Were the 92-99 carry over cars from 87-91 Under the skin? - GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Chev, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat


General GM Chat When starting new posts, please specify YEAR, MAKE, MODEL, ENGINE type, and whatever modifications you have made. Chat about all things GM (and related cars). Off-topic stuff should be in the Lounge, and all Model specific mechanical problems should be posted in the proper forum.

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-26-2006, 01:11 PM   #1
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 87
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
fatboyq is on a distinguished road
Default Were the 92-99 carry over cars from 87-91 Under the skin?

Meaning did GM use the same suspension/chasis from the 87-91 model year onto the new 92+ body design? I know the skin got changed new doors, fenders etc but was the cars chasis platform the same underneath the new skin?

I was looking at my friends 91 SE and my 94 SSE when I peeked under the car his suspension and exhaust setup looked exactly like mine did. Rode on the same 110inch wheel base etc. So that got me thinking was the 92+ model new from the ground up or just a new body on the same old chasis?

Engine(5hp diff),tranny, wheelbase,fuel tank,battery, alternator, radiator locations were the same as a 91 model.

just trying to fiugre out what chaged mechanically on the new body design? I want to know if the suspension was totally redesigned, electrical system redesigned etc..
fatboyq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 01:34 PM   #2
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 0
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
banned3800 is on a distinguished road
Default

Basicly it was the same car remodeled from the second floor up... lol

There were several improvements over the years... Both in front suspension and structural rigididty... The 91 models got a lot of the newer stuff before the 92 model year redesign... The 91-92 Bonneville use the same springs, struts and the like... But the 91 had the THM440-T4( 4T60 ) fully hydraulic trans and the 92 had the 4T60-E or Electronic trans... Yes they pretty much rode on the same wheel base and underpinnings... Its amazing to see the parts that can swap from year to year...

For example I wanted a larger rear sway bar for my 95.... so I got the 21mm rear sway for it and yanked the 18 mm stock rear sway bar...

I looked at my 91 LE and saw the dinky 14mm sway on it and decided to throw the 18 mm sway on it for better handling.... It was a good improvement..

So yes even with the diffrences they are very simmilar

__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
banned3800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 01:58 PM   #3
DINOSAURUS BOOSTUS

Expert Gearhead
 
BillBoost37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Enfield, CT
Posts: 41,391
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of light
Default

If you search on Frankenbonne you'll see that the entire subframe, steering, motor and even torque axis mount bolt right up.

90 had a vacuum can on the firewall...97 had a cruise control module there... bolted right up. Fans look identical...stuff like that...Even the fuel lines sat right ...on the other side of the frame..but they went right on.
BillBoost37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 02:37 PM   #4
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 87
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
fatboyq is on a distinguished road
Default

So basically it'* identical to the 91 model, under the new shape lies the same old beast. I knew they had to be similar casue my frineds 91 felt very similar to my 94 when I drove it. Now I know why,cause it basically is the same car under neath.

Im sure in 2000 they had allot of Chasis imporvements over the 99 model year.

that kinda sucks GM didn't give us a better chasis/ frame new suspension for a supposedly new model 92+

Still love the car just kinda feel like they sent cheap on us.
fatboyq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 02:41 PM   #5
DINOSAURUS BOOSTUS

Expert Gearhead
 
BillBoost37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Enfield, CT
Posts: 41,391
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of light
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatboyq
So basically it'* identical to the 91 model, under the new shape lies the same old beast. I knew they had to be similar casue my frineds 91 felt very similar to my 94 when I drove it. Now I know why,cause it basically is the same car under neath.

Im sure in 2000 they had allot of Chasis imporvements over the 99 model year.

that kinda sucks GM didn't give us a better chasis/ frame new suspension for a supposedly new model 92+

Still love the car just kinda feel like they sent cheap on us.
If you had a GM 350 back in the day and liked it..would you say that about the 5.7L today? It'* the same basic block..with difference..
BillBoost37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 03:42 PM   #6
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 649
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Jason1351 is on a distinguished road
Default

The newer 5.7'* are 346 c.i.
Jason1351 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 04:08 PM   #7
DINOSAURUS BOOSTUS

Expert Gearhead
 
BillBoost37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Enfield, CT
Posts: 41,391
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of light
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason1351
The newer 5.7'* are 346 c.i.
It'* a comparison..not an exactness example.
BillBoost37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 04:44 PM   #8
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 649
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Jason1351 is on a distinguished road
Default

I knew that
Jason1351 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 05:14 PM   #9
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 87
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
fatboyq is on a distinguished road
Default

I hear what your saying however; and engine and a car are completer different things. I don't mind they GM used the 3.8L from the prevous years, it just that when you redesign a car from the ground up you tend to improve suspension geometry, steering effort, ride quality, structural integrity, less wind noise, engine noise etc to improve your product i.e. Bonneville. It was more of a re-skin then a redesign to save money etc, increase profits on the car since they had been making the chasis for years.

Just trying to figure out what really changed in 92+ models compared to the 87-91. I searched the web but found nothing much. For example 1n 1997 when BMW redesigned the 5 series they had aluminum suspension composnents and the frame/ chasis was 50% more ridgid etc, according to edmunds.com not direct quote on #*.

This is what Im trying to figure out with the 92 redesign.
fatboyq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 05:49 PM   #10
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 0
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
banned3800 is on a distinguished road
Default

The 92 model were a more rigid design than any of the 87-91 Bonnies... I believe that the improvement was more than 50%... Some of that improvement is evident in the 91 Models as a lot of the newer technology was added in 91... Both the C and H bodies has some structural improvements that made the car more rigid...

The Underpinnings are the same, but the unibody did go through some changes...

And to top it off what suspension did your friends SE Bonneville have?

__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
banned3800 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Venom~The Snake Sheds It's Skin GXP Venom Your Ride: GM Pictures & Videos 14 02-23-2010 06:42 PM
Through steel..... and skin and bone... OLBlueEyesBonne Your Other Rides: Pics & Videos 9 05-24-2007 01:06 AM
Skin Cancer on my 96 SE BigV07 Detailing & Appearance 8 03-31-2007 11:04 AM
My Next Tattoo... (mild fantasy art skin warning) ReallyAGXP Lounge 5 03-30-2007 08:55 PM
Artist Says She Made Pistol Out of Own Skin MOS95B Lounge 8 04-27-2004 02:30 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:56 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.