okfoz

I have not, nor do I really want to, go thru the Camaro Parts Catalog, however I have gone thru parts of the Illustrated Parts Catalog (henceforth IPC) for Firebird... Here are the changes to the 1LE cars...
1988
- Front Brakes (Obviously)
- Rear Brakes (Obviously)
- 1LE Fuel Tank 12509285, The Standard tank was 12509205
- Fuel Filter Strainer 25027354
- Parking Brake Lever (1988 ONLY - Became standard for 89-92)
- Master Cyl (1988 ONLY - Became standard for 89-92)
- Parking Brake Cable
- Rear Axle & Rear Brakes
- Steering Knuckle RH & LH 18016737 (LH) 18016738 (RH)

1989
- Front Brakes (Obviously)
- 1LE Fuel Tank 12509285, The Standard tank was 12509205
- Fuel Filter Strainer 25027354
- Steering Knuckle RH & LH 18016737 (LH) 18016738 (RH)

1990
- Front Brakes (Obviously)
- All Fuel Tanks the same 12509285
- Steering Knuckle RH & LH 18016737 (LH) 18016738 (RH)

1991-1992
- Front Brakes (Obviously)
- All Fuel Tanks the same
- Rear Axle Lower Control Arm 10164151 5.382
- Steering Knuckle RH & LH 18016737 (LH) 18016738 (RH)
- Front Lower Control Arm RH & LH 12505472 (RH), 12505473 (LH)
- Rear Shocks 22064149

I could not find anything else...

In short -
1988 was the most unique, Front & Rear Brakes & Fuel Tank
1989 Front Brakes and a Fuel Tank,
1990 Front Brakes Only
1991 & 1992 Front Brakes, Front Control Arms, Rear Control Arms & Rear Shocks

John

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Didn't know they changed that much in the 91-2 cars.

J.C. Denton

iTrader: (1)

Interesting info... What is the difference between a 1LE fuel tank, strainer and parking brake lever?

sircrunch1986

not much to get excited about

LiquidBlue

John - what do you mean by changes, also when you say all the same, does that mean every car 1LE or not received it? Also, what about exhaust?

Mark_ZZ3

Front Struts and rear shocks were also unique to 1LE. 89 "as delivered" numbers were different that parts books. Somewhere in another thread I thought we had hashed this all out.

Mark.

Mark_ZZ3

From an older post. Keep in mind I deal with the race cars that led to the 1LE package, so some of my info comes from there. Some info in parts book is replacement parts, not as delivered/supplied. And some info is just plain missing. Don't forget the spare tire was changed in 89 to the black aluminum 15X6 rim to clear the brakes - but was not standard on ALL cars. Had to be 16" wheel car I think.

Not to re-ignite the discussion again ... but here was the notes. ( I assume this all stems from the latest round of big dollar cars on the Auction block?)

1988 - unknown. Only a few examples to look at. A4U cars have info which lead up to the 1LE package.

1989 - 1LE package included (above the normal options included with Iroc-Z FE2 and Trans Am WS6) Both will have G92.

Camaro - 36mm front, 24mm rear sway bar. 12" 1LE brakes. Unique Front struts and rear shocks. Aluminum Drive shaft. Front/rear coils selected for "ride height". Rear Control Arms/Bushings. Gas tank with internal plastic reservoir and extended strainer.

Trans Am - Chassis Stiffener from Camaro, 12" 1LE brakes, Unique Front struts and rear shocks. Aluminum drive shaft. Front/rear coils selected for "ride height". Rear Control Arms/Bushings. Gas tank with internal plastic reservoir and extended strainer.

1990 - (short run up unto Dec 31 1989) - no data

1991 - Multiple Production Year run.

Some reference in racing docs that racing parts are now included in production 1LE package.
- improved crankcase ventilation
- camaro developed chassis stiffener and suspension bushings on Trans Am
- Camaro 1LE shocks and struts on Trans Am
- Revised rear axle control arm bushings to reduce axle hop
- flow checked fuel injectors.

