[Tommy R]

Hey you all,

I'm looking for information on 4th Gen F-bodies. Specifically, I'm interested in the diff options, gearing differences (rear end and tranny), 1LE vs. base model specs, and any other differences from model year to model year.

For example, I know the '93s are speed density, not mass air. Are there any differences there from a performance or maintenance standpoint? The '93s also had a slightly different T-56 tranny, as I understand it. Were '93 and '94 models not available with 3.42 rear gears? Would a 150 mph speedo indicate that the car has 3.42's? No governor? I remember my old roommate's '94 T/A didn't have the "GT" package and as a result had the 115mph speedo, governor, and maybe even 3.23 gears (instead of 3.42s).

I know in '96 they went OBD-II with dual cats. They're also rated at an insignificant 10 hp more than the '93-'95 models. Of course, in '98 the LS1 came out with much more power. However, the LT1s are obviously still very compeitive in F-Stock, despite the power deficit, iron block, and smaller front brakes. Any particular reason for this? Or are the right people just not running LS1's? (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)

So, needless to say, I'm intersted in LT1 vs. LS1 differences, too. But, I'll likely stay with the cheaper candidate, i.e. the LT1.

I should point out that I'd mainly be interested in F-Stock, so update/backdate concerns are of less importance. I'm not sure if/when I'd move to ESP.

Thanks in advance,
Tommy

[y5e06]

What?
Tommy are you thinking of moving to an F-body???
When did this come about? LT1's make great FStock cars. Originally I was unconvinced of this until I put some seat time in Franks LS1. After that experience, whether its setup related or not, I really like my car much better on the cone courses. They're also more affordable!
I can answer some of this, I'm sure others will fill in and/or correct me:
'93's came with either 2.73 rear gears and the M28 3.36 1st gear t56 (less desirable and less common)
or 3.23 rear gears w/ the M29 2.97 1st gear t56.
All '94-'02 cars had the T56 and 3.42 rear gears, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th were different ratios than the '93 trans. (can't recall the numbers) although the LT1 & LS1 transmissions are not interchangeable. There are other gears and such with automatics but I don't even pay attention to those.
If I were shopping for an LT1 to eventually modify I'd stick to the '94-'95 LT1 due to the MAF vs. speed density and the OBD I vs OBD II, but thats just me.
1LE's are interesting cars although they aren't something to hold your breath for in finding. base Z28's and Formulas will do just fine.

[Tommy R]

Hey Morgan,

Yup, I'm considering a move to an F-Body. It may be the most cost effective way to race a nationally competitive car on the cheap. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Anyhoo, thanks for confirming my thoughts on the '93 tranny. I need to find out those tranny ratios. I'm curious how it compares to the standard T-56 with 3.42s. The '93 (with 3.23's of course) may still be worth considering. Is there any easy way to determine if a car has 2.73's vs. 3.23's other than counting the driveshaft's revolutions?

I'm curious why you prefer your LT1 over the LS1. Was it low/mid range torque? Did it somehow handle differently? What were your impressions?

Thanks,
Tommy

[CamaroFS34]

Honestly, I prefer the LT1 over the LS1 as well. Part of it is due to the low end torque of the LT1, but it's also related to the weird braking issues with the LS1 (aka "LS1 axle hop").

There should be an RPO that distinguishes between 2.73 and 3.23. I'd have to look it up when I get home, however.

Oh, and the 2nd through 6th gears in the '93 are the same as in the '94-97 transmissions. It's just the first gear that's different.

Karen

[y5e06]

go here
http://www.1le.net/
also click on manual gear box
http://www.f-body.org/tech/tech.htm

As far as the car comparisons go, We both had the same basic setup. Similar alignment, both have 35mm solid front bar, both have Koni Singles, Both with Hawk HP+ (but different brakes). I've even used the same tires on both cars, 710's, A3S03's, and Victoracers. For what ever reason my car just felt sharper. It transitions a bit better and the turn-in in mine is a tad quicker as well. Steering does feel a bit more responsive. Maybe I just take a while to adjust to different vehicles, but it sure felt like home when I hopped back into mine after a couple months off. Although looking at LS1 dynos vs LT1 dyno curves I wouldn't expect there to be a whole lot of performance difference. In fact the LS1 does have a higher peak but at a higher RPM. Down low it is respectable as well. The LT1 torque curve isn't a curve, its damn near table top flat. You should see my dyno plot, its flat from ~2000rpm all the way up to 4500+ rpm at around 274RWTQ. Anyway, seat of the pants feel my LT1 does feel better coming of the slower corners but the LS1 did scream down the longer & faster sections. Whatever the reason for the differences I no longer plan on ever buying an LS1 F-body.
If you are really serious about it then maybe you should arrange to have a couple co-drives in both types of properly setup cars and make up your own decision.
By the way, mine still has the worn out 139K+ mile suspension bushings on it.

[bruecksteve]

I'm tired of being 60 hp short of a LS1. It doesn't matter what I do to my LT1, it will never have the power of the LS1.

I don't buy the more torque in the LT1. How many autocross's do you run where your RPM drops below 2500 rpm?? Not many, at least not here.

Look inside the glove box for a GU5 code for the 3.23 gears.

Give me more power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :drive:

[y5e06]

I didn't really buy it either, but I could swear I felt a SoTP difference between the two.

[CamaroFS34]

I don't buy the more torque in the LT1. How many autocross's do you run where your RPM drops below 2500 rpm?? Not many, at least not here.

I think the low-end torque is better in the LT1. The power starts to "come on" sooner in the LT1 than the LS1, and I think there are enough "slower" turns at most events (even National level stuff) that it can make some difference.

When margins are less than a tenth, any difference matters. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Karen

[trackbird]

I don't buy the more torque in the LT1. How many autocross's do you run where your RPM drops below 2500 rpm?? Not many, at least not here.

I think the low-end torque is better in the LT1. The power starts to "come on" sooner in the LT1 than the LS1, and I think there are enough "slower" turns at most events (even National level stuff) that it can make some difference.

