CRG Discussion Forum

Camaro Research Group Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: OLD IRON on March 22, 2011, 08:06:20 AM

Title: 1968 L/89
Post by: OLD IRON on March 22, 2011, 08:06:20 AM
Does anyone know what month the first L/89's were made?
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: KurtS on March 22, 2011, 07:39:00 PM
I've seen nothing that indicated they weren't available at the start of production.
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: Jerry@CHP on March 22, 2011, 07:54:59 PM
They were available at the beginning of 1968 production.  As a matter of fact, find the May 1968 issue of Super Street Cars.  They did an awesome article on one of the first '68 L89's to arrive in the NY area.  Has the early bumble bee SS stripe meaning it was built Sept-Dec 1967.  Deliever to Oak Hill Chevrolet, Eastchester, NY.

One of the best articles out there with many photos.

Jerry 
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: OLD IRON on March 23, 2011, 06:39:45 AM
Thanks for the info' Kurt & Jerry.

Were the L/89's assembled at both plants?

Joe.
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: 1968 Z28 on March 23, 2011, 01:29:14 PM
All big block engines were assembled at the Tonawanda (NY) engine plant.
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: KurtS on March 23, 2011, 02:08:05 PM
And both assembly plants built L89 cars.
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: L78racer on October 09, 2011, 04:52:27 PM
Did the L89 use a different piston than the iron head?
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: bertfam on October 09, 2011, 06:28:59 PM
I'm assuming you mean different from the L78, and the answer would be no. Only difference between the L78 and L89 was the addition of the aluminum heads.

Ed
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: L78racer on October 09, 2011, 07:19:37 PM
Thanks. I'm assuming the aluminum head also used a composite gasket. Wouldn't you take a compression hit by the thicker gasket?
Title: Re: 1968 L/89
Post by: bertfam on October 09, 2011, 08:15:00 PM
Yes, a different gasket was used. Cast iron L78 heads used the 3863199 gasket while the aluminum L89 heads used the 3921940 gasket. The "compressed thickness" probably had minimal effect, if any, on the compression ratio.

Ed