Technical Trivia Question

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Joe L.
    Beyond Control Poster
    • February 1, 1988
    • 42936

    #16
    My Answer To Technical Trivia Question

    Well, several folks got pretty close to identifying one of the model years and/or engine which used a unique-to-that-model year timing set or component thereof. One of the engines was, indeed, the 1996 LT4. Below, I'll respond to each of the 5 elements of the question that I posed above in order to try to make this as clear and concise as possible:

    1) What were the model years?

    The model years were 1966 and 1996.

    2) What were the engines?

    The engines were all 1966 small blocks, including the Corvette small blocks, and;
    For 1996, ONLY the LT4 engine used in Corvettes only.

    3)What was the specific unique component or components for each of the 2 model years?

    For 1966 small blocks, the specific component was the camshaft timing sprocket

    For 1996 LT4, the specific components were the entire 3 pieces of the timing set.

    4) What was the configuration of the unique component or components?

    For 1966 small blocks, the camshaft timing sprocket was a nylon-toothed, "wide" sprocket design.

    For 1996 LT4 the timing set was roller timing set. A true, single roller timing chain was used with sprockets designed for said roller chain. Both cam sprocket and crank sprocket were steel and the cam sprocket was specially balanced.

    5) What made them unique to that model year?

    All 1955-66 Chevrolet small blocks used in passenger cars and light trucks used "wide tooth" timing sprockets and timing chain. Sprocket tooth width was 0.58". However, the 1955-65 camshaft timing sprocket was a ductile iron piece. For 1966 ONLY, the camshaft timing sprocket was changed to the nylon-toothed, aluminum design with sprocket width the same as the previous ductile iron. The timing chain and crankshaft sprockets were the same as earlier. For 1967 and later, the nylon/aluminum camshaft timing sprockets continued to be used for small blocks. However, the camshaft sprocket and other timing set parts were changed to the "narrow tooth" design (sprocket tooth width was 0.525"). So, the 1966 small block was the only model year that ever used the "wide tooth", nylon/aluminum camshaft sprocket.

    As far as 1996 LT4 goes, keep in mind that ALL 1992-97 Gen II small blocks used a special design camshaft timing sprocket which included an integral sprag gear which provided waterpump drive through a secondary gear. However, all 1992-1997 LT1 engines (and, the "B" body Gen II smaller displacement engine) used a Morse-type timing set (otherwise known as "early-link" or "silent chain"). A Morse design timing set was the type used for all 55+ Gen I small blocks installed in passenger cars and light trucks. Also, the camshaft timing sprocket and crankshaft timing sprocket used for LT1 (and "B" body engine) were manufactured of powder metal.

    The timing set used for 1996 LT4 ONLY was a roller design timing set, utilizing a single, true roller chain. In fact, it was the very first use of a roller chain in any Gen I or Gen II small block installed in a passenger car or light truck. And, it was the very first use of a TRUE roller design timing set in any PRODUCTION small block.

    Not only were the chain and both sprockets different due to the roller design, but the sprockets were manufactured of steel and the camshaft sprocket was specially balanced. The LT1 (and "B" body engine) shared NO timing set parts with the LT4. The LT4 was a one-year-only engine as far as PRODUCTION installation in any passenger car and it was unique to the Corvette application---it was not installed in Camaros or any other passenger car. Even for Corvettes, it was used only for 1996 models with 6 speed manual transmission.

    And, there you have it!

    I'll be posting some other information when I get a chance regarding timing set parts used for both big blocks and small blocks over the 1955-2007 period.
    In Appreciation of John Hinckley

    Comment

    • mike cobine

      #17
      Re: My Answer To Technical Trivia Question

      "The timing set used for 1996 LT4 ONLY was a roller design timing set, utilizing a single, true roller chain. In fact, it was the very first use of a roller chain in any Gen I or Gen II small block installed in a passenger car or light truck. And, it was the very first use of a TRUE roller design timing set in any PRODUCTION small block."

      My 1985 Chevrolet Suburban 3/4 ton with a 350 and Turbo 400 used a single roller timing chain. I was going to replace it with the same unit from the dealer, but the price at the time (Oct. 1992) was about 3 times the price of any good double roller.

      Is a 3/4 ton Suburban not classed as a light truck?

      Comment

      • Joe L.
        Beyond Control Poster
        • February 1, 1988
        • 42936

        #18
        Re: My Answer To Technical Trivia Question

        Mike-----

        Yes, but apparently it falls into the "over 8,500 lbs GVW" category. In that category, the engine configurations change from passenger car and "light truck" to the "truck" engines. "Truck" engines have used roller chains for a long time. The "first level" of truck small blocks use the single roller chain; the "heavy duty" truck engines use the double roller. However, I don't think that either are of "true" roller design. The double roller HD truck set is also sold as a "performance part" for engine upgrade.
        In Appreciation of John Hinckley

        Comment

        • Clem Z.
          Expired
          • January 1, 2006
          • 9427

          #19
          none of the GM roller chain were true rollers

          the rollers did not roll like the cloyes "true roller". till the true roller chains came out i had less chain stretch with the "silent" type chain using both metal gears than i had with GM double roller chain

          Comment

          • Joe L.
            Beyond Control Poster
            • February 1, 1988
            • 42936

            #20
            Re: none of the GM roller chain were true rollers

            clem------

            Yes, I also believe that all of the GM truck roller chains were not of the "true" roller design. However, the LT4 chain was a true roller. It was a Renold chain supplied through Cloyes who manufactured the sprockets for GM. It is a fairly expensive chain, too. The chain, ALONE, carries a current GM list price of $88.47.
            In Appreciation of John Hinckley

            Comment

            • Terry M.
              Beyond Control Poster
              • October 1, 1980
              • 15488

              #21
              Re: My Answer To Technical Trivia Question

              Thanks Joe for a VERY interesting and educational quiz. Nice job!

