When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
History / OriginalityGot a question about 1982-1992 Camaro or Firebird history? Have a question about original parts, options, RPO codes, when something was available, or how to document your car? Those questions, answers, and much more!
I'm assuming that this is known, but was just misstated. The 1992 Camaro 1LE/B4C is a 1LE with AC. I'm thinking you were referencing 1LE only cars and not ALL of them. This comment is only for future reference in case someone reads this thread and think they found the holy grail.
Good catch Scott and appreciate the note. May be my mentality of thinking of them more as B4C's with 1LE options rather than the reverse. 13 in 1991, 576 in 1992.
You do know that the spindles are exactly the same, right? The inner race of the wheel bearing that rids on the spindle is the same physical size 1LE vs Non-1LE. The outside of the race matches the rotor. It's still the same spindle. The outer wheel bearing is different because they were adapting a rotor from another car to the F-body spindle.
And this is why I hate this topic. I literally have to hold hands and guide people through this stuff.
edit: Oops, I missed this part...
The caliper casting isn't unique to the 1LE Camaro. Fairly sure that the casting is shared with one or another variety of the Corvette, the only difference is where the casting was machined for the brake hose. I'd look into it further, and document proof, but like I've said I really don't a damn anymore.
Now I'm going to have to find the time to check my spindles - I have an extra set that will be going on my 87 when I finally get to it.
Fairly sure or absolutely sure Drew? From Mark's research the myth of the shared caliper died a couple of years ago. If you are looking for absolute clarity, I would expect you not to be injecting uncertainties unless of course it fit the narrative.
Now I'm going to have to find the time to check my spindles - I have an extra set that will be going on my 87 when I finally get to it.
Fairly sure or absolutely sure Drew? From Mark's research the myth of the shared caliper died a couple of years ago. If you are looking for absolute clarity, I would expect you not to be injecting uncertainties unless of course it fit the narrative.
I have ton's of info, tons of actual hardware, and cars to go look at. I'm passionate about these cars and all the weird things that GM did over the years. And ya I have a soft spot for 1LE due to the Player's racing series I have spent years documenting.
Now to facts ...
The 1LE rotors were C10 parts, drilled for the smaller bolt pattern. Later units carried the 1LE casting number, early units carried the C10 casting. These rotors are thicker than stock rotors and will make your wheels stick out further.
The spindles ... now I have not compared stock to 1LE. I assumed they were modified stock parts. But I can certainly compare. I have a set of early 1LE parts from 1987 used on a Cut away car. I'd have to compare casting numbers and see if anything is different. From what I recall, bearings were stock for the C10 rotor ... not sure if they are thicker than a F body spindle, but because they are thicker, this could be the case. Hence the root of the HD bearings on 1LE.
Once I get to that box in the my stuff, I can have a look.
Fairly sure or absolutely sure Drew? ... If you are looking for absolute clarity, I would expect you not to be injecting uncertainties unless of course it fit the narrative.
Why would I bother taking the time to be absolutely sure, or post documentation, when the opposition can't be bothered to do the same? If a person wants to know, the resources are out there. I'm tired of being trolled for participating in the conversation. I just really don't care anymore. Someone else can waste their time.
From what I am gathering from this conversation the 1LE was actually more of a combination of the Camaro and Firebird worlds, with some tweaks. Where the Firebird got larger sway bars, and a softer ride suspension, the Camaro got a stiffer ride suspension, with smaller sway bars and a wonderbar. So you take the best, biggest, stiffest from both lines and you combine them into a single suspension package you get 1LE, AND you add the brakes on top of it. For the most part, the pieces and the parts were off-the shelf parts for one line or the other, but then you add them together, you seem to get 1LE... For 88-89 the Gas Tank had baffles, which became the standard tank either mid 1989, or in 1990. The shocks seem to be unique, but as someone pointed out, the point is moot because well, 30 year old shocks and struts are old, and would not be the same as when new..
