Supporter Victory Lane

| With the car being a month newer than yours Charley the window of when 4K started to be used comes into play. That may be the question 
tom @ camaropacecars.com ( remove the space between m,@,c)
|
| | |
Supporter 2009 Victory Lane

| quote: Originally posted by #92: the tag I just posted is on my car. I assumed you thought the RM car wasn't a L78 because of the 4P on it's tag so I posted mine to show you that L78's also got 4P tags. why do you think the RM car is a small block car ?
Hi Charley, Sorry about the confusion on my part and thanks for clearing it up. I did assume that the 4P from the first tag you posted was a small block. Those situations are always tricky and catch me off guard when a big block shows up with a 4P on the trim tag. I was not sure when GM changed over from 4P to 4K. I thought that 4P's were used earlier in the production year for 302's and 375hp Camaro's.  Thanks for sharing your trim tag!  |
| | | Posts: 1719 | Location: Sacramento/Auburn, CA | Registered: 12 December 2005 | 
IP
|
|
Supporter 2007 Victory Lane

| RM car is VERY likely L78. I'd bet money on it!!! |
| | |
Supporter Victory Lane

| on it! 
tom @ camaropacecars.com ( remove the space between m,@,c)
|
| | |
Supporter 2009 Victory Lane

| quote: Originally posted by #92: the tag I just posted is on my car. I assumed you thought the RM car wasn't a L78 because of the 4P on it's tag so I posted mine to show you that L78's also got 4P tags. why do you think the RM car is a small block car ?
Charley, Is the engine in the #92 the original one? Does it have it's VIN stamped on the pad? |
| | | Posts: 1719 | Location: Sacramento/Auburn, CA | Registered: 12 December 2005 | 
IP
|
|
Racing
| No my car had it's engine changed at Chevrolet Engineering. |
| | |
Racing
| My car came to Chevrolet Engineering as a L78. They then changed it to a L34-L35 hybrid. |
| | |
Supporter 2009 Victory Lane

| Charley, Your a man of few words!  OK now it makes sense to me.  I didn't know your Pacer had an L78 originally in it and replaced it with another engine. So they replaced it with a hybrid? Why didn't they use the L78 that came in it? You would think that the L78 would suffice and be able to do the job.  |
| | | Posts: 1719 | Location: Sacramento/Auburn, CA | Registered: 12 December 2005 | 
IP
|
|
Victory Lane

| Tom it is pretty well and widely known that when Chevrolet brought the pace cars to the track for testing and evaluation the Speedway officials deemed the solid lifter high-power L-78 as "too radical" for use. It is also thought that they possibly didn't care for possibly having to do periodic valve lash adjustments. At that point Chevrolet Engineering issued "Chevrolet Engineering Build Order #98168" which spelled out the work to be done for the actual pace cars to ready them for use at the track, including the removal of their factory drivetrain to be replaced with they hybrid hydraulic lifter 325/350HP 396 and THM400 3-spd automatic transmision. Go the link below and follow the links there to see each page of the engineering build order. http://www.camaropacecars.com/1967/Promotion_car.htm
Mike L.
|
| | |
Racing

| quote: My car came to Chevrolet Engineering as a L78. They then changed it to a L34-L35 hybrid.
That makes sense. Was Chevrolet using the 4K code at the time or only the 4P for SS? |
| | | Posts: 129 | Location: Cincinnati, OH | Registered: 30 June 2009 | 
IP
|
|
Supporter 2007 Victory Lane

| 4P was still being used at this point in time.
Mike |
| | |
Supporter Victory Lane

| This car still remains to be seen as an L78 but it is in fact a real Pacecar etc. More work and research is being done behind the scenes but for now suffice to say the car has been entered to The Registry and the new owner is a stand up fellow 
tom @ camaropacecars.com ( remove the space between m,@,c)
|
| | |