[T.O.Dillinder]

This should be fun.
Your opinions on the pros and cons between the 3rd and 4th gen F-bodies.
These are my opinions, and I could be way off with a couple of items.

Engines:
4th gen wins this one. Racing groups keep forgetting that the LT1 350's were a option in the later 3rd gen years, but keep forcing the 305s of being the only option for racing.
The 4th gens have the 350s as the only V-8 option.

Transmissions:
5-speeds; Tremec and the World class T-5's help make it a 3rd gen pro.
Dependable enough, weighs less, and since when do you need 6 speeds for road racing.
The only time I have actually shifted into fifth is at Road America running a 3.73 gear ratio.

6-speeds; weigh more, more dependable than regular BW 5 spd.


Front Suspension:
4th gen hands down.

Rear Suspension:
Tie, they are the same for both generations.
I do use the 4th gen Koni Yellow rear on my 83 Z-28 because I do not have to remove the rear shock to adjust it.

Overall Weight:
In stock trim I know for sure the 3rd gen has the advantage. I have not seen actual weights for stripped down 4th gens so it may be close.

Brakes:
Out of the box I would give the 4th gens the advantage.

Parts Availability:
4th gen. They are everywhere.
Aftermarket parts were really not available for the 3rd gens compared to 1st and 2nd gen cars. It just seems the Aftermarket Companies really never worked hard for the 3rd gens.
The 3rd gens are still competing in large numbers and you have to look hard for performance parts. If I had the money......

Ease of maintenance:
I give the pro to the 3rd gens.
The 4th gen engine compartment is a pain, and the dash is as big as a pain.

Overall Looks:
The 3rd gen looks sleek and fast.
The 4th gen looks like a beast and would grab the competiition and beat or eat it.
My favorite 4th gen commercial was the Pontiac Ram Air Trans-Am.
Pulls up behind a Ferrari, revs and swallows the Ferrari and sends it out through its tail pipes. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/lmao.gif)
I love the looks of the 2000- 2002 RA TA's. They are just plain mean lookin'.

Interior:
Pro to 4th gen. The interior just seemed more refined compared to the 3rd gen.

Your turn.

This post has been edited by T.O.Dillinder: Dec 6 2007, 05:40 PM

[KeithO]

This should be fun.
4th gen wins this one. Racing groups keep forgetting that the LT1 350's were a option in the later 3rd gen years, but keep forcing the 305s of being the only option for racing.
The 4th gens have the 350s as the only V-8 option.

Overall I agree with your statements. However, the L98 was available starting in 1987 and was an option through 1992. The LT1 was never offered in the 3rd gen and in fact wasn't available at all until the 1992 Vette.

[Mojave]

Engines:
4th gen wins this one. Racing groups keep forgetting that the LT1 350's were a option in the later 3rd gen years, but keep forcing the 305s of being the only option for racing.
The 4th gens have the 350s as the only V-8 option.

Transmissions:
5-speeds; Tremec and the World class T-5's help make it a 3rd gen pro.
Dependable enough, weighs less, and since when do you need 6 speeds for road racing.
The only time I have actually shifted into fifth is at Road America running a 3.73 gear ratio.

6-speeds; weigh more, more dependable than regular BW 5 spd.

This isn't quite right. The 3rd gens got a TPI 350, aka L98, which is not an LT1. LT1 makes more horsepower and just as much torque.

T-5's, even WC T-5's, can't handle the torque from an L98 or an LT1. While T-5's are nice and light, I would take a T-56 over a T-5 any day of the week. Cruising in 6th gear at 75 mph at 1900 rpms with 4.10's is something a T-5 will never match.

[StanIROCZ]

Engines:
4th gen wins this one. Racing groups keep forgetting that the LT1 350's were a option in the later 3rd gen years, but keep forcing the 305s of being the only option for racing.
The 4th gens have the 350s as the only V-8 option.

LS1 hands down kicks ass. I want one really bad.

I like a stock lt1 better than a stock L98, but if you're going to modify them I like the GenI sbc better because it doesn't have the optispark.

Lt1's never came in 3rd gens.

Interior:
Pro to 4th gen. The interior just seemed more refined compared to the 3rd gen.

yeah, I was looking the interior one day and finally said, "why am I keeping it".



