While 82 to 92 LCA's are interchangeable, there are differences.

One is not reinforced (GM 10000063), which is typical of most, I think.

Two is reinforced with Stab Shf Lwr Cont (1983-86) (GM 10000097). Which cars were so equipped, I'm unsure. See the two PDF files below for a visual (parts 21 and 22). The pic is from my 85 shop manual.

Three is the 1LE, which has high-durometer bushings (50K) vs. the production bushings (11K). According to my H.O. 350 Camaro Manual, "These harder bushings reduce wheel hop under hard acceleration." (GM 10164151).

JamesC

 

i've only seen the reinforced pieces in photos, never on anything i've owned or seen in the junkyards. the 1le bit is interesting, but suppose it's a moot point with the age on these cars now....

 

I've always thought those holes and brackets were for G bodies, whose sway bar mounted directly to the arms. I believe they use the same LCA's.

 

They do. You'll find a bit more info (even from some old-timers weren't familiar with the reinforced LCA's on thirdgens) below:

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/susp...tock-lcas.html

JamesC

 

the ones I took off my 86 were reinforced

-Jim

 

Those reinforcements are indeed used on the gbody to keep the arm from collapsing when the sway bay is bolted to them. My t-type used to have them

 

suppose this can be a cheap alternative for beefing up the stock arms if you're not looking to upgrade to something tubular. i doubt junkyards would be looking for much for the reinforcement pieces, although the tubular arms have come down a bit in price recently....

 

The stock arms are plenty stiff despite what the marketing would have you believe.
I cut a 1.54 60 foot on stock arms in my Buick. And the sway bar is attached to them for additional stress.

 

So is it a safe to say that these can be considered a sort of hybrid type of a boxed arm?