When margins are less than a tenth, any difference matters. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Karen

I thought that as well, and I'm not argueing with you. But, when I dynoed my car, it dynoed at 300 ft lbs or higher from 2500 rpm to 5200 and that seems to beat the 274 ft lbs listed earlier in this thread. This is my 2002 Z28, stock with a lid. The 2 graphs are 3rd and 4th gear. 4th is the higher line (I was just checking).

http://home.columbus.rr.com/trackbirdz28/i...201%20small.jpg

[edit] Remove the worlds largest dyno sheet and show it as a link [/edit]

[NataSS Inc]

Christ almighty guys, let try and resize those pics (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

[mitchntx]

Christ almighty guys, let try and resize those pics (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Agreed ....

[trackbird]

Christ almighty guys, let try and resize those pics (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Agreed ....

If it's too small, I can make some adjustments.... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rant.gif)

I linked it off my site. I forgot it was "huge". I can't resize it at work.....

Changing link.....

[Soma07]

Oh, and the 2nd through 6th gears in the '93 are the same as in the '94-97 transmissions. It's just the first gear that's different.

Actually they're all different except 4th (which is still 1:1).

I'm too lazy to look them up but the 93 M29 tranny actually has the same ratios as the Z06 transmission except for 5th and 6th.

IMO the differences between a 93 and a 94-97 aren't worth mentioning. Technically the MAF system is better but i've driven both and couldn't tell any difference. At least with a 93 you get better transmisison ratios.

Tommy,

Welcome, time to ditch that Bimmer for something with torque (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

To check the rearend ratio just look at the option codes which are on a sticker in the glovebox.

GU2= 2.73
GU5=3.23
GU6=3.42

However the 2.73 cars are pretty rare so there is ~90% chance any 93 six speed car you find will have 3.23's (which is good because then you can switch them for 3.42's and stay legal in ESP).

If you have any questions about 93's vs. 94+ feel free to e-mail me (or ask here). I think I have all the differences memorized by now (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Sam Strano]

Tommy Regan....... I knew it was you. Tommy R, Austin TX.... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

You'll get all kinds of info here, most of it's even good (unlike a lot of places!).

Maybe I missed it, but is this for F-stock? I assume so because of the "race on the cheap" idea.

My take. Buy either one, both can win. LS1's have more HP, LT1's have better torque belowabout 3500 rpm than a LEGAL F-stock LS1 does. And because of the gearing, you will at times be down there (well, maybe not in Texas....). Karen's right, the brake-hop issue doesn't rear it's head in an LT1 either, and it's cheaper to buy. Of course it's more ragged out, and if you get a '99+ LS1 you need not worry about limited slips wearing out like you do on '98 and earlier cars so that's a Pro in the LS1 column.

I'd not recommend a '93. The gearing is a non-issue because those cars all had 3.23's even with a 6-speed where the later cars have 3.42's with 6-speeds. Also the fact it's a one year only car causes some glitches, like the front brakes are different and that sucks when it comes time for pads.

What you wanna know??? I got lots of opinions. But in the end, frankly it's 6 of one, and a half-dozen of the other. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Edit: I'll add I think the reason LT1 steering feels/is faster is two reasons. The steering wheel is smaller which helps quicken it some. And the LS1's have a version of Magnasteer, which is pretty numb and might be slower too, don't know that for sure, but I doubt it.

[TxAgZ28]

The ladies man is interested in F-bodies! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

Check out the FS nationals results:
http://ww2.scca.com/soloresults.php?ID=55

Only 2 LS1's in the top 10! And only one trophied (way to go Frank!).

[ESPCamaro]

IMO the LS1 gains you little on an autox course.

I don't care what one has dynoed at. You can SEE THE DIFFERENCE ON COURSE. The LT1 doesn't give up much if anything on course. Torque makes up for the HP deficet.

Example (I've got to use it since it was my best ever event at Peru). Sam and I leave at the same time. Both .5somethings at the light. Sam's LS1 vs my LT1. We hit the turn around the same time. And were close enough each time, I'm not convinced of any power advantage on an autox course.

Sam's car did have issues that event but mine did to, although much less severe.

[trackbird]

IMO the LS1 gains you little on an autox course.

I don't care what one has dynoed at. You can SEE THE DIFFERENCE ON COURSE. The LT1 doesn't give up much if anything on course. Torque makes up for the HP deficet.

Example (I've got to use it since it was my best ever event at Peru). Sam and I leave at the same time. Both .5somethings at the light. Sam's LS1 vs my LT1. We hit the turn around the same time. And were close enough each time, I'm not convinced of any power advantage on an autox course.

Sam's car did have issues that event but mine did to, although much less severe.

Lonnie,

I agree that seems to be the case. What I was trying to say is that LT1's feel like they have more low end grunt to me and yet, I make more torque at 2500 than most of them seem to. Meaning, the LS1 isn't lacking low end grunt, but it feels like it is (compared to the LT1). I was trying to explain that the numbers say the LT1 does not have more grunt on the bottom (on paper), but they sure feel like they do. I'm open to explanations/suggestions as to why that is.

The LT1 torque curve isn't a curve, its damn near table top flat.  You should see my dyno plot, its flat from ~2000rpm all the way up to 4500+ rpm at around 274RWTQ.

This was what I was replying to. I was 300 to 317 ft lbs from that power band and the 300 ft lbs held on until 5200 rpm. That's 26 to 43 ft lbs in my favor (depending on the LT1's peak, I only have that info to use). And my car seems to dyno lower than most 2002's I've seen.

I didn't say LT1's were bad, slow or anything else. I was just making an observation that the numbers and the way they feel don't seem to match up. That's all, nothing else.

[pknowles]

I was trying to explain that the numbers say the LT1 does not have more grunt on the bottom (on paper), but they sure feel like they do. I'm open to explanations/suggestions as to why that is.

Overall I think it's a moot point as far as time on course, although I might recommend LT1 just because it's cheaper. I think the LT1 feels like it has more torque because of the good ol butt dyno. The LT1 pulls hardest around 2800-3000 rpm while the LS1 pulls hardest around 4000. Because the LS1 pulls harder at 4000, it feels weaker at 3000, which it is but not by that much.

