hated to bust his bubble...
02-12-2012, 03:21 PM
#21
Le Mans Master
The question is what the hell is the freeking starter doing up there? The LT5 is a great design but what were they thinking?
02-12-2012, 03:36 PM
#23
Le Mans Master
Lotus would have preferred if the starter was not in the valley -- because the PCV breather box would then have run full-length in the entire valley, instead of only being in the front half of the valley.
02-12-2012, 03:40 PM
#24
Le Mans Master
Packaging. If the starter were adjacent to the side of the block, then there would be no room for exhaust manfiold/cat in the space between the block and the framerail. One of the chief design requirements was that the LT5 had to fit into the existing C4 chassis with no significant modification.
Lotus would have preferred if the starter was not in the valley -- because the PCV breather box would then have run full-length in the entire valley, instead of only being in the front half of the valley.
Lotus would have preferred if the starter was not in the valley -- because the PCV breather box would then have run full-length in the entire valley, instead of only being in the front half of the valley.
02-12-2012, 03:58 PM
#25
Tech Contributor
Also due to this smaller size requirement even the Airconditioning compressor was undersized for the motor by design. To compenstate for the increase in interior heat load GM fitted all windshields with special solar resisant glass windshields for the ZR-1 only. GC
02-12-2012, 04:09 PM
#26
Race Director
Thread Starter
Get real. it was a junk design that is why it was replaced. A car has to be somewhat of a robust product and the opti is everything but that. A puddle can take your car out and cost hundreds if not thousands for a person that does not work on their own stuff.
A new person to vettes does not know how junk the design is or expect it since most vehicles you can spray down the engine bay. I am sure he did into try to soak the thing but they are just that temperamental.
So what is so good about the design to you? All I see is it allowed for spark when conditions allowed.
A new person to vettes does not know how junk the design is or expect it since most vehicles you can spray down the engine bay. I am sure he did into try to soak the thing but they are just that temperamental.
So what is so good about the design to you? All I see is it allowed for spark when conditions allowed.
SERIOUSLY, having worked as a design and development engineer for over 30 years, i know first hand, no matter how careful and how much time you spend on any design, murphy's law will eventually bite you in the a$$. nobody's perfect, and i learned a long time ago - don't shoot blindly from the hip without first identifying the target. i wonder how many failed, first generation optispark ignitions were caused by conditions outside the design envelope - 5%, 10%, 30%, 50%, what - ??? if anyone has any statistical data on that, i love to see it...
02-12-2012, 04:42 PM
#27
well, i have to agree with you - it is a junk design - total POS. in fact the whole frickin' car is a junk design. those idiot engineers and designers really had their heads up their butts on that one. they have no idea what's happening in the real world. i'm know, cause i'm perfect. i was perfect right out of the chute and i never make a mistake, so i never had to learn from my mistakes - wait a minute, is that a paradox - ??? - can't be - i'm perfect. not sure why i drive such a poorly designed car. those engineers and designers should have consulted us first on that POS LT1 ignition system.
SERIOUSLY, having worked as a design and development engineer for over 30 years, i know first hand, no matter how careful and how much time you spend on any design, murphy's law will eventually bite you in the a$$. nobody's perfect, and i learned a long time ago - don't shoot blindly from the hip without first identifying the target. i wonder how many failed, first generation optispark ignitions were caused by conditions outside the design envelope - 5%, 10%, 30%, 50%, what - ??? if anyone has any statistical data on that, i love to see it...
SERIOUSLY, having worked as a design and development engineer for over 30 years, i know first hand, no matter how careful and how much time you spend on any design, murphy's law will eventually bite you in the a$$. nobody's perfect, and i learned a long time ago - don't shoot blindly from the hip without first identifying the target. i wonder how many failed, first generation optispark ignitions were caused by conditions outside the design envelope - 5%, 10%, 30%, 50%, what - ??? if anyone has any statistical data on that, i love to see it...
