factory coated bearings. The list can go on and on! We will continue to update as we continue to test and measure. We have a set of pistons getting ready to go into production for a 416 CID LT1 stroker, so once our testing is complete on the stock engine we will begin testing the stroker version.

Click on the link below to check out some of the updated pictures!

http://s851.photobucket.com/user/Tex...0Engine%20Pics

NitrousExpress

iTrader: (4)

Cool. Best of luck!
-Garrett

TurbopigB4C

iTrader: (5)

I sure hope GM is holding out until the very end to unveil a 15 Camaro with LT1 and 7 speed in the Cadillac ATS chassis just to keep the 14 Camaro selling as long as possible. I don't think I can save the 25k dollar down payment to get a new C7 at a 500 dollar a month car payment.

Trevor @ Texas Speed & Perf.

iTrader: (3)

We have updated our album with more pictures!

http://s851.photobucket.com/user/Tex...0Engine%20Pics

TurbopigB4C

iTrader: (5)

I couldn't see in the pictures if the engine mounts on the block are the same as an LS. Are the mounts different?

Trevor @ Texas Speed & Perf.

iTrader: (3)

Yes, the mounts do look the same. With that said, older style mounts may or may not get in the way, depending on what else is around it. Sorry for the bad pic. I was trying to work around the manifolds with the engine on the dyno stand.



You can see on the front driver's-side of the block where the optional dry-sump will bolt in, and that may or may not cause issues with an older style mount. Our 2014 Corvette that we have on order has the Z51 package with dry-sump, so we will be able to tell more at that point.

TurbopigB4C

iTrader: (5)

Its awesome how GM keeps so much stuff the same so that older cars can swap in the newer engines easily. An import would change the mounts on purpose when a new version comes out.

badazz81z28

iTrader: (6)

lol...I'm sure it's not for your convenience . Saves the company money with tooling from manufacturing and part supplies. Nobody wants to produce 1 off components, that's too expensive. That is unless its a government contract.

Exidous

iTrader: (11)

All I need is for someone to make a T-56/TR6060 bell housing adapter and I'm gtg. I'd love to swap one of the new LT1's into my RX. Keep up the good investigating TSP!

DSRE

iTrader: (7)

So what's the deal with the cylinder heads? Flow numbers ? Valve size? What rocker arms do they use?
Thank you for all the information on these! I'm excited for direct injection!

Sales2@Texas-speed

iTrader: (5)

Here is our thread featuring the LT1 cylinder head:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...xas-speed.html

It has a 1.8 Rocker Ratio. Intake valve size is 2.130" and 1.59" Exhaust.

TurbopigB4C

iTrader: (5)

Are you going to also order the GM crate engine pn 12657206 to see how it compares? I just saw it online. Its the 6.2 liter truck version of the Gen V and is 3000 dollars cheaper.