One more to add, you can fit 17x11's on the front of a 4th gen.

[T.O.Dillinder]

My bad. I keep wanting to call the L98's, LT1's for some reason.
My point was though the 3rd gens did offer a 350 cui. engine. A fact that gets pushed to the side about updating and backdating in Race class rules.

I personally have not had problems with the T-5's. I just don't try to power shift them.
In CMC (NASA) and AGS (MWC) they have done well.

[y5e06]

My point was though the 3rd gens did offer a 350 cui. engine. A fact that gets pushed to the side about updating and backdating in Race class rules.

thats because the 350 L98 cars never had T-5's, only automatics. Those classes you mention are those along the lines of keeping stock driveline components and swapping in a manual wasn't within the factory specs.

[Mojave]

My bad. I keep wanting to call the L98's, LT1's for some reason.
My point was though the 3rd gens did offer a 350 cui. engine. A fact that gets pushed to the side about updating and backdating in Race class rules.

I personally have not had problems with the T-5's. I just don't try to power shift them.
In CMC (NASA) and AGS (MWC) they have done well.

T5's are great for lower power applications, as the 75 lbs weight savings over the T56 is significant. But an LTx or an LSx will blow one up in short order.

All the CMC 3rd gen cars running T5's are 305's, as Morgan pointed out.

This post has been edited by Mojave: Dec 6 2007, 07:20 PM

[Shortcutsleeping]

Front Suspension:
4th gen hands down.

Say what?

Wins how? What are the parameters for claiming victory?



Costas
cars and such...

[CrashTestDummy]

Front Suspension:
4th gen hands down.

Say what?

Wins how? What are the parameters for claiming victory?



Costas
cars and such...

+1. Give me a 3rd Gen front-end any day.

[trackbird]

The 3rd gen has a strut setup that can be very effective. It's not as sophisticated as the 4th gen front suspension, but it's not exactly bad.

3rd gens have no ABS and are narrower and lighter as well. However, the narrower width limits tire sizes to about 275's to keep them in the fenders (17x9.5" wheels with 5.5" of backspacing will fit 275/40-17's perfectly on a 3rd gen).

I sold my 2002 Z28 and bought my 1992 Z28. I like both cars, the 4th gen felt heavier to me. I understand that it has more curb weight, but it just felt a bit more lethargic than a 3rd gen chassis. I'm sure it's my personal feelings, but I've always felt that the 3rd gen had better "reflexes".

Also, 3rd gens are cheap enough to be "disposable". Put it in the wall? Just buy another shell for a few hundred bucks and start over. That may be the main reason I switched. My 2002 was too nice (and expensive) to wreck on track.

[T.O.Dillinder]

Front Suspension:
4th gen hands down.

Say what?

Wins how? What are the parameters for claiming victory?

I just feel the upper and lower control arm design is better than a MacPherson Strut front end.
Easier to make suspension adjustments.
Plus being The later model years, the 4th Gen has a load of aftermarket parts.

I have wondered at times if the MacPherson Strut design and also the beginning of the electronic fuel injection systems kept Aftermarket Manufacturers at a distance from the 3rd Gens when they were new.

The original post is intended to get your personal opinions about the two generations. I am not trying to start any sort of arguement. It is more about finding nuances between the two.
I have test drove the 4th gens, but I have not had the oppurtunity to work extensively on one. I know from watching a couple of aquaintcences with theirs', the Windshield coming over the engine compartment makes working on one a pain when working in that area.

[firehawkclone]

Motor's are a wash, you can go around each one's weakness.

There are pleanty of parts for the 3rd and 4th gens, as long as there Camaro's!

3rd gen win's on wheel bearing's! For now anyway.

3rd gen's front suspension has more parts to wear out/ bend, but they are cheap!

[dailydriver]

The 3rd gen has a strut setup that can be very effective. It's not as sophisticated as the 4th gen front suspension, but it's not exactly bad.

Is part of the appeal also that just by adding camber plates to the 3rd gens one can much more easily get max caster/camber out of them (with just a lift of the hood and a bolt adjustment)??

[roadracetransam]

Motor's are a wash, you can go around each one's weakness.

There are pleanty of parts for the 3rd and 4th gens, as long as there Camaro's!

3rd gen win's on wheel bearing's! For now anyway.

