Hey all,

There has been some discussion over on the street racing board as to the existence of the LU5/4spd combination. I know it was brought up earlier in a thread pertaining to an 82 pace car, and I also know that the 5-speed was not put behind any LU5 motors (from the factory) due to their propensity to grenade. However, the 4-speeds that were used in 82 were the T-10 transmission (?). Is it possible that the T-10 was used with the LU5 motor?

BTW -- the only reason I brought this up is because the tech data lists an LU5/M4 as available with a 3.23 rear (the G92 option if equipped with aa automatic)

 

Not the stick, but the 4 spd auto in 83 was.

 

Yes the T-10 four speed did come with the 82 and 83 LU5 Z-28's starting mid-year 82.

 

Thanks guys ... I knew this would be the place to ask.

 

 

Is our tech data wrong then?

 

 

Wrong the T-10 was an option starting mid-year 82, it was only when the first LU5's came out that the th-200c was the only tranny available. Even though the T-10 was an option only a few were built.

 

 

The 4 speed was available for the LU5 in 82 and it even had it's own special gear ratios. 1st (2.88:1)2nd(1.91:1)3rd(1.33:1)4th(1.00:1)

 

Oh yeah and especially in the 82's case, since the manual was offered mid year, the brochure is printed well before production. So production changes may occur that wont be reflected on the brochure.

 

 

According to Mike Antonick's Camaro White Book, and I quote
"RPO LU5 (305ci, 165hp) was available only with Z28, only with automatic transmission, and not in California."

And according to our 1982 Specification sheets, as supplied by Chevrolet. The LU5 was only available with MX1(auto tranny).
Any Crossfire injection cars with a factory manual were probably produced as 1983's.

 

82 RECARO TA has it right.

As far as I'm concerned, <b>if someone can produce a build sheet to verify an LU5 with manual transmission, then that's great, let's see it, but until then, such a car simply doesn't exist</b>. Burden of proof is on those who claim the car exists.

The website those gear ratios came from is also the same website that lists a "TH350" as being the 1982 automatic transmission.. can you hear their credibility going down the toilet? I can. Did you notice they're talking about Corvettes and not F-bodies? D'oh. 2.88 / 1.93 / 1.33 / 1.00 might be right for 'vette I dunno, but for LU5 f-body it is not right.. not even close. So don't trust everything you read online on sites that think they're authoritative.

LU5 auto only, period, end of story. (Until there is proof to the contrary)

 

OK so maybe it came from a more credible source, like this website:

http://www.iroczone.com/specs/camaro/camindex.html

The 1982 page looks legit doesn't it? This website is regarded as something of a treasure find by many, since it lists RPO's and production numbers of all RPO's, their prices, etc. They have some great info, but they have some major bloopers too. nevermind the fact that they're missing half the RPO's, we'll give 'em that as a freebie. But let's see what they say about this LU5 manual transmission thing:

"1982 Z28 Transmission: 4 speed (RPO MM4) w/ 3.42:1 low standard. TH-200c (RPO MX1) automatic optional. Mandatory for LU5 until midyear when MM4 4 speed with 2.88 low became available."

Bogus, but.. fair enough, let's take a closer look and see what they have to say about the next couple of years:

"1983 Z28 Transmission: 4 speed (RPO MM4) w/ 3.42:1 low standard. TH-200c (RPO MX1) automatic optional. Mandatory for LU5 until midyear when MM4 4 speed with 2.88 low became available."

"1984 Z28 Transmission: 4 speed (RPO MM4) w/ 3.42:1 low standard. TH-200c (RPO MX1) automatic optional. Mandatory for LU5 until midyear when MM4 4 speed with 2.88 low became available.

Wow.. THREE consecutive mid-year introductions of the LU5 with manual transmission. This is so wrong it's not even funny.

So even this website which is seen as a good source for restoration has got it 100% wrong. Their credibility is down the drain as well as the site I mentioned in the previous post ( http://members.fbody.com/iroczfbody/DRIVETRAINLIST.htm )

Both these sites are full of it and they don't even know it. Good luck placing your faith in what you read online.

GT

 

Unfortunately, the webmaster of iroczone.com, iroc.fbody.com, and probably plenty of others are not GM historians. We're regular people that provide the best information that we can given the resources we have available to us. Are there mistakes on those sites? Of course. There's mistakes everywhere. I've got more Camaro books than I can count and every one of them has errors. That's bound to happen when GM keeps such ****ty records of their vehicles.

 

Anyone would agree with the fact that no book is perfect, so I don't see why it's relevant. The fact remains that people jump to conclusions based on what they read online, and then they confidently spread that information as hard facts, when in reality it's BS and they don't know any better but they want to try and impress somebody. This thread is a perfect example. Not to offend anyone, but the internet is not reliable when it comes to super-specific stuff like "did they make a stick shift LU5?". If you have a build sheet to prove that they made it, then they made it. If you do not have a build sheet, then ask other LU5 followers if they have a build sheet. One possibility is the <a href="http://www.crossfire.homeip.net:81/cftest/default.asp"> Crossfire Injection Forum</a>. So if nobody has a build sheet to prove it, chances are it was never made, or maybe they made a test mule which was quickly destroyed after experiments. That's on top of the fact that all GM documentation says they were not made, and .. there you go.

 

There is no such thing as a manual 4 spd behind an CFI car in 82 or 83. Everyting I've ever read (Camaro articles for 82, 83 & 84 years, info on the net, I've even got the 83 dealer brochure in front of me) says the CFI's only came with automatics.