Why does the L98 motor get no respect?
01-09-2008, 08:38 PM
#61
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2000
Location: Plantation Florida USAF(Retired) 1966-1990
Posts: 47,922
Received 4,505 Likes
on
3,590 Posts
U.S. Air Force
St. Jude Donor '05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-'20-'21-'22-'23-'24
NCM Sinkhole Donor
I like the looks of a L98 engine!
01-09-2008, 09:24 PM
#62
Drifting
Thread Starter
Also, the Corvette Challenge cars were stock L98's with a few minor mods. They were not close to 350HP.
01-09-2008, 10:51 PM
#63
Racer
Member Since: Dec 2007
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More people should post pics of their cars with the targa off, looks so much better. Silver rims looks really good on your paint combo.
01-09-2008, 10:59 PM
#64
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Feb 2006
Location: Cleveland OHIO
Posts: 2,240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aaron,
That is amazing! I never heard of a L98 with that much horsepower. I would love to hear more about it along with seeing a few photos if possible. Someday I hope to add a 2008 to my garage. I too will always keep my L98. Someday my son will inherit my 1987 and I hope he will pass it on to his son one day.
That is amazing! I never heard of a L98 with that much horsepower. I would love to hear more about it along with seeing a few photos if possible. Someday I hope to add a 2008 to my garage. I too will always keep my L98. Someday my son will inherit my 1987 and I hope he will pass it on to his son one day.
Once you change the induction on the L98 you no longer have a L98. They get no respect because 245chp is 
01-09-2008, 11:46 PM
#65
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2002
Location: OBAMA IS HITLER
Posts: 22,209
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
Shoot! I was getting ready to use you for an example too!
According to your profile you have spent a ton of money on a 1990 doing the following:
Mods: 355cid, AFR/TPIS 187cc fully CNC'd 56cc heads, Accel Superram, Accel 219 cam, Speed-Pro forged pistons, Melling lifters, Cloyes double roller chain, stock TB to 52mm by AS&M, CC ProMagnum 1.6 RR's, ARP studs & bolts, FMS 24# injectors, Holley AFPR, Racetronix 255 fuel pump kit, FlowKooler water pump, Hooker #2149 headers & Y pipe, Magnaflow SS catback, Hurst shifter & ball ****, Taylor 8mm wires, CAGS disabled, 180 t-stat, 10.18:1 C/R. Firestone WO's. Tuned by my hero, Alvin at PCMForLess.
Is this not evidence of someone who thinks a 1990 is about all you need??
According to your profile you have spent a ton of money on a 1990 doing the following:
Mods: 355cid, AFR/TPIS 187cc fully CNC'd 56cc heads, Accel Superram, Accel 219 cam, Speed-Pro forged pistons, Melling lifters, Cloyes double roller chain, stock TB to 52mm by AS&M, CC ProMagnum 1.6 RR's, ARP studs & bolts, FMS 24# injectors, Holley AFPR, Racetronix 255 fuel pump kit, FlowKooler water pump, Hooker #2149 headers & Y pipe, Magnaflow SS catback, Hurst shifter & ball ****, Taylor 8mm wires, CAGS disabled, 180 t-stat, 10.18:1 C/R. Firestone WO's. Tuned by my hero, Alvin at PCMForLess.
Is this not evidence of someone who thinks a 1990 is about all you need??
so i had to fix it. and it's now really just barely adequate. kinda.
as for spending lots of money, this was a one-shot deal. next time, i'm purchasing 505 or more horses straight from the factory, but i'll first be kind enough to allow the original buyer take most of the hit in terms of depreciation. also in terms of spending tons of money, there are all kinds of people who go out and blow their engine, tranny, rear end, or whatever up every year just to replace it all again.
any other questions?
ps...i don't have a "need" when it comes to cars. i certainly have a "desire". my "desire" would be an LS9 supercharged C6, or beyond. so no, my '90, while in excellent condition, is nowhere near the "best", for me or compared to anyone else. i'd be arrogant to think so.
Last edited by Red Tornado; 01-10-2008 at 12:05 AM.
01-10-2008, 01:47 AM
#68
Team Owner
IMHO I feel that the LT1 motor was a waste of time on GM's part. They had the tech back then to build the LS1 motor but chose not to. WHY??? The LT1 isnt much more than an L98 with a different cooling system, intake, and minor tweaks that you would see between other 350's. Oh not to mention that craptastic optispark. If I had a LT1 I would change to a different ignition system.
Honestly though, digging through my '85 i've found a lot of things that pizz me off. When I try to explain my displeasure with said designs people say it was the best they could do with the tech they had back then. I say thats complete BS. Case in point: my old '87 Buick Lesabre with a 3.8L V6. It had sequential fuel injection, not found on corvettes until the LT1
. It also had a distributor-less ignition almost identical to what the LS1 uses
Honestly though, digging through my '85 i've found a lot of things that pizz me off. When I try to explain my displeasure with said designs people say it was the best they could do with the tech they had back then. I say thats complete BS. Case in point: my old '87 Buick Lesabre with a 3.8L V6. It had sequential fuel injection, not found on corvettes until the LT1
. It also had a distributor-less ignition almost identical to what the LS1 uses
01-10-2008, 04:27 AM
#69
Drifting
"Why does the L98 motor get no respect?"
You know what's worse? Instead of fixing the problem they kept it for 6 years.
I hope who ever made that decision got fired for it.
I have one in my camaro so I'm speaking from first hand experience how much I hate the intake.
01-10-2008, 06:22 AM
#71
Le Mans Master
Proud LT-1/ LT-4 owners have the advantage of reverse flow cooling and you don't! Now why doesn't LS-1 have it? It went back to conventional cooling.
01-10-2008, 08:40 AM
#73
Le Mans Master
Hey Redtornado
please specify why you said that the L98 is good at stoplights
because of the low end torque ?
So a L98 its a stoplight beater ? will beat anyone on the launch but then before the quartermile will lose ?
please specify why you said that the L98 is good at stoplights
because of the low end torque ?
So a L98 its a stoplight beater ? will beat anyone on the launch but then before the quartermile will lose ?
01-10-2008, 08:52 AM
#74
Safety Car
A few years back I did an article for one of the Corvette magazines on the L98/LT1 transition. The interesting information was in the SAE papers written by the engineering team. The PR guys were essentially blowing smoke at the car magazines - and the car magazines were buying it.
The real problem with the L98 was that the intake system had way too many parts. Now only were manufacturing costs out of sight but the warranty costs were incredible. The L98 engines were leaking all the hell over the place.
The goal was not to improve performance but to reduce manufacturing and warranty costs. The only problem was the low end torque went all to hell with the new intake system. That's when the PR guys told all the magazines that the LT-1 had all this horsepower. Forget the fact that torque is really what you drive on a daily basis.
The magazines all drank the Kool-Aid and we have this eternal debate now about which one is the best engine. The thing is that the LT-1 was a great engine because it was cheaper to produce and the new intake solved the leaking problems. Warranty costs dropped big time.
If anyone is interested I can go back and dig out the old SAE papers which are really interesting. If my memory isn't all shot to hell the name of the paper was "New Generation Small Block V8 Engine," SAE paper 920673, by Anil Kulkarni of GM.
Some day I have to get around to telling the true story of the dreaded LT-1 ignition system. Man, was that a corporate screwup.
Richard Newton
101 Projects for Your Corvette 1984-1996
Ultimate Garage Handbook
The real problem with the L98 was that the intake system had way too many parts. Now only were manufacturing costs out of sight but the warranty costs were incredible. The L98 engines were leaking all the hell over the place.
The goal was not to improve performance but to reduce manufacturing and warranty costs. The only problem was the low end torque went all to hell with the new intake system. That's when the PR guys told all the magazines that the LT-1 had all this horsepower. Forget the fact that torque is really what you drive on a daily basis.
The magazines all drank the Kool-Aid and we have this eternal debate now about which one is the best engine. The thing is that the LT-1 was a great engine because it was cheaper to produce and the new intake solved the leaking problems. Warranty costs dropped big time.
If anyone is interested I can go back and dig out the old SAE papers which are really interesting. If my memory isn't all shot to hell the name of the paper was "New Generation Small Block V8 Engine," SAE paper 920673, by Anil Kulkarni of GM.
Some day I have to get around to telling the true story of the dreaded LT-1 ignition system. Man, was that a corporate screwup.