              "the "B" body Gen II smaller displacement engine"
              NOT Corvette related, but the engine to which you refer is the L99 4.3L V8.

              Ever try to get a thermostat for a Gen II LT1? One stands a real good chance of getting a Gen I thermostat because every parts guy in the world "knows" that all 350cid Chevrolets take the same thermostat -- WRONG BUCKO! And the old school thermostat works for dodo in the reverse flow cooling system of the Gen II engine.

              Now try to convince those same pimply-faced parts guys that you have a 4.3L V8. Not only are you cursed with a dog of an engine, but every parts guy in the world wants to sell you V6 parts. Even many Chevrolet parts counter people don't believe a 4.3L V8 exists. Thank goodness I don't have one, but on the B-body boards I see people posting with the wrong parts ALL the time.

              It's almost as bad as the 1970 LS6 Chevelle and the 1971 LS6 Corvette, but that is another story we have already beat to death.
              Terry

              Comment

              • mike cobine

                #22
                Re: My Answer To Technical Trivia Question

                Yes, it did as it was 8600 GVWR. However, all 20/25/2500 and 30/35/3500 series trucks, both pickups and chassis, were over 8500 GVWR from the 1973 design to the early '90s (8600 GVWR). Yet they were in what GM called the Light Truck service manual. GM begins their Heavy Truck with the 50, 60, and up series. I think they used to have a 40 series, but I haven't seen anything on that in a long time.

                To confuse it more, it was configured as Heavy Duty Emissions, but being a passenger vehicle, it was licensed as a "station wagon" by Illinois. The EPA rated those over 8500 GVWR as Heavy Duty Emissions, which may well be why GM rated all these at 8600, to avoid the emissions issues and gas guzzler issues.

                Played havoc on getting through emissions. When you would pull in, they would test for passenger car emissions levels due to the license. However, the emissions labels and the official documentation called for Heavy Duty emissions. Naturally, the test station wouldn't believe me and I had to go through the formal protest. I had almost made it on the passenger, having plugged the smog pump to pump all the time.

                I only had to do that once. I never got a second notice, after having to appeal on the first time.

                The chain was a roller, but while there were rollers on it, they were more like sleeves around a fat post than the rollers in a true roller. That was another factor in me not using the dealer chain. And like Clem said, it had a lot of stretch at around 110,000 miles when the cam went flat. The gears looked like new, but the chain needed at least one link removed. I replaced cam and timing set with an L82 equivalent and a Cloyles roller and it made a truck to remember.

                The vans were a different rating, even though a same series designation. The 20/25/2500 was 6800 or 6600 depending on year, from the '70s to the mid '90s.

                The late '90s used 7200 or 8600 GVWR for the 2500 series 2WD pickups and 6800 or 8300 GVWR for 4WD.

                It gets complicated.

                Comment

                • Joe L.
                  Beyond Control Poster
                  • February 1, 1988
                  • 42936

                  #23
                  Re: My Answer To Technical Trivia Question

                  Terry-----

                  Yes, I just couldn't recall that "L99" designation. At first I thought "L09" and then I thought, no that's not right.

                  As far as the LT1 thermostat goes, I have TWO answers for the parts problem:

                  1) Buy the complete waterpump assembly new from GM; the thermostat comes with it (the 92 waterpump is unique to that year and the 93-97 are all the same, so you have to be sure that you get the correct one);

                  2) Order the thermostat (as well as other parts) by PART NUMBER. That's the only solution I've ever found to keep counter guys from screwing you up. I started doing this about 35 years ago. The part number for the LT1 thermostat is GM #12555290 aka Delco #131-100. Even if they don't have GM or Delco, ask them to CROSS-REFERENCE from either of those numbers rather than going to the application. This part is applicable to all Corvette LT1 and LT4; I'm fairly sure it's also the same for Camaro LT1, "B" body LT1, and L99.
                  In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                  Comment

                  • Joe L.
                    Beyond Control Poster
                    • February 1, 1988
                    • 42936

                    #24
                    Re: My Answer To Technical Trivia Question

                    Mike-----

                    Yes, I should have said in the original post "engines installed in passenger cars and light trucks under 8,500 pounds GVW".
                    In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                    Comment

                    • Terry M.
                      Beyond Control Poster
                      • October 1, 1980
                      • 15488

                      #25
                      Re: My Answer To Technical Trivia Question

                      "I'm fairly sure it's also the same for Camaro LT1, "B" body"
                      Yes, GM #12555290 a.k.a. Delco #131-100 is the Gen II LT1 and L99 thermostat for the B-body (and D-body, Fleetwood, which also has the LT1 in a few years). I can't positively verify the F-body application but I do agree it likely applies there as well.
                      Terry

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      Searching...Please wait.
                      An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

                      Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                      An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

                      Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                      An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
                      There are no results that meet this criteria.
                      Search Result for "|||"