Video 1, video content:
Truck intake does not fit
Truck accessories barely clear the hood. Alternator has 1/2" clearance when hood closed...
For A/C, use A/C bracket from a V6 Vortec 4.3L S-10, and "put some reinforcement brackets on"
Using truck fuel rails, need to figure out a way to bolt down to the LS1 intake.
He seems to suggest that the stock fuel lines will work...that should be explained later.
Walbro 255 ltr/hr fuel pump in tank
Had to trim one of the accessory brackets (lost the idler pulley area) to clear the LS1 intake. Idler relocation bracket solves that. This is standard.
Exhaust manifolds are a bit of an issue. He thinks he wanted the 98-99 F-body passenger side manifold would work, but cannot find one so he's modifying the truck manifold. I assume the truck manifold fits fine on the driver's side. But perhaps 98-99 LS1 manifolds are what I want...or maybe I want something better flowing.
Video 1, comments:
Right away he says check out video 3 for an overview of everything. At this point I will watch all 3 before I attempt to summarize anything.
Caprice engine swap?
Re: Caprice engine swap?
Ah, ended up not reusing factory fuel lines. Just ran some high pressure rubber hose up to the engine bay. Special high pressure hose clamps are required! Didn't know such a thing existed.
He says with the correct 1" setback engine mounts, he had to modify the trans crossmember to go back 2". I don't understand this if the trans is in the same place.
Truck coils block the heater core lines. Have to move coils forward. I wonder if all coils have the same issue.
Used an LS1 F-body throttle cable. Had to bend rod on throttle pedal to ensure WOT.
Using truck accessories, and is using an LS1 F-body water pump w/ spacers (available). Obviously also still using the R4 compressor. A/C bracket details at 9:13. He says the bracket is also from the full size trucks (GMT-400s used the R4 compressor also), and some S10s.
He shows where the interference is with the truck accessory bracket and LS1 intake, and what the idler relocation bracket does.
Ha, they drove it a grand total of 10 miles before the factory trans shit the bed. That is why I already know I would need a 4L60-E. Because, you know, those never fail.
Went with a single 112" serpentine belt. All LS-based engines that I know of have a dual serpentine setup. You can still see it on the crank pulley.
He says with the correct 1" setback engine mounts, he had to modify the trans crossmember to go back 2". I don't understand this if the trans is in the same place.
Truck coils block the heater core lines. Have to move coils forward. I wonder if all coils have the same issue.
Used an LS1 F-body throttle cable. Had to bend rod on throttle pedal to ensure WOT.
Using truck accessories, and is using an LS1 F-body water pump w/ spacers (available). Obviously also still using the R4 compressor. A/C bracket details at 9:13. He says the bracket is also from the full size trucks (GMT-400s used the R4 compressor also), and some S10s.
He shows where the interference is with the truck accessory bracket and LS1 intake, and what the idler relocation bracket does.
Ha, they drove it a grand total of 10 miles before the factory trans shit the bed. That is why I already know I would need a 4L60-E. Because, you know, those never fail.
Went with a single 112" serpentine belt. All LS-based engines that I know of have a dual serpentine setup. You can still see it on the crank pulley.
Re: Caprice engine swap?
Apparently he had it for sale for $2,500 on craigslist but no one bought it so he still has it. That car had like 74k on it! That thing would be gold up in New England (car/project/AGL is from northern Alabama).
Actually, AGL is in the military and was in AL around the time of this video. He's from San Antonio, TX.
AGL also says if it was a wagon, he would have bought it from the owner.
Actually, AGL is in the military and was in AL around the time of this video. He's from San Antonio, TX.
AGL also says if it was a wagon, he would have bought it from the owner.
Re: Caprice engine swap?
AGL responding to someone wishing they had the time and money for something like this:
If you want it, it will happen. You have to make it happen. It takes drive and patience. I usually collect parts for at least a year before doing a swap. Waiting for a good deal and money to buy them.
Re: Caprice engine swap?
LT1 B-body people are still ignorant about life before 1994, sigh:
pretty cool, but i'd rather see these cars left stock...i have a 94' with the lt1 it has 198.000 miles on it and it still will smoke the tires off.
Re: Caprice engine swap?
And after 1995...LT1 B-body people are still ignorant about life before 1994, sigh:
Re: Caprice engine swap?
Close, 1996. There's a guy on the SS forum with a 500 rwhp Chevrolet SS. That is probably pretty fun.
Re: Caprice engine swap?
True, but that isn't even on the same planet as the 90's B-Body (or 80's) G-body. I kind of just thing idolizing those drivetrains defies logic. Sure they were ok back then, but they are not on par with even the late 90's early 2000's stuff. I don't understand the concept of wanting these in stock form. Nobody today would ever buy a new car with these specs.
Oh sweet, 17 mpg and 220 HP Perfect!!! Um, no. It is like getting pumped about a 1976 Trans Am with a Pontiac 400 and like 190 HP. Sorry, no. I understand the body style of those cars, I really like them too, but I wouldn't be happy with the stock drivetrain after driving even a peppy 4 cylinder from the late 2000's.
