C3 Tech/Performance V8 Technical Info, Internal Engine, External Engine, Basic Tech and Maintenance for the C3 Corvette
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

1970-71 LT1 engines

Old 07-25-2012, 09:59 PM
  #1  
riverracer au
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
 
riverracer au's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2010
Location: "ɹǝpunuʍop", Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,170
Received 290 Likes on 177 Posts

Default 1970-71 LT1 engines

a mate has just bought a '71 LT1 and we got talking about the engine.
what makes the '70 with 370 hp so special over the '71 with 330hp?
was it the 186 heads, cam, higher compression pistons etc, or what?
or was it the new rating system, but i thought that came in '72?

where can we find a break down/listing of parts that go in a LT1 engine?
ie: cam specs, pistons used etc.

any good engine books on this?

this mite solve/start a bar fight for us...

Old 07-25-2012, 10:49 PM
  #2  
maxler
Advanced
Support Corvetteforum!
 
maxler's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2007
Location: Warren MI
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

In 1971 GM mandated a compression drop on all engines to a max of 9.5 to 1. That is most of the difference from 1970 to 1971. Gm did change rating in 1972 so the HP changed again.
Old 07-26-2012, 12:25 AM
  #3  
gbvette62
Race Director
 
gbvette62's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2000
Location: Shamong, NJ
Posts: 11,094
Received 2,017 Likes on 1,309 Posts

Default

The 70 LT-1 has 11-1 pistons, while the 71 has 9.5-1 pistons. GM was preparing for regular un-leaded fuel.
Old 07-26-2012, 12:51 AM
  #4  
Les
Race Director
 
Les's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 1999
Location: Sierra Foothills CA
Posts: 10,831
Received 961 Likes on 571 Posts

Default

The 70 LT-1 had 11 to 1 comp. ratio, as stated. The 71 LT-1 actually dropped to a 9 to 1 comp. ratio.
Old 07-26-2012, 12:55 AM
  #5  
Vette5.5
Le Mans Master
 
Vette5.5's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Livonia MI
Posts: 5,116
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Maybe a little more info on the leaded fuel thing. Adding lead to fuel was a cheap way to bump octane rating. This turned out to be a bad thing coming out of the tail pipe, so was phased out. At first, there was low lead gas, that still allowed a little octane boost, but after a couple years, that was gone too. Todays higher octane fuel, is done through further refinement, yielding less actual fuel, per given crude oil input. It's now considered a more politically correct thing to limit premium octace to 91, in CA and other states, to save maybe 1% crude over doing 93 octane, allowed in other states. No lead's actually a good thing though, as the engines combustion chambers burn much cleaner now.
Old 07-26-2012, 08:42 AM
  #6  
Easy Mike
Team Owner
Support Corvetteforum!
 
Easy Mike's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 2000
Location: Southbound
Posts: 38,928
Likes: 0
Received 1,468 Likes on 1,247 Posts
Cruise-In II Veteran

Default

Originally Posted by riverracer au
...where can we find a break down/listing of parts that go in a LT1 engine?...ie: cam specs, pistons used etc....
Try Google. Tons of information has been published on the LT-1s.

Last edited by Easy Mike; 07-26-2012 at 12:40 PM.
Old 07-26-2012, 11:22 AM
  #7  
larrywalk
Melting Slicks

 
larrywalk's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2002
Location: St Louis MO
Posts: 2,303
Received 102 Likes on 73 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by riverracer au
a mate has just bought a '71 LT1 and we got talking about the engine.
what makes the '70 with 370 hp so special over the '71 with 330hp?
was it the 186 heads, cam, higher compression pistons etc, or what?
or was it the new rating system, but i thought that came in '72?

where can we find a break down/listing of parts that go in a LT1 engine?
ie: cam specs, pistons used etc.

any good engine books on this?

this mite solve/start a bar fight for us...

To lower the compression ratio...
Pistons - flat top versus .100" dome
Heads - 76 cc chambers versus 64 cc chambers
Old 07-26-2012, 11:32 AM
  #8  
jb78L-82
Le Mans Master
 
jb78L-82's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2007
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 7,114
Received 740 Likes on 617 Posts

Default

1972 was the first year of Net HP ratings, which is the current standard today. Prior to 1972, all the engines were rated at Gross HP which is very misleading since the engine power is measured at the flywheel with no accessories on the engine including water pump, power steering pump, Alternator (not sure about this one), and most importantly an open exhaust (or lack thereof-no OEM exhaust manifolds, exhaust pipes, mufflers etc). The best example of the difference between Gross and net HP ratings on the C3 corvette is the 1971 LT-1 rated at 330 Gross HP an and the 1972 LT-1 which is essentially the same motor as the 71 LT-1 which was rated at 255 Net HP-which is a 75 HP difference between the 2 rating systems on the same engine. For the uninitiated the difference between Gross and Net HP is very confusing and misleading! Hope that helps!
Old 07-26-2012, 11:41 AM
  #9  
Mike Ward
Race Director
 