[JKDZ28]

i have a 93, and have no desire for an LS1

[shortbus]

The LT1's biggest problem is the optispark.

Otherwise is is a pretty strong motor. I believe it is more durable then the LS1.

There is no doubt the LS1 has more power, but the LT1 has more roots int he 350 motor. So, you can interchange more parts and they will be less expensive.

If you can put a cam that is well matched 1.7 rockers in an LT1 then you'll (roughly) have the power of an LS1.

[GaryK]

My $.02:

I've had a couple LT1 Camaros, a '94 and a '95. I did quite a bit of F stock autocrossing back when I had them, and all I can really say for sure is that they were a blast to drive. I competed against LS1 Camaros many times, but can't really draw any conclusion on F Stock potential other than to say I didn't feel like I was at any real disadvantage to the LS1's.

I recently bought a 98 Camaro with the intention to do some autocrossing again. I did look around for LT1 cars, but with what I had to pay for one that was well maintained and in decent shape, I figured I might as well go for a newer LS1 car...this assuming I could get into a nice one for less than 10k, which I did. I'm prepping to ESP rules, but whether I was planning to run FS, ESP, or SM I'd have been just as happy with an LT1 car. If you find the right one you can save some money over an LS1 car. I think all the other pros and cons kind of equal out, so to me its nothing more than a question of money.

[shortbus]

I regularly compete againt LS1 cars.

In fact I am the only LT1 car in the area... And I do pretty well against the LS1 cars. One of them is a WS6 car and I go head to head and toe to toe everytime. It is a good match. He has more motor, tire, suspension and I am within a second (last week) of his times.

I do have the LS1 brakes all around. The LT1 brakes are horrible... and the biggest weakness of the LT1 car IMHO.


I need to look at the other LS1 cars from the last autocross.. Paul Williams (FS) beats my times on Kuhmos. (Not to mention a great driver.)

A LS1 vert I beat more then half the time. (He is on Hosiers.)

The LS1 WS6 (from above) is always a head of me (but behind Paul)- is anywhere from 1.5 to .7 seconds ahead.

A LS1 1LE SS gets killed by everyone. He is on decent streets, but less expreienced then I... But, my expirence is thin too.

So I end up being middle to upper ground and about the 3rd fastest FBody near me. Hopefully with these new wheels and tires I bump up a few.

So as far as competition ability the LT1 still has a big can of whoop ass.

[trackbird]

Otherwise is is a pretty strong motor. I believe is is more durable then the LS1.

I agree with that feeling. I've been somewhat afraid to start with the heads and cam on my LS1 due to the fear of it coming apart. I don't think I have that same fear with an LT1. I'm not sure why I don't think they are as durable, but I still don't quite trust them.

[LT4Firehawk]

What I was trying to say is that LT1's feel like they have more low end grunt to me and yet, I make more torque at 2500 than most of them seem to. Meaning, the LS1 isn't lacking low end grunt, but it feels like it is (compared to the LT1). I was trying to explain that the numbers say the LT1 does not have more grunt on the bottom (on paper), but they sure feel like they do. I'm open to explanations/suggestions as to why that is.

Depends on the LS1 I guess. My bone stock 2000 TA (M6) has the following dyno:
(IMG:http://www.lt1.net/images/evandynostock.gif)

As you can see, it doesn't hit 275 lb-ft of torque until 3300rpm and doesn't hit peak torque (304) until 4000rpm. I repeat, this was a completely bone stock 2000 TA that had 1750 miles on it. By comparison, my bone stock 95 Formula (M6) made 289lb-ft (table top flat curve) to almost 4000rpm. Also, the LT1 in my 92 Vette made 300lb-ft from 2000-4000rpm bone stock, again with that table top smooth curve.

FYI, the LS6 in the Z06 has a similar tq curve to the LS1, but with a more gradual rise from 300 lb-ft @2500rpm to 340lb -ft @4500rpm. The LT4, has the same characteristics as the LT1, just a higher level of torque (328lb-ft from 2000-4500rpm).

I've always said the LSx engine are stronger on the top end than an LT1, but that they lack the low end grunt. These figures back it up. The best is the LT4, torque of an LT1 and HP of an LS1, but of course you'd have to be ESP to run one of those, plus they aren't nearly as cheap as the LT1 (or even LS1) cars.

Anyway, back to the primary question, for FS I'd favor the LT1 for several reasons:
cheaper
no brake hop issues
better low end torque

For ESP or roadcourse use, I'd recommend the LT4.

[shortbus]

So what LT4Firehawk is saying....

I need an LT4 intake and a set of heads.... Where's my damn credit card!

[LT4Firehawk]

So what LT4Firehawk is saying....

I need an LT4 intake and a set of heads.... Where's my damn credit card!

Well, not exactly. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) For ESP you'd also need a 4 bolt main LT1/4 block to make it truly legal under the update/backdate rule. Of course, how many people are going to be nitpicky enough to protest you for having a 2 bolt main block instead of one with 4 bolt mains? (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)

[Tommy R]

Hey fellas,

Okay, Jason (Soma07), how do you know me? And how do you know my language? (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Sammy, yes, 'tis me. I'm certainly not decided, but I'm considering a swap from co-driving the Scirocco in FSP to moving back into a pony car in F-Stock. And, yes, this means I'd be selling the (potentially STX or DSP) 325is I was slowly prepping. Of course, nothing is set in stone yet as I'm merely in the data acquisition phase at the moment. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Anyway, on to the questions.........

'93 models: I'm still undecided. The gearing is better with the "old" T-56 and 3.23's. Second is effectively 6.9:1, whereas the later models are 6.1:1 which I thought was interesting. However, I'm not fond of a "single year production" vehicle with unique/troublesome concerns. Speed density and eventual mod-ability is a concern. And is batch firing true with this model? I didn't know the front brakes were different, too!

LT1 vs. LS1: Smaller steering wheel in the LT1, huh? Interesting. It sure appears that the LT1 has the stronger low end torque and obviously the LS1 has the horsepower. But, I'm not going the LS1 route. The LT1 is certainly cheaper, plus it's still very nationally competitive. A win/win. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) And the braking issue with the LS1 is a serious one to consider, IMO. I've experienced and seen that wheelhop. It can be quite violent.

Weight: Does the LS1 carry a lack of weight compared to its iron block counterpart? If so, how much? For that matter, what's an FS class F-body weigh in at? Are theZ28's lighter than the Formulas? No T/A's for me, FWIW.

Suspension: Any differences among the years of LT1 cars? Obviously a 1LE isn't necessary to win. Any spring rate differences over the years? Sway bar/bushing differences?

Non-performance stuff: I know the Optispark can be an issue. And changing plugs/wires requires an act of Congress. But, what about the other "mundane" maintenance issues? T-56's and the rear ends seem to hold up well to anything, but drag slick launches. The LT1 sure seems plenty robust. What about steering racks, A/C compressors, window motors, electrical issues, fit-n-finish after 100k miles, etc.? I need to consider the whole package and potential repair costs and daily nuisances are a real consideration. I don't expect BMW interior quality, but just how bad does it get?

FWIW, I'm expecting the suitable candidate to have 100k+ miles. At that point I'm sure it'll be needing lots of maintenance, if not already done. Are bushings a PITA?

Diffs: Are all LT1's equipped with some sort of posi? Are they Auburns? I understand the LS1's came with Torsens, but even they have shown to be far from flawless. Do the Auburns wear and need replacement every few years? Suggestions here?

Thanks,
Tommy

[LT4Firehawk]

Suspension: Any differences among the years of LT1 cars? Obviously a 1LE isn't necessary to win. Any spring rate differences over the years? Sway bar/bushing differences?

All the same. Only suspension option was 1LE. Like you said, that's not really that big a deal, just get some Koni SAs or DAs and stick with stock springs.

Non-performance stuff: I know the Optispark can be an issue. And changing plugs/wires requires an act of Congress. But, what about the other "mundane" maintenance issues? T-56's and the rear ends seem to hold up well to anything, but drag slick launches. The LT1 sure seems plenty robust. What about steering racks, A/C compressors, window motors, electrical issues, fit-n-finish after 100k miles, etc.? I need to consider the whole package and potential repair costs and daily nuisances are a real consideration. I don't expect BMW interior quality, but just how bad does it get?

FWIW, I'm expecting the suitable candidate to have 100k+ miles. At that point I'm sure it'll be needing lots of maintenance, if not already done. Are bushings a PITA?

Window motors can be somewhat problematical, but that's just because of the design. They'll usually start slowing down long before they fail and give you plenty of warning.

Power steering pumps can also be prone to failure under heavy abuse, at least with roadcourse use. I'm not sure how true that is to autox, I'll let some of the others give feedback on dedicated autox PS failure.

Timing chain will probably be getting very weak by 100K miles. If it hasn't been done, plan on doing it immediately and going with an upgraded unit. While your in there is a good time to go ahead and replace the opti and waterpump. You should be able to go ahead and upgrade to a vented opti too, I know there's at least one place out there that sells a wiring harness adaptor to fit the late model opti to the early harness.

Really there shouldn't be a lot of issues if the car was well maintained. I sold my 95 at 97K miles and it was still in very good condition and fit/finish.

Diffs: Are all LT1's equipped with some sort of posi? Are they Auburns? I understand the LS1's came with Torsens, but even they have shown to be far from flawless. Do the Auburns wear and need replacement every few years? Suggestions here?

The LT1s (other than SLP cars) all came with Auburns. While they aren't as strong as the Torsen used in the SLP/LS1 cars, it is still a decent unit. I never replaced the stock one on my 95 and it had probably 200 quater mile passes, several autoxes, 10 track days, and 97K miles on it. It was still working like new when I got rid of it.

[y5e06]

Batch fire really isn't that much of an issue. Only real problem w/ '92-'93 LT1's (including vettes) is you need to burn a chip instead of having the flash prom in the ECU. Lots of guys eak out tons o' power in the batch fire corvettes. Window motors tend to slow down and wear out. Straight forward enough fix. Seems to be common GM problem. Never had a compressor issue w/ my AC camaro, although I've gone through 2 on the Vette, one on the caprice, and need a third for the truck.
139K miles and I've never had a power steering pump problem.
I R&R'd the timing chain on my 114K mile Corvette this past spring (same engine), It looked great for wear. Didn't appear to have excessive slop. I don't think its much of a concern unless you already have the wp, opti, & timing cover already pulled off. Opti sparks suck, I've replaced at least half a dozen. Do the WP while your there too. Fit n Finish of F-bodies is absolutely horrid. It may be a big turn off for you, especially if moving out of the BMW quality. Want to get a good look over of a prime example of the higher mileage LT1? Check out mine at the next event (A&M).
Auburns do wear out, they are a clutch type of posi. You'd probably want to replace it each year just prior to nationals. If you buy a new one, you can have it rebuilt/exchanged for <$100. Karen can fill you in more about that.

[y5e06]

oh, At the April national tour My car weighed 3450 w/ 3/4 tank of gas, a drawtite hitch, stock salad shooter rims, V710's, power drivers seat, PW, PL, hard top car, 35mm solid front swaybar, and spare & jack removed. Driver not included.

[ESPCamaro]

Expect eventual problems with optisparks, diffs, and to an extent power steering pumps.

My recommendations. Take FWIW and call Sam too, DO NOT use Mobil 1, and keep the oil level topped off.

Expect an FS car to weigh mid 3,400's. In general the Camaros are lighter than Firebirds.
No weight saving advantage to an LS1. I've seen Jr's and Sam's car put on a scale when they were both FS.


As far as ESP the LT4 is definately the best choice. I'll tell you right now though, that there are no more. Try buying an LT4 longblock.......

You need more than a 4bolt block for an LT4 conversion. ALOT of parts are required. In fact almost every part is a little different.

In extremely rare instances where someone finds a complete LT4, or finds all the parts necessary, all NEW ESP LT4 cars are illegal.

[2manyfbods]

Expect eventual problems with optisparks, ........

By ESP rules - Wouldnt an ignition system that allows multiple coils retrofitted to a LT1 be legal? (Delteq or LTCC)

My recommendations. Take FWIW and call Sam too, DO NOT use Mobil 1, and keep the oil level topped off.