So more or less, yes, with the exception of the larger front brakes, the pieces are not so special parts, mostly off the counter items, BUT in the combination they were offered makes them more than the sum of the parts.
John
This is one of the better summaries of what 1LE was ... take the best of both lines, combine them in one easy to order package, add the upgraded race only parts like brakes and shocks/struts/bushings, and there you have the package. The fact that some parts came on other cars is mute. The key here is the 1LE order code put them all in one which you could not get with any other grouping. The story that makes people interested is how you had to order it. No AC. No Fog lights. Had to know someone. Secret handshake. It's all the story, but that is what attracts people. The oddities are those cars that came with AC or T Tops or what have you.
I'll continue to post up facts about the cars I own and parts I have or paperwork I have.
The fact that some parts came on other cars is mute.
The word you're looking for is moot. It's moot to your opinion, but not to mine.
For many the crossover is as important or more important. Otherwise there wouldn't have been magazine articles and websites with lists of "1LE parts" for the last 25 years, and "1LE" wouldn't be such a popular Ebay buzzword for thirdgen parts.
The word you're looking for is moot. It's moot to your opinion, but not to mine.
For many the crossover is as important or more important. Otherwise there wouldn't have been magazine articles and websites with lists of "1LE parts" for the last 25 years, and "1LE" wouldn't be such a popular Ebay buzzword for thirdgen parts.
We can agree to disagree without it being a battle.
Absolutely. Debates can be healthy, but when it gets personal, then it's time to stop. When people are passionate about things, then debates are not healthy.
I'll stand on a soapbox and say no one here is the expert. We all have observation, facts, books, and other sources of info we draw upon to make conclusions. And that is all they are. When other evidence is presented, then the conclusions can be changed.
Opinions should be held at bay ... in my opinion ... lol.
1LE was a number of things. Discounting as just brakes or worn out shocks gets people going. Let's chat about the 36mm front sway bar in my camaro. Nothing in a parts book. Very little write up on it. Someone must have swapped it in! It's a neat historical fact until proven otherwise I suppose. It would be a good effort to document one of the 1988 1LE cars and see what was or wasn't in them. But that's just me. I Like that kinda a chit. And rear swaybar size was reduced in 1991/92 due to oversteer in racing. That only came in 1LE cars - well as far as I have measured - again until proven otherwise.
Let's keep things positive and fun. No need to take the wind out of my sail.
Attached is a PDF I created for the 1LE, and any reference to the 1LE within the IPC.. There are some things I did not include, such as bolts, hoses, brake pistons, bearings etc. I went thru my MicroFiche IPC for the Camaro too...
One thing I did notice is that the Filter Strainer for the Gas tank used a different part number for the Firebird than the Camaro. I do not know why.
This may not be the end all of the 1LE information, it is only the information I could find, the Parts Catalog which was provided by GM.
If there is anything that I missed or need to add, or correct, let me know and I will do so.
One thing I did notice is that the Filter Strainer for the Gas tank used a different part number for the Firebird than the Camaro. I do not know why.
I'm not going to fact check your data, for reasons I've already explained. But I'm pretty sure I know why you're seeing two different numbers. Now just a guess here, but are you using the 82-91 Camaro P&I Catalog or are you using the 82-92 Catalog? Because the 82-92 Camaro Catalog and the 82-92 Firebird Catalog show the same part number.
You've got to remember that part numbers change. So if you're using different data sources to crosscheck your info, sometimes you'll run into a number that was changed and one of your data sources might pre-date the changeover.
Are any of these 1LE P/N's still available over the GM parts counter? I'm guessing they are not....
If not, what's the purpose of the list? Just historical data or for guys doing a restoration trying to locate some NOS stuff ??
But like drew said, the P/N's changed over the years
Even with the old numbers it will give you a place to start if you are looking for NOS parts. Esp if you hit a person with a dealer buyout at a swapmeet that doesn't want to deal with the smalls in old boxes.
Some dealers can still see the old number and what number it's been superceded to.
