When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
History / OriginalityGot a question about 1982-1992 Camaro or Firebird history? Have a question about original parts, options, RPO codes, when something was available, or how to document your car? Those questions, answers, and much more!
So, I inquired about this car, because of a recent discussion we had on if in '88 you could get a 5.7 IROC with t-tops and G92. I asked for a pic of the SPID. He sent me a pic of the build sheet instead and said the price just went up. I think he raised the price a few thousand. Because of my question?????
The only way you got the G92 3.27 gears with CC1 L98 combo after 87 where on certain pontiac firebird models. 88-89 Formulas 89 T/A/GTA models and then 3.23 gears with ttops L98 mid year production of the 91 Formulas to 92 with PW7 wheels. So even certain firebird models with l98 were restricted to hardtop only. I've never seen a G92 code CC1 L98 camaro in 88-89. Every camaro ive come across in 15 years after 87 with ttops and L98 the factory slapped it with highway gears 2.77. Why pontiac got away with it i don't know know but chevrolet for some reason made you pay the price in performance if you wanted ttops then 90-92 it was mandatory hardtops with L98 3.23 gears unless you got C&C ttops added on later at the dealer. Yes yes i know about the whole convertible thing in 88 having CC1 but there was probably a reason why chevrolet had the verts converted from a CC1 ttop model to start and that was probably the only exception to a 88 with G92 code being born as a CC1.
The only way you got the G92 3.27 gears with CC1 L98 combo after 87 where on certain pontiac firebird models. 88-89 Formulas 89 T/A/GTA models and then 3.23 gears with ttops L98 mid year production of the 91 Formulas to 92 with PW7 wheels. So even certain firebird models with l98 were restricted to hardtop only. I've never seen a G92 code CC1 L98 camaro in 88-89. Every camaro ive come across in 15 years after 87 with ttops and L98 the factory slapped it with highway gears 2.77. Why pontiac got away with it i don't know know but chevrolet for some reason made you pay the price in performance if you wanted ttops then 90-92 it was mandatory hardtops with L98 3.23 gears unless you got C&C ttops added on later at the dealer. Yes yes i know about the whole convertible thing in 88 having CC1 but there was probably a reason why chevrolet had the verts converted from a CC1 ttop model to start and that was probably the only exception to a 88 with G92 code being born as a CC1.
Yeah, '89 for sure required hardtop on G92 on Camaro. The question was on '88, where G92 LB9s were available with t-tops and convertible and we were trying to find any evidence that '88 5.7 t-tops could be had with G92.
The only way you got the G92 3.27 gears with CC1 L98 combo after 87 where on certain pontiac firebird models. 88-89 Formulas 89 T/A/GTA models and then 3.23 gears with ttops L98 mid year production of the 91 Formulas to 92 with PW7 wheels. So even certain firebird models with l98 were restricted to hardtop only. I've never seen a G92 code CC1 L98 camaro in 88-89. Every camaro ive come across in 15 years after 87 with ttops and L98 the factory slapped it with highway gears 2.77. Why pontiac got away with it i don't know know but chevrolet for some reason made you pay the price in performance if you wanted ttops then 90-92 it was mandatory hardtops with L98 3.23 gears unless you got C&C ttops added on later at the dealer. Yes yes i know about the whole convertible thing in 88 having CC1 but there was probably a reason why chevrolet had the verts converted from a CC1 ttop model to start and that was probably the only exception to a 88 with G92 code being born as a CC1.
Somewhat hard to follow, but I don't see it as "Pontiac got away with it" because that's not exactly how it was. One side was available while the other wasn't, depending upon the year.
If you wanted L98/3.27/CC1, you could get that on the 1987 Camaro but not on the 1987 Pontiac (disclaimer for exports).
If you wanted L98/3.27/CC1, you could get that on the 1989 Pontiac but apparently not the 1989 Camaro.
1988? Not on the Pontiac side and the Camaro side appears to be the same.
Of course there's the 1991/1992 Formula with the PW7 rims that allowed the above options. However, the Formula was marketed as the performance car with less weight.
Somewhat hard to follow, but I don't see it as "Pontiac got away with it" because that's not exactly how it was. One side was available while the other wasn't, depending upon the year.
If you wanted L98/3.27/CC1, you could get that on the 1987 Camaro but not on the 1987 Pontiac (disclaimer for exports).
If you wanted L98/3.27/CC1, you could get that on the 1989 Pontiac but apparently not the 1989 Camaro.
1988? Not on the Pontiac side and the Camaro side appears to be the same.
Of course there's the 1991/1992 Formula with the PW7 rims that allowed the above options. However, the Formula was marketed as the performance car with less weight.
