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.
LR1 or LX1 would of been much better. Now you'll have to say old LT1 or new LT1, lol. Just causes more confusion.
This is the 3rd introduction of the LT1. While I agree that this moniker should have remained retired, it won't be the end of the world to say "Gen5" or "C7 LT1".
And don't forget that in 1978 the LS6 was a 151 cu in four banger with a two barrel carb, and the LS9 was a 350 V8 with a four barrel and the LT5 was a engine performance package for high Altitude..
Good points.
Originally Posted by 68ragtop69
Who cares if they reuse LT1. At the end of the day, it's just an RPO code!
It's all about convenient (or inconvenient if you don't like it,) timing. The original LT1 was used for 1970 model year. Then again 22 years later for the 92 model year. Guess what? The 2014 model year it will be released in will be 22 years again. I guess GM just couldn't resist, and we all know GM is a bit heavy on the cheese at times.
It's all about convenient (or inconvenient if you don't like it,) timing. The original LT1 was used for 1970 model year. Then again 22 years later for the 92 model year. Guess what? The 2014 model year it will be released in will be 22 years again. I guess GM just couldn't resist, and we all know GM is a bit heavy on the cheese at times.
I actually kind of like that, a new LT1 engine every 22 years, as long as it's makin' the big power and is reliable it works for me.
this is going to be real confusing once engine swaps for this engine get popular. i can just imagine searching ebay or craigslist and searching LT1 and having to sift through a tons of useless posts and items to find one potential engine that might suit my needs. I already go through this when i search for ls1 or ls2 and get tons of lq4s, lq9s, etc. that have ls1 in the title.
For everybody who thinks it should be "LR1" ... remember, LR1 was used for a I4 2BBL engine and then a 1.6L I4 MFI engine (both Europe, I believe) ... not a good lineage for a modern V8.
RPOs are not exclusive to Corvettes, or to the United States ... they are world-wide designators, and probably most possible three-character designations have been used at some point in the past.
That said, I do not think LX1 has been used, although GM seems to shy away from using "X" in mechanical-type RPOs (perhaps they use it internally for experimental, much like the military).
Personally, I liked my LT1 C4 ... I have no problems with reusing it. It is just a designation within the GM system, regardless of the relative importance we "fanatics" place on it.
Last edited by 07MontyRed; Oct 25, 2012 at 08:31 PM.
Dont mind me ima newbie here but i dont like the LT1 name it was fine back in the day but we are in the LS ENGINE era.they should have called it the LS4.
Dont mind me ima newbie here but i dont like the LT1 name it was fine back in the day but we are in the LS ENGINE era.they should have called it the LS4.
Do you really believe the LS series of engine designations started with the LS1 of 1997? Nope. There were three LS series engine desinations back in 1978. LS6, LS8 & LS9. None of the three was a supercharged 6.2L engine with 638 HP.
What would you rather of had as the engine designation instead of LT1?
LC5...that was once a V6 321 cu in 2 barrel engine.
LD4...that was once a 250 cu in 6 cyl truck engine.
LF7...that was once a 260 cu in V8 diesel engine.
LG9...that was once a 305 cu in V8 2 barrel.
LM1...that was once a 350 cu in V8 4 barrel.
I mean, I'm pretty sure the general consensus is LX1 or LR1 where probably the two best choices. Like I said, repeating is nostalgic, repeating twice is a bit unoriginal. Heck CM(corvette motor)1 would hate at least been unique to a ground up new design motor.
I mean, I'm pretty sure the general consensus is LX1 or LR1 where probably the two best choices. Like I said, repeating is nostalgic, repeating twice is a bit unoriginal. Heck CM(corvette motor)1 would hate at least been unique to a ground up new design motor.
GM has long grouped their engines as "L' series just as they have grouped their transmissions as "M" serires and rear axles as "G" series and Brakes as "J' series etc. So the "C" series you speak of (CM1) would be for a roof, compressor, heater, A/C or lamp.
Only thing I could easily find for a "LX1" was a "LX3" that was a 1.4L 4 banger with a 1 barrel carb back in 1978.
Hard to find a designation that hasn't been used before. GM uses the same groupings across their entire line, not just Chevrolets or Corvettes.
Maybe.
But it reminds me more of one of the THE hottest small blocks EVER produced in the 1970 Corvette (and 1970 1/2 Camaro Z28).
My very first Corvette was a C4 LT1, it was a great/fun car.
Haters gona, hate. This is starting to sound like off topic. Sheesh. I never will understand why Corvette people bad mouth the cars they are supposed to love.
If your legit, you'll act legit. Bad mouthing stuff that is NOT yours is not being legit. Each car (regardless of make, model) has its pro's and con's just like anything else.
Really?
You're opposed to your brand new Corvette engine being named for some of the most classic small blocks of all time but would have NO problem with it being associated with a FWD Monte Carlo SS/Impala SS/Grand Prix GXP engine?
This has already been mentioned in this thread but, LS4 was already used, not all that long ago either actually.
The only ones left were LS5 and LS8 but they will likely need more than just two designations with this new engine line so they had to start over with the 'LT'.