When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Most sources suggested that the '70 LT-1 was under rated. It's performance is a big step up from a L46 due to the cam, intake, and manifold as stated by 70LS1.
I drove a 70 LT-1 and the way i can descibe it is that it revs like a small block and has the power and pull of my 70 454/390,BUT it handles way better than a Big Block.Very impressed with the LT-1.
Most sources suggested that the '70 LT-1 was under rated. It's performance is a big step up from a L46 due to the cam, intake, and manifold as stated by 70LS1.
I agree i believe the power was very under rated...JERRY
Most sources suggested that the '70 LT-1 was under rated. It's performance is a big step up from a L46 due to the cam, intake, and manifold as stated by 70LS1.
What about he 71-72 versions with the lower compression ratio? Are they more comparable to the L46? Ive always had the same question about these two motors and just how different they are.
I'd say the cam makes the most noticeable difference. Don't get me wrong, I've had my 70 L-46 for 33years, but its a dog off the line, but never quits on the top end. (love that)
I will never sell it, but for one exception..... a 70 LT1
I'd say the cam makes the most noticeable difference. Don't get me wrong, I've had my 70 L-46 for 33years, but its a dog off the line, but never quits on the top end. (love that)
I will never sell it, but for one exception..... a 70 LT1
I hate to tell you, but the LT-1 will be just as "doggy" off the line as the L-46, if not even more so. I really love my L-46 and it pulls nicely with 3.55 gears and an M-20. I know it'd pull stronger off the line with a 3.70 rear, but I already turn 3200 rpm at 70 mph and wouldn't want that to be any higher.
I think the L-46 is one of the the most under-rated engines of all time. I had the pleasure of test driving an 69 w/L-46 and she pulled great up to 5500 and had a nice little idle.
I love Q-jets which flow 750,..the Holley flows a bit more, 780. I think the weak spot on the L-46 is the cast-iron intake which was the same part used on all 350 w/ q-jets. I'd get a Q-Jet Performer or Q-Jet RPM Performer and paint it orange.
Add a set of headers and you'd have a great street engine that doesn't often need rocker adjustment, gets better mileage, and has power to spare.
Honestly on the street, would you rather have a torque curve from 1500 to 5500 or 2500 6500? That's basically the difference between the LT-1 and L-46. Nice to have the choice though.
Love my 1969 L-46. Got the M-21 and 3.70 out back and it doesnt mess around! My 1970 L-46 has the M-20 and 3.55 out back and you can definently notice a difference in the two, but they both have tons of power! (maybe b/c I like to mod the crap out of them)
My first vette was a 69 350/350 vert.I loved that car,it was fast and handled great.The only thing i did was junk the Q-jet for a Holley,as the Q-Jet gave me nothing but fits.
What about he 71-72 versions with the lower compression ratio? Are they more comparable to the L46? Ive always had the same question about these two motors and just how different they are.
The low compression LT-1's have similar peak power to a high compression L-46. The LT-1 still revs higher and has more top speed potential.
The LT1 heads are a little different from the L46 in that they have screw in studs and guideplates which are needed for strong valvespringx and high rpm. Headers for either will make the biggest increase in power. And also the L46 got 2 inch exhaust where the LT1 Got 2 1/2.