*** Gas tank now standard on all F-bodies ***

Camaro - 36mm front, 23mm rear sway bar. 12" 1LE brakes. Front Struts and Rear Shocks now 1LE part numbers. Aluminum Drive shaft. Front/rear coils selected for "ride height".

Trans Am - 23mm rear sway bar. Chassis Stiffener from Camaro, 12" 1LE brakes, Front Struts and Rear Shocks now 1LE part numbers. Aluminum drive shaft. Front/rear coils selected for "ride height".

1991 Second run in 1991

*** notes that the camaro front chassis stiffener is removed ***


1992 - no data yet.


Part Numbers

Front brake rotors as supplied on cars:

1988, 1989 - casting number 14008647
1991 casting number 18016211

1LE replacement part 18016035 (unsure what casting number is)

Front Struts as delivered.
*** 1LE part number is 22064153 - racing notes say struts are the same, only part numbers are different ***

1988 - ?
1989 - 22074399 (Trans Am may have had different ones)


Rear Shocks
*** 1LE part number is 22064149 ***

1988 - ?
1989 - 22089138

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Mark are you talking about the wonder bar when you say chassis stiffener?

Mark_ZZ3

1988 was the most unique, Front & Rear Brakes & Fuel Tank. (Very unique - caliper carriers and adapters were unique in 1988, and more "production" for 1989.
1989 Front Brakes and a Fuel Tank, Front Struts, Rear Shocks, Lower control arms. Spare tire was 15X6 to clear brakes.
1990 Same as 89.
1991 & 1992 Front Brakes, Front Control Arms, Rear Control Arms & Rear Shocks,

Also note, My 89 Camaro has a 36mm front sway bar and 24mm rear. Both the Trans Ams and Camaros (in 1989 at least) came with the same front and rear sway bar, and the wonderbar.

Mark_ZZ3

Yes.

The parts books show replacement parts ... but they don't show how the cars were delivered. I've seen *many* 1LE and Players cars. I've checked the parts on them. Many of the cars are low mile cars. The racing notes show the replacement part number as 1LE, but as delivered was different. So the story goes.

After 89 ... it seems the chassis stiffener may not have been on the Trans Am, nor the 36mm sway bar on the Camaro. In 89 at least ... this was the case.

Mark.

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

I thought you were, just checking. In the firebird parts book it lists the wonder bar from ? till at least 89 and says it was to be installed on WS6 cars but I've never seen a bird with one from the factory. Thought that was interesting.

okfoz

I was just getting tired of hearing that the 1LE was "Just Brakes" So I decided to look up every instance of "1LE" in the parts catalog... This is what I got back... I did not mention the hoses and the other parts that were part of the brakes, although I did note the spindles... There were also differences in the Prop valve, which in my head went with the Master cyl.

The IPC I used only called out the suspension pieces being different for 91 & 92. I suspect they were heavier duty. BUT they could have been lighter weight... I do not know what the differences were.

1LE was not "Just" a front brake package from 89-92.

okfoz

I looked at a 1989 Formula that had a Factory wonderbar, owner said he bought it new and the car came that way... never seen another.

John

Mark_ZZ3

Indeed. 1LE was a package of things. Brakes were one part. So was a bunch of other stuff. Essentially what was needed for a spec race car. I've tried to document all the variations, and the players car differences. Lots of minor things ... some without paperwork. Plus parts catalogs are replacement parts, not as delivered.

Granted you can get some of the parts in other packages, but hey ... they created 1LE for a reason - it was an order package that saved you the trouble of trying to piece together the right parts.

At times, my info rolls into the Player's race cars ... so I get confused.

Mark.

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Figures, lol One way to tell is the wonderbar cars used a little longer bolt on the sway/ wonder bar bracket. Most won't care/know to change the bolts. (I'd leave the shorter one, less weight)

Abubaca

iTrader: (3)

So don't take this the wrong way....I'm a fan of the 1LE, and love the heritage of certain package every bit as much as the substance of said package. ....and I really wanna believe!!!!! But I'm bit underwhelmed. I mean other than brakes......how is the 1LE impressive? I'm not trolling.....I'm genuinely asking. ...and my point of view is that of a driver, not a collector, -as that's where the debate always seems to come up. Someone says it's worth more, and then someone rolls their eyes and says it's just brakes. What beyond the brakes would be worth having?

okfoz

For years people have said "it is just a brake package" Apparently it is more than that, in 91-92, and according to Mark, it goes back further, the suspension was actually different than a regular car. Bruce Hawkins once told me that a 1LE just drives differently, in theory they they should drive the same, but he said that a 1LE just drives better, he claimed you could blindfold him and put him in a 1LE and he could tell the difference. Honestly until I get a chance to do so I will probably never understand, just like anyone else who has not driven both would not understand.

