The LT5 is not forgotten - ZR-1 Net Registry Forums

Bob Eyres · 10-28-2011

Well, I went back to the book, Pgs.22-25, and from my reading many of the engineering decisions were dictated by the fact that this engine had to fit through those frame rails and could be "no more than 675mm wide". This was not possible with the connecting rod length in the Chevy 350 small block. So they sold GM on designing a whole new block, "As soon as we shorten the connecting rod, the cylinder head joint face moves inwards, and we can get it all in".
GM wanted rubber belt cam drives too, but that idea had to be ditched because the pulleys on the cam sprockets would be too large for the narrow packaging requirements.
Some of this isn't too clear a read for a non-engineer like me, but it's obvious a lot of design compromises were made to slip that LT5 in from the bottom.

10-28-2011	#11
Bob Eyres Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Jupiter, Fl. Posts: 814	Re: The LT5 is not forgotten Well, I went back to the book, Pgs.22-25, and from my reading many of the engineering decisions were dictated by the fact that this engine had to fit through those frame rails and could be "no more than 675mm wide". This was not possible with the connecting rod length in the Chevy 350 small block. So they sold GM on designing a whole new block, "As soon as we shorten the connecting rod, the cylinder head joint face moves inwards, and we can get it all in". GM wanted rubber belt cam drives too, but that idea had to be ditched because the pulleys on the cam sprockets would be too large for the narrow packaging requirements. Some of this isn't too clear a read for a non-engineer like me, but it's obvious a lot of design compromises were made to slip that LT5 in from the bottom.