Oh sweet, 17 mpg and 220 HP Perfect!!! Um, no. It is like getting pumped about a 1976 Trans Am with a Pontiac 400 and like 190 HP. Sorry, no. I understand the body style of those cars, I really like them too, but I wouldn't be happy with the stock drivetrain after driving even a peppy 4 cylinder from the late 2000's.
Re: Caprice engine swap?
First of all, I generally agree with you. LT1s are irrelevant and have been for the past 5 years anyway.
But, don't underestimate the performance of those cars, even bone stock. Impala SS was in the high 6s 0-60 (like 6.7 or so) and a low 15 second 1/4 mile at 92 or so. But even the numbers don't fully characterize the experience. The LT1 is a very responsive engine, and if you drove one with a stick, you'd definitely be impressed.
The LT1 provided a lot of longevity to the platform, starting at 260 hp (and 330 lb-ft) and being pretty accepting of mods. Not as good as any LS obviously but pretty good nonetheless.
Look, my L05 never really ran right at the top of the RPM band, and that's on an engine that was never known for top end whatsoever. With the old dual exhaust (and yes, the factory SINGLE exhaust), it at least still retained the stump pulling torque and hard launch. Now it is lacking in low end torque AND horsepower. No wonder it feels underwhelming to you.
An LT1 was rated at 55 more hp than my car but in reality, your average street runner probably has more like 80 more hp and you can definitely feel that. It's too bad Adam's 94 9C1 is not on the road. It would definitely explain why those were sought after back in the day. And to be faster in something small, you had to have something like an Integra Type R (GSR wouldn't do it). Or maybe an AWD DSM that got out of the hole hard. Hell these cars were about even with the 5.0 GT Mustangs. Just ask the Michigan State Police who tested them. Or a BMW 740i for something that had a similar weight/footprint. Yeah a 740i probably has far more sophisticated handling and a better ride/handling compromise, but in terms of actual capability, the cars were very similar.
LT1s were also capable of a real 25 mpg highway on E0 gas. The performance and economy envelope in a fullsize car was duplicated by basically nothing that I know of at the time. By the way, on E10, more like 22-23. You think that 7 series got better fuel economy? Nope. With a very expensive ZF 5-speed automatic trans.
I understand what happened as far as your lack of familiarity with this stuff - the LT1 basically didn't come in anything you'd actually want to drive. But the 90s was a very significant era for GM V8s, whether you like it or not. The other fact is, most people were driving 80s stuff because they just couldn't afford the better 90s stuff. Maybe a small percentage actually preferred the 80's stuff genuinely.
Nowadays it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to get the LT1 when pretty much nothing you to do an LT1 is going to do what an LS can, dollar for dollar.
But even my L05 was once capable of like 133-135 mph on flat road, and 139 downhill racing a 5.0 Mustang.
But, don't underestimate the performance of those cars, even bone stock. Impala SS was in the high 6s 0-60 (like 6.7 or so) and a low 15 second 1/4 mile at 92 or so. But even the numbers don't fully characterize the experience. The LT1 is a very responsive engine, and if you drove one with a stick, you'd definitely be impressed.
The LT1 provided a lot of longevity to the platform, starting at 260 hp (and 330 lb-ft) and being pretty accepting of mods. Not as good as any LS obviously but pretty good nonetheless.
Look, my L05 never really ran right at the top of the RPM band, and that's on an engine that was never known for top end whatsoever. With the old dual exhaust (and yes, the factory SINGLE exhaust), it at least still retained the stump pulling torque and hard launch. Now it is lacking in low end torque AND horsepower. No wonder it feels underwhelming to you.
An LT1 was rated at 55 more hp than my car but in reality, your average street runner probably has more like 80 more hp and you can definitely feel that. It's too bad Adam's 94 9C1 is not on the road. It would definitely explain why those were sought after back in the day. And to be faster in something small, you had to have something like an Integra Type R (GSR wouldn't do it). Or maybe an AWD DSM that got out of the hole hard. Hell these cars were about even with the 5.0 GT Mustangs. Just ask the Michigan State Police who tested them. Or a BMW 740i for something that had a similar weight/footprint. Yeah a 740i probably has far more sophisticated handling and a better ride/handling compromise, but in terms of actual capability, the cars were very similar.
LT1s were also capable of a real 25 mpg highway on E0 gas. The performance and economy envelope in a fullsize car was duplicated by basically nothing that I know of at the time. By the way, on E10, more like 22-23. You think that 7 series got better fuel economy? Nope. With a very expensive ZF 5-speed automatic trans.
I understand what happened as far as your lack of familiarity with this stuff - the LT1 basically didn't come in anything you'd actually want to drive. But the 90s was a very significant era for GM V8s, whether you like it or not. The other fact is, most people were driving 80s stuff because they just couldn't afford the better 90s stuff. Maybe a small percentage actually preferred the 80's stuff genuinely.
Nowadays it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to get the LT1 when pretty much nothing you to do an LT1 is going to do what an LS can, dollar for dollar.
But even my L05 was once capable of like 133-135 mph on flat road, and 139 downhill racing a 5.0 Mustang.
Re: Caprice engine swap?
Check the woods. I hear there are a ton of them in there.kevm14 wrote:That is why I already know I would need a 4L60-E. Because, you know, those never fail.