Administrators RTz Posted October 28, 2006 Administrators Share Posted October 28, 2006 Brian Bills (BrianV8Z), Paul Ruschman (BRAAP), and myself were hanging out in the shop today. I talked them both into participating in a ‘myth busting’ session. We weighed one each of said motors... well the short blocks anyway. Both engines comparably outfitted. Pictures tell a thousand words, see below.... . . The verdict? The LS1 weighed a measly 4 lbs less! Granted, there are many other considerations... heads, alternators, flywheel/clutch package, exhuast manifolds, intake manifolds, etc, etc. But, in the end, the single largest component, and arguably the largest potential contributor, shows no significant weight savings. Obviously, this is not a scientific, lab grade test procedure we've concocted. The main goal was was to see if they were similar in weight... the answer appears to be yes. P.S. We did weigh a pair of intake manifolds... the LS1 and the Offy pictured below. The Offy was 3lbs heavier... add another 8lbs for a carb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinOlson Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 So this is a LT1 block verses a LS1 aluminum block? I would like to see these test redone with a little more accurate method of taking the weight. 2 bathroom scales leaves something to be desired. Definitely a interesting test tho! Regards, Justin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators RTz Posted October 28, 2006 Author Administrators Share Posted October 28, 2006 So this is a LT1 block verses a LS1 aluminum block? Specifically, an '85 Vette block verses an LS1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpyvette Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 btw that OFFY is one of the LEAST EFFECTIVE low and mid rpm range INTAKE DESIGNS EVER, I tested one about 15 years ago on a 454 and lost 50 plus ft lbs of tq over the dual plane edelbrock, and NEVER reached a higher power level even at 6500rpm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinOlson Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Found this article claiming a 55 lbs total difference between a the LT1 and a LS1. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3165/is_n1_v33/ai_19053775 Regards, Justin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyZ Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 So this is a LT1 block verses a LS1 aluminum block? I would like to see these test redone with a little more accurate method of taking the weight. 2 bathroom scales leaves something to be desired. If the scales are biased, they'll be biased the same for each block, so I doubt it matters much at all. If the bocks were put on the scales the same way, in theory you should get a good read. I bet the comparo was reasonable. It's not the first time I heard they were comparable in weight. Ron & Paul are no idiots--if they say the weight is comparable, I'm inclined to believe them...despite the bathroom scales Davy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted October 28, 2006 Administrators Share Posted October 28, 2006 Well, we would agree that Bathroom scales are not the best way to perform this sort of test, but as stated in Rons original post, the point of this test was to see how much “DIFFERENCE†in weight there was, not for actual numbers. For the sake of getting as much repeatable accuracy as we could using B-room scales, we placed a long block of aluminum block across the scales and a wooden block between the aluminum and the lower scale to get the aluminum block level. We then weighed one engine then the other. T o verify that he scales were giving figures that were realistic, we even moved one of the engines more to one end of the scales and the total weight was within one pound, i.e. the scales were reading repeatable no matter which end of the aluminum we biased the weight on. This means the footprint†of the weight being subjected on the scales themselves was the same for both engines. As Ron stated, differences in ancillaries and cylinder heads will alter which weighs more than other, but I can’t really see much difference in the heads when comparing aluminum heads. As for 55 lbs difference between comparably equipped long blocks, ie. Aluminum heads, albumin water pumps, alternators light weight gear reduction starters, etc.? I don’t believe it. In tat article “they†said fully dressed but didn’t quality what was included in their term “fully dressedâ€. Them, “theyâ€â€¦. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted October 28, 2006 Administrators Share Posted October 28, 2006 btw that OFFY is one of the LEAST EFFECTIVE low and mid rpm range INTAKE DESIGNS EVER, I tested one about 15 years ago on a 454 and lost 50 plus ft lbs of tq over the dual plane edelbrock, and NEVER reached a higher power level even at 6500rpm Not wanting to thread jack. Grumpy, could we take this discussion to the thread linked below which has more details on possibly using as a low profile super charger manifold. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=115326 Yeah, in looking at this manifold, I would NOT use it on any N/A small block, especially with the current selection in intakes available. The drivers side water passage leading the thermostat is also quite restrictive. What is your opinion of using this intake for a custom low boost roots type super charger, cutting out the middle web and also welding on injector bungs for multi-port EFI? I realize it isn’t ideal, but for a custom “low profile Super charger intake do you think it will work at least “ok” with its huge plenum and its very short 1”-1 ½” long runners? http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=115326 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted October 29, 2006 Administrators Share Posted October 29, 2006 ...... Ron & Paul are no idiots--....... Davy Well, at least one of us isn't... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heavy85 Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 I know how to explain it - you have to take the engine (LS) off the stand before you weight it. Duh .... and all that rust must have been worth 10 lb if you'ld just taken the time to clean it up first. We see where the bias lies here. Next your going to tell me a little ole L6 is heavier than a hefty SBC - oh wait .... Cameron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LS2 V8 Miata Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 I love it, you guys never fail to entertain! News Flash . . . The Billions spent in Detroit by GM, Ford and Chrysler attempting to engineer more HP per pound via lighter aluminum engines was all wasted!!! Definatively proven by the Walgreens bathroom scale! What a HOOT! You guys are great, great I tell ya! It's Halloween, paint a Pumpkin black and tell us it's a Bowling Ball!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 I love it, you guys never fail to entertain! News Flash . . . The Billions spent in Detroit by GM, Ford and Chrysler attempting to engineer more HP per pound via lighter aluminum engines was all wasted!!! Definatively proven by the Walgreens bathroom scale! What a HOOT! You guys are great, great I tell ya! It's Halloween, paint a Pumpkin black and tell us it's a Bowling Ball!!!! Rule #10 buddy. http://forums.hybridz.org/announcement.php?a=2 If you've got a counterpoint prove it, but please do not make fun of someone who disagrees with you, especially when they've actually got empirical proof of their point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Was he making fun of rontyler's post?? I took it that he was making fun of Detroit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr_hunt Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Another really good thread going bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgkurz Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Rule #10 buddy. http://forums.hybridz.org/announcement.php?a=2 If you've got a counterpoint prove it, but please do not make fun of someone who disagrees with you, especially when they've actually got empirical proof of their point. LS2 V8 Miata was definitley making fun of the big three. It's a great thread no matter how imperical the data is... This thread prompts some questions. Let's assume for argument sake that the LS1 and L98 short blocks are similar in weight. Is the major advantage in the more modern EFI and head design? The LSx series engines and especially the LS7 have such a superbly flat powerband for the power they make. Could you get close with a L98 or LT1 with aluminum heads? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 JON... I'm sorry. I meant no disrespect by my post. I really just wanted to know if he was being made fun of. I read LS2 V8 Miata's post as making fun of Detroit. I guess sometimes I'm just dense. Again, I'm sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr_hunt Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Mike your a post whore, I think your trying to run your post count up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Well let's just let the thread roll on. I keep reading it and I keep reading that he's being sarcastic and saying that the two idiots in their garage with some bathroom scales are wrong and that GM wouldn't have spent billions of dollars in vain. That's how I read it the first time, that's how I read it now... In any event, if anyone else would like to share some more proof one way or the other, that would be helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop N Wood Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Post looks inflamatory to me. Look back though some of his other postings. Looks to bit of a trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1 Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 I can say pretty confidently that most 1st gen SBC blocks, bare with main caps and bolts, weigh 163# +/- 1#. Anybody know what a bare LS1 block weighs? jt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts