Brakes Looking to upgrade or get the most out of what you have stock? All brake discussions go here!

Those using 1408 9496 1LE PROP VALVE

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 3, 2007 | 03:36 PM
  #1  
Jetmeck's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
From: K.C. Mo.
Car: '89 GTA 9,000 MILES
Engine: 350
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.27 9 bolt
Those using 1408 9496 1LE PROP VALVE

This is the 82-early 89 version FYI. It looks like gmpartdirect is the way to go by the way. About 72 dollars shipped to me.

Anyway a lot of threads have been devoted to this.
Many people saying GM finally got it right with the late 89-up version because this was the only one for all F-bodys starting 90. So I know a few of you have used the late 89 up version with success.

What about this 82-early 89 version 14089496...anyone noticed a difference ? I mean I hope it has the better proporioning that the late 89 up version supposedly has ?

Thx for patience and replies.
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2007 | 04:43 PM
  #2  
Jetmeck's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
From: K.C. Mo.
Car: '89 GTA 9,000 MILES
Engine: 350
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.27 9 bolt
anybody ?
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2007 | 07:53 PM
  #3  
KagA152's Avatar
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,704
Likes: 1
From: Roscoe, IL
Car: 1991 Trans Am
Engine: LQ4
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: 3.70
i had it on my LS1 setup. never had anything else on there to compare it with, but it worked good
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2007 | 08:38 PM
  #4  
anthony64ss's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
From: East Bay Area
Car: 1984 Z28
Engine: L31
Transmission: WC T5
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt 3.73
I dont think the valving is different between the two. My understanding is that pre mid 89 used a course pitch fitting(M 1.0?) at the inlet of the prop valve, while mid 89 on used a finer pitch fitting (M 1.5 or 1.25 cant remember). My 14089496 works great on my 85 with stock fronts and 1le rears. I did have to bend one line, however, no biggle.
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2007 | 10:06 PM
  #5  
Jetmeck's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
From: K.C. Mo.
Car: '89 GTA 9,000 MILES
Engine: 350
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.27 9 bolt
Originally Posted by KagA152
i had it on my LS1 setup. never had anything else on there to compare it with, but it worked good
What year car and are you sure you had the 82-early 89 version...14089496 ? Thx
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 05:45 AM
  #6  
JamesC's Avatar
Moderator
25 Year Member
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 19,282
Likes: 103
From: Lawrence, KS
Car: Met. Silver 85 IROC/Sold
Engine: 350 HO Deluxe (350ci/330hp)
Transmission: T-5 (Non-WC)
Axle/Gears: Limited Slip 3.23's
I believe the brake lines were changed mid-89 from M1.0 to M1.5 flare threads. The M1.0 lines are the first design and the M1.5 lines are the second. I used 14089496 for my front 1LE conversion and later for the 1LE rears. Mine was a direct fit.

JamesC

Last edited by JamesC; Jan 5, 2007 at 06:01 AM.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2007 | 12:24 PM
  #7  
Jetmeck's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
From: K.C. Mo.
Car: '89 GTA 9,000 MILES
Engine: 350
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.27 9 bolt
Originally Posted by anthony64ss
I dont think the valving is different between the two.
That is what I am interested in ? Anybody verify this ?

I undertstand the thread pitch was different. Thx
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
manualbrakes.com
Brakes
63
Apr 9, 2024 11:55 AM
Hotrodboba400
Firebirds for Sale
3
Dec 10, 2019 07:07 PM
87v6Bird
Brakes
9
Oct 4, 2015 07:37 AM
Necron
Brakes
4
Sep 14, 2015 12:45 PM
Hotrodboba400
Firebirds for Sale
0
Sep 2, 2015 07:28 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:47 AM.