Carbureted years of third gens

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mjoekingz28

Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,996
Location
United States of America
I have access to the third gen Camaro website, but cannot figure when (and how to tell) carbs went away.


I think 86 or 87 is the end where TBI and TPI took over and in 1988 carbs were gone and FI was it.

The 305s look like streetable fun. I had been eyeing the H.O. L69s but there is this single snorkel LG4 that is right up my alley.
 
Forget about TPI. What you want is the Rochester E4ME with the electronic feedback solenoid operated power enrichment valve. A major boat anchor.
grin2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
I have access to the third gen Camaro website, but cannot figure when (and how to tell) carbs went away.


I think 86 or 87 is the end where TBI and TPI took over and in 1988 carbs were gone and FI was it.

The 305s look like streetable fun. I had been eyeing the H.O. L69s but there is this single snorkel LG4 that is right up my alley.


I know the 305 in Camaros was port fuel injection in 1985.
 
I had a 85 Monte SS that came with the L69. It's 180hp. It ran mid 15s in stock trim. Not a bad car, but definitely not something I would consider powerful.

Remember, all the same stuff that bolts onto a Chevrolet 305 will bolt onto a Chevrolet 350. 45 more cubic inches means more power when done like for like.

A 350/260HP Crate engine would be a nice add on for a 305 Camaro and you could probably put all the fuel injection stuff over to it and it run nicely.
 
In 1985, you could get the base model with a 305 q-jet at 165 HP, the L-69 HO with a q-jet at 190HP, or the 305 TPI at 205HP. 1986 still had the q-jet base, but the HO was gone. By 1987, I think it was all TPI.

As far as anchoring watercraft, the base engine had the same compression and valves as the other two. Making it an HO was a matter of installing a better cam.

The 305 itself, with the long stroke and small bore was never going to be a beast, but a better cam, a slight lift increase from roller rockers, and a tubular exhaust (made by Edelbrock at the time) would put the base 305 ahead of the 350TPI that came out in 1988.

The real fix was a 350, or better, a 383, with better heads. With a larger engine under it, the Q-jet was a better choice than the TPI. The TPI was flow limited. The Q-jet would support the flow of a 383 with cam and head mods. You couldn't go crazy with the cam, because of the power brakes, but you could build a quick car from a base model.

"Hot Rod" magazine ran a whole series on that line of modification in the late 80s.

You'll need subframe connectors, and a LSD, and the TH700R4 will need some help.

The perfect build, in my mind, would start with an '85 HO model with the manual trans. They made a few in both the Camaro and TA. You can still get all the parts you need...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for conversating Astro14!


My ideal StreetRod was a 83 4BBL H.O. 5spd L69 with the twin snorkel. An 83 I chose for the cable clutch- I enjoy simplistic things. But I saw this 86 n eBay in a really nice color. The pipes look terrible, but it looks to have manual locks. The windows are the crank type
smile.gif
. It is a 5 speed, the seats look nicely bolstered. It appears clean all over. It is single snorkel, tho.


I also really wanted manual steering.....I loved my two cars that had it (Ford Aspire and 85 Mazda RX-7).....but this 86 on ebay has NO AC which I think is cool(punpun). I have never had an auto without AC from the factory. So this is a plus.......It should be really neat to see how much spare and complexity is spared by not having cold air.


Anyway, right now I am driving a Cobalt automatic with the 2.2 and it has ample power (145 @ 5600?). It is a really fun car to drive. A perfect streetcar in my opinion. It will move, handle, is quiet, isnt a gas/oil destroyer, looks good, is comfortable. It is NOT a track car with blinkers as some RR sportbikes have proven, but I want a track ride on the track and a street ride on the street. And besides, the Cobalt could be had with Turbo or Supercharging-but I wouldn't want that if you paid me to have it.......on the street!


Ok, so in high school I have a 97 Z28 LT1 (hence the screenname)
It was a dog, I blame the gearing....3.42s and a six speed made it faster than it seemed. I tried souping it up, but it didnt help. I ran a 14 flat at 103......still have the timeslip, but it didnt ever seem fast enough. I sold it and bought the Aspire.

This Cobalt is fine powerwise. I dont know if the 305 would plague me. Maybe it would be fun around the streets as I enjoy with the Cobalt.....or would it make me power hungry as the 97 Z28 did. That Z was my third car and I got it my senior year 2000.
 
The 700R4 in stock form makes driving a third get disappointing when cruising around town. My dad owned a 90' Iroc-Z with the 305 and automatic. The transmission torque convertor locked up too soon making it feel like a dog around town. You can get a Corvette servo and do a few things though.
 