3rd gen's front suspension has more parts to wear out/ bend, but they are cheap!

Wheel bearing yes, except they are they are part of the brake rotor, so big negative re: changing worn rotors.

[trackbird]

3rd gen win's on wheel bearing's! For now anyway.

3rd gen's front suspension has more parts to wear out/ bend, but they are cheap!

I do like having real bearings.

How do you figure the 3rd gen has more parts? They're down at least an upper control arm and two bushings to start. They use an idler arm steering setup with a center link instead of a rack with inner and outer tie rods, but that's not a huge deal either (in my opinion at least). I think they are more different than better or worse.

The 3rd gen has a strut setup that can be very effective. It's not as sophisticated as the 4th gen front suspension, but it's not exactly bad.

Is part of the appeal also that just by adding camber plates to the 3rd gens one can much more easily get max caster/camber out of them (with just a lift of the hood and a bolt adjustment)??

Well, the front of a 3rd gen is simple and easy and works well enough. It's far easier to tear down and rebuild. No spring compressors needed. It's a fairly simple design that has decent camber control with enough spring and sway bar (just like a 4th gen). I suspect the 3rd gen has a sightly worse camber curve, but I can't remember if I've seen numbers on it.

The highest placing CMC F-body at the nationals for the last two years has been Jeff's 3rd gen. CMC removes the benefit of wider tires on the 4th gen though, so they are equalized in that regard.

I think both cars can be made to work well. I like that the 3rd gens have no ABS, they are easier to work on, parts are cheap for SBC engines and they are lighter/narrower. I like that 4th gens have better brakes (later ones do and it's a cheap and easy swap to the earlier cars), make more power and are a bit more civilized with better interiors (only an issue if you keep the interior).

Wheel bearing yes, except they are they are part of the brake rotor, so big negative re: changing worn rotors.

Many of the aftermarket brake kits fix that. My car has hubs with good bearings in them (like the stock setup) and uses a slip on rotor. When you fix the 3rd gen brakes, you can usually fix that "problem" at the same time. So, it's not as much of a negative it might seem.

[Shortcutsleeping]

I just feel the upper and lower control arm design is better than a MacPherson Strut front end.

What car won the CMC title again?

From a purely theoretical point of view, an SLA is better if it is designed that way in the first place. You are trying to compare an already built SLA that has some shortcoming to a strut that also has shortcomings. While I'll never argue an LS1 wins vs my 305tpi, I feel you've got the front suspension one wrong.

Easier to make suspension adjustments.

Tell you what, you change camber on a 4th gen and I'll change camber on a 3rd gen and let's see who has time to go get a track burger. I won't even need to reset the toe when I'm done.

Plus being The later model years, the 4th Gen has a load of aftermarket parts.

Because it NEEDS a load of parts to get decent settings (good neg camber). Thirds can typically get -2.0 stock and with camber plates you can get anything you need. And its all up top and easy to get to and adjust. On the '89 ASedan I built and crewed I (1993 here...) had scribed lines on the towers for various camber settings. It took me, at best, 4 minutes to change camber on both sides of that car. No time re-setting toe either.

The original post is intended to get your personal opinions about the two generations. I am not trying to start any sort of arguement. It is more about finding nuances between the two.

Well, nuances are typically, at least in part, based on fact. You are saying that the 4th is easier to make suspension adjustments on, but unless you have done it on both (I have...too many times to count, as I'm sure many on this board have also) then you are just guessing. Why not just put that you are guessing on that topic and ask for feedback?

The motor stuff is simple (ls1), the trans stuff is simple (big power? t56. Lower power and need light weight? t5). I've put a DA system on several fast 4th gens and have never seen initial turn in rates (in deg/sec) that will match a 3rd gen. <shrug>

As far as bearings/rotors, the 4th wins when it is time to swap rotors, but for bearings I've yet to have to replace mine in a 3rd. Good bearings, packed well and adjusted correctly will give a LOT of use (track and hard street is what mine sees).

I'm with Kevin. 4ths always feel heavy (except Scratcher...and that doesn't count) to me and much less nimble. Back to back at similar levels of prep at an AX I've always done better in a 3rd. Road course is pure 4th just for the power aspect. Unless it is equalized then see 'CMC'.

