:excited: :woot: :woot: :excited:

:thumbsup:

I have a 67 Firebird. I stopped by AC and talked to him about rebuilding a 69 Pontiac block that I have. He had a couple of fully rebuilt al LS long blocks sitting on stands, and said for the same money of rebuilding the Pontiac, I can have one of those. I was restoring the Firebird back to stock, and wanted old school motor. A month ago, I sold the Pontiac motor and began an LS swap. Should have gone LS with AC back then, and could have saved me boat load of $$$.

Tu

One quick question. Who makes your roll bar? I'm thinking of doing the same to my Firebird.

Hey Rick, I just met another local guy here that is doing a 67 Firebird project with an LS engine swap. He just picked up an LS2 out of a GTO a few weeks ago. You’ll be really happy going with the LS engine… you just can’t beat the new technology with computer control, and fuel injection. Also the lighter weight with the aluminum block is nice. I know that I will never go back to a gen 1 carburated engine.

I bought the 4-point roll bar kit from Detroit Speed. It’s a nice design and all of the parts fit perfectly.

Thanks Dale.

Hey Dale,

Back to your clutch set up: I've got a question/caution for you. D&D tells me that their spacer is designed for the LS1 (Camaro) slave, not the ZR1 slave, and that Mark S. used LS1 slaves in his similar setups.

It might be a good idea to compare the sizes of the LS1 and ZR1 slaves to make sure you don't have a problem down the road.

If it works fine now, how could it be a problem down the road? I am just asking because I am new to all of this. I am only in the mock up stages but I have already purchased the complete set up Dale has. Wondering if this is something I should change now.

Good question. A couple of things come to mind:
1. Too much or or not enough release bearing to clutch finger clearance could lead to premature bearing failure, or
2. Too much or not enough wear adjustment could lead to shortened clutch life.

Or it might be just fine as is. Does anybody know of the dimensional differences (if any) between the LS1 and the LS9 slaves? I think that's what we need to know.

I don’t know the dimensional difference is between the LS1 slave and the ZR1 slave, and I’m not sure which bell housing Mark Stielow used on his build. I am using a QT bell part#RM-8020… D&D “ZR1 Clutch Spacer” Part#BC40… GM ZR1 throw out bearing part#24237569… GM pilot bearing part#12557583… GM ZR1 twin disc clutch, and a Katech (Fidanza) aluminum flywheel.

I was very careful to check all the critical dimensions when installing the new transmission and clutch, including the free play on the slave… and the fit of the transmission input shaft to the pilot bearing. Using the parts listed above, everything fit correctly and the clearance between the clutch fingers and slave face was ~0.12”. I did not have to use any shims on the ZR1 slave.

When I called D&D and told them I was installing a ZR1 twin disc clutch and ZR1 slave they asked which bell I was using. They knew exactly which spacer I needed to use with the QT bell. They had the spacer I needed on the shelf. I’ve been driving the car for a couple of months now and everything works great.

I do appreciate the word of caution though… it’s good to have discussions like this. When you mix and match parts things can go wrong.

:lateral:

John, I found out some info on the dimensions for the for the LS1 and LS9 slaves. I contacted Katech and they said the ZR1 LS9 slave is 2-3/8” when compressed. I went to an auto parts store and measured an LS1 slave for a 2002 camaro (AC Delco #386433, Summit #24264182) and it was about 2-1/2” when compressed.

It looks like either the LS1 or LS9 slave would work. The plumbing is slightly different on the two slaves, and the ZR1 slave has a rubber boot covering the spring and the LS1 slave did not… I’m not sure what other differences there might be.