Wait...an 86 V8 car without A/C might be a 1LE!

The 305/automatic cars tended to have super-tall (2.73) axle gears.
 
If building a 3G car (as opposed to buying a nice one to drive), I would start with an LG4. Mostly, because I would love to see just how close to factory I could get a Motown Industries 427ci small-block to look.
 
The LG4 was the base engine, right? I think everything will bolt up to a 427 small block - keep the stamped steel valve covers for the factory look. The snorkel going into the air cleaner is pretty small, so while the Q-jet is good for flow, the snorkel might be the weak point, and the HO version (L-69) with its dual snorkel still says "carbureted smog-engine" but will have the flow needed for a much larger engine.

Still have to address the chassis issues. It was an economy car chassis, designed around the 2.8 V-6. It's flexible (add the subframe connectors) with small brakes and a small rear end. Build the rear end, beef up the TH-700R4, and put on bigger brakes and it's got real potential.

I drove my '85 TA for nearly 100,000 miles. Black with gold trim (of course) and snowflake wheels.

It was a good car, made a bit better with Koni adjustable shocks, A shift/lock-up kit in the TH-700, Goodyear Eagle GTs in the 215/65R15 stock size, a Hypertech chip (and 160F thermostat, which, together, must have added, like 8 BHP to the whopping 165 stock level) and a set of Comp Cams rockers arms (which added at least another 4, maybe 5 BHP...) like these: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/cca-1417-16/overview/

I never got around to the Edelbrock exhaust (essentially, fitted headers, they look like this: http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive/misc/tech-center/install/6000/68732.pdf), which would have made a substantial difference, or the cam, which was really what the engine needed, because my oldest daughter was born and it turns out that you can't really get an infant car seat in the back of the TA...
 
Last edited:
The photo I took for Autotrader, when I sold it, in about June of 1993...

image_zps39uvpl3f.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Astro14
The LG4 was the base engine, right? I think everything will bolt up to a 427 small block - keep the stamped steel valve covers for the factory look. The snorkel going into the air cleaner is pretty small, so while the Q-jet is good for flow, the snorkel might be the weak point, and the HO version (L-69) with its dual snorkel still says "carbureted smog-engine" but will have the flow needed for a much larger engine.


Stock valve covers should work with spacers (to clear the 1.6 ratio roller rockers)...either use the HO intake (I think all TBI cars also got the 2-snorkel setup) or add a second snorkel to the stocker.

Quote:
Still have to address the chassis issues. It was an economy car chassis, designed around the 2.8 V-6. It's flexible (add the subframe connectors) with small brakes and a small rear end. Build the rear end, beef up the TH-700R4, and put on bigger brakes and it's got real potential.


Stock WS6/1LE brakes in front would probably be fine, especially with rear discs. (No way anything less than a complete aftermarket 12-bolt, 9", or Dana 60 would work here.) I'd rather have a T56 than an automatic...but if stuck with one, yeah, a 700 would certainly work. Starting with a solid-roof car would be a requirement, and it would probably also need at least a 6-point cage to stiffen things up.
 
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
Oh yeah, the 1LE is definitely cool, but is for closed circuits and could use manual steering.


What I liked about the 3rd gen 1LEs is the fact that they came from the factory as radio/air delete cars.

NOT so for the 4th gen versions.
frown.gif


They were not only/exclusively road course cars, but they WERE built to be competitive in SCCA Showroom Stock road racing competition.
wink.gif
 
I have a "high output" electronic Q jet 305 in my 86 SS. It has always been a total mutt from day one. Even with the 3:71 gearing and the 2004R, it is boring to drive.

I would not spend money trying to "soup up" a 305 when a 350 or 383 would be light years more powerful. The 305 was never intended to be a powerful motor, it was designed to allow the small block platform to be more fuel efficient in the era of oil embargoes and energy crises.
 
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
I have a "high output" electronic Q jet 305 in my 86 SS. It has always been a total mutt from day one. Even with the 3:71 gearing and the 2004R, it is boring to drive.

I would not spend money trying to "soup up" a 305 when a 350 or 383 would be light years more powerful. The 305 was never intended to be a powerful motor, it was designed to allow the small block platform to be more fuel efficient in the era of oil embargoes and energy crises.


Yup, the 305 was never destined for greatness due to the small bore size that resulted in valve shrouding and limited overall valve diameter, both of which capped the engine's ability to breathe when compared to its 4" bore siblings and SBF competitors.
 
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
I disagree


It is the truth though. Any engine builder or racer will tell you the same. I would rather have a 283 to work with than a 305.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top