Meissen's LT1 Build-up Thread

[meissen]

OK good news. My dad went to Murrays and had a good discussion with a guy there that used to rebuild engines with another guy. He said that they always went 5lb over what the factory rating is to make up for the friction and he also said that if they were TTY bolts then it'd say so on their parts lookup. He put in '95 and it did not say TTY. He checked all the way up to 98 and that's when he finally got a bolt that said TTY - so it looks like (at least in Murray's database) than 93-97 bolts are NOT TTY at all which would confirm what Shoebox was saying about 93-97 being the same and that they only switched to Torque-angle specs, but that they're not TTY bolts.

That said, my dad and I discussed it some more and we're both in agreement that we're going to check what they're torqued at right now and then torque them down to 5ft/lb over what factory specs are and we're just going to call it a day and not replace the bolts and we won't have to replace the gasket because we're just continuing to torque them down we're not uncompressing the gasket at all.

[sman]

Sounds like a plan B! I agree with the bolts, I called my guy back at the dealer, and he said there is NOTHING in the system to indicate that the headbolts on 93-97 lt1's are TTY. Why the hell he didnt tell me this earlier, beats the hell out of me. He did say the system just said it RECOMMENDS replacing when the heads are pulled. But its not nessisary from what hes looking at. Sometimes I just want to reach though the phone and smack the guy....

Anywho. Good luck Brian. Depending on whos tranny and converter Ridings favors, you might just beat me to this since Im working a double both days this weekend.

[JoeliusZ28]

here is some good data for you brian:

http://www.camaroz28.com/forums/showthread.php?t=492912

[9T8W66]

OK good news. My dad went to Murrays and had a good discussion with a guy there that used to rebuild engines with another guy. He said that they always went 5lb over what the factory rating is to make up for the friction and he also said that if they were TTY bolts then it'd say so on their parts lookup. He put in '95 and it did not say TTY. He checked all the way up to 98 and that's when he finally got a bolt that said TTY - so it looks like (at least in Murray's database) than 93-97 bolts are NOT TTY at all which would confirm what Shoebox was saying about 93-97 being the same and that they only switched to Torque-angle specs, but that they're not TTY bolts.

That said, my dad and I discussed it some more and we're both in agreement that we're going to check what they're torqued at right now and then torque them down to 5ft/lb over what factory specs are and we're just going to call it a day and not replace the bolts and we won't have to replace the gasket because we're just continuing to torque them down we're not uncompressing the gasket at all.

Brian
I am Sorry if my comments caused all this confusion, sounds like you guys have this all figured out now. Crossing my fingers

[meissen]

Hey no problem, Craig! It's all a learning experience and atleast now I know. I think the real culprit for the confusion was Shoebox's image that says 1996+ are TTY bolts.

[meissen]

Well we took the rocker arms off and checked torque - almost all of them were ~55-60 ft/lb. So we torqued them all down - and my dad said on the passenger side it wasn't even before but now it is. Dad adjusted valve lash while I read off the firing order to him. We're all set there with valve lash I think - though we'll find out real fast when we fire it up in a couple weeks. We went and got an oil filter and some replacement valve cover gaskets - the ones that came with the felpro are a good 2" shorter than the stock gaskets that were on there.

[JoeliusZ28]

they are supposed to be to small to seal better. your stock ones are just stretched out from holding that position so long.

[98blackbeauty]

they are supposed to be to small to seal better. your stock ones are just stretched out from holding that position so long.

thats what others have also said too, but the one in the gasket set were at least 1 to 1.5 " to short and when streched the corners were pulled in my fear was they would not seal the corners good. So went to Murrays and they had nice rubber or silicone gaskets for valve covers they were the same size as the old ones and fit snugly on the valve cover like you would expect. maybe the cast iron heads are a little smaller than the alum. heads.

[JoeliusZ28]

thats what others have also said too, but the one in the gasket set were at least 1 to 1.5 " to short and when streched the corners were pulled in my fear was they would not seal the corners good. So went to Murrays and they had nice rubber or silicone gaskets for valve covers they were the same size as the old ones and fit snugly on the valve cover like you would expect. maybe the cast iron heads are a little smaller than the alum. heads.

they are the same size. The fel-pros i used were at least an inch and a half too short and they seal fine.

[meissen]

Yeah I don't know - the basic OEM replacement gaskets we bought from Murrays are a lot closer to the same size as ones that were on there. The fel pros were making me nervous too - the seal didn't seem too bad but it was pretty stretched - also we're stretching these around the Canton valve covers which are not exactly the same as the stockers when it comes to how the valve gasket sits on it.

[meissen]

Crawled under the car and painted the passenger side wheel well tonight after Ang and I watched Eagle Eye. I felt shitty for not working on the car and just wanted to get the stuff done. Angie's getting less tolerant of how much time the car is consuming and she's being mildly vocal about how much she wants the project to be done. Well, project can't get done if I dont work on it so I went out there and got some progress done.

I'm amazed to say that I have finally gone through all two pints of the POR-15. I was able to paint almost all of the under carraige - I got all the parts that see road grime, the only part I didn't get to is above the rear end and behind it which was all very, very clean. Here's a quick break down of what I covered - which I think is pretty good for the two pints:

• 85% of the under carraige
• "Frame rails" in the engine bay
• Most of the firewall
• All 4 inner wheel wells
• 50% of the k-member and a-arms (I painted over the rustoleum)
• 50% of the rear end (I painted the top half - will have to paint the bottom half with the rustoleum I have)

Not bad at all!



So mildly funny pics - here's two pictures of me pushing the shock up with one finger/thumb:





Wow - look at how well the shock springs back out after being compressed!!!





No wonder I was bottoming out all the time. Here's some pics of the under carriage with all the por-15 on it and one of "the black hole"







Rear end with the new stainless steel brake lines attached. My dad wasn't too pleased with the fitment - he said that the bends weren't formed in the rights pots but hey for the price and the quality overall of the stainless steel and the such it looks like a good deal.




Engine bay with final coat of red:







New power steering reservoir and pressure line:

[MP81]

Looking good Brian!

Don't worry Angie, it'll be done soon! Then it'll be time to start another project.

[sman]

Ls1 into angie's bird?

Look great B! Kinda wish i would have done something with the undercarige.....

[meissen]

BTW Mike told me he's gearing yours so you'll be slower than me.






























jk, I'm picking my transmission up on Monday or Tuesday it looks like so the engine won't be going in until sometime this week, still hoping to fire it up on Saturday. I'm seriously thinking about talking my boss into giving me Thursday and Friday of next week off so I can devote two full days to working on the car before Saturday's fire up.

[BP_Z28]

nice..im thinking about coating Yoshi now with the POR15