Is the LS1 a SBC?

[80LS1T]

Ok lets see what everyone considers the LS1.

[HarrisonTX]

Good question.

IMO its based off the sbc, and wouldnt have all the tech. in it without years of the sbc, but it sure wont take some double humps....

[BRAAP]

This is sort of a tough one but yet not so tough when you look at the American V-8 engines produced by the big three as a whole.

I’m sure the hard core LS purists probably view the definition of Small Block Chevy as NOT encompassing the Gen III power plants, but the rest of us generic car guys probably would agree that the definition of Small Block Chevy as being the smaller of the two V-8 engine families that Chevy is currently producing. Chevy is still building a Big Block, even though it has a different code name and has gone through a few design changes, i.e. Mk IV and Mk V, etc, it is stilled called the Big Block, so why not the current iteration of the 4.8, 5.3, 5.7 and 6.0 series called a Small block? Heck, even Ford calls their 289, 302/5.0 and the 351/5.8 small blocks, and Chrysler calls there 318, and 360/5.9 small blocks and both Ford and Mopar have their iteration of Big Blocks as well and the general public has accepted those monikers for those power plants, even though all of these Small and Big Block engines have undergone mild to massive changes throughout production since inception.

 

I personally view the terms “Small Block” and “Big Block” as defining the basic overall physical dimensions of those engines.

 

My vote is for yes, the LS-1, LS-6, LS-2 can also be called small blocks.

[myplasticegg]

small blocks are small blocks; big blocks are big blocks; LS motors are LS motors

[mas28O]

Ls1 motors are not small blocks. They are ls1's ,and they are larger than the Small block motors.

[BRAAP]

I will agree that the Gen III power plants will most likely be, and should be called by its engine code or Generation, i.e. Gen III, LQ-4, LS-1 etc, especially on the forum as it makes it easier to describe exactly what engine you are talking about without being to vague, but the term “Small block Chevy” is a very generic broad encompassing description of a motor type/size. LS-1 is an engine code. LT 1, L-98, ZL-1, L-88, ZL-1, L-78, LS-7, are also engine codes, but all those engine codes are either a “Small Block” or a “Big Block”, not a broad encompassing descriptor. Now we do, and should, continue to use the engine code as a means to describe a particular power plant as that 3 digit code is a much abbreviated descriptor for a long list of design parameters and optional parts.

 

Yes, the LS-1 is a completely different engine from pretty much every aspect, no one disputes that fact, but, YES, it is also a Small Block Chevrolet power plant, just as its brethren the 4.8, 5.3 and 6.0 are all smaller in physical size and shape than the Big Blocks, which in their current production run are also much different than their predecessors, but they are all still under the descriptor Big and Small Block Chevrolet.

 

 

Can we put this dead horse to rest now?

[9kredline]

small blocks are small blocks; big blocks are big blocks; LS motors are LS motors

 

You already knew my take on it, but that pretty much summed it up.

 

Too many block casting and engineering differences. A small block is just a small block, but LSx's are fruit and cake.

 

Noticing a lot of folks saying they think it's a SBC, but no posts. This could be interesting, write a response with your vote!

 

EDIT:

It's even on GM's website.

http://www.gmgoodwrench.com/perfpartsjsp/category.jsp?section=ep

 

Chevy "Gen 3 Design" LS1 - LS6 - LQ4

 

as opposed to:

 

Chevy Big-Block V8

Chevy Small-Block V8

 

I don't know how much more evidence I can provide.

[DaleMX]

Now that I have one I must say it's totally different. I vote no.

[Mike kZ]

I agree with Braap. Yes an LS engine is totally different, but physically it's a small block

[spotfitz]

Would it be better if we called it a mouse instead? lol

[RPMS]

It's a small block. It's an LS-motor. It's two, two, two motors in one!

 

"smallblock" is a generic term, in my mind at least. It denotes the smaller of the v8 motor that a company produces. Ford, MoPar, and GM all made small block and big block pushrod engines. GM makes both the 350cid LS1 and a 454, thus the LS1 is still the smaller of the blocks.

 

When the LS1 no longer uses pushrods, goes to a V10, or goes to being a boxer configuration, , THEN perhaps I'll feel differently.

 

Scott

[Mikelly]

In my opinion, It is still an SBC. It is 346cubic inches in the original LS1 configuration. I think a lot of people get hung up on the tehcnological aspects... Ford's little 4.6 is an SBF in my opinion though, so gage my comments accordingly.

 

Mike

[Danno74Z]

HotRod Mag: "The General Motors small-block Gen III LS1 V-8 has been around since 1997, but many enthusiasts are still learning about its great features". Article goes on to say: "As a final exclamation point on the design, this block turned out to be lighter, smaller, more rigid, and more usage-flexible than any other production small-block V-8 GM has ever built". I agree with Mike's assessment in that it is an advance engine with a lot of technology but it is still classified as a "small-block" by the general automotive world.

 

Danno74Z

[BRAAP]

Of all the arguments I have read thus far “against” calling the LS-1 a Small Block, the only one that holds any water is the fact that Corporate GM doesn’t call it a Small Block themselves.

