One Fast Ol' LT-1

Recently, the Grubb Worm Camaro has gone as fast as 7.309s at 196mph in the quarter mile. Even more impressive, is that it's not doing it with an LS1, but instead with an old LT-1. And even further impressive, the owner is jamming his own gears, with a Tremec T-56 that still uses an H-pattern. So, currently, the fastest RWD stickshift GM is using the redheaded stepchild of small block Chevys. It's also the fastest LT-1 car. Period. 

I'd really like to know the engine combo on this thing, because as fair as I know, there was never any aftermarket LT-1 blocks available (I know Brodix made ONE billet-aluminum block that was punched out to 434ci in an Impala SS) and the biggest a stock LT-1 block will go is 396ci, because of the water jackets. That intake also looks suspiciously stock. Or if it's an aftermarket piece, it's not a big tall box-ram setup like you see on a lot of max effort LS engines. It doesn't look like it's radically lighter than most F-bodies, either, and I'm pretty sure he has a weight minimum for most of these events. 

Oh, yeah, and video of that 7.30 run

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Ffacebook%2Fvideos%2F10221203498420905%2F&width=500&show_text=false&height=281

Whoops, I am just now realizing that the 1993-1997 Optispark wonder had no hyphen either. It's only the '70-'72 that had a hyphen. Then Gen II and Gen V both have no hyphen. That's confusing.

The info I've found on that motor is that it's a stock '97 block and stock LT4 intake manifold. Trick flow heads. Pretty sure it's running a crank trigger setup on a Holley Dominator, so no more optispark.

EDIT: added the video I found on Tick Performance's channel.

In reply to Daylan C :

Good lord, I wonder how many LT1 blocks they have hinged getting to this point. I also love the video where 1320video kind of embedded themselves in the crew for a weekend and the car went 7.5xx with a clutch that they resurfaced by scratching with a giant rock in the pits.

Wow.

I did wonder when I clicked which LT1 we were speaking of. At first Chevrolet was pretty great using old names to harken back to old amazing engines, but now that they've done it over and over, it's really hard to keep them straight.

Isn't the LT1 block just a wee bit better than the standard engine which came before it? I mean, if they are running block filler , a main girdle and stuff, it should be strong enough for that output, though not ideal in the long term.

Thanks for reminding me how much I miss the 97 Formula I sold.   

Maybe this is the start of a sea-change in how people view the LT1.  I can remember when the 400 SBC was the red head step child of SBC’s.  Smog dog they said.  Siamese bores.  They over heat.  Then, almost overnight, hot rodders started trying to find them.  406 was a good combo.  

Somebody shows the way.  Others follow.

Hot damn. All I got.

A 401 CJ said:

Maybe this is the start of a sea-change in how people view the LT1.  I can remember when the 400 SBC was the red head step child of SBC’s.  Smog dog they said.  Siamese bores.  They over heat.  Then, almost overnight, hot rodders started trying to find them.  406 was a good combo.  

Somebody shows the way.  Others follow.

 

I've always been of the opinion that if the LS1 hadn't come out so soon and been what it was, the LT1 would be remembered as a great engine. It did make a lot of advancements over the old Gen 1 SBC. Optispark was more accurate than a distributor.  Reverse-cooling higher compression ratios. They were all roller cam and one-piece rear main seals. It had a lot of stuff going for it. But when they killed it after only a few years, and then the LS was an even larger leap forward, it really hurt the LT1

If I had that much power in my 94 LT1 Camaro I might be able to keep up with bone stock Miatas at Autox events.

Probably not.

In reply to NickD :

But that has made them cheap hot rod fodder. Hell I've got one that I just traded a set of wheels for, that were on the car when I got it. People think they're junk, and although they're quirky, they're not "bad" per se

A 401 CJ said:

Maybe this is the start of a sea-change in how people view the LT1.  I can remember when the 400 SBC was the red head step child of SBC’s.  Smog dog they said.  Siamese bores.  They over heat.  Then, almost overnight, hot rodders started trying to find them.  406 was a good combo.  

Somebody shows the way.  Others follow.

 

This is why you NEVER follow haters. When they rag on your "terrible engine choice", keep it, and when it comes time, sell them your "terrible engine choice" for a "terribly (over) priced" fee. 

This car is the epitome of this meme.

I've always been of the opinion that if the LS1 hadn't come out so soon and been what it was, the LT1 would be remembered as a great engine.

I strongly agree with that. I personally kinda love the LT1. I remember driving stock LT1 and LS1 Fbodies and not feeling like the LS was all that big a deal, just an incremental improvement. Of course, that LS was just the beginning, but it wouldn't necessarily have been the end for the SBC either. 

In reply to Vigo :

I agree.  I’ve driven them back to back and not seen any difference in the butt dyno (street driving).  I’m pretty sure if they were both governed to 4500, my old ‘94 Formula would have kept up with my LS6 Z06.

What's the weight and dimensional difference between the LT and LS engines? 

In reply to yupididit :

LS heads are a bit taller, other than that they both fit in the same hole. Not sure on the weight but I know most LT heads are iron and most LS heads are aluminum.

In reply to yupididit :

I think LTs are a bit shorter thanks to the super-low profile intake manifolds. LT1 intakes are the same height, if not slightly shorter, than the valve covers. Plus, the LT doesn't have the deep-skirt block of an LS motor (conventional 4-bolt mains instead of cross-bolted main caps)

Daylan C said:

In reply to yupididit :

LS heads are a bit taller, other than that they both fit in the same hole. Not sure on the weight but I know most LT heads are iron and most LS heads are aluminum.

All B-body heads are iron. All F-body and Vette heads are aluminum, including the LT4.

In reply to Appleseed :

So statistically b-body is probably the largest group, probably doesn't count for a majority of all engines though. I was thinking f-body heads were iron too.

In reply to Appleseed :

D-body (Caddy Fleetwood) also used iron heads. 

I had a friend with a Caprice that had the "Baby LT1", the strange 4.3L V8 variant. What a weird and forgotten engine.

I've never liked that body style of Camaro but this 1300hp monster makes me like them a little more.

In reply to NickD :

I have one of those 4.3s. The seller I got it from didn't know it was a 4.3 or that they existed. He was advertising it as a 5.7.

infinitenexus said:

I've never liked that body style of Camaro but this 1300hp monster makes me like them a little more.

When it comes to the 4th-gens, If I had to get a Chevrolet variant, it would be the LT1 cars. They look much better than the more catfish-looking LS cars. If I had to get a Pontiac, I would get the LS car, because the LT cars are very awkward-looking in my eye, a little too stuck in transition between the 3rd-gen and the LS 4th-gen styling.

If recall correctly,  only the LT4 got 4 bolt mains. I know my 9C1 only had 2 bolt main caps.

I always forget that the Fleetwood is a D-body.