Mike Ward's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 2001
Posts: 15,892
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes on 27 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by jb78L-82
1972 was the first year of Net HP ratings, which is the current standard today. Prior to 1972, all the engines were rated at Gross HP which is very misleading since the engine power is measured at the flywheel with no accessories on the engine including water pump, power steering pump, Alternator (not sure about this one), and most importantly an open exhaust (or lack thereof-no OEM exhaust manifolds, exhaust pipes, mufflers etc). The best example of the difference between Gross and net HP ratings on the C3 corvette is the 1971 LT-1 rated at 330 Gross HP an and the 1972 LT-1 which is essentially the same motor as the 71 LT-1 which was rated at 255 Net HP-which is a 75 HP difference between the 2 rating systems on the same engine. For the uninitiated the difference between Gross and Net HP is very confusing and misleading! Hope that helps!
No alternator, no air cleaner, no engine driven smog stuff, no nothing.
Old 07-26-2012, 11:54 AM
  #10  
riverracer au
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
 
riverracer au's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2010
Location: "ɹǝpunuʍop", Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,170
Received 290 Likes on 177 Posts

Default

thanks for the in-depth info
makes me want to rebuild my piddly underpowered '72 L48 to match earlier specs
maybe a set of '70 186 heads, new manifold and cam to match to keep the stock look
just thinking/rambling....
Old 07-26-2012, 03:41 PM
  #11  
Alan 71
Team Owner
 
Alan 71's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Westminster Maryland
Posts: 30,173
Likes: 0
Received 2,878 Likes on 2,515 Posts

Default

Hi,
I believe that Chevrolet did publish the SAE net hp ratings for 71 engines, but the info wasn't widely disseminated.
This chart is from the Corvette News edition that had the 71 introduction info in it.
There are a couple of interesting numbers if you look closely.
Regards,
Alan



Old 07-26-2012, 08:12 PM
  #12  
Solid LT1
Le Mans Master
 
Solid LT1's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2003
Location: Fremont CA
Posts: 5,727
Received 32 Likes on 27 Posts

Default

186 heads should add 20HP to a later LT-1 motor, combustion chamber shape much better fro making HP. We used to swap 292 "Turbo" heads back in the 70's, these heads really woke up those low compression smog headed motors. My buddies 70 Z28 360HP Camaro went from 14.40's at the drags to 13.90s with this swap (done by 18 year old kids who didn't know much back then.)
Old 07-26-2012, 09:02 PM
  #13  
74modified
Burning Brakes
 
74modified's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2008
Location: Mobile Alabama
Posts: 1,037
Received 14 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Vette5.5
Maybe a little more info on the leaded fuel thing. Adding lead to fuel was a cheap way to bump octane rating. This turned out to be a bad thing coming out of the tail pipe, so was phased out. At first, there was low lead gas, that still allowed a little octane boost, but after a couple years, that was gone too. Todays higher octane fuel, is done through further refinement, yielding less actual fuel, per given crude oil input. It's now considered a more politically correct thing to limit premium octace to 91, in CA and other states, to save maybe 1% crude over doing 93 octane, allowed in other states. No lead's actually a good thing though, as the engines combustion chambers burn much cleaner now.
Not to hijack the thread, but the lead also lubricated the valves, the reason older engines need hardened valve seats installed.
Old 07-26-2012, 09:32 PM
  #14  
Barry's70LT1
Drifting
 
Barry's70LT1's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2001
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,864
Received 823 Likes on 241 Posts

Default

A little more LT-1 trivia....

- Crankshaft = Forged Steel, Tuff Trided Journals (Base engine = Cast)
- Rods = Shot Peened/Magnafluxed (pink) (Base engine = not)
- Pistons = Forged TRW (Base engine = cast)
- Heads = 2.02 I / 1.6 E with Push rod Guides (Base engine = 1.94 I)
- Intake = High rise Aluminum (Winters Foundry) (Base engine = cast Q-Jet)
- Carb = Holley (Base engine = Q-jet)
- Cam = Solid lifter Hi-Perf (Base engine = Hydraulic Lo-Perf)

Get notified of new replies

To 1970-71 LT1 engines



Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 1970-71 LT1 engines



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:57 PM.