Originally Posted by dcsti
So you concede that your engine was:
1. Larger displacement (you said 400 cubic inches, correct?)
2. Not as durable
3. Not as clean
4. Lower mileage
You have an interesting definition of "equaling the performance of the modern V8". You don't even "match most of the metrics" unless you dismiss the ones you don't seem to care for. What was your point again?
You can't idly dismiss the fact that GM has to meet pretty stringent emissions standards. To me, this is the biggest achievement of the GM V8's. The doomsayers have been adamant these engines would be killed off by emissions regulation. Yet, GM just announced another iteration.
400 cubic inches is about 6.3 ish liters...same as current Vette engine.
Not sure if as durable, but mine was flawless while I had it. I never performed a 100k mile durability test. So we will never know.
Not as clean and got lower mileage. Yeah, I concede those two points. I guess the total engineering might and resources of GM had a 17 year old on Pizza Hut Salary beat. Guess they showed me!
The only notable innovations the small block has really seen is in the materials and emissions department, from an all time low in 1977, to an all time high today. If that impresses you, then great. Liking the LS engines is not hard to do for most people. They check a awful lot of boxes and do a bunch of things well. But on a list of most desirable engines, they are not in the top 30 for me personally.