i always thought u could get G92 only with
350 Auto or 305 manual

but seems i was wrong because this one is 305 auto with G92

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1987-...QQcmdZViewItem

how rare is this combination?

 

There was always a RPO-G92 but it's content changed over the 3rd gens production life.From '82-'86 it was just the performance axle option.But you are right in wondering if it was for certain combinations.My '83 has the G92 option for that year - 3.23 axle ratio(combination of having the 700R4 and the LU5 305)would be an example.From '87 up,to me,it gets a little more complicated as to the contents of the package when combined with other options.

That is a beauty up for auction.Whoever ordered her certainly checked off a lot of option boxes.

 

I believe that the camaro you could have opted for it with any of the engines... not sure about the V6 & LG4 but since the G92 was an actual option that you could could opt for it by checking a box.


I believe 99% that the firebird did not have the G92 unless you got the 1LE.

John

 

My 88 Formula 305TPI Auto came with 3.23 gears, alum Driveshaft, Drum brakes, Alum space saver spare, and upshifts to 4th at WOT.
Did it have the G92 package?

 

The short answer is: for Camaro

from 82-86 the G92 was a stand alone option avalaible with a lot of combinations of engines and transmissions.

In 87 that all changed. G92 became part of a package. For the TPI 305 with automatic you got the engine oil cooler, rear disc brakes, and a 3.23 ten bolt posi rear end. This combo was available in 88 as well, then was dropped.

 

Hell, I wish it was that way again. In order to get any new gm car with the options that you want you have to order 7 million other options you don't want or need just to get the car you wanted.

 

dang somebody got a steal on that iroc for only 4150 thats much lower than I thought it was gonna go for

 

so does this 305 have 215 hp or 190 hp ? or is it not related to G92 option ?

 

All TPI 305's with an automatic were 190hp (weak cam) whether they had G92 or not.

 

That does seem like a screamin' good deal. But I'd bet that close up there were some issues that would have brought it back in line with the expectations of a casual observer. Every used car I've ever seen looks better in digital pictures than in real life. Nice car anyway though.

 

I know this is slightly off topic but along similar lines.Labrat it's odd,but typical GM,in the situation with the '87 LB9's horsepower being lower with the 700R4 than with the manual when ,in the same year,the only way to get the L98/B2L was with the same 700R4.It was done before in '83 with the LU5(700R4 only)and L69(manual only)even though torque ratings for the two motors are very close.

 

Well there have been many explainations for it. I'm not sure which one I believe. It's ironic but I did own an 85 Z28 (not an Iroc) that had the 215hp TPI 305 with automatic. It was faster than the car I have now, but it wasn't an Iroc.

 

You need to clarify that statement with some years:

85 305 TPI is 215 HP.
86 305 TPI is 190 HP.
87 305 TPI is 190 HP.
88 305 TPI is 195 HP.
89 305 TPI is 195 HP.
90-92 305 TPI is 205 HP.

All the above is with the 700R4 automatic transmission.

 

It would be interesting to know how GM decides what motor/trans combinations will be available for a given model/year.I know emissions is part of the equation,sales probably after a model year run,possible warranty claims and whatever else.I have a feeling the LU5 wasn't available with the T-5 because Corporate knew the motor wouldn't be around long enough to pay for emissions cert(now this is my opinion).Even though the Vette used the same CFI on the L83('84 intake had balance holes)as the LU5 but still technically for 2 years.But the L69 was available first with the T-5 then with it and the 700R4 then back to the T-5.The LB9 starts just with 700R4 then available with both the rest of the 3rd Gen run.Sometimes it doesn't seem to me HP/Torque ratings play as much a part as we would think.

 

An engine with an auto trans, spends more time in the lower RPM range then one with a manual trans. that’s why it is easier to pass an engine with an auto. GM was not able to get the LU5 to pass in California or with the manual and maintain reasonable fuel economy numbers, which would have hurt their CAFÉ numbers. As late as December 81 GM was still telling people that the LU5 with manual trans would be available soon, but in mid 82 they announced the combo was not going to be available at all.

 

The reason your 85 TPI was faster than the car you have now is because of the cam. The TPI when introduced in 85 was the same engine as the L69, except for the induction. The cam was changed for 86-89 TPI to the so-called "Peanut Cam", dropping the HP to 190.

 

Sorry I should have been more clear. I knew exactly why the 85 was faster than the 87. I found it ironic that the slower car is 2 years newer and the top model level available. Got love GM!

 

labrat,
I do not think you see the whole picture.

GM did not willingly reduce power to the 1986 LB9 cars. From a standpoint of technology, emissions and fuel economy GM did the best they could with what they had. From my understanding in 1986 the emissions standards changed from 1985, To this day you will find that many cars in the 90's get better fuel economy than the same engine in newer cars, it has to do with the EPA. You build on that CAFE dictates that cars are to be above 22.5 mpg average and you have to reduce horsepower to meet both these criteria. GM put out the fastest car they could in each year of production. It was not a GM did this for no good unknown reason it has to do with politics. In 1987 they offered the L98 cars with that in mind why make the LB9 cars almost as hot, that has a marketing purpose.

Also the LB9 was not the top engine in 1987 with the G92.

JOhn

 

Ya I hear ya, I can't believe GM would do that if they didn't have too. On the other hand why not put the weak cam in the LB9 with the 5 speed as well. The 215hp Lb9 with a 5 speed is pretty close to a L98. Also no 350 87 Camaro's had G92, because there was only one rear end available in them, the 3.27 9 bolt.

 

I think you may be missing something in this thread or another thread.

In spite of what is thought I have no doubt that GM would produce as much horsepower they could in each year from 1982-1992 from an engine as long as they stayed above the magic 22.5 mpg. and were within the emissions requirements for the year.

The reason why they could put the better cam in the LB9/M5 cars was the Manual transmissions get slightly better economy than the Automatic. I believe they put the peanut cam in the LB9/A4 cars to de-tune them Otherwise the 10% difference in CI in the 350 would probably decreased the sales of the 350. They were pushing the 350 in my opinion. But they wanted a performer with the M5 trans too... in order to keep balance thats what we ended up with...

It was not until 1990 that the same cam came in all LB9 & L98 cars. Or at least they use the same cam part number. THe big difference from the LB9/M5, and the LB9/A4 was the DUal cats and the axel ratio from 1990 - 1992 so in a way we ended up with just that.

John