Just curious, Why not Mobil 1?

[patred]

DO NOT use Mobil 1, and keep the oil level topped off.

Ut oh, where's Karen? (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[robz71lm7]

I regularly compete againt LS1 cars.

In fact I am the only LT1 car in the area... And I do pretty well against the LS1 cars. One of them is a WS6 car and I go head to head and toe to toe everytime. It is a good match. He has more motor, tire, suspension and I am within a second (last week) of his times.

I do have the LS1 brakes all around. The LT1 brakes are horrible... and the biggest weakness of the LT1 car IMHO.


I need to look at the other LS1 cars from the last autocross.. Paul Williams (FS) beats my times on Kuhmos. (Not to mention a great driver.)

A LS1 vert I beat more then half the time. (He is on Hosiers.)

The LS1 WS6 (from above) is always a head of me (but behind Paul)- is anywhere from 1.5 to .7 seconds ahead.

A LS1 1LE SS gets killed by everyone. He is on decent streets, but less expreienced then I... But, my expirence is thin too.

So I end up being middle to upper ground and about the 3rd fastest FBody near me. Hopefully with these new wheels and tires I bump up a few.

So as far as competition ability the LT1 still has a big can of whoop ass.

You can't really compare the two engines between cars that are setup differently and driven by different people-especially at local events.

Heck some people have good and bad days. For example I've beaten Greg Cudnick (slightly faster than paul williams) by over a second and Paul has beaten me by over a second at times.

LT1 brakes really aren't that bad for FS if you use good pads (w/o they suck). I could consistently lock up my 275 victo racers with LT1 brakes and HP+ pads. I just switched to LS1's for open tracking.


Trackbird, I'd feel more comfortable putting heads and cam on a stock bottom LS1. LS1's are just plain stout. A lot of LT1 owners are experiencing spun bearings after heads and cam. Some of that is due to age and sloppiness and people revving too high, but not all. A lot of people are finiding the front cam bearing looks like crap at the time of the cam swap. I think some of it might have to do with the LT1 water pump.

FWIW, my 10 year old LT1 dyno'ed 300+ ft-lbs from 2000 rpms up with cai and a catback. I don't think there is a significant difference between either. In esp I feel the LS1 is a better choice, however in FS it's about even.

Of course LT1 r&d is not dead by any means. There are stock heads/bottom end cam only LT1's dynoing 350-360 rwhp and running in the 11's. There are some heads and cam 350 ci guys making 420-440 rwhp.

[Soma07]

Tommy,

I recognize you from CC.com (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) I am a frequent lurker/occasional poster there. A few months ago when I was semi-looking for an E36 you posted some good info so I wanted to try and return the favor.

A few random thoughts:

93's are the redheaded stepchild of the 4th Gen F-bodies but they don't differ from the other LT1s by that much and most of it is trivial crap. The brakes use different pads but they are really no better or worse than the 94+ cars. Sam probably knows better than I but I don't think its that big of a deal to find decent pads for them. I'm almost sure Hawk HPS & HP+ are available.

Don't sweat the timing chain, I just replaced mine at 190k and it really looked no worse than the new one.

Fit and finish is typical GM, in other words not that great. With nearly 200k and 11yrs on mine it has more squeeks and rattles than I would like but its far from falling apart. As long as you find a car that isn't beat to shit (which can be a challange) I don't think you'll have any problems.

Power steering pumps can and do die but its not that common. Mine will start to whine if I have to do more than 2 back to back runs or if its really hot outside. No damage so far but it does make a little fluid leak out of the resevior.

If I had my choice of a year to pick it would probably be a 95. It had the vented optispark (cheaper & supposedly more reliable) but not OBDII. That said I would probably buy the cleanest car you can find regardless of the year. IMO the differences from year to year are very minor when you consider the big picture.

Good luck and let us know what you decide!

[CamaroFS34]

In terms of what "goes bad" with a higher mileage car, there is a thread floating around on here with all the stuff I've replaced on my 300+K green car. Of course, I'm crazy about maintaining stuff, and despite hammering the car around the autocross course (and letting people like Dean Sapp and Kevin Dietz do the same), I've never (knock on wood (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif) ) replaced an optispark. I've done bushings by way of replacing the entire control arm (it's just easier, and in the long run, probably cheaper).

Karen

ps., yeah, Lonnie, why not Mobil 1? I don't see any problems with it, and neither did the guys at F-Body Central when they pulled the heads for the head gaskets....

[robz71lm7]

Mobil 1 is a decent oil, but it's not the best for 350 sbc. It tends to be on the thin side for our engines. The wear results from it are decent, but could be better.

[Sam Strano]

ps., yeah, Lonnie, why not Mobil 1? I don't see any problems with it, and neither did the guys at F-Body Central when they pulled the heads for the head gaskets....

Oh boy.... Probably has something to do with his blown up motor on Mobil 1. Or maybe Kevin Howell's blown up motor on Mobil 1..... Or maybe Beecher's blown up motor on Mobil 1. Or any of the little things I've had happen with Mobil 1 like excessive usage that lessened or stopped when the brand was changed.

Come to think of it, the only LT1 or LS1's I've seen pop were on Mobil 1. I don't know what McGeorge runs in the MR2, but I'd bet it was Mobil 1 and Tim had the same problem in Peru that the V-8's did...... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

The fact the engine is clean means the oil has detergents. Good, but not protecting the engine per se. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Basically, you've been luckily (like most of us) to not have a problem that really would stress the oil film. Synthetics are about protection (and a little power too <g>). I don't expect you to have a problem just because you on on Mobil 1. But I'd expect any problem that might occur to be more serious than it should be. MHO and only based on my experiences, which are numerous. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[rmackintosh]

ps., yeah, Lonnie, why not Mobil 1? I don't see any problems with it, and neither did the guys at F-Body Central when they pulled the heads for the head gaskets....

Oh boy.... Probably has something to do with his blown up motor on Mobil 1. Or maybe Kevin Howell's blown up motor on Mobil 1..... Or maybe Beecher's blown up motor on Mobil 1. Or any of the little things I've had happen with Mobil 1 like excessive usage that lessened or stopped when the brand was changed.