Other than that I came off rude and now see that
02-12-2012, 04:58 PM
#29
Moderator
Member Since: Jun 2002
Location: Maryville Tn
Posts: 46,071
Received 109 Likes
on
84 Posts
CI 5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12 Veteran
St. Jude Donor '09-'10-'11-12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-‘18-'19-'20-'21-'22-'23
NCM Sinkhole Donor
Hate to hear that happened to the new owner. I've never sprayed my engine down (learned about the LT1 and opti while I still owned my '85).
I'd love to hear what Anil Kulkarni (worked for GM in '92) has to say about the opti-spark...he had alot to do with the LT1 and designing the opti, If I'm not mistaken.
I'd love to hear what Anil Kulkarni (worked for GM in '92) has to say about the opti-spark...he had alot to do with the LT1 and designing the opti, If I'm not mistaken.
02-12-2012, 06:14 PM
#30
Safety Car
If I'm not mistaken, it was the omission of a planned vent that caused the early Opti-Sparks to have issues. Later ones with the vacuum vents seem to be much better.
I am willing to bet A LOT of trouble with LT1's is blamed on the Opti, when in fact it is something else. Few on here can call themselves expert diagnosticians when it comes to cars, and even fewer average Corvette owners can do so. Lets face it a LOT of folks throw money and parts at a problem. Not all but I'm willing to bet a majority of them do.
As far as the Opti-Spark being junk, I disagree, the combination of a omitted vent and a harsh environment led to its early demise. As far as a timing device goes, if you can find a more accurate method, I'd love to hear about it. Lots of other manufactures used optical distributors they just didn't put them under a water pump at the front of the engine. Had it been placed in the traditional spot like a late model 4.3L V6, we would not be having this conversation.
I am willing to bet A LOT of trouble with LT1's is blamed on the Opti, when in fact it is something else. Few on here can call themselves expert diagnosticians when it comes to cars, and even fewer average Corvette owners can do so. Lets face it a LOT of folks throw money and parts at a problem. Not all but I'm willing to bet a majority of them do.
As far as the Opti-Spark being junk, I disagree, the combination of a omitted vent and a harsh environment led to its early demise. As far as a timing device goes, if you can find a more accurate method, I'd love to hear about it. Lots of other manufactures used optical distributors they just didn't put them under a water pump at the front of the engine. Had it been placed in the traditional spot like a late model 4.3L V6, we would not be having this conversation.
02-12-2012, 06:41 PM
#31
Team Owner
Member Since: Jan 2009
Location: Somewhere in Mo
Posts: 73,434
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes
on
27 Posts
St. Jude Donor '09-'10, '14
If I'm not mistaken, it was the omission of a planned vent that caused the early Opti-Sparks to have issues. Later ones with the vacuum vents seem to be much better.
I am willing to bet A LOT of trouble with LT1's is blamed on the Opti, when in fact it is something else. Few on here can call themselves expert diagnosticians when it comes to cars, and even fewer average Corvette owners can do so. Lets face it a LOT of folks throw money and parts at a problem. Not all but I'm willing to bet a majority of them do.
As far as the Opti-Spark being junk, I disagree, the combination of a omitted vent and a harsh environment led to its early demise. As far as a timing device goes, if you can find a more accurate method, I'd love to hear about it. Lots of other manufactures used optical distributors they just didn't put them under a water pump at the front of the engine. Had it been placed in the traditional spot like a late model 4.3L V6, we would not be having this conversation.
I am willing to bet A LOT of trouble with LT1's is blamed on the Opti, when in fact it is something else. Few on here can call themselves expert diagnosticians when it comes to cars, and even fewer average Corvette owners can do so. Lets face it a LOT of folks throw money and parts at a problem. Not all but I'm willing to bet a majority of them do.
As far as the Opti-Spark being junk, I disagree, the combination of a omitted vent and a harsh environment led to its early demise. As far as a timing device goes, if you can find a more accurate method, I'd love to hear about it. Lots of other manufactures used optical distributors they just didn't put them under a water pump at the front of the engine. Had it been placed in the traditional spot like a late model 4.3L V6, we would not be having this conversation.