Honestly for $1000 you could probably take any 89-92 with a G92, throw on the front brakes, and do some cheap mods to the suspension and get the car to perform better than a 1LE. But it was not made in the factory that way...

In the end it was more or less a spec built Factory race car. By today's standards it is nothing special, but back in 88-92 it was.

John

BizJetTech

iTrader: (3)

IMO, 1LE = marketing genius for GM that added up to a lot of hype in the magazines of that era to assist in sales
I like them, dont get me wrong, but just dont see them as all that different or "special" from a G92 where I can have A/C.
I'd much rather have a B4C

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

1LE was made for road course and class type racing. The bigger brakes let you go in deeper and harder into a corner with less fade. That's what made the car "faster". It was for faster lap times, not really anything to do with a strait line performance increase unless you want to count a little bit lighter of a car.

Abubaca

iTrader: (3)

If that's true......well.....that would certainly be "worth it" then.

Oh I'm sure. I'm not suggesting that the 1LE should perform like some supercar, and I'm not suggesting you couldn't easily replicate it. .....to BizJetTech's point, was it simply marketing? NOW ....sure....now it's a fabled 1LE. But sitting on the lot back in the day, if you drove both, was there a difference? I guess Bruce thinks so. .....or did GM know they could hit up the parts bin, throw in a new cool RPO and make some money?

Abubaca

iTrader: (3)

No doubt. Faster for sure. -but if you were comparing the G92 upgrades, you have words like, gear, suspension, exhaust. 1LE has words like gas tank and emergency brake. Kinda underwhelming. ....and of course, brakes. No don't get me wrong, I've LS brakes on my Iroc and it might've been the best upgrade I've done next to a manual transmission!!!!

Big&BadGTA

iTrader: (1)

85@IRocZ

iTrader: (6)

I have had two 92 1le cars imo they drove different in some ways then a rs handled better for sure. now i have two 91 b4cs but haven't drove them yet both in restoration process so dont know on them.had a few 91 g92 5sps i didnt see to much difference then the 1le cars other then the braking but none of my cars that i had were low mileage examples neither nor did i race them.

Mark_ZZ3

For me, 1LE is more than any one year of options, but instead the story on how it came to be. It came as a result of racing, not marketing, but in the end did help sell cars. Race on Sunday, Sell on Monday. I think that is where the original Z28 came from. 1LE took off where G92 ended.

The brakes started out as an off the shelf GM upgrade in 1986, used redrilled rotors, and Brembo calipers. By 1988, GM decided to use the Corvette HD calipers as they were DOT approved. All the 1988 Players cars had 1LE brakes (built in Jan-Mar 1988). They also had different Struts and Shocks ... and the spare tire was given to the teams after the cars were delivered. These were the PRE-1LE cars. The 88 1LE cars were purely a marketing build to showcase the soon-to-come package. But think about it ... GM Canada ordered 74 of them in 89, leaving only 37 ordered by the public!!! I'd say that was terrible marketing - if they intended to sell more cars. It wasn't until 1991 brochures when the 1LE was marketed (at least in Canada). In 89 and 90, 1LE was a package to help SCCA, Firehawk and the likes order a factory prepped car to go racing. It met the rules so to speak. A G92 (without the larger brakes) would not have been as competitive and actually dangerous.

Nowadays ... brake upgrades, suspension upgrades, LS swaps all are decades ahead of those old cars. Resto mod as they call them. And FWIW, restomods sell for MORE money that the stock originals. Same will be true for thirdgens. I'd hands down trade my stock 1LE car for a Detroit Speed Iroc!!!