Now looks IS a subjective thing. Late 3rd gens win that one easily. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)


Costas
cars and such...

[trackbird]

Oh, and I hate the goofy castor bushing in the 4th gen front end. 3rd gens can use ny-liner bushings or bearings, 4th gens are more difficult since it's not a straight "hinge" arrangement on the lower control arm. This should allow a 3rd gen to have less front end deflection and unwanted suspension motion than the 4th gen setup. I think that's my biggest complaint on the 4th gen front end. Again, both cars can be made to work well, but we're talking about the nuances here. I enjoyed my time with my 4th gen (5 years). I enjoyed my time with my first 3rd gen (7 years) and my current 3rd gen (6 months or so). Given my choice (and unlimited budget), I'd buy a couple of each. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[marka]

Howdy,

Tell you what, you change camber on a 4th gen and I'll change camber on a 3rd gen and let's see who has time to go get a track burger. I won't even need to reset the toe when I'm done.

Thirds can typically get -2.0 stock and with camber plates you can get anything you need. And its all up top and easy to get to and adjust. On the '89 ASedan I built and crewed I (1993 here...) had scribed lines on the towers for various camber settings. It took me, at best, 4 minutes to change camber on both sides of that car. No time re-setting toe either.

Huh? I've not done this on a 3rd gen, but on every single other strut car I've ever worked on changing camber via cc plates certainly affected the toe...

I used to use that in fact on our old E36 bmw (front steer) so that when I knocked the camber in at an event I'd get some toe out for free.

Certainly a strut car w/cc plates is easier to adjust static camber/caster than most anything else. I don't know that I'd call that superior though...

Mark

[StanIROCZ]

I don't like the parallel steering linkage in the 3rd gen. There's more joints and therefore more slop. This just isn't theoretical. I've replaced every part of the linkage at one point in time. I have a ~2 year old ~5000 mile idler arm that is loose.

Toe adjustment isn't repeatable. If I drive forward, stop, then check toe, I get a 1/4" different measurement than if I drive backwards, stop, then check toe. I think the rack would be better. Maybe all my problems will be solved with the new moog idler that I got. We'll see.

This post has been edited by StanIROCZ: Dec 6 2007, 10:52 PM

[StanIROCZ]

Huh? I've not done this on a 3rd gen, but on every single other strut car I've ever worked on changing camber via cc plates certainly affected the toe...

The tie rod is co-planar (horizontal and in-line) with the ball joint on a 3rd gen so the camber change does not effect the toe. If, for example, the tie rod was raised to be in line with the spindle snout you would gain toe out with a (-) camber increase.

[trackbird]

I ran (and am currently running) the Moog Problem Solver idler arm. I've not had any issues with either of the ones I've used (two different cars). Your results may vary.

[T.O.Dillinder]

The original post is intended to get your personal opinions about the two generations. I am not trying to start any sort of arguement. It is more about finding nuances between the two.
I have test drove the 4th gens, but I have not had the oppurtunity to work extensively on one. I know from watching a couple of aquaintcences with theirs', the Windshield coming over the engine compartment makes working on one a pain when working in that area.

My 83 has Camber Plates.
I worked with SLA's on three GT-1 cars, two super late models (short track) and a couple of older Monte Carlos in Street Stock for short track racing. With a SLA you can adjust Camber, Toe, and Caster.
Caster can effect how the car reacts during braking.
With my limited experience with strut set ups, you have Camber and Toe adjustments, correct?
My 83 Camaro is set up at - 2.0 Camber and 1/16" toe out. A friend of mine that has raced 3rd gens in MWC and NASA for six years now suggested that I can go 1/8" toe out for a tighter turn road coarse.
Yes losening 2 bolts is quicker than four.

[slowTA]

In my eyes the perfect combination would be 4th gen power and wheel fitment, in the lighter 3rd gen frame that sports a rack and pinion. I think the 4th gen suspension is pickier to maintain (have to try a few different camber bushings to find one that lasts) and the bearings have been talked about already.

The few things I don' t like about my thirdgen are the lack of affordable large rims, the narrow transmission tunnel that wont accept the Unbalanced Engineering Torque Arm, recirculating ball steering, the fact that the computer and harness are getting old and frail, and that mine has a 9 bolt instead of a 10 bolt. I think the struts cost more than 4th gen front shocks.