Whew! So what does LE stand for in 1LE?
Limited Edition?
Luxury Edition?
Legendary Edition?
Law Enforcement?
Less Equipment?
Low Energy?
Light Equipment?
Less Economy?
Lasting Excitement?
Likely Expensive?
Let's Engage?
Whew! So what does LE stand for in 1LE?
Limited Edition?
Luxury Edition?
Legendary Edition?
Law Enforcement?
Less Equipment?
Low Energy?
Light Equipment?
Less Economy?
Lasting Excitement?
Likely Expensive?
Let's Engage?
Are any of these 1LE P/N's still available over the GM parts counter? I'm guessing they are not....
If not, what's the purpose of the list? Just historical data or for guys doing a restoration trying to locate some NOS stuff ??
But like drew said, the P/N's changed over the years
I picked up two sets of the front calipers recently NOS - one set went on my Z28 before I went to Lime Rock the others will go on my 87 IROC when I get to it.
I kept the originals off the Z28 - they will need to be rebuilt, if anyone wants/needs them.
Are any of these 1LE P/N's still available over the GM parts counter? I'm guessing they are not....
If not, what's the purpose of the list? Just historical data or for guys doing a restoration trying to locate some NOS stuff ??
But like drew said, the P/N's changed over the years
Sort of... Both of those strainers are available as AC Delco parts under the part numbers listed. TS18 and TS44 are the AC Delco numbers, IIRC. They're both a double ended strainer, the only real difference is that the earlier version has the ends sealed 90* from each other, so if you looked at it from the end and it was transparent it'd be a + and the other has them sealed horizontal only, so it'd look like a -. Pretty sure the reason behind the change is that the basic horizontal only version was more universal, shared with early 4th gens and early 90's B-bodies like the Caprice. Depending on where you look both strainers are (still) called out as 1LE or late thirdgen parts. Rock Auto still has both available.
As for the other parts, most everything is going to be long obsolete. The coffers were long ago raided by the prospectors to be listed on Ebay as "RARE 1LE" parts.
I think the reason for the listing of part numbers was intended to show evidence that 1LE cars were "special", but I look at it and see really few actual significant differences. At the end of the day it's just a different perspective.
So far the only part of this that has been a surprise to me is that Camaro and Firebird FE2 code front control arms are apparently different. I'd assume the difference is in the bushings, but the book lists the same bushing numbers for both. The difference isn't the control arm stops either, since there are only two options with or without 16" wheels. I'm curious to know what the difference is, I'm just not willing to pull one each off two of my cars and start looking for the difference. I have a hunch, but I'm not going to take an educated guess until I verify it for myself. Maybe come spring when I feel like getting under the cars to change oil, etc.
Maybe come spring when I feel like getting under the cars to change oil, etc.
Yea, screw it! The weather is so nasty here right now, I can't even enjoy any of my non-1LE cars at all right now. Usually I drive the 89 even if it's 10 degrees as long as the roads are dry and salt free and I can't even do that! I miss driving my base 89 1LE delete. I can't wait til Spring!
Yea, screw it! The weather is so nasty here right now, I can't even enjoy any of my non-1LE cars at all right now. Usually I drive the 89 even if it's 10 degrees as long as the roads are dry and salt free and I can't even do that! I miss driving my base 89 1LE delete. I can't wait til Spring!
Ya know, the funny part is, I just want to know the difference between the two control arms, for my own knowledge. To the point where I'm almost considering attempting to obtain one of each from the classifieds to compare. Finding out there's a mystery, I want to solve it. Suppose that's why I spend as much time on the forums trying to answer questions. It gets to be a way to be involved in the hobby when there is no where to actually drive one of the cars. Generally it's fun figuring stuff out.
Ya know, the funny part is, I just want to know the difference between the two control arms, for my own knowledge. To the point where I'm almost considering attempting to obtain one of each from the classifieds to compare. Finding out there's a mystery, I want to solve it. Suppose that's why I spend as much time on the forums trying to answer questions. It gets to be a way to be involved in the hobby when there is no where to actually drive one of the cars. Generally it's fun figuring stuff out.
