Actually you dont know **** so u n ur butt budy can go **** yourselves

 

So obviously you still have to proove anything dumbass. Fruit salad amd finalcam explained it. But just because everyone on Ls1 n other alike sites doesn't mean its true ive asked several other people who built engines for decade's one said in his opinion he counts it as a bolt on most said different. Remember ls1tech isnt a credible site neither is other forums that are alike

 

You cling on to "as it came from GM" but say heads are a bolt on

You're a complete dumb ***

 

Yet you quote some off the wall site for the definition of the bolt on and it's some how creditable

 

Heads are not classified as a bolt on. If they were then the only delineation between a stock bottom end car and a bolt on car would be what, just the cam?? Further more if you classify heads as bolt ons then one would have to classify turbo systems as bolt ons since they begin and end at the exhaust manifolds up to the charge pipe.

 

 

Soooooo, we all agree that heads are considered bolt ons now?

 

I'm pumped that my turbo car just became a cam, bolt on car.

 

heads are not considered a bolt on because of the fact that engine coolant runs through them without a way to by pass. Any engine modification that touches oil/coolant is no longer considered a "bolt on" modification. That's why. Are they held on by bolts? Yes. As is everything else on a damn engine.

 

So you're saying Hio's car isn't bolt on?

 

does he have aftermarket/ported stock heads? I don't really pay too much attention to people's rides. I'm here to laugh at the drama of the SRK section

 

hio's car doesn't have an ls1 in it.

 

correct. its a swapped car. i know Hio's argument about it still having a factory engine because some of the 02's did come with ls6s in them. But his did not. Not trying to start a riot, its just the way i see things.

 

He has aftermarket rockers. I'm not very car smart, I just know how to change my oil, not where it goes.

 

 

lol that's a great gif!

 

Your last sentence is what im talking about its how you perceive it. There is no distinct line at which classifies heads as a bolt on or not bc everyone who actually told me the difference gave me different reasons as to why THEY thought it aint a bolt on

 

Isn't an EWP considered a bolt on?

What I meant with my post, to clarify, is that heads are not a bolt on because they are not associated with the colloquialism "bolt ons" ...simply by popular consensus, not by some hidden rulebook somewhere. It's much easier to distinguish the general performance capability of a car if there is an agreed-upon term to describe it. Heads/cam is not part of "bolt ons," nor is any power adder.

Is there an exact line at which "bolt ons" stops and some other category begins? No, it's more of a gray area, but just because a mod bolts onto the car doesn't mean it's a bolt on. As US Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said, "I'll know it when I see it."

 

meh, i had a whole explanation of why and EWP is also a bolt on, but this topic is too open for speculation. no matter who's arguing this point, one person will find something wrong with it.

 

Your last sentence is what im talking about its how you perceive it. There is no distinct line at which classifies heads as a bolt on or not bc everyone who actually told me the difference gave me different reasons as to why THEY thought it aint a bolt on