[LT1ornothing]

Did a little searching on the forums, Google, and a few different social media outlets and could not find much information.

So weapon x (and I am sure other vendors as well) offer a 454 LT1 shortblock. Now I realize large displacement is not as common as it once was and it is easier and more practical to just slap on a blower on top and call it a day in these times.

I was just looking to see if anyone has done a 454 for their gen6, genuinely curious about the results. Katech looks to be getting between 700-800 horsepower out of their 427 package depending on what intake manifold you choose. Seems like 700+ hp out of a 454 would be a breeze without camming it to the point of no drivability.

If you have any information on a 454 build or if you are a 454 LT1shortblock vendor and would like to share your findings, projects, etc. I would love to know more about the set up.

[Puddin]

I wouldn't go bigger than a 427 as they are rowdy enough on the drivability scale. Those Katech numbers were also at the flywheel not to the tires but still thats almost 700 to the tire through an auto so a manual 427 I can see hitting 700 with their Track attack setup.

[LT1ornothing]

Originally Posted by Puddin

I wouldn't go bigger than a 427 as they are rowdy enough on the drivability scale. Those Katech numbers were also at the flywheel not to the tires but still thats almost 700 to the tire through an auto so a manual 427 I can see hitting 700 with their Track attack setup.

Absolutely, yes I knew their claims were at the flywheel. How much more "rowdy" could a 454 be over the 427? If the camshaft is spec'd out more mildly (think torquer K2 katech style cam [ 219 / 233 @ .050, . 643/ .655 lift, 118 LSA] re-grounded to favor the extra cubic inches in this situation) where it sacrificed a tad of hp in exchange for insane torque from 2500 rpm to near redline AND good drivability. I just feel like if you don't get greedy with the cam size, keep the redline under 7,000rpm, a 13:1 454 LT1 on e85 should be street friendly drivable and fast.

[6spdhyperblue]

Originally Posted by Puddin

I wouldn't go bigger than a 427 as they are rowdy enough on the drivability scale. Those Katech numbers were also at the flywheel not to the tires but still thats almost 700 to the tire through an auto so a manual 427 I can see hitting 700 with their Track attack setup.

Ive seen you make this comment before, can you explain as I understood this would depend on the cam no? The cubes soak up the duration?

[KingLT1]

Bigger engine doesn't mean worse drivability...the 6.2 doesn't drive any worse then a 5.3. You simply size the camshaft for the application and intended use. Put a mild cam in a 454 and it will behave fine...it will simply use use more fuel.

[LT1ornothing]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Bigger engine doesn't mean worse drivability...the 6.2 doesn't drive any worse then a 5.3. You simply size the camshaft for the application and intended use. Put a mild cam in a 454 and it will behave fine...it will simply use use more fuel.

King, you have been around and heard of tons of set ups. Seen anyone try a 454 on a gen 6 camaro or c7?

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Bigger engine doesn't mean worse drivability...the 6.2 doesn't drive any worse then a 5.3. You simply size the camshaft for the application and intended use. Put a mild cam in a 454 and it will behave fine...it will simply use use more fuel.

True but it kinda negates the point of doing a stroker motor if your just going to put a mild cam in. If you want mild why not stay stock cubes?

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by 6spdhyperblue

Ive seen you make this comment before, can you explain as I understood this would depend on the cam no? The cubes soak up the duration?

Of course it would depend on cam but why go mild if you're going to go through all the extra money and trouble to have the motor stroked?

[Puddin]

If I could start over I probably would've sunk the extra money I spent on the 427 and spent it on fuel upgrades and a 2650 or twins and stayed stock cubes.

[LT1ornothing]

Originally Posted by Puddin

Of course it would depend on cam but why go mild if you're going to go through all the extra money and trouble to have the motor stroked?

To keep it drivable on the street, to avoid having to replace valvetrain components as frequently. I'd happily give up 50 hp if the car drove and idled near stock. There is just too much compromise with the bigger cams.

[LT1ornothing]

Originally Posted by Puddin

If I could start over I probably would've sunk the extra money I spent on the 427 and spent it on fuel upgrades and a 2650 or twins and stayed stock cubes.

I'm leaning hard towards a 2650 stock cubes + fuel system. I was just curious about the 454 and why so little information about the set up was available.

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by 1LEornothing

King, you have been around and heard of tons of set ups. Seen anyone try a 454 on a gen 6 camaro or c7?

Biggest I've heard of is the ARS 440. https://www.lsxmag.com/news/building...-lt1-with-lme/

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by 1LEornothing

To keep it drivable on the street, to avoid having to replace valvetrain components as frequently. I'd happily give up 50 hp if the car drove and idled near stock. There is just too much compromise with the bigger cams.

That's exactly why I landed with the setup I have (Jannetty smooth idle cam, Kooks headers, Maggie 2300 @ 10 psi of boost). It idles close to stock, remains very drivable (in other words, passenger friendly as well), yet it's powerful enough being a stock displacement LT1.

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by 1LEornothing

To keep it drivable on the street, to avoid having to replace valvetrain components as frequently. I'd happily give up 50 hp if the car drove and idled near stock. There is just too much compromise with the bigger cams.

After listening to Pray over on Facebook and seeing some of the pics of the heads on some of the cars he's worked on the valvetrain at least to me is always going to be a major weak point for our cars.