In my 89 racing notes, there is a section that talks about competing with 1988 cars. If so, they had to change the followign:
On a Camaro:
- Add Front and Rear sway bars and bushings PN 14094344, 10035033
On a Trans Am
- Add bracing; Front end brace 14074745, RH wheel house reinf. brace 14045394, Front end lower structure brace (14079634)
- Lower Control Arms L/R 14091389, 14091390.
The changes were to be in line with the 1989 cars that were already factory equipped that way.
Also a reference to the Struts and Shocks. Service replacement parts were 22064153 and 22064149 with a note that these were the same parts as delivered on the cars, only the part numbers were different. My 1LE has the as delivered numbers 22074399 struts code LB. Same number verified on other Players cars.
Also a reference to the brake rotor having a different replacement part than what was delivered on the car.
I doubt this will be in any parts catalog as they refer to the service replacement numbers.
Here are a couple pages from Jan 1990 with information on the first batch of 1991 R7U cars ... with notes about 1LE.
The info suggest the Camaro and Trans Ams were made to be more alike. Camaro braces, struts and shocks over to Trans am (This explains why the 1989 Trans Am I document had slightly different shock numbers for that year only. ) And of course the fuel tank being standard on all cars.
This one talks about the 1LE parts becoming standard for struts and shocks. In 89 the Camara and Trans Am were different "as delivered", but race teams would use the off the shelf 1LE parts for replacements. Also a note about the smaller rear sway bar.
I'm not going to fact check your data, for reasons I've already explained. But I'm pretty sure I know why you're seeing two different numbers. Now just a guess here, but are you using the 82-91 Camaro P&I Catalog or are you using the 82-92 Catalog? Because the 82-92 Camaro Catalog and the 82-92 Firebird Catalog show the same part number.
You've got to remember that part numbers change. So if you're using different data sources to crosscheck your info, sometimes you'll run into a number that was changed and one of your data sources might pre-date the changeover.
The Firebird book and the Camaro Book are BOTH 1982-1992. The Firebird book is November 92 (which is after production has complete) The Camaro Fiche was April 95. So there is the possibility that there was a new PN, But not during production.
Last edited by okfoz; 01-24-2019 at 11:01 AM.
Reason: Changed April 96 to April 95,
The Firebird book and the Camaro Book are BOTH 1982-1992. The Firebird book is November 92 (which is after production has complete) The Camaro Fiche was April 96. So there is the possibility that there was a new PN, But not during produciton.
Yeah, I was going from the paper books. Camaro September 1991 and Firebird November 1992, which both show the 25027354 strainer.
On the front control arms, I was always under the impression that WS6 and 1LE cars used the same bushings, guess not. My teens-early 30s rate of booze consumption really ruined my brain.
Is there any difference in the bumpstop part numbers, maybe harder or shorter due to shorter hand selected springs?
Also, I saw something a year or so ago that called out the trans mount with blue paint on stud was harder durometer used in 1LE. (my guess is it is just the strongest made for the car line)
Checked all my 350 an 305 tpi 5speed cars with WS6 and the part had blue paint dab on them.
On the front control arms, I was always under the impression that WS6 and 1LE cars used the same bushings, guess not. My teens-early 30s rate of booze consumption really ruined my brain.
Is there any difference in the bumpstop part numbers, maybe harder or shorter due to shorter hand selected springs?
Also, I saw something a year or so ago that called out the trans mount with blue paint on stud was harder durometer used in 1LE. (my guess is it is just the strongest made for the car line)
Checked all my 350 an 305 tpi 5speed cars with WS6 and the part had blue paint dab on them.
If there was any difference with the bump stops, it was not listed, or I did not spot it. I noticed with the digital PDF copy which I used to search (Also Nov 1992) did not catch all of the "1LE" references, thus why I missed the struts in my original Post. It was the easiest means to search the entire thousand page document.