Come to think of it, the only LT1 or LS1's I've seen pop were on Mobil 1. I don't know what McGeorge runs in the MR2, but I'd bet it was Mobil 1 and Tim had the same problem in Peru that the V-8's did...... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

The fact the engine is clean means the oil has detergents. Good, but not protecting the engine per se. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Basically, you've been luckily (like most of us) to not have a problem that really would stress the oil film. Synthetics are about protection (and a little power too <g>). I don't expect you to have a problem just because you on on Mobil 1. But I'd expect any problem that might occur to be more serious than it should be. MHO and only based on my experiences, which are numerous. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

....yeah...I have a similarly low opinion of Mobil 1....and I have taken a lot of S#%T for it around here... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) ....but I used it for 2 track days and it came out THINNER than water if you can believe it.... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) .....don't use it anymore.....

[sgarnett]

Mobil 1 is one of those periodically-debated topics. I've used it (and still do) in a lot of different engines. The two exceptions are:

1) My 96 Dodge 5.9. These engines tend to build up crud at the intake manifold gasket, which allows it to dry out or otherwise develop a latent leak. Synthetics tend to clean out the crud and expose the gasket, allowing oil into the intake manifold. If I'd bought the truck new I'd have used M1 from the beginning, but since I bought it at 100K it gets conventional Castrol.

2) My oil-fired LS1 needs all the viscosity help it can get. It gets Redline 10W-40

Other than that, I run M1 in everything - generator, tractor, mowers, the built 350 SBC in my former truck, the venerable MGB (which cruises at 4000 rpm on the interstate).

In other words, I don't think there's anything wrong with M1 per se. However, I do think the M1 10W-30 grade is too thin for some applications.

OTOH, for the only engine I use in competition, Redline is a very small part of the total budget (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[patred]

Or maybe Beecher's blown up motor on Mobil 1.

Didn't their engine blow after continuous laps on a skidpad running the same direction? (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Something about sustained G's and no accusump or equivalent?

Also, what weight Mobil 1 are these people using to have their engines "pop"? Mobil 1 came out with a 15W50 synthetic for "high performance" usage a few years ago ... don't know if it might be indirectly related to known issues???

Pat

[robz71lm7]

By ESP rules - Wouldnt an ignition system that allows multiple coils retrofitted to a LT1 be legal?  (Delteq or LTCC)

Perfectly legal. I've got the parts for my delteq install on the way in the mail. There is a guy on ebay that sells new northstar coils and icm for $140 shipped. The ICM alone is $220+ from GMPD or autozone.

As of right now it will eliminate the cap and rotor from my optispark but still use the sensor for timing. However an add-on will soon be available from Delteq that allows you to stop using the opti completely. Although, the cap and rotor are the biggest problem, IMO.

[ESPCamaro]

[QUOTE=

The fact the engine is clean means the oil has detergents. Good, but not protecting the engine per se. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

My engine, at 98,000 miles looked brand new inside.

Aside from spun bearings. BTW the crank had to be turned under .030. Which is ALOT.

(Oh well slower bearing speed for more power (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/nutkick.gif) )

[ESPCamaro]

ps., yeah, Lonnie, why not Mobil 1? I don't see any problems with it, and neither did the guys at F-Body Central when they pulled the heads for the head gaskets....

Well aside from the $3,600 I don't have that it cost me, nothing.

And if not for the deals I worked out the same work would have cost well over $4,000. I'll probably always maintain a bitterness about the whole situation.

[Tommy R]

Okay, so exactly how do the Firebirds and Camaros differ in weight? I can see Formulas weighing more than comparbly equipped Z28s. Motorized headlights and maybe a slightly pimpier interior could make a difference, but how much?

Then how much is the difference to a Trans Am? Does the "tall wing" most T/A's have weigh much more than the Formula's spoiler? Are T/A's typically heavier simply because they're often more optioned out? Would a "stripper T/A" with the low wing and no t-tops weigh close to that of a Formula? I'm sure the side and rear fascias add some weight, but I can't see it being more than ~20 lbs. or so.

Discuss. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Tommy

[pknowles]

I got a Camaro because I believe the Camaro's are lighter. Firebirds have things like flip up headlights and power anntenia's which do add weight. AC became standard in 98, so any car after that will have AC and you can look around on the web for how much stuff weighs. I've heard that power windows actaully weigh less then hand crank windows (never weighed either). Take into account that I've only seen a handfull of hand crank windows on Z28's and your probably going to get a car with power windows. T-tops don't really make a weight difference (assuming you run with them out), the roof structure is the same on t-top and non t-top cars; a thin sheet metal roof is tack welded over the t-top supports on non t-top cars, so don't think you are getting a stronger roof structure in a non t-top car. Honestly the big weight options are AC, CD changers, and power seats. Most other options are small. FWIW, the 500W Monsoon sound system in my car weighs almost nothing. When I took out the spare, one of the amps is right there so I took it out to see how much it weighed. To my suprize I have NEVER heald an amp that was so light and I mean significantly lighter then any other amps I have ever had.

[Tommy R]

Thanks, Phil. You touched on some of my weight concerns. I've been doing research, but haven't found quite what I'm looking for. I'd love to see a weight breakdown of similarly equipped Z28a, Formulas, and T/As. Specifically, I'm interested in the LT1 variety since that's what it looks like I'll get, should I decide to move away from the BMW.

Tommy

[Jabberwocky]

Is it okay to run without the t-tops? Locally people could care less when I do it, but it sounds like this car is for something stricter. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

There is also an option of getting cloth no power seats, which I believe saves a whole bunch of weight. But the only car I've seen this in was an 1LE and some v6, I dunno if leather was standard on the regular z28.

[pknowles]

Is it okay to run without the t-tops? Locally people could care less when I do it, but it sounds like this car is for something stricter.

Sure you can, I've run at National tours, ProSolo's, and the National Championship with my T-tops removed. As long as you don't have a harness that goes over the shoulder and your head sticks out above the roof line you can remove the T-tops while autoxing.

I dunno if leather was standard on the regular z28.

