From: jlg@zycor.lgc.com ()
Subject: Re: Formula (was Re: BETTER? 92 Camaro...)
Originator: jlg@marvin.zycor.lgc.com
Organization: Landmark/Zycor  (Austin TX)
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:31:01 GMT

>>>        Despite what the literature says, I've seen (usually late
>>>in the model year) TPI firebirds with the rear drums.  But the scariest
>>>thing I saw was a 5.7 IROC with rear drums and 15", non-speed rated
>>>GT +4's!  A car that would go 145 MPH with tires that go to mush
>>>at 120....hope that thing had a speed limiter...
>>
>>1LE f-bodies are not the only f-bodies to have the Borg-Warner 'australian',
>>9 bolt rear end.  All '87-'89 5.7 IROC's and all '87-'89 5.0 G92 5 speed IROC's
>>have the BW rear end.  WS6 Firebirds went the BW rear end one year earlier (1986).
>>1989 was the last year for any BW f-body rear end.
>
>        Was the LSD unit for these rear ends an Auburn unit (clutch-cone)
>or the clutch pack type?

The BW rear end is a 4 pinion rear and the LSD is cone-clutch.

>
>>
>>In addition, all 5.7 IROC's ('87-'90) and 5.7 Z28's ('91-'92) required rear disc
>>brakes and the 16 inch wheels.  The same was true for all 5.0 TPI G92 5 speed
>>IROC's ('87-'90) and all 5.0 TPI G92 Z28's ('91-'92).
>>
>>The only TPI powered f-bodies (a lot of them) that have rear drums are 5.0 non-G92
>>automatics and 5.0 non-G92 5 speeds.
>
>        Were any 5.0 G92 automatics ever made?  Sounds like a waste
>of time.
>

Yes, '85-'88 G92 was available on 5.0 TPI automatics.  These however did not
get the BW rear end or the bigger (+25hp) 5.7,5.0/G92/5-speed cam.  

>
>>
>>The 5.7 IROC you saw with rear drums and 15 inch wheels was likely not a 5.7.
>>I have seen several 5.0 IROC's rebadged as 5.7 IROC's.  To be sure, always
>
>
>        No, this was on a dealer lot, a brand new car.  I have seen
>other new, on the lot 5.7 camaros with rear drums as well (but
>no 15" wheels other than the one described before).  I was in
>the market a couple of years ago and looked at a LOT of f-bodies
>(even some 1LEs).  Just because the literature says something
>(like the pontiac "all 5.0 5 speeds require rear disks" doesn't
>mean they didn't build cars contradicting their claims...or
>perhaps they were ordered from the dealer specifically that way.
>Dealers do some pretty weird stuff...I saw a 5.7 1LE IROC with
>leather seats and a CD player (and of course, the slime tried
>to tell me it was a 'vette beater...)!
>
>--Ken


Hmmm...strange, 5.7 Camaros without rear discs?  I'll have to see if 
I can find one.  Never have seen one before.  From the sources I have
read, rear discs have always been required on 5.7 Camaros.  Do you
know what year these 5.7/rear drum Camaros were? Were they IROC's or
Z28's.  Who knows, I've seen other build-weirdness on other Camaros
as well.  I guess the factory can build whatever it wants.  You're right, 
literature (especially the dealer brochures) are often incorrect/
incomplete.  I've read plenty of bogus info in magazines and books.  

John Gravell



-- 
Yr Model        Engine      Displacement   HP      Torque  Induction
---------------------------------------------------------------------
85 IROC-Z (man.) L69         5.0 (305)    190       240    4BBL H.O.
87 IROC-Z (man.) LB9         5.0 (305)    215       295    TPI