[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

I guess 423 WHP could be a bit generous on a dyno, so I see your point. So going by relative percentage, we are looking at a 3% to 4% gain, then.

Got any link/source to your observations?



LG is known to release some clickbait stuff nowadays.

If you really know the inside news like MartinjIm does, then you probably won't be allowed to confirm or deny anything, unless you enjoy having an army of lawyers after you.

Will believe it when we see it, though I highly doubt we will see it.

I have to say I don’t have any real inside info on this and GM has surprised more than a time or two over the past year or two (Blackwing V8). I’d say my last real “inside” info where I knew more than I told you guys has been all C8 related, including LT2 and LT6 specs.

I still maintain though that LT2 as an RPO code will not go into Camaro. Some of the hardware that makes it an LT2 just doesn’t work in a front engine car. Start with the sump. It is possible that a number of the improvements can be integrated into an LT1 replacement, but then it would likely be given a different RPO code. Maybe LT3, so start that rumor if you want.

As far as LT5 in ZLE…possible but very unlikely. GM does need to keep some LT5 capability around to provide service support for ZL1, but that doesn’t mean it would stick around in production for a very low volume ZLE. If it was applied across the board to all ZL1, maybe, but not for just ZLE. Another potential would be to add it to another moderate volume vehicle like an Escalade Blackwing edition. Thing is, LT4 would also make a nice Escalade Blackwing at lower cost and would make a nice bookend to the CT5 Blackwing with the same engine. FWIW, GM recently discontinued LT5 as a crate motor offering. That was my last signal that LT5 is truly dead.

Originally Posted by 6sigma

I think it is plausible. After all, they did put a manual trans in a car that was never designed for it (CT5). If GM decided to put an updated LT1.5 or modified LT2 into Camaro I am sure they could do it. Even more plausible is the LT5 in a ZLE. That would be a very cool sendoff for ICE Camaro, and GM seems to be feeling a bit sentimental these days with the Blackwing cars.

Probably splitting hairs here, but Alpha 1 CTS had MT engineered into the platform, including CTS-V and Alpha 2 is an evolution of Alpha 1, so technically, CT5 was engineered for MT application.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I have to say I don’t have any real inside info on this and GM has surprised more than a time or two over the past year or two (Blackwing V8). I’d say my last real “inside” info where I knew more than I told you guys has been all C8 related, including LT2 and LT6 specs.

I still maintain though that LT2 as an RPO code will not go into Camaro. Some of the hardware that makes it an LT2 just doesn’t work in a front engine car. Start with the sump. It is possible that a number of the improvements can be integrated into an LT1 replacement, but then it would likely be given a different RPO code. Maybe LT3, so start that rumor if you want.

As far as LT5 in ZLE…possible but very unlikely. GM does need to keep some LT5 capability around to provide service support for ZL1, but that doesn’t mean it would stick around in production for a very low volume ZLE. If it was applied across the board to all ZL1, maybe, but not for just ZLE. Another potential would be to add it to another moderate volume vehicle like an Escalade Blackwing edition. Thing is, LT4 would also make a nice Escalade Blackwing at lower cost and would make a nice bookend to the CT5 Blackwing with the same engine. FWIW, GM recently discontinued LT5 as a crate motor offering. That was my last signal that LT5 is truly dead.

Eh, I still think you have access to more info than Lethal Garage does, so that's something.

My point being, we just don't know. People who say they know anything is BS. Again, GM would be all over them if they really leaked some important info. People who really know can't tell for many reasons. Just play the cards we are dealt.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

Eh, I still think you have access to more info than Lethal Garage does, so that's something.

Probably.

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

My point being, we just don't know. People who say they know anything is BS. Again, GM would be all over them if they really leaked some important info. People who really know can't tell for many reasons. Just play the cards we are dealt.

Exactly.

[oldman]

AFAIK (been racing Miatas over the last year, and a Boxster) there are only two current production based long blocks that are identical: LT1 and the truck L86. The only parts that I know of that separate the two are the intake and exhaust manifolds, probably acc placement. So I don't see any reason GM could not and would not keep the LT1 and put a slightly redesigned Lt2 intake manifold on it and pickup the 10 to 15 HP. They did the same thing with the LS1. The base LT1 intake was heavily compromised because of the Vette, with that no longer an issue and the current LT1 intake used only on the Camaro, I see no reason why GM would not put a slightly redesigned LT2 intake on the current LT1 for the OP 470 HP.

The LS1 had three or four changes off the top of my head, con rod bolts similar to the ones used on their spec race crate motor, the LS6 intake manifold that came out first on the Vette, sheet metal exhaust manifolds to cast, cam? I believe had a small change 2001.