My 350 TPI and T5 combo has held up well together. The engine has Dart Iron Eagle heads with a Comp Extreme energy cam (just about .500 lift) with 4,000 miles one it, the T5 is stock with almost 100,000 miles. The tires break loose before any damage is done to the T5.

One thing I specifically don't like about 4th gens (that hasn't been listed yet) is the huge dash board that is hard to see over.

[firehawkclone]

One more thing......PCM's

4th gen is much easier to reprogram.

[prockbp]

well, I am simply faster on the autocross course in my 3d gen than i was in my 4th gen..

Both cars had similar investments: Dampers (Koni SA's both cars), Wheels/tires (17x11 CCW with 315s on 4th gen and 16x10 CCW with 265s on 3d gen, Victoracers on both), Rod-End Panhard Bar, Max Camber (-1.7 on 4th, and -2.5 on 3d), Hawk Brake Pads

My 4th gen had extra investments: Rod-end Control Arms, G2 Springs to max out camber, G2 Torque Arm


The 3d gen was simply faster- by a lot... not a real technical post, but I spent significantly less money on the 3d gen and I was faster- that's the nuance that i like (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)


the thing I miss most about my 4th gen is 'brake-pedal-stabbing-ability'... not that stabbing the brake pedal is a fast way to drive, i just have a tendency to miss braking zones

i will also add that going over 110mph in my IROC scares the shit outta me... while i felt confident enough to take the 4th gen up to 150mph....

This post has been edited by prockbp: Dec 7 2007, 01:06 AM

[jeffburch]

Wow.
Alot of comments to ponder here I'll tell ya.

The only thing I can add is; it's a good idea to load the front wheels when any measuring is happening.
I will run a long cheapo cinch strap thru the wheels and anchor them aft.
Not alot of tension but some.

jb

[trackbird]

i will also add that going over 110mph in my IROC scares the shit outta me... while i felt confident enough to take the 4th gen up to 150mph....

I've felt comfortable at well over 110 (and faster than your 4th gen speed as well) in my 3rd gen. It's as stable as anything I've driven.

[V6RSR]

i will also add that going over 110mph in my IROC scares the shit outta me... while i felt confident enough to take the 4th gen up to 150mph....

I've felt comfortable at well over 110 (and faster than your 4th gen speed as well) in my 3rd gen. It's as stable as anything I've driven.

Agreed, I could never get my 3rd gen fast enough to be close to scary. Down hill with the wind behind it I has done 138 mph- but is stability is far from an issue. my car is far from stock though except for the tire width. Matter of fact there is not a stock part left under the car.

[z28evans]

Sounds like adding a ls1 / t56 & rearend to a 3rd gen is the perfect way to go (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)

*Hated working on my 4th gen, always felt bloated. Stock 3rd gen got beat by my wife's Grand Prix GTP

Plus, it's proven that 3rd gens look better (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[dailydriver]

Sounds like adding a ls1 / t56 & rearend to a 3rd gen is the perfect way to go (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)

Would they allow this hybrid/conversion in CMC 2??

A fully dry sumped, modded LS7/worked T56 would be cool in a clean, gutted, late model 3rd gen (rules notwithstanding of course).

[StanIROCZ]

Sounds like adding a ls1 / t56 & rearend to a 3rd gen is the perfect way to go (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)
Plus, it's proven that 3rd gens look better (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Jackpot (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)

[nape]

Less bench racing, more wrenching. Forget about aftermarket parts, get that CMC car on the track. The more of the season it spends in the garage vs. at an event, the slower you'll be (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[T.O.Dillinder]

Less bench racing, more wrenching. Forget about aftermarket parts, get that CMC car on the track. The more of the season it spends in the garage vs. at an event, the slower you'll be (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I'm gett'n there, I'm gett'n there! Jeez be patient will ya.LOL!!!
I should be done with the wiring this weekend, if not Monday night.
A big THANKS goes to Bob Denton.
Machine shops sure have gotten expensive since the last time I needed one.

[Sam Strano]

I believe that the question of which is better depends on what you are doing with the car, what the rules are (if any), what the costs are to do what you want.