Nope. Of course take the fact that the car that Mike "junior" Johnson has driven in and won FS in is pretty close to a fully optioned car.

[patred]

Personally, I wouldn't nit-pick about what options weigh what. Like Phil mentioned, Diane's car has every option except an auto (T tops, leather, etc, etc) ... and it's a single-cat '95, too ... and most people who have driven it (including me (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ) say it has less power than most other competitive F Stockers Z28s.

If you find a clean F Body and do all the "tricks" (shocks and bar) and drive the piss out of it, I don't think it should matter if you are saving a few pounds here and there. Heck, if weight was such a big deal, Kent Weaver would've kicked Sammy's ass all day in F Stock. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Pat

[Tommy R]

Thanks, Pat. I agree. I guess what I'm wondering is if the weight between a Z28 and T/A is in the realm of insignificant (<75 lbs) or not (>100 lbs).

I normally would want a Formula or Z28 where I feel the difference is insignificant. However, I may have a really good lead on a Trans Am (hardtop, cloth, low wing, but power seats) for a really good price. I just want to make sure they're not, say 200 lbs heavier than the other F-Bods. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

My old rommie's '94 T/A (t-tops, leather, pimped) weighed over 3600 lbs. on the scales without him in it!

Tommy

[35th_Anniversary...]

I ran without my t-roofs in Peru & DC at Nat'l Tours as well. The rulebook says you can remove anything that can not be held down securely....

My SS weighed in at 3350 without me, no roof, small amount of gas, factory rims & tires last year. Obviously my Goodyear Eagle F1's are heavier than Hoosiers. I did have the ST35 bar on as well. The SS does have a fiberglass roof which may decrease a little weight as well.

Not sure why not many T/A's AutoX. Pontiacs are chick cars... did Pontiac offer a 1LE option?

[Nick]

... did Pontiac offer a 1LE option?

They sure did. Check out www.1le.net and go to Production Numbers.

[patred]

Thanks, Pat. I agree. I guess what I'm wondering is if the weight between a Z28 and T/A is in the realm of insignificant (<75 lbs) or not (>100 lbs).

I normally would want a Formula or Z28 where I feel the difference is insignificant. However, I may have a really good lead on a Trans Am (hardtop, cloth, low wing, but power seats) for a really good price. I just want to make sure they're not, say 200 lbs heavier than the other F-Bods. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

My old rommie's '94 T/A (t-tops, leather, pimped) weighed over 3600 lbs. on the scales without him in it!

Oh yeah, I forgot about the T/A's and their factory body kits. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Though I don't know for sure how much weight difference there is between a T/A and a Formula. 3,600 does sound kinda porky.

Pat

[LT4Firehawk]

Here's a list of weights I compiled a while back for a post on another board, from lightest to heaviest:
Z06: 3116lbs
C5 coupe: 3218lbs
C5 Vert: 3245lbs
C4 Coupe: 3298lbs
LT1 Formula: 3311lbs
LT1 TA: 3345lbs
LT1 Z28: 3373
C4 Vert: 3360lbs
LS1 Z28: 3439lbs
LS1 Formula: 3455lbs
LS1 TA: 3477lbs
LT1 Formula Vert: 3489lbs
LS1 Z28 Vert: 3574lbs
LT1 Z28 Vert: 3591lbs
LS1 TA Vert: 3605lbs
LT1 TA Vert: 3610lbs

I believe these are the lightest weights for each model with no options and the earliest year the car was available (some options become standard equipment over the model run). From looking at this a stripper LT1 Formula is the lightest of all the f-bodies, followed closely by the TA and Z28. What's really interesting to note is that the LT1 Formula is only 13lbs heavier than a C4 coupe (of course, the Vette has a much lower cg).

Anyway, I really wouldn't worry much about whether it's a Formula, TA or Z28. Just find the best one for the money. If you can get a good deal on the TA, it would be a great car. Personally I wouldn't settle for anything other than a hardtop due to the extra chasis flex on the t-top cars. I've had the oppurtunity to do a good bit of driving in both t-top and hardtop f-bodies on roadcourse, and there is definitely a difference in stiffness.

[Soma07]

I got a Camaro because I believe the Camaro's are lighter. Firebirds have things like flip up headlights and power anntenia's which do add weight. AC became standard in 98, so any car after that will have AC and you can look around on the web for how much stuff weighs.

The flip-up headlights don't weigh that much, <10lbs. The power anteana is <2lbs and did not appear until 95. Also AC became standard in 96, not 98.

The big spoiler on TA's doesn't weigh much either (its hollow). I take mine off every now and then to wax the bottom and you can easily pick it up with one hand. Its bulky because its so big but I'm sure its not more than 10lbs.

Tommy,

TA's don't weight signifigantly more than any other F-body. 3600lbs does sound high though...

[bruecksteve]

ps., yeah, Lonnie, why not Mobil 1? I don't see any problems with it, and neither did the guys at F-Body Central when they pulled the heads for the head gaskets....

Oh boy.... Probably has something to do with his blown up motor on Mobil 1. Or maybe Kevin Howell's blown up motor on Mobil 1..... Or maybe Beecher's blown up motor on Mobil 1. Or any of the little things I've had happen with Mobil 1 like excessive usage that lessened or stopped when the brand was changed.

Come to think of it, the only LT1 or LS1's I've seen pop were on Mobil 1. I don't know what McGeorge runs in the MR2, but I'd bet it was Mobil 1 and Tim had the same problem in Peru that the V-8's did...... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

The fact the engine is clean means the oil has detergents. Good, but not protecting the engine per se. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Basically, you've been luckily (like most of us) to not have a problem that really would stress the oil film. Synthetics are about protection (and a little power too <g>). I don't expect you to have a problem just because you on on Mobil 1. But I'd expect any problem that might occur to be more serious than it should be. MHO and only based on my experiences, which are numerous. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

My car's been running Mobil One since I've owned it and currently has 187,000 miles on it. Still doesn't burn oil, still runs strong for a LT1.

I would suspect something else besides oil. A lot of people run Mobil One and DON'T blow engines too.