I'm pretty sure ive seen 88 Formulas with 350 and ttops because of the formula being lighter but i maybe wrong. I think that was the only in 88 anyway to get away with it but I'm not 100% on that. Thats why i stated above 88-89 formulas and then 89 only for the T/A and GTA. I know in 87 for pontiac in the US you couldnt get 350 and ttops just the iroc did.
Ive owned a few third gens and have been looking at the rpo codes in these for 15-16 years now and i haven't seen evidence at all of a 88 5.7 CC1 G92 iroc. All 88s with L98 CC1 have the GH3 axle code in the iroc that i come across. In that time frame that i have been looking i don't see any of them that would exist unless a few of them in the first month of production in aug-sept of 87 for the 88 model were built and GM changed the order procedure very early. But i doubt it.
Yeah, '89 for sure required hardtop on G92 on Camaro. The question was on '88, where G92 LB9s were available with t-tops and convertible and we were trying to find any evidence that '88 5.7 t-tops could be had with G92.
To be honest if the G92 was ever available in 88 on LB9 with ttops it had to of been an auto car. Ive never come across a 88 LB9 MM5 G92 ttop car. Ive only seen that group of codes on a convertible for that year but never on a coupe unless it was hard top. I had 88 iroc 5 speed with ttops but it was the M39 3.08 gears.
I'm pretty sure ive seen 88 Formulas with 350 and ttops because of the formula being lighter but i maybe wrong. I think that was the only in 88 anyway to get away with it but I'm not 100% on that. Thats why i stated above 88-89 formulas and then 89 only for the T/A and GTA. I know in 87 for pontiac in the US you couldnt get 350 and ttops just the iroc did.
Ive owned a few third gens and have been looking at the rpo codes in these for 15-16 years now and i haven't seen evidence at all of a 88 5.7 CC1 G92 iroc. All 88s with L98 CC1 have the GH3 axle code in the iroc that i come across. In that time frame that i have been looking i don't see any of them that would exist unless a few of them in the first month of production in aug-sept of 87 for the 88 model were built and GM changed the order procedure very early. But i doubt it.
T-Tops with the L98 was not an available combination on the Formula for 1988. If you seen one, it may have been C&C. Or perhaps an export, if it did exist.
T-Tops with the L98 was not an available combination on the Formula for 1988. If you seen one, it may have been C&C. Or perhaps an export, if it did exist.
Your probably right on the 88 formula. what i meant earlier saying why pontiac got away with L98 CC1 G92 I was basically referring to the 89 formula, T/A, GTA year as to camaros that same year where they didn't get L98 CC1 G92. It was almost like a switch between the 87 camaros getting those options and pontiac didnt in 87.
To be honest if the G92 was ever available in 88 on LB9 with ttops it had to of been an auto car. Ive never come across a 88 LB9 MM5 G92 ttop car. Ive only seen that group of codes on a convertible for that year but never on a coupe unless it was hard top. I had 88 iroc 5 speed with ttops but it was the M39 3.08 gears.
I could swear I've seen '88, t-top, G92 5 speeds, but my memory could be wrong. I've DEFINITELY seen a bunch of convertibles, (I almost bought one), and also remember seeing LB9, G92, autos in t-top and convertible. The auto G92s were just 3.23 gears, KC4 oil cooler and 145 mph speedos with the 195 hp, peanut cam, LB9.
I've had my eye out for '88 G92 t-tops since the thread I mentioned above.
I could swear I've seen '88, t-top, G92 5 speeds, but my memory could be wrong. I've DEFINITELY seen a bunch of convertibles, (I almost bought one), and also remember seeing LB9, G92, autos in t-top and convertible. The auto G92s were just 3.23 gears, KC4 oil cooler and 145 mph speedos with the 195 hp, peanut cam, LB9.
I've had my eye out for '88 G92 t-tops since the thread I mentioned above.
I have too, but have failed to find any evidence. Ive seen plenty of hardtop G92 irocs over the years. This 88 IROC-Z vert belonged to a member here gatorcola was his screen name and it was local car near me for a long time. It had the LB9 MM5 G92 drivetrain he bought it new in TX and drove it back to Florida where it stayed for about 25 years and then sold the car to somebody in TX. It was the first in person IROC Vert i ever saw with that drivetrain when i looked at the RPO codes about 10 years ago. The story was from what i remember him telling me was that he was looking fr a IROC-Z convertible with a 5 speed no dealerships around had one. He went to a dealer that took time to try and locate one and the sales men said i really shouldn't be doing this, but theres a dealer in TX that has one, the sales man gave him the information of the car and which dealership it was. He got on a plane to TX and he asked a sales man about the car he was inquiring about and they ended up making a sale on the car he liked it and drove it all the way back to Florida.