3rd gen's can be lighter, but not a lot. My '91 1LE was only about 20 pounds less than my 2001. They are more flimsy, and have crappy steering setups and a front suspension that hates bumps. They have less power, but are easier to work on. They are easier to see out of too.

4th gens have better steering. Front end works bumps much better, but has the stupid "caster" bushing. Obviously a power advantage, as well as stonger manual gearboxes. Piss-poor hubs.

Back in 2003, I had to decide whether or not to finish building my '91 for ESP, or do my '01. I chose the later because of the power and gearing, I would have had to spend a LOT of money to get the power near LS1 levels, and always be stuck with some pretty short gearing. Now, that's ESP where you can't slap a built engine in a 3rd gen. Pick some other use, your car choice might change.

[wannafbody]

Which gen makes the best autocross or track car? Why?

[BumpaD_Z28]

WOW ! Can of worms question here ...

But for me 3rd gen (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

~DaVe

[firehawkclone]

Some think the best AI car would be a LS1 3rd gen!

[axoid]

1LE 3rd gen.

[trackbird]

I sold my 2002 Camaro and bought a 1992 Z-28.

For autocross, the 4th gen cars have wheel wells that will swallow 17x11" wheels and tires. The 3rd gen will really only (easily) fit 275 series tires on a 17x9.5 wheel. I know Axoid has 17x11's on the rear of his 3rd gen...

For road racing, I don't think the 315 series tires and 17x11's are as much of an advantage. The 3rd gen is narrower, typically lighter and has no ABS, and therefore no ABS problems (or "no ABS to have to remove if your racing class doesn't allow it). The 3rd gen is easier to work on (under the hood) and small block Chevy parts are really quite inexpensive. And, the 3rd gen is much easier to see out of and you can tell where the corners of the car are located. On the other hand, the LSx engine has much more potential, and far more potential with better heads, etc. It will cost you more for LSx parts, but you'll build big power more easily with that engine. The 4th gen does have a better front suspension (geometry wise), but the castor bushing is a bit of an issue with that design. And, if you use enough sway bar/spring rate/roll stiffness in a 3rd gen, the front suspension on those cars can be made to work very well (in spite of the design differences).

If you stick and LSx in a 3rd gen... That could be the right answer.

Just my thoughts, others may not agree.

[CMC #37]

I would agree! I think for RR on big speed tracks the 4th gen I like better. For tighter tracks and autox I like the third gen better.

[axoid]

I know Axoid has 17x11's on the rear of his 3rd gen...

I have 315s on the front now too. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[trackbird]

I know Axoid has 17x11's on the rear of his 3rd gen...

I have 315s on the front now too. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

But not on 17x11's...

[BigEnos]

For autocross in ESP, an LT1 4th gen is my fav. Fewer ABS issues, the clutch usually works OK, more gearing options, and way better steering feel.

[StanIROCZ]

The EXACT same question was asked here:

http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/index.php?showtopic=10869

Don't feel bad for not searching since this was hard for me to find when I knew it was out there somewhere.

[Mojave]

The EXACT same question was asked here:

http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/index.php?showtopic=10869

Don't feel bad for not searching since this was hard for me to find when I knew it was out there somewhere.

Damn, I spent 20 mins looking for that thread but gave up.

[trackbird]

I was thinking about that other thread, but I was lazy...

Thanks Stan!

Merged.

[souseless]

I have 315's on 17x11's all the way around my 89 TA. Now the do stick out beyond the wheel well but I have adequate turn radius for autox. I by the way like the 3rd gen for reasons already posted especialy overall looks and that masive 4th gen dash. I also agree that the combo to have is an LSX 3rd gen. I would stick with the lighter t5 though. They seem to hold up fine when not drag racing.

[trackbird]

I don't think you could make a T5 live behind an LSx (even if you could bolt it up) while driving it as you'd drive an LSx'd third gen. "Poof", nothing but transmission dust...

[1meanZ]

One more thing......PCM's

4th gen is much easier to reprogram.

You sure about that? I dropped $300 at Moates.net and I can now tune and datalog any OBDI GM car there is.....

[trackbird]

One more thing......PCM's

4th gen is much easier to reprogram.

You sure about that? I dropped $300 at Moates.net and I can now tune and datalog any OBDI GM car there is.....

