Hello!

I want to know if a WS6 Package with stiffer coils are available for a V6?

In the year 82-84 The firebird S/E came standart with V6 HO.

Did you know witch coils are in?

Sorry for the english i came from Austria

Thanks for answers.

Martin

Hopefully someone else will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the WS6 package in those model years was only available with the Trans AM package, and the Trans Am only came with a V-8 engine.

For 82-84, WS6 was an available option on the SE, regardless of engine.
The base Firebird, it was not.

I have a 1984 Firebird S/E with the "high output" LL1 2.8 V6 and factory WS6. I have never measured the antisway bars with a gauge, but I would venture to say they'd be 36mm and 24mm.

This car has been sitting around about 5 years now and I really want to get it restored back into daily-driver condition, but I don't have the time. I tried Hawk's but apparently they're too busy. I'm gonna try Thirdgenresource.

A small photo of the car is in my signature below.

So yeah it exists,

GT

Do a search on ThirdgenResource before you contact them for anything...

I want to think that the WS6 in 1982 - 1984 used 34MM front and 23 or 22 mm rears

WS6 was available on the T/A and S/E Firebirds. Base Firebirds could be upgraded to Level II but not WS6.

According to an old THUNDER AM(now known as High Performance Pontiac) magazine from 1982 I have, Level III(WS6) used 96 N/mm front and 23.5 N/mm rear springs. Level I suspension on base Firebird had springs with 58 N/mm and 18 N/mm ratings. Level II suspension which was standard on S/E and T/A had springs with 64 N/mm and 18 N/mm ratings.

Level I had only a 27mm front sway bar; Level II had a 30mm front bar and 12mm rear bar; Level III(WS6) had a 32mm front bar and 18mm rear bar for V6 engines and 32mm front bar and 21mm rear bar for V8 engines. At some point in the 1984 model year the rear bar on WS6 increased to 23mm. 1984 10th Aniversary T/As used a special WS6 package with 34mm front bar and 25mm rear bar.

Hello!

Thank you very much for the answers.

I think such coil springs are hard to find.

So yesterday i have buyed coils springs of an 1990 GTA with WS6.

I hope that fits on my 1987er V6 Firebird.

So i think i must cut the fron coils.

thanks a lot
Martin

I think Dens71TA has the most correct numbers so far in this thread. Just saying "WS6" is murky, because it doesn't really define ONE set of specifications. It really varies by year and by engine. I could've sworn at some point the front bar went to 36mm, but that could be after 1984. The 32/21 on a 1982 V8 is right, I can tell you that. And WS6 included other stuff like quicker steering box ratio, better springs, lower axle gears, etc.
gt

WS6 went to the 36mm front bar in 1986. The 1985 WS6 was a carry over of the '84 15th Anniversary T/A setup with exception to the rear bar being reduced to 24mm mid-year due to some handling complaints(I want to say oversteer problems??) After that the 24mm rear bar was used until the end of 3rd-gen production.

Your correct it was a steering problem, but if memory serves they changed some of the 1LE cars down to 23 mm from the stock 24 mm because the car would push thru the corner. By reducing the dia of the rear bar the car would not understeer...

I would assume that it would be a similar correction for the 1985's.

John

1985 was the first year for the 36mm front bar, not 1986.

Thats not what the GM Firebird Master Parts microfiche and some '85 WS6 Trans Ams I've ran across at the salvage yard indicate.

Then the microfiche and the cars you checked were wrong. The product literature also says otherwise, and my 85's bar was 36mm, and so was my friends car. He bought his new Nov 84, I bought mine used in 1988 but that car did not have a single modification. It was even on the original tires when I got it.

For the record the Parts catalog calls it a "SHAFT, Stabilizer"
FRONT
1982 - 1984 BASE = 27mm
1982 - 1984 (F41) WS4 & W69 BASE = 30mm,
1982 - 1984 WS6 = 32mm
1984 No description = 34mm
1985 BASE = 30mm
1985 F41 (HD) = 32mm
1985 WS6 = 34mm
1986 - 1992 FE1 (Soft ride) = 30mm
1986 - 1992 F41 (HD) = 34mm
1986 - 1992 WS6 (FE2) = 36mm

REAR
1982 WS6 & WS7 (w/305L) = 21mm
1982-1983 F41 = 12mm
1982-1983 WS6, WS7, WY5, WY6 (w/V6) = 18mm
1984 F41 (HD) S/E W69 = 18mm
1984 WS6, WS7, WY5 (w/305L) = 21mm
1984 - 1992 WS6 = 24mm
1985 - 1992 FE1 = 21mm
1985 - 1992 BASE = 18mm

THe rears are not so cut & dried as the fronts...

HEre is the first part of my research
FIREBIRD:

Here are the Two pages from the CAMARO Parts Catalogs...

Should end most arguments...

With this I can honestly say, I was wrong...

L8r

Part numbers from books are nice but as you know, they are known for being inaccurate.

OK, since we're still delving into this subject, can someone tell me if my info on this URL is right or wrong, regarding 1982 WS6 on a Trans Am? Because if it's wrong I'd hate to be propagating bad info. http://ohok.com/82recaro/performance.html Some of that info, such as the spring rates, I got directly out of this thread.

And I do agree that part listings "straight from the horse's mouth", i.e. straight from GM, are often unreliable, not matching reality. I have seen it first-hand. An example, right off the top of my head.. I took a small survey of fender numbers on 1982 Firebirds and came up with 3 or 4 different part numbers for this one part, on seemingly identical cars, and all of them were original parts, not swap jobs, and BTW the T/A fender hole apparently makes no difference to the part number. Those white/green parts pages directly from GM have just ONE part number, and it doesn't match any of the fenders I saw with my own two eyes... Another example, I seem to remember those pages have a 10021756 number for the 15" N89 wheel, but in reality those same exact wheels are 10017891.

GT

Unfortunately its the BEST information we have. Like it or not, agree with the findings or the fact that it might be wrong, in the end its ALL we have. It is not like we can go out and inspect a million cars and say nope its wrong...

Honestly I think this is probably more than likely correct. Its consistant with what I have seen, not saying that your wrong, or that they may have had a early or mid-year change, or they may have intended one thing but got another.

There has been things that I have found that were wrong, in the IPC, but honestly 99% of the time it has been correct.

John