 

Ok, fair enough…

 

BUT…… did any of us stop to think if GM ever called the traditional V-8’s by the moniker “Small” and “Big” Block back in the day when the those terms were coined? My guess is that Corporate GM called these engines by their engine code, just like GM is currently calling the all aluminum Camaro/Vette 346 CID Gen III V-8 by its engine code, “LS-1”! I’m not 100% positive, but I would guess that the general hot rodding public gave the names “Small” and “Big” Block, not GM, Ford, or Chrylser. Now if what I am proposing is true, then in reality we shouldn’t be calling our beloved Chevy 305’s 327’s 350’s 400’s 427’s, 454’s Small or Big Blocks, but be calling them by there engine code …..Right?

 

 

My vote is, (if you haven’t already noticed), the LS-1 “IS” a Small block,

 

Next……

[Guest traub83]

to me its just the new version of the small block family! but i refer to it as an ls1 exe.. but in all reality it is a small block even if nobody calls it one..

[9kredline]

to me its just the new version of the small block family! but i refer to it as an ls1 exe.. but in all reality it is a small block even if nobody calls it one..

 

 

All I'm seeing is the "It's my opinion" answers for the guys that think it's a small block. The dimensions argument is pointless to me, it's all about the design and technology.

 

What makes it a small block?

[Mikelly]

Well, I'd counter that by saying it is a SMALLER block than the other small block we're referencing... It is lighter, and the dimensions aren't wildly different from that of my 383 stroker sitting on the stand. I suspect the deck height is lower, and overall dimensions are similar. So maybe the LS1, based on size, cubic inches, and weight is the next generation of the small block chevy.

 

Mike

[VRJoe]

OK, I'll use an analogy to help clear this up.

 

In 1863 Colt was producing PISTOLS. They were Cap & Ball revolvers that were loaded from the front of the cylinder. Powder was poured in the cylinder, followed by a wad and then the ball. A percussion cap was then placed on a nipple it the rear of the cylinder.

 

In 1873 Colt introduced the Peacemaker. It was (and is) a revolver loaded from the rear of the cylinder via a gate. It used self contained cartridges and a bored through cylinder. It was (and is) called a PISTOL

 

1911 Colt introduced the Model 1911, commonly called the Colt 45 or Government Model . It is a semi-automatic PISTOL. It has no cylinder and uses a magazine (clip) to feed the cartridge. It was (and is) called a PISTOL

 

Skip ahead to the introduction of the Glock line of handguns. They're produced with polymer frame, not steel. They were (and still are) called PISTOLS

 

As a further note there are Single Actions PISTOLS, Double Action PISTOLS, Single Action Semi-Automatic PISTOLS, Double Action Semi-Automatic PISTOLS, Full-Automatic PISTOLS, but they are ALL PISTOLS.

 

SBC is a generic term similar to PISTOL.

 

Hope that helps put this issue to bed.

 

- Joe

[Sumo]

Let's all just get along, it's a Small Block made by Chevy that's designated an LS-1. You know kinda like Star Trek, they're both Enterprises made by the Federation and their shields both suck because they go down to 42% when hit............i gotta stop watching too much tv.

[BRAAP]

QUOTE from 9Kredline…

 

***All I'm seeing is the "It's my opinion" answers for the guys that think it's a small block. The dimensions argument is pointless to me, it's all about the design and technology.

 

What makes it a small block?***

 

End quote…

 

 

 

I’ll answer 9Kredline’s question with a couple more questions.

 

Why not classify these Gen III engines as Small Block and also why are we calling the traditional Chevy engine a small Block if GM didn’t originally call them that either?

 

Chevy is still building a much larger engine that is publicly accepted as being the Chevy Big Block. Sure it is a different design than the traditional big blocks, but the public still calls it a Big Block. Why do we do that? Because there is another version of power plant being produced by Chevy that is smaller in dimensions and being as it is smaller than the other bigger engines in production, doesn’t it only make sense to call the new Gen III engines Small blocks? There are still 2 distinct sizes of V-8 power plants being produced, Small and Big, the only difference is evolution, but they are still Small and Big no matter how you look at them. That is why we are calling the LS-1 a small block.

 

 

If I understand 9Kredline’s argument correctly, it is that Corporate GM doesn’t call the LS-1 a small block, and if GM didn’t call the traditional V-8 engines by the term small block, then where does the term “Small Block” come from? Even if GM didn’t call the traditional engines, “Small block”, but the public does, then why can’t it apply to the current GM offering that is a smaller power plant than its big brother the Big Block?

 

Not trying to be an arse , but I’m seeing a terminology conflict in what you are saying concerning calling the LS1 a small block and the “dimensions being pointless”. When it comes to classifying an engine as a “small block” or a “big block” or neither of those, when GM is producing 2 very distinctly sized engines, doesn’t it only make logical sense to continue to classify the two classes of V-8’s in such a manner? So I do think that the “dimensions” thing is very relevant to this discussion.

 

9Kredline says “technology” and “design” is what it s all about. If “design” and “technology” is what defines an engine as a Small block, a Big block, or as neither classification, then why are we still calling the Gen II Chevy LT 1 a small block? Compared to its predecessor, the Gen 1 1955-1990’s Chevy V-8 engine, the LT 1 is more “technologically” advanced with its completely re”design”ed block and heads with the reverse flow cooling, and that funky distributor under the water pump, and that water pump driven off of the cam instead of a V-belt… The LT 1 is a vastly different DESIGN and TECHNOLOGY than the traditional small block but it is still classified by the public as being a GM Small Block. Even the foundational core of the LT 1 engine itself, (the block and heads) aren’t interchangeable with the early engines, but yet we still call this Gen II engine a small block.

 

The LS-1 is an LS-1, and it’s a Small block as compared to GM other larger offerings, the Big Block.