There are two different sets of bumpstops, but the books show them being with or without 16" wheels.
Regarding 'shorter' springs, I've yet to see any evidence that they exist. There are various spring rates, but you'll see the same codes on various FE2 cars regardless of 1LE, or if the car is a Camaro or Firebird.
It's possible that Pontiac and Chevy went a different direction with the front control arm bushing durometer to fine tune something to their specific goals. Just because the service parts in the book apply to both, doesn't mean they couldn't have been different during production. Or it could be some other difference that makes the actual control arm stamping different.
I can say that my 86 Trans Am (WS6), 87 Iroc, 91 RS (F41), and 91 Formula (WS6) all drive considerably different, in spite of the relatively minor differences. The earlier cars definitely ride rougher. The RS gives up very little with a 34mm front sway bar, narrower tires, etc but it rides a lot smoother in nearly all conditions. The Formula is smoother, but just as capable as the Iroc. The 86 T/A was tighter than both the 87 and the Formula, but I'd say the Iroc has always been jarring and rattly compared to the rest. Granted it's a sample size of one Iroc, but I drove a ton of Irocs before I settled on my 87. They all seemed a bit more harsh than the WS6 cars. For whatever that is worth...
I knew about the 16 and 15 inch wheel bumpstops but didn't know if any others were added later (my parts book only goes to 89).
On the springs, from what I understand, they were made in batches and sorted by height with the shorter ones selected for the 1LE or even low option/weight cars ? Just cherry picking the short ones out of a normal production run, or so I've read someplace. Maybe that's what they mean when they say "computer selected" height measured with a "lazer" and coded that way?
I noticed with the digital PDF copy which I used to search (Also Nov 1992) did not catch all of the "1LE" references, thus why I missed the struts in my original Post. It was the easiest means to search the entire thousand page document.
Shame! You've got to sit down at the desk with hard copies of both, and scan through the book page by page, one line at a time. The paper cuts will heal, but the knowledge is forever... At least until you forget. Age is a harsh mistress.
To be honest, when I go searching, I generally have the 3-ring binder(s) of the Camaro book, and the PDFs of the Firebird book on the laptop. I've never actually used the search in the PDF, suppose it just never occurred to me that the short cut could work.
On the springs, from what I understand, they were made in batches and sorted by height with the shorter ones selected for the 1LE or even low option/weight cars ? Just cherry picking the short ones out of a normal production run, or so I've read someplace.
I suppose it's possible, but from what I've seen the 1LEs have the same springs within the scope of FE2 as any other thirdgen. Down to the physical paper tags, I haven't seen any difference. I'd assume that they were computer selected with the same algorithm or process as any other thirdgen, but assumption is dangerously close to an educated guess.
There are two different sets of bumpstops, but the books show them being with or without 16" wheels.
Regarding 'shorter' springs, I've yet to see any evidence that they exist. There are various spring rates, but you'll see the same codes on various FE2 cars regardless of 1LE, or if the car is a Camaro or Firebird.
It's possible that Pontiac and Chevy went a different direction with the front control arm bushing durometer to fine tune something to their specific goals. Just because the service parts in the book apply to both, doesn't mean they couldn't have been different during production. Or it could be some other difference that makes the actual control arm stamping different.
I can say that my 86 Trans Am (WS6), 87 Iroc, 91 RS (F41), and 91 Formula (WS6) all drive considerably different, in spite of the relatively minor differences. The earlier cars definitely ride rougher. The RS gives up very little with a 34mm front sway bar, narrower tires, etc but it rides a lot smoother in nearly all conditions. The Formula is smoother, but just as capable as the Iroc. The 86 T/A was tighter than both the 87 and the Formula, but I'd say the Iroc has always been jarring and rattly compared to the rest. Granted it's a sample size of one Iroc, but I drove a ton of Irocs before I settled on my 87. They all seemed a bit more harsh than the WS6 cars. For whatever that is worth...
