mulletwearingtadrive

iTrader: (10)

what would be the difference between an LT1 found in a 96 caprice interceptor and a 94 LT1 TA?

thanks for any help or info......

buffman

iTrader: (9)

No such thing as a Caprice Interceptor. The Interceptor is a Ford thing. 9c1 would be the correct term.

First the 94 would be OBD-1, and the 96 would be OBD-2. The Motors are pretty much identical. I think the accessory bracket might be different, but the F-body LT1 will have Aluminum heads compared to the 9c1s Cast Iron Heads and both have a different cam. Stock power rating for a lt1 in a B-body with dual elextric fans is 260hp and 330 ft lbs of tq.

Matt

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

The iron heads on that Caprice will outflow the 94 aluminums on the TA. Also there was just on b-body LT1 didn't matter if it was grandma's wagon or the Impala SS a 9C1, or uncle Vinny's Fleetwood all the same heads and cam for the years the heads come in two castings but are VERY similar. The whole bottomend block crank rods pistons are the same. The b-bodied ALL got vented optis where the 94 f-body got the non-vented.

Also do not mistake the 260hp the b-body was rated as as being detune it makes more torque than the f-body at a lower RPM because it was designed for use in a much heavier car and this is also with 87 octane and a very restrictive intake in front of the TB. Bolton b-bodies with M6 swaps have achieved over 300RWHP as have f-bodies, so again don't let the factory ratings convince you it is weak. My wagon with a base curb weight of 4672lbs plus my 200lbs carcass went 15.5 the one and only night I raced it no tricks, belt on, full weight, 2.93s, 28" tall street tires, stock 1400 stall, 87 octane self tune, PVC intake tube to stock drilled airbox.

ON the OBD2 OBD1 thing there are differnt timing covers and the OBD2 motor will have a CPS reluctor which will interfere with balancer hub depth so if looking to swap the Caprice motor into the f-body I would recommend you pull the cover and the reluctor then use the f-body hub. I would also recommend retaining the Caprice timing cover as it is for a vented opti and use the vented opti. Just leave the CPS there but non-functional.

urbanhunter44

iTrader: (1)

Eh, that's two full seconds slower than a stock LT1 Fbody with some good tires...

Their ratings are accurate, where as the Fbody was horribly underrated. The iron heads flow slightly more on the intake side, same pretty much on the exhaust side. However the weight difference probably negates any effect this has and everything I've ever read/heard suggests that the aluminum variants can be opened up much further than the iron's can.

Basically they were cursed with a worse cam and a shitload of weight, but it has the same potential, albeit in a heavier package.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

Look at the gears on the wagon. Also I have seen LS1 car struggle to get a 13 second slip at my local track even with a little intake and exhaust work. It was not cursed with a worse cam it has am appropriate cam for the application guys have been foolish enough to swap in f-body motors looking for power and been disappointed because the lack of lowend compared to the b-body cam made the car feel slower. The current quickest bolton b-body is 12.3 so there is nothing wrong with the cam even though it is different from the f-body one. Is it right for an f-body no because your chassis will not handle the lowend torque as well so in general an f-body is better off going for HP even at the expense of lowend. When I race even LS1 cars with my Caprice on street tires and before the headers(best was 13.9) they would see my tailights till the 1/8th or so this chassis needs and utilizes torque well, then the LS1 cars would charge by after the 1/8th and MPH6-7mph higher but sometimes just a few tenths quicker. Just a different way of going fast.
That night I raced the wagon I beat a friends stock 04 Impala SS the blown 3.8L variety he went 15.6, the 03 Crown Vic I raced went 16.6. Comparing to other cars is better than raw times as some tracks are quick some slow this one is 2-3 tenths faster than the one 2 hours south of here even though elevation is VERY similar.

94BlownTransAm

Yesterday I put an Impala motor in my Trans Am.....We had got the torque specs on the rocker arms, and It said 50. So as we followed the "directions" the car didn't crank. So we pulled the push rods out and they were about bent in half. Anyway added new ones, What's the real torque specs??? And one question, Don't the imapala motor have what I guess you would say a "bigger cam"

buffman

iTrader: (9)

You need to properly lash the rockers just not torque them to spec. use the 1/4 TDC method and adjust them. You prolly have the rockers so tight the valves aren't opening.

According to a website
the 93-95 F-body cam is 202/207 (At .050" duration) .450"/.460" @ 116 LSA
96 F-body was 200/207 .447"/.459" @ 117 LSA

The 94-95 B-body cam is 191/196 .418"/.430" @ 111LSA
the 96 B-body cam is supposed to be slightly smaller.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

The Impala got the exact same engine as the rest of the b-bodies, everyone wants them to have gotten some special performance parts but reality is the closest thing they got to a special performance part is that steamroller sized rubber but it is so godaweful heavy it is tough to call performance oriented. I have SS wheels and rubber for summer use and it weights over 60lbs a corner, the winter rubber on Caprice alloy rims is just over 40lbs.
http://shbox.com/1/4th_gen_tech2.html#adjust_valves
This is a site put together by one of the guys over on Camaroz28.com great site and this should help you a lot.