I've driven non-1LE, 1LE, and 1LE-R7U spec cars. For sure the 1LE versions ride rough. The struts and shocks are not forgiving for daily driving. Not sure I could tell blindfolded, but maybe if I drove them all in the same day on the same track.

Anyways ... glad to see the Thirdgens - in any form - garnering interest on the world state like Barret Jackson.

Mark.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

People haven't been saying "1LE is just brakes" for years. I have been saying 1LE is just brakes for years. "People" have been saying that 1LE is PBR front brakes, PBR rear brakes, aluminum spare, aluminum driveshaft, baffled tank, special swinging fuel tank pickup, all kinds of suspension upgrades, non-a/c, dual cats, oil cooler, blah blah blah ad nauseum.

The Steering Knuckle Part# is different because it's modded for the brakes. Therefore I include it as part of the brake system.

"Front Lower Control Arm RH & LH 12505472 (RH), 12505473 (LH)"
Yeah, pretty sure that's a mistake in the catalog. Those part numbers are listed ALL OVER for 85-92. Pretty sure that number refers to the control arms with stops for 245/50R16 tires.

SEE - http://www.gmpartswiki.com/getpage?pageid=129834

My understanding is that the rear control arm part numbers are different because GM used harder durometer bushings on 1LE cars. I discount this because a) I consider it to be minor and inconsequential. b) Aftermarket control arms are better and practically come as free toys in CrackerJacks.

At this point, I don't consider that the shocks or struts installed 30 years ago are even worth considering. Objectively they're irrelevant in 2019.

Most 1LE discussions, aren't about 88s or 89s. The vast majority are related to 91-92.

So when you boil it all down, I consider "1LE is just brakes" an accurate statement. It's certainly much more accurate than the long list of things people have been saying are part of 1LE since 1990. It's concise and to the point. It's a simplification, but it's easy for people to understand.

GN1295

The self appointed 1LE expert. Did you really bold your "I" ? Were you around in the late '80's early '90's?

Drew

iTrader: (58)

I've been on this forum since it started in 1996. I was a moderator on here for a few years until I got tired of the backlash. So yeah, I've been around here awhile, and yes you could call me an expert on the topic. If you were to go back and read the forum, I've been vocal about my position for years. This thread was created in reply to a message I posted on another thread. I'll take credit for my statements and explain the logic behind them.

Don't be stupid.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Here's some more on-topic discussion, and original content for the community... Just for fun, here's a multi-page article from Motor Trend June 1990 on the 1LE. To the best of my knowledge, this is the earliest 1LE "hype" article. If anyone has one earlier, post pics or a link.









Cliff's Notes : TL;DR Summary

1. Guy working at a Chevy dealer see's a "Performance Axle Ratio" option in the price book for $675, decides that it's a hidden "Race Car", gets together with his buddies and they order a couple of them.
2. Guy starts building the 1LE myth, with the help of Motor Trend. The article blatantly explains that he and his buddies set out to have something "OMG RARE!" and to control the market.
3. Motor Trend tests the cars, and they perform a bit worse than other thirdgens they've tested before.
4. Motor Trend interviews John Heinricy, ex-product engineering manager for the Camaro, as to "exactly what (they) had in mind with this car". Heinricy explains the "development group" complained about the Camaro's performance, the showroom stock racers reinforced the concerns, so they cooked up the brakes and a better fuel tank with the larger strainer on the fuel pump, and threw in the "aluminum parts" to make it a more "complete package".

Another fun bit is where they talk about a 2/3rds page add in Hemmings expounding "RARE! Last of the IROCs! Easily worth $150,000."

So what does this article tell us?
- It absolutely confirms that the myth was started by biased individuals.
- It shows us that the 1LE package didn't make the cars any faster in a straight line.
- The man who worked at GM and actually was involved with the project, says the package was mostly the front brakes and the fuel tank.

We know that the tank and strainer went on to be on every V6 and TPI thirdgen in 91-92. The aluminum driveshaft was used any time GM wanted to save some weight. The aluminum spare was required to fit over the PBR rear discs on all 4 wheel disc cars 89-92. So what does that leave? What is special about 1LE, in layman's terms?

