changing crossfire C4 to carburation

Page 2 of 2  
It was in the Camaro from 1982!
You and the other guy, should be careful of cigarettes with white dust on them.
RK


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
what was in the camaro from 1982? the 7004R trans?
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 19:13:09 GMT, "Refinish King"

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They used the 200-4R for a while, then switched to 700R4. Don't remember when.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I don't remember if it was manual or automatic:
Call them at 570-644-0777, ask for Paul.
RK

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The crossfire system in the Z-28's only lasted 2 years, In 1984 the LU5 option was dropped and it was back to LG4 and L69 which in 1984 sported closed loop carbs!!!!! That system was not the same as the Corvette 1984 version by a far cry (they were the same POS that was installed on the 4 cylinders). It was so poorly designed that the most HP they could get out of the that 305 was a rated 160!
The TBI's used on the 1984 Corvette would not be used in regular GM production until late 1986!
Remind us not to send you to the parts store.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Cross-Fire TBI system on the 84 was two GM 200 series TBI's. The same TBI's that would appear in GM's medium cars and light trucks 3 years later. Synchronization of the TBI's was done via the ECU. It was a good system, fuel efficient, and got rid of that massive amount of vacuum lines that draped the intake manifold, but lacked the kind of performance you want in a Corvette.
I spoke with a welder the other day and he said that unless the manifold is broken in half it is not a problem repair it.(In the neighborhood of $100). A couple years ago he repaired a smashed runner on a SBC manifold for me. Looked like a factory new manifold when he was done. If you have a skilled welder with the right tooling he can work wonders.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've seen a lot of cars at junkyards that had been converted, usually because the previous owner didn't understand EFI enough to fix it. As soon as emissions inspections come, the car is useless. Strip the body for parts and crush the rest.

It'll need a standalone controller for the converter lockup. Such a device is available. The TV cable has to hook up to something or it'll burn up the transmission. A trans swap isn't an option due to the driveline beam.

No it isn't.

Fix it right. It's your car, of course. You'll do what you want.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

my 84/c4 runs very well with a carb. high output coil and wires, hooker headers and free flow exhaust. I do wish it were more street legal....

the only thing I did was add a good temp gage because the old one was broken. the others gages work fine. the led dash also works fine.

mine does...
--
'Key
=====




Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
'Key is correct. My 700R4 ('89) uses a TV cable and I believe it didn't get changed out for electronics until OBD-II was fully implemented, probably after '92 or '93. On the '84 the ECU does control the torque converter lockup clutch and that could be handled by a manual switch.
Question for 'Key. What are you using for a speedometer? And, did you leave the ECU in place to run it? Reason I ask is that early C4's divided the mph pulse signal from the transmission by 2, to accommodate speed signals above 120mph in the computer. I could be wrong but I think the 'digital dash' doesn't use the standard GM convention for pulses per mile.
That said, I'm still not supportive of scrapping the crossfire. I think the crossfire will be the least expensive route, both right away and over the long run--particularly if we see $5 gas. It will idle better, year-round, probably perform better and will avoid the hassle of getting the advance curve squared away. -- pj
'Key wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I recall seeing an aftermarket TCC lockup controller in the Summit catalog. It was intended for swapping 700R4's into non computer controlled cars but would work in this situation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

don't personally work on my car. my wrench/friend has done all the work on my car. I AM using the stock speedo. my ECU is still in place and controlls some things but not all. I don't seem to have any problems with the 'digital dash' .
--
'Key
=====
---snip to trim---
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

On an '84, the speed sensor feeds the digital cluster directly. The ECM is then fed a speed signal from the cluster. This was apparently done to simplify operation of the cruise control, which is controlled by the cluster.
Fixitman
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

On an '84, the speed sensor feeds the digital cluster directly. The ECM is then fed a speed signal from the cluster. This was apparently done to simplify operation of the cruise control, which is controlled by the cluster.
Fixitman
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.