[SuperMacGuy]

I see in Autoweek that the 2013 or 14 new Corvette engine is designated LT1. Why do they do that? Why use the same name as the older engine that everyone knows? I don't get how it works. Why not call it the LT2 or LS4 or YH99. Maybe there won't be confusion but maybe there will be, especially considering that the old LT1 is still in service in a lot of cars, not like it was last used in the 1960's and no one will really get them mixed up.

http://www.gizmag.com/chevy-2014-corvette-lt1-v8/24705/

[Steve91T]

I was surprised as well. Makes no sense to me.

Just like the new iPad. It's not the iPad 3, it's official name is "the new ipad". What happens when a newer version comes out? People years later are still calling their iPad "the new iPad" when it's far from new.

I don't understand what some of these companies are thinking.

[StanIROCZ]

Back in 1970 there was an LT1 that was pretty cool, a solid lifter 350 with an aluminum intake. Also there was the LS6, which was an aluminum headed 454 with 450 HP, also cool.

1992 comes along and they create an LT1. At the time it was advanced and made more HP than a TPI. The throw back to the old motor was cool because the 1970 was a classic. Same goes for the LS6 that came out in ~2002. There was enough of a time gap and the 1970's were 'classics' at this point in time so there wouldn't really be much confusion between old and new.

Now the 90’s LT1 has only been out of production 15 years and I don’t think anyone considers it a classic. I think GM was trying to be retro and cool but I think they completely fail. IMO the Gen II motor is the least desirable SBC and it is a mistake to create a ‘throw back’ to it.

[dailydriver]

Yes, recycling that name/designation for the THIRD time is a bit much!

[CrashTestDummy]

First off, as the 'bolt counters' will point out, the original LT-1 was called, and remains that, the 'LT-1'. While there's no differentiation in spoken words, GM will be the first to tell you that their first-born LT* was called the "LT-1" with the dash symbol.

Given the general lack of creativity remaining in the car manufacturers, I'm not surprised. While it's possible those inside the Ivory Tower figure that most people won't know about the previous iterations of the engine, and they're probably right, those to whom it really matters will hold such conversations.

Perhaps it's GM being crazy like a fox? I mean, enthusiasts hold such conversations, then think "hey, I'll have a V8, might as well get me one of those LT1's!"

Perhaps GM is wanting people to forget the issues regarding the last LT1, now that that platform is aging and many of the issues are starting to show themselves and be discussed on many online forums about cars that have LT1's in them?

Would you buy a car with a LT2 in it? Or if GM decided to take something from the success of their LS7 mill and call it the LT7? What conversation would we be having if they decided this next Gen engine was called the LTX?

Just thinking out loud here.

This post has been edited by CrashTestDummy: Nov 9 2012, 02:39 PM

[mr.beachcomber]

It's simply marketing...branding an object with a performance moniker. For example, Z06 was first used on the model year (MY) 1963 Corvette for an SCCA club racing Corvette coupe complete with an FI 327, brand new 4-spd, close ratio Muncie coupled with a posi 3.70 rear end ratio, knock-off wheels, heat/radio delete options, sintered metallic brakes, a fiberglass 36 gallon fuel tank, and special offroad exhaust system for dealer installation prior to delivery. The ZR1 option for club racing was first offered in MY 1970 Corvette for an LT-1 SBC, M22 4-spd, posi 3.70 rear end (standard, but buyer could specify ratio down to 2.73), special transistor ignition, aluminum radiator (vice standard brass/copper unit), heavy duty power brakes, heater/radio delete, and special springs, shocks, and front & rear sway bars.

Using the LT1 designation is simple an continuation of Chevy's attempt to performance brand their product. (For those that wonder why Chevy used the LT1 designation for their 2nd gen SBC, take a look at the engine performance chart below for the 1991 L98, 1970 LT-1, and the 1992 LT1 engines. The 2nd gen engine actually produced 15 more HP than Chevy admitted while besting the 1970 engine overall!)

(IMG:http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac219/MrBeachcomber/PowerCurves.jpg)

[roostmeyer]

Huh? It's an RPO code probably set by engineers, that marketing occasionally tries to use when its convenient. Yes, we're interested, but Joe schmoe off the street will never know and is just one more code among 30 or so in his glove box.

[BumpaD_Z28]

Back in 1970 there was an LT1 that was pretty cool, a solid lifter 350 with an aluminum intake. Also there was the LS6, which was an aluminum headed 454 with 450 HP, also cool.

1992 comes along and they create an LT1. At the time it was advanced and made more HP than a TPI. The throw back to the old motor was cool because the 1970 was a classic. Same goes for the LS6 that came out in ~2002. There was enough of a time gap and the 1970's were 'classics' at this point in time so there wouldn't really be much confusion between old and new.

Now the 90’s LT1 has only been out of production 15 years and I don’t think anyone considers it a classic. I think GM was trying to be retro and cool but I think they completely fail. IMO the Gen II motor is the least desirable SBC and it is a mistake to create a ‘throw back’ to it.

Love my LT-1 (BLOCK!) (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

It's simply marketing...branding an object with a performance moniker. For example, Z06 was first used on the model year (MY) 1963 Corvette for an SCCA club racing Corvette coupe complete with an FI 327, brand new 4-spd, close ratio Muncie coupled with a posi 3.70 rear end ratio, knock-off wheels, heat/radio delete options, sintered metallic brakes, a fiberglass 36 gallon fuel tank, and special offroad exhaust system for dealer installation prior to delivery. The ZR1 option for club racing was first offered in MY 1970 Corvette for an LT-1 SBC, M22 4-spd, posi 3.70 rear end (standard, but buyer could specify ratio down to 2.73), special transistor ignition, aluminum radiator (vice standard brass/copper unit), heavy duty power brakes, heater/radio delete, and special springs, shocks, and front & rear sway bars.

Using the LT1 designation is simple an continuation of Chevy's attempt to performance brand their product. (For those that wonder why Chevy used the LT1 designation for their 2nd gen SBC, take a look at the engine performance chart below for the 1991 L98, 1970 LT-1, and the 1992 LT1 engines. The 2nd gen engine actually produced 15 more HP than Chevy admitted while besting the 1970 engine overall!)

(IMG:http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac219/MrBeachcomber/PowerCurves.jpg)

15 more HP's and then the opti died before a 2nd dyno run could be made ! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ... meanwhile thousands of LT-1 (variants anyhow) made it out of the 70's, 80, 90's with hundereds of thousands of miles ... EACH !

[pharmd]

None of it matters...when you pull up outside the local autoparts store the redneck guy hanging out there is gonna say, "What's that thang have in it...a 350?"

[CrashTestDummy]

None of it matters...when you pull up outside the local autoparts store the redneck guy hanging out there is gonna say, "What's that thang have in it...a 350?"

"That's got one of them Corvette engines in it, don't it?"

That's what I hear _all_ the time regarding our 95-96 Impalas/Caprices.

[dailydriver]

None of it matters...when you pull up outside the local autoparts store the redneck guy hanging out there is gonna say, "What's that thang have in it...a 350?"

"That's got one of them Corvette engines in it, don't it?"

That's what I hear _all_ the time regarding our 95-96 Impalas/Caprices.

And I always have to explain that I have the same engine as a C5 Vette, which NEVER fails to impress the uninformed. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)