Richard Newton
101 Projects for Your Corvette 1984-1996
Ultimate Garage Handbook
01-10-2008, 09:33 AM
#76
I think chp is a bit irrelevant. Its the whole package that matters. Technology progresses over time and most cars technical solutions don't age very well (newer innovations turn them into antique). C4 as a whole with any engine is an exception.
If you take a 2007 turbo diesel powered mini van of any japanese make and put it on a twisty road circuit it will beat most stock sportscars made in 60's and 70's. This includes almost all Vettes, Ferraris, Maseratis, Jaguars etc. It will even beat most cars made in 80's. But not C4 Vettes and 911 Porsches. They are an example of 2 very well executed cars which are still today pretty fast with any stock suspension and engine. In real life C4 Vette in good condition can hang with most modern sportscars on a twisty circuit if the driver does his job.
On street I think L98 does its job very well too. And if you are not satisfied its very easy to get more out of it. More go fast parts available than to any later gen engine used in Vettes.
If you take a 2007 turbo diesel powered mini van of any japanese make and put it on a twisty road circuit it will beat most stock sportscars made in 60's and 70's. This includes almost all Vettes, Ferraris, Maseratis, Jaguars etc. It will even beat most cars made in 80's. But not C4 Vettes and 911 Porsches. They are an example of 2 very well executed cars which are still today pretty fast with any stock suspension and engine. In real life C4 Vette in good condition can hang with most modern sportscars on a twisty circuit if the driver does his job.
On street I think L98 does its job very well too. And if you are not satisfied its very easy to get more out of it. More go fast parts available than to any later gen engine used in Vettes.
Last edited by ToniH; 01-10-2008 at 09:40 AM.
01-10-2008, 09:47 AM
#78
Safety Car
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: modland CT
Posts: 4,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did everything to my L83...xram, differant throttle bodies, headers, gear....Still slow as poop!
I had a kid in a newer TA make me look real dumb one day...Thats when I bought my 383!
01-10-2008, 10:18 AM
#79
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2002
Location: OBAMA IS HITLER
Posts: 22,209
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
A few years back I did an article for one of the Corvette magazines on the L98/LT1 transition. The interesting information was in the SAE papers written by the engineering team. The PR guys were essentially blowing smoke at the car magazines - and the car magazines were buying it.
The real problem with the L98 was that the intake system had way too many parts. Now only were manufacturing costs out of sight but the warranty costs were incredible. The L98 engines were leaking all the hell over the place.
The goal was not to improve performance but to reduce manufacturing and warranty costs. The only problem was the low end torque went all to hell with the new intake system. That's when the PR guys told all the magazines that the LT-1 had all this horsepower. Forget the fact that torque is really what you drive on a daily basis.
The magazines all drank the Kool-Aid and we have this eternal debate now about which one is the best engine. The thing is that the LT-1 was a great engine because it was cheaper to produce and the new intake solved the leaking problems. Warranty costs dropped big time.
If anyone is interested I can go back and dig out the old SAE papers which are really interesting. If my memory isn't all shot to hell the name of the paper was "New Generation Small Block V8 Engine," SAE paper 920673, by Anil Kulkarni of GM.
Some day I have to get around to telling the true story of the dreaded LT-1 ignition system. Man, was that a corporate screwup.
[B]Richard Newton
The real problem with the L98 was that the intake system had way too many parts. Now only were manufacturing costs out of sight but the warranty costs were incredible. The L98 engines were leaking all the hell over the place.
The goal was not to improve performance but to reduce manufacturing and warranty costs. The only problem was the low end torque went all to hell with the new intake system. That's when the PR guys told all the magazines that the LT-1 had all this horsepower. Forget the fact that torque is really what you drive on a daily basis.
The magazines all drank the Kool-Aid and we have this eternal debate now about which one is the best engine. The thing is that the LT-1 was a great engine because it was cheaper to produce and the new intake solved the leaking problems. Warranty costs dropped big time.
If anyone is interested I can go back and dig out the old SAE papers which are really interesting. If my memory isn't all shot to hell the name of the paper was "New Generation Small Block V8 Engine," SAE paper 920673, by Anil Kulkarni of GM.
Some day I have to get around to telling the true story of the dreaded LT-1 ignition system. Man, was that a corporate screwup.
[B]Richard Newton
thank you for laying out very nicely exactly what i say all the time, and get knocked for it. all us L98/LT1 types **** and moan, and i laugh. and then they get more angry. and i laugh even more