And to whoever said it, yeah I found this forum when I had my first fuel delivery issue and thought I would fix it myself. But I've seen tons of people on here reading, looking, and asking questions while they search for a vette.
I'm glad I didn't though, if I would have came to this forum before I was a vette owner, I would never have bought one. This is where you see all the problems.
02-12-2012, 07:22 PM
#32
Race Director
Oh how true that is!For every issue (any issue) you read about here, there are hundreds if not thousands of similar equipped cars without issues.
02-12-2012, 07:39 PM
#33
Banned Loser
Member Since: Aug 2009
Location: They say you learn from your mistakes, I must be a genius
Posts: 52,839
Received 249 Likes
on
115 Posts
2017 Corvette of the Year
2016 C4 of Year Finalist
Creator of the "Original" whining and crying thread
St. Jude Donor '14-'15-'16-'17
Don't see many threads here saying "hey my car is running perfect, i've got nothing to bitch about today" 
02-12-2012, 08:34 PM
#36
Race Director
Man I hate to see someone start off their vette experience like this guy is.
Hey we need to see these kind of threads. I've had my 93 fours years and had very few problems and has run like a top. Well it has tell now and I'm replacing the opti and water pump this week. Don't get me wrong, after 19 years it's time to replace a few things so no complaints from me.
Hey we need to see these kind of threads. I've had my 93 fours years and had very few problems and has run like a top. Well it has tell now and I'm replacing the opti and water pump this week. Don't get me wrong, after 19 years it's time to replace a few things so no complaints from me.
02-13-2012, 01:05 AM
#37
Intermediate
If I'm not mistaken, it was the omission of a planned vent that caused the early Opti-Sparks to have issues. Later ones with the vacuum vents seem to be much better.
I am willing to bet A LOT of trouble with LT1's is blamed on the Opti, when in fact it is something else. Few on here can call themselves expert diagnosticians when it comes to cars, and even fewer average Corvette owners can do so. Lets face it a LOT of folks throw money and parts at a problem. Not all but I'm willing to bet a majority of them do.
As far as the Opti-Spark being junk, I disagree, the combination of a omitted vent and a harsh environment led to its early demise. As far as a timing device goes, if you can find a more accurate method, I'd love to hear about it. Lots of other manufactures used optical distributors they just didn't put them under a water pump at the front of the engine. Had it been placed in the traditional spot like a late model 4.3L V6, we would not be having this conversation.
I am willing to bet A LOT of trouble with LT1's is blamed on the Opti, when in fact it is something else. Few on here can call themselves expert diagnosticians when it comes to cars, and even fewer average Corvette owners can do so. Lets face it a LOT of folks throw money and parts at a problem. Not all but I'm willing to bet a majority of them do.
As far as the Opti-Spark being junk, I disagree, the combination of a omitted vent and a harsh environment led to its early demise. As far as a timing device goes, if you can find a more accurate method, I'd love to hear about it. Lots of other manufactures used optical distributors they just didn't put them under a water pump at the front of the engine. Had it been placed in the traditional spot like a late model 4.3L V6, we would not be having this conversation.
02-13-2012, 02:47 PM
#38
Melting Slicks
what am I going to do now!! Oh, just open the hood and start d****** around, I'm shure I can F*** something up...If we opend the hoods on our other cars half as much as we do on the Vette's...who knows, just saying.
02-13-2012, 04:03 PM
#39
Drifting
Member Since: Dec 2007
Location: woodbury new jersey
Posts: 1,315
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
11 Posts
im tired of seeing sooo many people talk trash on the opti. before i bought my car i was on these forums for over a year and almost got scared away from buying an lt1 car just cause what people say about the opti. my car has over 140,000 miles on it and i have all the reciepts since it was new, and the opti was never changed. i changed it back when i bought the car. it took me a few hours. ill say the job was wayyy easier and quicker then the time me and a buddy changed the fuel injectors on his l98, a job that takes me maybe 15 minutes on my lt1. i think alot of the negativity around the lt1 comes from l98 owners who feel like they need to find something that theres does better