[MatthewAMEL]

Originally Posted by oldman

AFAIK (been racing Miatas over the last year, and a Boxster) there are only two current production based long blocks that are identical: LT1 and the truck L86. The only parts that I know of that separate the two are the intake and exhaust manifolds, probably acc placement. So I don't see any reason GM could not and would not keep the LT1 and put a slightly redesigned Lt2 intake manifold on it and pickup the 10 to 15 HP. They did the same thing with the LS1. The base LT1 intake was heavily compromised because of the Vette, with that no longer an issue and the current LT1 intake used only on the Camaro, I see no reason why GM would not put a slightly redesigned LT2 intake on the current LT1 for the OP 470 HP.

The LS1 had three or four changes off the top of my head, con rod bolts similar to the ones used on their spec race crate motor, the LS6 intake manifold that came out first on the Vette, sheet metal exhaust manifolds to cast, cam? I believe had a small change 2001.

I think the question is at what point do the changes make it a 'new' engine in the eyes of the EPA/DOT?


I have no idea what that point is. The revised LT4 in the BW5 is still a LT4, so that would seem to be a no brainer for ZL1/ZLE.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by MatthewAMEL

I think the question is at what point do the changes make it a 'new' engine in the eyes of the EPA/DOT?


I have no idea what that point is. The revised LT4 in the BW5 is still a LT4, so that would seem to be a no brainer for ZL1/ZLE.

It’s actually GM that defines their RPO codes. Back when I was in Powertrain Engineering, RPO codes would change if there were differences in

• The Big 6 (block, head, crank, cam, rod, piston)
• Fueling system
• Displacement on Demand
• Sometimes, but not always, intake or exhaust manifold

Putting an LT2 intake on an LT1 long block would make it different enough to warrant a new RPO code. Likewise using an LT2 long block but maintaining LT1 exhaust manifold would make it a different RPO code. There are a number of ways GM can sprinkle LT2 improvements into Camaro. All of them would likely require a different RPO code. I’m tossing LT3 out there as a possibility. How they content it (LT1 long block with LT2 intake and accessories vs LT2 long block with LT1 accessories ) would be anybody’s guess.

[GearheadSS]

Originally Posted by oldman

AFAIK (been racing Miatas over the last year, and a Boxster) there are only two current production based long blocks that are identical: LT1 and the truck L86. The only parts that I know of that separate the two are the intake and exhaust manifolds, probably acc placement. So I don't see any reason GM could not and would not keep the LT1 and put a slightly redesigned Lt2 intake manifold on it and pickup the 10 to 15 HP. They did the same thing with the LS1. The base LT1 intake was heavily compromised because of the Vette, with that no longer an issue and the current LT1 intake used only on the Camaro, I see no reason why GM would not put a slightly redesigned LT2 intake on the current LT1 for the OP 470 HP.
.

There is no L86 in production currently. The only V8 engines larger than a 5.3L in trucks are the L87 6.2L in 1500s and the L8T 6.6L in HDs.

The L86 hasn't been used in production since the 2020 MY in the full size SUVs.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

There is no L86 in production currently. The only V8 engines larger than a 5.3L in trucks are the L87 6.2L in 1500s and the L8T 6.6L in HDs.

The L86 hasn't been used in production since the 2020 MY in the full size SUVs.

L86 = 6.2L engine with AFM
L87 = 6.2L engine with DFM

L87 replaced L86 gradually beginning in 2019-20 as GM ramped up volume of the DFM equipped engines. Pickups first, then utilities when Spring Hill got up to full volume capacity.

[s346k]

Originally Posted by oldman

The LS1 had three or four changes off the top of my head, con rod bolts similar to the ones used on their spec race crate motor, the LS6 intake manifold that came out first on the Vette, sheet metal exhaust manifolds to cast, cam? I believe had a small change 2001.

lsgun also had cyl head casting changes, oil return at the rear of the block, etc. none of those items made a noticeable difference in power or even warranted an engine designation change. the rod bolt ferrules as well as the oil return were probably the biggest changes with regard to actual performance, or should we say durability.

i believe the fastest stock lsjuan fbody is a 99 car. which had the "worst" of everything. 853 heads, ls1 intake manifold, poor oil return and rod bolt ferrules.

i had an 00 and 99 fbodies. the 99 ran hard, 00 was meh.

[oldman]

ls1 was still a ls1 after the above mentioned changes. Since the LT1 has a Camaro history I think GM would keep it at LT1 or LT1 - 2022. I don't see why GM would leave 10 to 15 HP on the table when Camaro sales are not all that great. I could see it before as the Vette and Camaro shared the same intake manifold.

[GearheadSS]

Y'all ready to stop believing all of these youtubers and websites(GMA) posting bogus information yet? We now know for a fact that none of this crap was true.

[5.M0NSTER]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

Y'all ready to stop believing all of these youtubers and websites(GMA) posting bogus information yet? We now know for a fact that none of this crap was true.

^^^ This.

[SS_Don]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

Y'all ready to stop believing all of these youtubers and websites(GMA) posting bogus information yet? We now know for a fact that none of this crap was true.

Does this mean that Elvis isn’t alive either?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Big Lou 1le]

All that was posted for views.