# LS1 in a 240sx? **URL:** \ **Category:** SON240sx Automotive\ **Created:** [November 5, 2008, 10:05pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/ls1-in-a-240sx/119673 "2008-11-05T22:05:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 64
**Author:** ![Mr.K](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/mr.k/32/5670_2.png) [@Mr.K](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Mr.K)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2008, 8:08pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/ls1-in-a-240sx/119673/64 "2008-11-09T20:08:15Z")
> [@wtb: AMP](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/wtb-amp/18905/4): > > BTW. > LS1 series motors never made more than 350hp out of the box. > The carvettes had 350 and the **fox bodies** had 305. The extra power comes from the ecu not the engine. > LS2’s are rated at 405 I believe. > The lS1 is reliable. It’s just not as reliable as everyone seems to think. My friend works for GM… You won’t believe how many LS powered cars are in there getting fixed. Oh god, you just insulted GM fans everywhere. Fox Bodies =/= F-bodies. Mustangs =/= Camaros/Trans Ams. I’ve never ever heard of the LS1 having anything but very high levels of reliability, especially given the amount of power. The reason the Camaro’s LS1 has less power than the Corvette’s LS1 is mainly because of the restrictive exhaust they tacked onto it. The corvette has a true dual system. Also, many owners have put their Z28s on a dyno and obtained Corvette numbers, so there is a theory that GM underrated the HP numbers of the F-bodies to keep the Corvette as the flagship car. --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/ls1-in-a-240sx/119673)._