stic5

I've driven a C4 ZR-1, and I used to own a '96 Camaro Z28 with an LT1. There's no doubt that the C4 ZR-1 was significantly faster than my Camaro Z28, but I wasn't impressed with the difference given the difference in price and weight. I've also driven an LT1 car with a supercharger that was an absolute beast. GM should have waited a couple years to release the ZR-1, given it an LT1 with a supercharger, and it would have been a cheaper and better car. That's the only point I'm trying to make here. The LT5 was a nice engine but it was a step in the wrong direction. If that wasn't true then my C6 would have a big, heavy engine with 4 cams and all kinds of complex, useless technology. Corvettes evolved, and they did so with pushrod engines that evolved from the LT1, not the LT5. Stop trying to accuse people of not having experience or knowledge simply because you don't agree.

Z51JEFF

You Sir,haven't got a clue.

punky

Right on the money. LT5, R.I.P.

stic5

Thanks. That's sweet of you to say.

Exactly. It was an oddity but it sure was fast and exciting! Wouldn't mind adding one to my collection someday...

DoctorV8

Do you have any idea how the 240 hp L98 evolved into the 300 hp LT1? Or where the basic block design for the LS1 came from? I suggest you read Dave McLellan's book, and then re-read what I just quoted you saying above. The LT5 project was the springboard that lead to much of what we love about our Gen III/IV small blocks. 6 bolt mains, basic bore/stroke and block architecture...the list goes on. Read the book.

Maybe you shouldn't make it so easy to pick on you based on your quote above.

Like the LT5 or not, its role in the evolution of the small block Chevy is undeniable.

Z51JEFF

All you guys trying to find fault with the LT5,your stretchin.Granted,the car is abit of an oddity in the way it came about or even that G.M. would spend the money to develop the car.But looking for ANYTHING remotely negative to say about the motor,its just not there.Now,you want to criticize the platform the car was built around,I can see that.The legacy that the LT5 has left behind is in the Corvettes built today.I know what the car is,dont plan on selling mine anytime soon.And,there is only ONE KING,and it went out of production back in 1995[IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG]

rhipsher

Not really. If your a gear head like me you can do it. Sure it's a little intimidating at first but I've had to do a few things to mine. And for the non ZR-1 owners these pics and video of what I've done to mine will give you some insite to what went into the design of the LT5 that makes it so unique.
Replace a broken throwout bearing.



http://s301.photobucket.com/albums/n...t=MOV01848.flv

And do my own top end porting and repowder coat.
http://s301.photobucket.com/albums/n...t=100_0014.flv
Getting all the top end parts back from the powder coaters for reassembly.




Re assymbely.



All 16 injectors.


And wahla done.


What can I say. I love this car. And I would love a new ZR1 and take care of it the same way.

DDSLT5

You've "driven" a ZR-1? That and ten cents won't get you a shoe shine in Penn Station. Let me know when you've OWNED a ZR-1 and had an opportunity to drive it for a year. Then you might have a clue - but maybe not. As for weight - your Camaro weighed more than the ZR-1, and the LT5 weighs the same as the LS9 (you know, it has all kinds of complex, useless technology on top of it making it heavy!).

The LT1 contributed NOTHING to the LSx engines. The LT5 contributed many things to the LSx, with the ladder frame enclosed bottom end being the most significant, allowing the use of a cast crankshaft reliably with as much as 638 hp with a factory warranty intact.

Do you really think that a supercharger on an LT1 would meet the warranty requirements of GM?

I like funnies! You make me laugh!!!

rhipsher

And if your going to enlighten other corvette owners that are not aware then you can't do it without mentioning the 24 endurance world speed record that the ZR-1 set that has long been forgot about. I just assumed that every corvette owner thats been in the corvette game longer than 10 years would know this stuff. Apparently not. GM obviously had enough confidence in the LT5 that it could pull it off with no problems at all and boy did it ever. To push any car around a track for 24 hours at top speed without having a meltdown or even needing a tune up after words is incredible. Because if it failed GM and Lotus would have had sever egg on it's face for all of the world to see.
http://www.zr1netregistry.com/ZR1_records.htm

magnetized

Cool pic of 2 great cars

@ LT5humpers

stic5

Sorry DoctorV8, but I only have a master's degree and it's not even in V8s. Therefore I won't be quoting any text books, nor will I break down engines to specific characteristics of their block architecture. I will simply restate that my original point was that good ol' pushrod engines were working fine, and they continue to work quite well today. I'm sure that GM learned something from the LT5 that they applied to future engines, but please stop trying so hard to sound enligtened and talk around the fact that not only did GM not make the LT5 on their own, but its basic layout was completely scrapped for that of its predecessors. Now, go ahead and quote a book passage that is speaking of something completely different than what I'm talking about if it will make you feel more intelligent.