The front brakes.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

How about some more content on the topic. Support for my position, without calling names or attacking anyone... Weird.

The Front Lower Control Arm thing kind of got me thinking, so I went digging in the references. I had looked at this before, but to be completely honest, I looked in the Camaro Parts & Illustration Catalog instead of the Firebird book. I dug out both books and looked to see what they had to say.

First the 82-92 Camaro P&I



And now the same chart from the 82-92 Firebird P&I



Ok, so that's not terribly easy to follow... So I pulled the data into a text file and decoded all the RPO codes and separated the variations by part number.

14083561 & 14083562
82-84 Camaro
82-83 Firebird
84 Firebird (Except 16" Wheel)
85 Camaro (Except Touring Susp FE2)
85 Firebird 14" Whl, 15" Whl (P215/65/R15 Tires)
86 Camaro (Except Z28, B2G) *B2G - 86 COMPONENTS OF IROC-Z PACKAGE*
86-92 Firebird 15" Whl (P215/65R15 Tires)
87-92 Camaro Exc 16" Wheel

14094518 & 14094519
85-86 Firebird 15" Whl (P235/60R15 Tires)
91-92 Camaro 16"-Tire Opt (QMT) *P235/55R16*
91-92 Firebird 16"-Tire Opt (QPE) *P215/60R16*

14091391 & 14091392
85-90 Firebird QLC
85-90 Firebird 16" Wheel
91-92 Firebird 16"-Tire Opt (QLC), (Exc (1LE) *P245/50ZR16*

12505472 & 12505473
85 Camaro Touring Susp (FE2)
86 Camaro B2G, Z28 *B2G - 86 COMPONENTS OF IROC-Z PACKAGE*
87 Camaro 16" Wheel
88-90 Camaro Z28
91-92 Camaro 16"-Tire Opt (QLC) *P245/50ZR16*
91-92 Firebird (1LE)

My notes are in *s, the rest is pretty much right from the charts. What these charts are telling me, is that for whatever reason there's a difference between FE2/WS6 Firebird control arms, and FE2/Iroc control arms. Except that for whatever reason the 91-92 Firebirds with 1LEs used the Camaro FE2 control arms.

Thems 91-92 Firebird 1LE control arms sho must be something special to be "1LE" exclusive. Mmm hmm.

scottmoyer

Drew, I need to ask you to behave yourself and to stop poking those that think your not a nice guy. And you also need to stop proving your point on the 1LE debate. The evidence and proof you provide, the details, part numbers and knowledge all seem to go against the hype, and we can't have that!!

Drew

iTrader: (58)

You missed the struts. All the way at the bottom. 22064153



Not to get too wound up about this, but this, THIS, kind of fact checking, and supporting my position, the time it takes to counter incorrect, incomplete, and misleading info (however well intended), is exactly why I find the 1LE topic so exasperating. It's a great, big, fat, nothing burger. It's about the least important, least relevant, bit of idiotic trivia that draws the most grief. I simplify 1LE to "Just brakes" because I don't want to waste time discussing all the stupid @#$! that comes with the topic.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Sorry man, I'll try to keep my scans, documentation, and anti-social trolling in check. I wouldn't want someone who has never posted anything beneficial to the forum, and apparently doesn't even own an on-topic vehicle to get butt-hurt.

Big&BadGTA

iTrader: (1)

This is a pretty good link with some really good info about background and parts lists for content of the 1LE Option, year to year.

http://www.camarosource.ca/rare_specialty/1le/

Aside from the brakes, which is kinda how it seems this option/program began, it does include some supporting components, plus the unique fuel system components to prevent fuel starvation while cornering. Something pretty prevalent in a 3rd gen, otherwise, while cornering.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Except that it's simply not accurate.

The oil cooler was never part of 1LE, it was part of the engine package on the engine that was required on 1LE cars. It's not 1LE specific because it's on EVERY L98, and G92 LB9.

The only difference between regular spindles and 1LE spindles is the 1LE version has the caliper mounting ears removed. There's nothing "Larger" about them.