I have seen where Pontiac wanted the Firebird to have a softer ride than the Camaro, Magazine articles complained that the Camaro was much more harsh of a ride than the Pontiac counterpart. I think in part it had to do with spring rates (which are not defined by 1LE) in the parts catalog, I looked. I did not look at the differences between Camaro springs and Firebird springs as a comparison. I do know that the WS6 (FE2) Firebirds had the 36mm sway bars before the FE2 Camaro cars by about 3 or 4 years. I want to think in 1989 is when the IROC finally got the 36mm sway bar. But the IROC had the "Wonder bar brace" which also made up for any shortcomings of having a 34mm sway bar from 1985-1988.
I suspect in part the reason why the GTA and Trans Am did not get the Wonder bar with the WS6 was due to weight savings (stupid CAFE). Therefore it would not have made much of a difference if the Formula got it and the GTA/TA didn't so they probably just decided to skip it.
Shame! You've got to sit down at the desk with hard copies of both, and scan through the book page by page, one line at a time. The paper cuts will heal, but the knowledge is forever... At least until you forget. Age is a harsh mistress.
To be honest, when I go searching, I generally have the 3-ring binder(s) of the Camaro book, and the PDFs of the Firebird book on the laptop. I've never actually used the search in the PDF, suppose it just never occurred to me that the short cut could work.
I have a Digital and paper copies of the Firebird books. Never found a Camaro one I was willing to invest in when I got the Microfiche for $10...
I suppose it's possible, but from what I've seen the 1LEs have the same springs within the scope of FE2 as any other thirdgen. Down to the physical paper tags, I haven't seen any difference. I'd assume that they were computer selected with the same algorithm or process as any other thirdgen, but assumption is dangerously close to an educated guess.
Take this with a grain of salt, but back before the internet, when info came verbally from GM officials, it was said that certain 3rd gens, certain IROCs in particular, were chosen to get regular production springs which were "one code" shorter. Meaning they picked the shorties out of the bin for these cars. YMMV..
I have seen where Pontiac wanted the Firebird to have a softer ride than the Camaro, Magazine articles complained that the Camaro was much more harsh of a ride than the Pontiac counterpart. I think in part it had to do with spring rates (which are not defined by 1LE) in the parts catalog, I looked. I did not look at the differences between Camaro springs and Firebird springs as a comparison. I do know that the WS6 (FE2) Firebirds had the 36mm sway bars before the FE2 Camaro cars by about 3 or 4 years. I want to think in 1989 is when the IROC finally got the 36mm sway bar. But the IROC had the "Wonder bar brace" which also made up for any shortcomings of having a 34mm sway bar from 1985-1988.
I suspect in part the reason why the GTA and Trans Am did not get the Wonder bar with the WS6 was due to weight savings (stupid CAFE). Therefore it would not have made much of a difference if the Formula got it and the GTA/TA didn't so they probably just decided to skip it.
John
The players cars were all measured for ride height before each race and had to conform to specs. The cars sat about 1 inch lower than a non players, non 1LE car. (Great article in Formula 2000 I posted). The front springs were CDB and rear were NNN (as delivered in 1989). According the books, these were not the stiffest/tallest springs available ... but most likely achieved the proper ride height. I'd have to guess the spring rates under the FE2 listing are all similar, just differences to accommodate for vehicle weight and ride height. Keep mind the players cars all had decent amount of options AND race with a 6 point cage. Plus those decals weighed alot! :-)
FWIW CDB springs were used often. If you look at the books, the part number of the spring known as CDB is 14029396. CDB first appears in the 84-85 Chevrolet spring chart. But now if you back-up to 83, you'll see a spring with the code BXZ with production number 14029396. Both springs use the same service replacement number. The BXZ code dates all the way back to 1982.
Now I'm just going to go out on a limb and guess GM changed the code because BXZ and BZX are easily confused and not the same spring. Changing to CDB makes it a lot harder for someone to grab the wrong spring.