[CamaroFS34]

AC became standard in 98, so any car after that will have AC and you can look around on the web for how much stuff weighs.

Actually, AC was standard starting in '96. When I picked up my 1LE car at the dealership, one of the first things I saw were the AC controls on the dash. I freaked, thinking that the dealer had screwed up my order. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Karen

[pknowles]

Actually, AC was standard starting in '96. When I picked up my 1LE car at the dealership, one of the first things I saw were the AC controls on the dash. I freaked, thinking that the dealer had screwed up my order.

Karen

Your right, now I remember seeing a 97 1LE car with AC. Cool.

[trackbird]

I wanted to order a 2002 1LE, but, as I remember, you had to buy an SS (mostly loaded as I remember) and then the $3500 1LE package. It became an overweight, $34,000 Camaro. Mine is too loaded as it is (and 3 weeks later a manual window, hard top showed up on the lot for $23,500....I was quite miffed). Mine is "everything but an SS" (sadly) and it should be very heavy. I've not weighed it yet.

[robz71lm7]

I was going to say, I think a lot of these motor failures are due to oil starvation. Starvation is more to blame on the pan (LT1 or LS1) than the oil. However, there are better oils to band-aid this. Redline has around 500-600 something PPM of moly which is an extreme pressure anti-wear additive. Mobil 1 and most over the counter oils have less than 100 ppm moly. The 6-10 times as much moly in Redline offers more protection when the oil film is compromised.

It's a band-aid, but I think it's a good idea in cars that starve. If time and money were not an issue (yeah right) I'd pull my stock LT1 out and add a canton pan and a stock volume pump with a high pressure spring ('69 camaro I think).

[Sam Strano]

Okay, so exactly how do the Firebirds and Camaros differ in weight? I can see Formulas weighing more than comparbly equipped Z28s. Motorized headlights and maybe a slightly pimpier interior could make a difference, but how much?

It's crap. Jacksonville Nat'l Tour, 1998:

Alex Tziortzis '98 1LE weighed 10 pounds less than the '98 Firebird Formula Dean Sapp was driving. Alex has a CD Changer as the only option. Dean's car had a Monsoon, Power seat, power windows, power antenna, cruise, rear defog, etc. Only other difference was Alex was on Victoracers, Dean on BFG R1's (remember them???).

[Sam Strano]

On the oil front, mileage and all that doesn't matter. There are cars with 200k+ miles on them on regular oil that run great (my winter beater Toyota being one). If you don't have an issue that is going to put undue stress on the oil film you'll be fine with most anything.

All I know is I've seen first-hand a number of oil related failures. All, without fail, have been on Mobil 1. It's not scientific, but it's also not just a coincidence. Doesn't matter to me what you run. It matters to me what I run, and it will never be Mobil 1 again.

[2manyfbods]

Sam, What oil do you use?

[NataSS Inc]

Back on the LT1vs LS1.

Here is my dyno on my 99 SS. Cam heads and a "few" bolt ons. Car pulls like a rabid pit bull out of the corners. 430rwhp 406rwtq. And that was through a giant Moser "9. On a 10 bolt, which is back in there now it is closer to the 450rwhp. Didnt get a chance to dyno it because the motor let go prior to be able to get it back on the dyno after the swap. I have yet to see an Lt1 car make the same #'s w/ equivelent mods (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) .
May have to copy and paste link
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid1...da.jpg.orig.jpg

[robz71lm7]

There a bunch of Advanced Induction/Lloyd Elliott stock displacement LT1's making over 400 rwhp with just heads and cam now. I'd have to search CZ28.com for some of the higher ones.

[Sam Strano]

Sam, What oil do you use?

I use Redline for anything that gets pounded, like the Camaro. I used Valvoline Synthetic in my gas trucks, Running Valvoline Premium Blue in my Diesel truck.

[trackbird]

Bang for the buck, I'd buy an LT1 car (I bought mine new, last year and all that, or I'd have an LT1). They can be tricky to work on, but you can find them cheap.

[Tommy R]

Back on topic from the oil debate..... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I drove two F-bodies this past weekend, a '94 T/A and a '98 Formula. I had an issue with both of them, including the '96 SS that I sat in (a co-worker's). When I move my right foot from the gas pedal to the brake pedal, the toe of my shoe catches the underside of the dash! And no, my feet aren't that big (10.5)! This is with sandals or my work/dress shoes on. I don't recall this being an issue the few times I've autocrossed 4th gens wearing racing/wrestling shoes.

It was a major PITA and really detracted from the driving enjoyment. I tried a different heal position, but it was hardly comfortable. Has anyone else noticed this? Frankly, it sucked.

Tommy

[trackbird]

I wear a 10.5 shoe as well. If I wear tennis shoes or "small" hiking boots, I don't have a problem. If I wear work boots (Timberland Pro series or Wolverine type) I catch the toe on the panel slightly. You can remove the panel and free up some room if it is really an issue, I think I just learned to pull my heel back and put my foot at more of an angle (I'm comfortable that way) and I no longer hit the panel under the dash.

Not elegant, but effective.

[y5e06]

I don't think I've ever noticed this problem, and I've driven a number of LT1 & LS1 cars.
oh, size 13 shoes. maybe my foot motion is different?
couldn't you just trim the panel?

md

[shortbus]

I have noticed that (foot hitting the underside) and it is annoying.. I never thought of cutting that either.

But, now I will.

[trackbird]

I have noticed that (foot hitting the underside) and it is annoying.. I never thought of cutting that either.

But, now I will.

Brian's car is getting lighter again.....

[LT4Firehawk]

I had this problem sometimes with my 95 Formula, but haven't had it at all with the 97. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) Doesn't really make sense as they exactly the same under the dash, and I know my feet haven't shrunk. Maybe it has to do with seat position as well as foot position?

[patred]

It was a major PITA and really detracted from the driving enjoyment.  I tried a different heal position, but it was hardly comfortable.  Has anyone else noticed this?  Frankly, it sucked.

Tommy

That's weird. I've driven 9 different F bodies this year (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) and haven't had issues with any of them (size 11 1/2).

Pat

P.S. You know what they say about guys with big shoes? They have big feet!