This is completely false. There never was an 18 gallon tank. There never was a "special swinging" fuel pickup. It's the standard 16 gallon tank, with improved baffling, and a longer filter sock on the fuel pump. The filter sock is the "special pickup". This is a prime example of facts getting twisted between the source, and the most recent re-teller.

Further, the baffled tank and special fuel strainer were on every TPI car, at least by 91. The V6 even used the "special" fuel system in 91. While it might have originated as a 1LE part, it was typical/universal later on - therefore, it's not specifically a 1LE feature.

Quote:

T-Tops delete

T-tops weren't a standard option that had to be deleted. It was optional equipment that had to be added. If anything it was an option that wasn't allowed with the engine required by 1LE.



Also never happened. This line is an editing error. A factoid copied from one article on the 1LE to another, to another, to the point I can't even remember where it originated. I debunked this myth literally YEARS ago.

I'm done. You guys can believe whatever hog wash you want.

GN1295

Wait a minute. T-tops weren't allowed with the engine required by the 1LE???? Strangely enough they share the same engine with the non 1LE cars and as i'm sure you know, many G92 cars both 5.0 5sp and L98 had t-tops. Hmmmmmmmm. Don't you hate when that happens?

Big&BadGTA

iTrader: (1)

Drew,
I thought that link was interesting, but I didn't take as the absolute gospel. The web is a strange place where legends seem to grow.

Anyways, the fuel system stuff IS unique to the 1LE cars, and also part of the 1989 Turbo Trans Am (which also got the brakes up front).

I am only talking about the 1988/1989 cars. I've never been really interested in any with airbags, and do know there were changes in 1991/1992, especially.

sonjaab

YAWN!

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Reading comprehension really isn't your strong suit, is it? "If anything" https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/if+anything

"If nothing else; if in any amount or degree; if at all."

Meaning, that if there's any truth in what the author of that page was trying to say, it's certainly not that 1LE "deleted" the t-tops. At different times, during the years 1LE production spans, t-tops were not available with the L98. In certain circumstances you might be able to say that T-tops couldn't be ordered on a 1LE, but they'd never be deleted since they were never standard equipment.

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/hist...ls-camaro.html

Just one thread about the "RARE" mesh wheels myth.

The problem with the link is that there are obvious factual errors. It's no big deal, those errors are repeated verbatim on nearly ever webpage talking about 1LEs and every 1LE classified ad. The status quo is that the majority has it wrong.

I understand what you're saying, yes in 88/89 the fuel system was uniquely 1LE. But you can either address any audience with a wall of text about what's unique in each and every circumstance, it quickly becomes tedious for the person explaining AND confusing for the listener. It's much easier, and to the point to generalize and simplify the topic. Further, it doesn't really matter anyway. Most people asking about 1LEs, off the cuff, don't really care about the 115 1LEs that got the special tank in 88/89, that was the universal tank from 90-92. Most people aren't going to get excited about a plastic tub in the gas tank, or a special extra-long fuel strainer. Dare I say it's stupid to mention it?


I mean that's a key part of what makes a 1LE Camaro worth $10k more than one without the RPO code. Impressive, isn't it?

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Here's a documented 1LE with T-tops. https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/hist...ml#post6211746



Guess that kinda proves 1LE doesn't delete CC1.

Mark_ZZ3

A magazine reference for 1LE. From Formula 2000 June 1989 comparing a stock Camaro to a R7U car. This isn't motor trend, car craft, etc. It's a race publication - and Canadian.

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/hist...ro-iroc-z.html

"An enthusiast can get a car equipped with the same Delco shocks and struts we have developed over the past three years," he says proudly. "They offer better damping for longer periods. In fact when the computer recognizes an order bearing all the right options: high output 5.0 litre engine, five speed manual gear box, a performance axle ratio, and no air conditioning, it will add all the heavy duty components we have developed for the Iroc-Z grouped under the special production package under engineering option code 1LE!

This includes the brakes, struts and shocks, but also an aluminum prop shaft, bigger front and rear anti-roll bars from the Trans Am, and a better baffled fuel tank that lets you use its contents to almost the last drop with out any surging in hard cornering.