I have too, but have failed to find any evidence. Ive seen plenty of hardtop G92 irocs over the years. This 88 IROC-Z vert belonged to a member here gatorcola was his screen name and it was local car near me for a long time. It had the LB9 MM5 G92 drivetrain he bought it new in TX and drove it back to Florida where it stayed for about 25 years and then sold the car to somebody in TX. It was the first in person IROC Vert i ever saw with that drivetrain when i looked at the RPO codes about 10 years ago. The story was from what i remember him telling me was that he was looking fr a IROC-Z convertible with a 5 speed no dealerships around had one. He went to a dealer that took time to try and locate one and the sales men said i really shouldn't be doing this, but theres a dealer in TX that has one, the sales man gave him the information of the car and which dealership it was. He got on a plane to TX and he asked a sales man about the car he was inquiring about and they ended up making a sale on the car he liked it and drove it all the way back to Florida.
The only way you got the G92 3.27 gears with CC1 L98 combo after 87 where on certain pontiac firebird models. 88-89 Formulas 89 T/A/GTA models and then 3.23 gears with ttops L98 mid year production of the 91 Formulas to 92 with PW7 wheels. So even certain firebird models with l98 were restricted to hardtop only. I've never seen a G92 code CC1 L98 camaro in 88-89. Every camaro ive come across in 15 years after 87 with ttops and L98 the factory slapped it with highway gears 2.77. Why pontiac got away with it i don't know know but chevrolet for some reason made you pay the price in performance if you wanted ttops then 90-92 it was mandatory hardtops with L98 3.23 gears unless you got C&C ttops added on later at the dealer. Yes yes i know about the whole convertible thing in 88 having CC1 but there was probably a reason why chevrolet had the verts converted from a CC1 ttop model to start and that was probably the only exception to a 88 with G92 code being born as a CC1.
88 G92, 5 speed, LB9, IROC-Z convertibles did start out as t-top cars, but they actually do not have the CC1 code
So here all this time I thought that the 1988 5.7 CC1 irocs were getting the same rear end as the same optioned 1987's. What changed? Stricter regulations, or did the 1988 get a little chubby somewhere?
A good friend used to have a non G92 5.7 CC1 1988 Iroc. It had the high gears & I thought it was ordered that way.
Well, I suppose it was, but thought it was an option & apparently it was not. So did these cars not have the B/W 9 bolt then?
His was literally a twin to the red one in the OP.
Last edited by F-body-fan; 02-08-2021 at 06:12 PM.
So here all this time I thought that the 1988 5.7 CC1 irocs were getting the same rear end as the same optioned 1987's. What changed? Stricter regulations, or did the 1988 get a little chubby somewhere?
A good friend used to have a non G92 5.7 CC1 1988 Iroc. It had the high gears & I thought it was ordered that way.
Well, I suppose it was, but thought it was an option & apparently it was not. So did these cars not have the B/W 9 bolt then?
His was literally a twin to the red one in the OP.
Yes, 2.77 as well as 3.27 and 3.45 denotes it's a BW 9 bolt.
So this was this not about weight then? I don't understand why they would eliminate gear ratios if you wanted t-tops.
When 89 T/A's finally allowed both T-tops & 5.7's I thought it was because of the weight savings of the lexan tops that allowed it to happen.
Why did the combo slip through on the 87 camaros? Sorry if this is commonly known info. I am really caught off guard by all of this.
So now that I have had some sleep & my morning coffee, some of this is coming back to me after searching G92, but to be honest I am getting a bit more confused. Decades ago, I had owned two 1987 305 automatic cars with the performance package. Were these G92 cars? They had a lower gear ratio, 4 wheels disk & I believe an engine oil cooler. Might be missing something, but those were the three things I remember.
On my 1987 L98 Camaro & 1989 L98 GTA they both have T-tops, B/W rear ends, 3.27? gears, 4 wheel disk, & engine oil coolers. I had always made the dumb assumption that those 3 things above were mandatory and part of the L98 engine option as well as the stronger B/W rear axle. Together I assumed they added too much weight for t-top 1988 trans ams so they were not available together until 89 because of the lighter lexan t-tops.
Meanwhile, I thought Irocs for some reason were still produced this way in 1988 just like 1987's & I believed the iroc was just a fuzz lighter than the Pontiac T/A. But seeing in 1988 camaros you could get the L98, T-tops, engine oil cooler, 4 wheel disks & they still have the B/W rear end, the only difference is the gear ratio? There goes the weight theory unless the weight effected the fuel economy so it required a higher gear? That would make some sense, although I have never heard that before. I am just guessing.