You'll also run into thirdgens that have a CDB spring on the left or right with a BZX or BZW on the opposite side. Then they go on to tell you to replace springs in matching pairs even though GM didn't always use matching pairs in front.
Point being that there's nothing really unusual about the springs used on 1LEs. They might be one notch softer than BZWs, but I'm not sure that'd make for a much lower sitting car.
Well, my F-Body came with the very special I8PP cigarette lighter. I say we all agree that the car is now worth six figures because of that and call it a day. Someone contact Barrett Jackson and give them a heads up. Okay, is that how it works? Just kidding. I tend to agree with both John and Drew on this subject. John is absolutely right that is was a race package (albeit a ridiculous one), and Drew is absolutely right that it was an absolute joke to refer to it as that. However, its the demand that brings the value of a product, not the actual quality of the product, and what Drew doesn't realize is yes, he is proving his point with each and every response that he makes, but he is inadvertently adding to the hype because it is the constant discussion that keeps raising the interest and awareness. Most collectors know little about their investment, all they care about is the demand, and for the world to keep the interest in it alive. Otherwise it has no value...
Hi there,
does anybody know if there is any truth to the story that they removed (or failed to install) the sound deadening material under the carpet and in the rear pillars, for weight reduction? I heard this story back in the 90's.
Hi there,
does anybody know if there is any truth to the story that they removed (or failed to install) the sound deadening material under the carpet and in the rear pillars, for weight reduction? I heard this story back in the 90's.
No truth to that. They did remove some sound deadening in the 5th gen Z28. Not in the 3rd gen 1LE though.
Hi there,
does anybody know if there is any truth to the story that they removed (or failed to install) the sound deadening material under the carpet and in the rear pillars, for weight reduction? I heard this story back in the 90's.
Maybe Mark could help out with this. I would see where some teams may have removed it for the Players Series to get that slight edge. Kind of like someone sourcing aluminum front fenders... 2# is 2#
Maybe Mark could help out with this. I would see where some teams may have removed it for the Players Series to get that slight edge. Kind of like someone sourcing aluminum front fenders... 2# is 2#
In the early years ... the cars would be ordered with or with options ... so a different weight for sure. Teams would look for "advantages" where possible. Weight you can't see ... would be removed. By 89, it was a package to keep weight the same. Scrutineers would weigh cars to see if they were in tolerance. I would say teams would often be on the "low" side of the tolerance. :-)
But no I don't have info that supports the cars coming without any from the factory.
Now the underhood insulation would be removed. As were the spare tires (which makes them hard to find in a ex-race car).
If you have ever raced your car, or watched the races closely ... a good driver will make more gains than any small amount of weight loss.
My '91 1LE has all the factory padding under the carpet. It was also built with the deluxe interior, power door locks, and a rear window defroster. It didn't come from the factory with the front brace (wonder bar) or a radio.
My '91 1LE has all the factory padding under the carpet. It was also built with the deluxe interior, power door locks, and a rear window defroster. It didn't come from the factory with the front brace (wonder bar) or a radio.
Very similar to mine that was specifically ordered by a female Delco executive. Rear defroster was mandatory for a vehicle in Rochester NY, she added the cassette stereo, power locks and leather interior. No wonder bar on mine either but I've never seen where that was considered a part of the 305 cars, 350 only.
Very similar to mine that was specifically ordered by a female Delco executive. Rear defroster was mandatory for a vehicle in Rochester NY, she added the cassette stereo, power locks and leather interior. No wonder bar on mine either but I've never seen where that was considered a part of the 305 cars, 350 only.
neither one of my 92 1le 5sps had the wonder bar or my 91 g92. My b4c cars r 350 autos and they dont have the wonder bar neither is it because of the bigger front sway bar?
01-22-2019, 08:45 PM
You've got to sit down at the desk with hard copies of both, and scan through the book page by page, one line at a time. The paper cuts will heal, but the knowledge is forever... At least until you forget. Age is a harsh mistress. 