rhipsher

If you actually knew DoctorV8 you would be absolutely humbled. Not only does he know what he's talking about "which you could learn something from" but his education level supersedes any masters degree. It's not my place to go into what he does for a living but lets just say he can afford any car he wants anytime he wants. So if he has a ZR-1 in his very very nice collection then that says volumes about the car. He wouldn't own it if it wasn't something special. And this is just what he can fit in his garage.



His new toy.


Sanjay! You've gotta give me a ride in that bad azz V12 Merc.

DoctorV8

Ok, that was stic5 at 10 am today.

Now here he is after DDSLT5 and I both pointed out that the LSx block is essentially identical to the LT5, not the LT1

stic, you need to understand that the valvetrain alone does not make the motor! If you're a true Vette enthusiast, rather than taking ignorant potshots at something you clearly know little about, why not either

1) cut the BS posturing and actually go buy the book I'm talking about, written by the second chief engineer of the Corvette

2) If that's not your thing, then LISTEN to those of us that know what we are talking about. To summarize:

The current LSx motors are basically pushrod versions of the LT5. They share no parts with the LT1. Many of the airflow improvements the LT1 received over its L98 predecessor were a direct result of lessons learned from the LT5

No one is slamming pushrod 2 valve motors. They have many advantages over a DOHC layout. But again, your claim that the LS1 came from the LT1 just reinforces your ignorance on the subject.


LOL! I would, but I'm planning on beating up a 7 year old to make myself feel stronger instead.

stic5

I'm going to make two points:

1. The C4 ZR-1 is indeed a very nice car and I'd be proud to own one.

2. Who cares how much money "DoctorV8" makes or what his education is? I certainly don't.

stic5

Thanks for making my point for me, doc. And that point is, as I've said several times now, that crazy 4 overhead cam design was nice at the time but completely unnecessary. GM could have done better, but they did quite well with the C4 ZR-1. It's a nice engine and car, and I wouldn't mind having one, but it's not some revolutionary mark of automotive perfection. Its more of the interesting oddball of Corvettes. Go ahead and flame me some more. I'm not going to be baited into anymore of this silly argument.

rhipsher

Then why not be open minded Instead of being confrontational. Obviously education seems to matter to you or you wouldn't have mentioned "Masters degree" Now all of a sudden it doesn't matter! Your a walking contradiction. Not worth wasting anymore time on.

DDSLT5

Forrest? That you? Stupid is as stupid does.....and you DO!

I think you are one of the retired GM engineers who is still pissed that McLellan went to Lotus to build an engine with 400 hp for their supercar. GM developed twin turbo technology for the L98, then dropped it in Callaway's lap because they didn't want to do it themselves. The best GM could manage was a 245 hp L98. The LT1 is a result of the LT5 slapping GM engineers in the face with their inadequacies.

We all know the truth: you LOVE the LT5 and you yearn to own one.

Poor jealous bastard.

BTW- how long was that Masters in basket weaving?

DoctorV8

So you still haven't admitted that your statement I quoted above was erroneous. The LS1 did NOT come from the LT1. Period.

Whether the LT5 was "unnecessary" is a matter of conjecture. Evolution being what it is, it was an important step that lead to management deciding to pursue the compact pushrod layout with the LT5esque bottom end. Had the OBDII compliant LT5 of 1996 been released, complete with variable valve timing and 500+ HP, history might have been different. The motor was virtually showroom ready when GM pulled the plug.

The LT5, impressive as it was in stock trim, was in the infancy of its development.....it is an animal when modified. That's what the combination of DOHC revvability and big cubes can do for you.

An LT1 with a blower just isn't even remotely close.....DDSLT5 and I can demonstrate this for you if you are interested!

Z51JEFF

Once again,you have proven my point.Im done.

xlr8nflorida

1. I did not accuse you of lacking experience or knowledge. However, now I am - You need to buy a clue

2. Buy these 2 books and get a clue:

Heart of the Beast by Anthony Young

Corvette from the Inside by Dave McLellan

Oh just for kicks, can you please elaborate on "all the complex useless technology in the LT-5?"

I heard that is why the ZR-1 was the fastest production car in the world and set several World Records - it was all because of the "useless technology"