I would really enjoy hearing more about this when someone has the time to get into the details.
Last edited by F-body-fan; 02-09-2021 at 05:56 AM.
So now that I have had some sleep & my morning coffee, some of this is coming back to me after searching G92, but to be honest I am getting a bit more confused. Decades ago, I had owned two 1987 305 automatic cars with the performance package. Were these G92 cars? They had a lower gear ratio, 4 wheels disk & I believe an engine oil cooler. Might be missing something, but those were the three things I remember.
On my 1987 L98 Camaro & 1989 L98 GTA they both have T-tops, B/W rear ends, 3.27? gears, 4 wheel disk, & engine oil coolers. I had always made the dumb assumption that those 3 things above were mandatory and part of the L98 engine option as well as the stronger B/W rear axle. Together I assumed they added too much weight for t-top 1988 trans ams so they were not available together until 89 because of the lighter lexan t-tops.
Meanwhile, I thought Irocs for some reason were still produced this way in 1988 just like 1987's & I believed the iroc was just a fuzz lighter than the Pontiac T/A. But seeing in 1988 camaros you could get the L98, T-tops, engine oil cooler, 4 wheel disks & they still have the B/W rear end, the only difference is the gear ratio? There goes the weight theory unless the weight effected the fuel economy so it required a higher gear? That would make some sense, although I have never heard that before. I am just guessing.
I would really enjoy hearing more about this when someone has the time to get into the details.
Yes, in '87 and '88 you could get G92 on the LB9 auto. It included oil cooler, 3.23 rear axle in a 10 bolt, (vs the standard 2.73) and 145 mph speedo.
I was kinda rambling there & kinda buried my question.
I guess what I was wondering is, what is it about the package where it was a no go with the L98 & T-tops in 1988? It would seem a person could order everything that was in the G92 package except the lower gear ratio. So the weight should have been the same. Was it a fuel efficiency vs weight EPA thing? From what I learned in the last few days the 88 should have weighed the same amount as 1987 & if you could have ordered G92 & T-tops, it again should have weighed the same. Only thing I can think of is fuel economy.
Did they tighten the standards for 1988 ? Hard to believe deleting t-tops improved fuel economy a measurable amount, but maybe?
.
Last edited by F-body-fan; 02-10-2021 at 05:41 AM.
I was kinda rambling there & kinda buried my question.
I guess what I was wondering is, what is it about the package where it was a no go with the L98 & T-tops in 1988? It would seem a person could order everything that was in the G92 package except the lower gear ratio. So the weight should have been the same. Was it a fuel efficiency vs weight EPA thing? From what I learned in the last few days the 88 should have weighed the same amount as 1987 & if you could have ordered G92 & T-tops, it again should have weighed the same. Only thing I can think of is fuel economy.
Did they tighten the standards for 1988 ? Hard to believe deleting t-tops improved fuel economy a measurable amount, but maybe?
.
I think by '89, CAFE was getting tougher. GM had to offer the performance stuff because of pressure from Mustang, but you'd better really want it and and know how to order it. GM would much rather you were buying a t-top, peanut cam LB9, single cat, 700R4, 2.73 geared IROC that the sales manager ordered for stock, than a hardtop, L98 cammed LB9, dual cat, 5 speed, 3.45 geared one. Same with a 2.77 vs 3.27 geared L98. Even if it was only one or two miles per gallon on the EPA loop. And no t-tops, discouraged the average buyer from ordering CAFE killing performance packages.
Same with Mustang. Dealers ordered 2.73 geared 5.0s. The 3.08 gear was a special order "Z code".
And no t-tops, discouraged the average buyer from ordering CAFE killing performance packages.".
I never really thought about it like that. Makes a lot of sense though & probably ties into the introduction of the L98 in 1987 & it's "limited availability" which of coarse became very available.
Slowing down the flood gates of orders a tiny bit. interesting that it was the G92 in the iroc & the CC1 in the Firebird.
I remember back in the day people saying, "no t-tops in 88 because the body needed the extra strength of the added power." I never bought into that theory. Made zero sense.
Did Pontiac try curb it by charging extra money for the Lexan tops in 89? Or were things easing up a little? I don't have the window sticker for my 89, so I have no idea what that option was priced at.
Always thought it was weird that my 89 has the N10 exhaust & lexan t-tops. I figure that second cat has to weigh more that the difference in t-top weights. The whole weight thing has always been a bit confusing.
Last edited by F-body-fan; 02-10-2021 at 01:10 PM.
02-06-2021, 04:07 PM
which of coarse became very available.