I have the osterich and all that good stuff, and I haven't bothered to learn to tune the 3rd gens. My solution is likely to involve Motec or similar (or a carb...bwhahahahahahahahaha). I do hate the ECM's in these cars.

[CMC #37]

I don't think you could make a T5 live behind an LSx (even if you could bolt it up) while driving it as you'd drive an LSx'd third gen. "Poof", nothing but transmission dust...

Word! The T5 could not live more than a few race weekends with my knarly 305 powered CMC car!

[1meanZ]

I do hate the ECM's in these cars.

Of course you do, the Ostrich is NOT the best setup. If you had this, you wouldn't mind it at all. I enjoy tuning.
http://www.moates.net/product_info.php?cPa...;products_id=54

[axoid]

My T5 has survived for a year behind a Firehawk motor, which is as strong or stronger then a stock LS1.

[nape]

I do hate the ECM's in these cars.

Of course you do, the Ostrich is NOT the best setup. If you had this, you wouldn't mind it at all. I enjoy tuning.
http://www.moates.net/product_info.php?cPa...;products_id=54

I had that setup and I still hated the EFI. TPI sucks and everything else is a band aid. I put a $65 Performer RPM intake and a $300 Holley 600DP and made 50RWHP more and now I don't have to worry about 20-25yr old modules and wiring either.

My T5 has survived for a year behind a Firehawk motor, which is as strong or stronger then a stock LS1.

Are you doing many track days? I'm not trying to get into a "road race vs. auto-x" dick swinging contest, but a weekend on the track is probably a year or more of autocross duty. That's not even mentioning the extra heat in running it that hard for that long.

If AI could run dog-ring gearboxes, I'd probably have a dog ring T5. Dog rings would get rid of a lot of synchro issues and the straight cut gears get rid of the gear weakness, then you're only dealing with heat and case flex.

[StanIROCZ]

I had that setup and I still hated the EFI. TPI sucks and everything else is a band aid. I put a $65 Performer RPM intake and a $300 Holley 600DP and made 50RWHP more and now I don't have to worry about 20-25yr old modules and wiring either.

Part of your problem was you had a bad Autoprom. It was the early version that had some issues. After I bought it from you I traded it for a new one from Craig.

But I agree, it still takes a lot of effort and patience to tune. I had many 'issues' before I could even get to the point of doing some meaningful tuning. Some of that I brought upon myself by being the only person in the world with a Jerico and a TPI, but there was some other stuff that was out of my control. DIY prom on thirdgen.org is your friend.

It is fun when you make a change and it 'works' (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by StanIROCZ: Jun 24 2009, 12:53 AM

[slowTA]

How do you tell the difference between the new and old Autoproms? I always have issues with mine, something goes haywire and I have to unplug the ECU to reset it. There was also an instance where the engine would stall briefly, but 'restart' just by momentum of the car.

[axoid]

Are you doing many track days? I'm not trying to get into a "road race vs. auto-x" dick swinging contest, but a weekend on the track is probably a year or more of autocross duty. That's not even mentioning the extra heat in running it that hard for that long.

My T5 hasn't seen any track time since the 350 got installed last year (persistent oil leak on the engine), but it has seen track time behind the pervious 305. I can see that all the shifting would be a different type of stress on a transmission than what autocross causes, but most of tracking and road racing doesn't launch from a dead stop as autocross does, even if it isn't as hard as a drag race start. I've always believed that it is hard shocks that break transmissions. I wouldn't think that there would be anything preventing putting an oil cooler on the T5.

Ether way, my trans has 105+ K miles on it, 25+K under my ownership.

I'm sure some day it will blow, I'll just fix it and throw it back in again.

[1meanZ]

I must have one of the later ones because the only issue I've had is getting it to simultaneously emulate and datalog. Otherwise I've not had any issues. Tuning takes time, and you have to understand what you're doing. If you are impatient and in a rush, your tune will reflect that. Anything worthwhile takes time, tuning is no different. For those of us that dual purpose our cars, EFI is very much worth it.

[firehawkclone]

Every chassis has its problems that you can go around/fix! Some are easier nowdays than in the past, and some take longer to do... but thats ok to some. It also depends on what chassis you started this little adventure where all on here!

I still think a LS 5.3 powered 3rd gen AI car would be hard to beat! To some it may not! Atleast its all GM!

.02