********

My 89 1LE Camaro has the larger Trans Am sourced sway bars on it. Not sure about 1990-up ... but 1989 did.

The only way to get all of these parts in the same car was to order option code 1LE.

I'm sure I have other magazines and race info on this. But search the forums, I'm sure I've posted it up before.

Mark.

Mark_ZZ3

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Exactly. This has been discussed to death.

I'm sorry I even replied in the other thread. If I had realized it would result in all the crap in that thread, and all the crap in this completely unnecessary thread, I wouldn't have said anything. No one needs to waste their time trying to convince me. I really don't care.

If y'all want to believe that a 1LE is equivalent in significance to a COPO 427 1967 Camaro, or that 1LE descended from Mt Olympus to bring peace and prosperity to the world, or whatever other fairy tales make you feel better, knock yourselves out.

GEN Xer

iTrader: (1)

My 88 formula had the baffled tank- it was the original tank I replaced 2 years ago, now it's doing duty as a fluid catcher in my front yard. I don't remember what the pump looked like but the one I replaced it with ran across the bottom and had the wide sock.

Besides the brakes and possible shock/strut difference, a lot of cars came with every other option. They also must be referring to the shocks alone in that ad because the larger sway bars were used on older cars too.

If it isn't brakes only- it's only brakes and marketing BS. You can't call a set of shock absorbers a "suspension"

Big&BadGTA

iTrader: (1)

KMK454

While everyone bickers in this thread, the market is speaking. It may be dumb money or smart money depending upon where you sit, but as of today 1LE cars are getting the $$$. Must have been a hell of a brake kit.

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Summer of 1989, I was driving my then new IROC-Z home from my girlfriend's (now wife) house. It was late, about midnight or 1:00 AM and I was on the Kennedy Expressway. Up ahead, I saw a strange trailer. I sped up to catch it and it was the Mecum Racing Team, towing this car and another team car on a trailer. I thought it was so cool. I stayed even with it for about 20 minutes taking it in going around either side of it. Too bad we didn't have cell phones back then.

Big&BadGTA

iTrader: (1)

Mark_ZZ3

The baffled tank was different in 89-up. My 88 has a short wall baffle. In 89, it was taller. Search the forum as there are pictures of the tanks. LINK

The struts and shocks were unique to the 1LE cars (and players cars). The Pre-1LE cars from the Players series helped to develop them. Started in 87 with the front struts, and expanded in 88 to include rear shocks. 89 1LE code made them available outside the Player's program. The part numbers on the as delivered cars were different than the parts books. The only references I've found is in the Player's racing notes - not any parts catalog.

The point of the ad (my opinion), was that if a buyer specified 1LE, then it meant the car came with all the components. If you didn't specific 1LE, then you got *some* of the same options, but not all. You couldn't get a 1LE car without the larger sway bars, or without the brakes, or without the shocks and struts, or without the performance axle and so on.

1LE had some other oddities to it. In 89, the Camaro came with the Trans Am sway bars. 36mm/24mm. No other option code gave you that. Just stock parts from the GM bin. No parts catalog will show it. But I can show you my 1LE, as well as all the players cars in 89 had them. Plus the article where Bill Ball (Gm engineer) is quoted as saying that. I'd love to get hold of the 88 1LE cars to document them ... see what they came with.

For me, the 1LE story stems from 1986-88 with the creation in 1989. After that, many race only items created production line improvements.

Again ... I'd trade the originality of my 1LE for a Detroit Speed edition. What was race only 30 years ago has been surpassed by new tech.

Mark.

Mark_ZZ3

This was one of the more productive discussion on 1LE - search for truth. Link

No bashing. Just fact finding and comparing info. Coming to conclusions about why GM may or may not have included options (cost, weight savings, etc.)

Mark.

mrestrictrplate

iTrader: (2)

I was in high school during the 1LE years. You wanted a 1LE then to get the good rear gears. I heard someone mention G92 once in Car Craft. Dealerships didn't want to hear about 3.23 04 3.45 gears. Just take delivery of what's in stock. Mention 1LE and they would walk away...race car they'd say.