Optispark?! What the hell?!
Cadillac
 

Cadillac Forums | Help Us Help You | Advertise | Cadillac Parts | Cadillac News | Cadillac Classifieds / (Old System)

Cadillac Technical Archive | Cadillac Dealers | Cadillac Reviews | Cadillac Dealer Reviews | Cadillac Vendors

CadillacForums.com is the premier Cadillac Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21
5.0 and 5.7 Discussion, Optispark?! What the hell?! in Cadillac Engine Technical Discussion; Why would GM install a distributor as complicated and inaccessable as the Optispark on the LT1 when they had the ...
  1. #1
    I~LUV~Caddys8792's Avatar
    I~LUV~Caddys8792 is offline Moderator
    Automobile(s): 1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Roseville, MN.
    Age
    27
    Posts
    34,087

    Optispark?! What the hell?!

    Why would GM install a distributor as complicated and inaccessable as the Optispark on the LT1 when they had the technology and the know how to install distributorless ignition on the LT1 like the system used on the 3800 and Northstar?

    I ask because a customer brought in a '96 Caprice Classic into work today with the LT1, and when the tech had it on the hoist, he pointed it out to me, and to get it off, you have to get the fan out, and the waterpump off to get at it. PLUS, the spark plug wires are like 2-3 feet long then. And the distributor is atleast $350 to buy new. ATLEAST $350, plus labor.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    CadillacForums.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    90Brougham350's Avatar
    90Brougham350 is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 94 FWB, 93 SDV, 94 FWB (sold), 90 Brougham (sold)
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    River Falls, WI
    Age
    29
    Posts
    3,730

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    I'm sure one of the LT-1 guys will chime in, but my understanding is that the ignition components don't need replacing for like 100,000 miles and there's no carbon buildup on the contacts like in a gen. 1 smal lblock. Then again, I could be dead wrong, I have been before!

  4. #3
    Stoneage_Caddy's Avatar
    Stoneage_Caddy is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): Gobi 01 Frontier/Ishi 96 Nighthawk/Gladys 94 Deville I Loved
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Undisclosed location in FL
    Posts
    14,603

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    i think LT1s eventually got distributor-less because ive seen a couple with the coil packs down low on the engine ......maybe it was just corvettes that got it ....

  5. #4
    N0DIH's Avatar
    N0DIH is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Automobile(s): 94 Fleetwood Brougham
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Age
    47
    Posts
    7,512

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    Nope, LT1's had Optis to the bitter end. 2 flavors out there, second generation is significantly better due to venting to reduce moisture.

    They aren't perfect, but it is a new approach to timing, it is ANGLE based, as opposed to TIME based like conventional distributors. Being it uses a crank shaft and camshaft sensors, it can very accurately time the engine, unique as it treats the engine as 8 separate 1 cyl engines as opposed to having 1 8 cyl engine. So each cyl can have its own uniqie timing if the PCM determines that is needed.

  6. #5
    I~LUV~Caddys8792's Avatar
    I~LUV~Caddys8792 is offline Moderator
    Automobile(s): 1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Roseville, MN.
    Age
    27
    Posts
    34,087
    Thread Starter

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    Did the usage of the Optispark have anything to do with the reverse cooling habits on the LT1?

    Any other GM motors use Optispark?

  7. #6
    N0DIH's Avatar
    N0DIH is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Automobile(s): 94 Fleetwood Brougham
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Age
    47
    Posts
    7,512

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    Nope, no one else used the Opti other than the L99, aka the 4300 V8.

    It has fantastic resolution, 720 pulses for each rotation. So there is unparalleled precision.

    As for the reverse cooling, that was a feature designed into the LT1/L99, but never made it to other engines. If you look closely at the LS1, it looks like it was in the original plan, but the lawsuit that GM lost on the LT1 discontinued its use on other engines. Bummer....

    The reverse cooling on the LT1 allows iron heads on a 10:1 compression with 87 octane and as high as 34 degrees timing in stock form with no pinging! I would say it works!

  8. #7
    I~LUV~Caddys8792's Avatar
    I~LUV~Caddys8792 is offline Moderator
    Automobile(s): 1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Roseville, MN.
    Age
    27
    Posts
    34,087
    Thread Starter

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    Quote Originally Posted by N0DIH View Post
    The reverse cooling on the LT1 allows iron heads on a 10:1 compression with 87 octane and as high as 34 degrees timing in stock form with no pinging! I would say it works!
    I always wondered how GM could squeeze that much power from that engine and not require premium fuel.

  9. #8
    UGOTIT is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    59

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    The optispark on the LT1 is the worst,I always had prolems with mine.

  10. #9
    I~LUV~Caddys8792's Avatar
    I~LUV~Caddys8792 is offline Moderator
    Automobile(s): 1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Roseville, MN.
    Age
    27
    Posts
    34,087
    Thread Starter

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    N0DIH, you mentioned the 4300 V8 earlier. I always wondered why they made that motor. It makes less power than the 4.3 V6 and just about as much power as the Series II 3800. Why would GM make such a lackluster V8? Was there a need for a smaller motor in the Caprices? It would have been kinda cool if they could take the RWD 3800 Series II and put it under the hood of the Caprices. You'd have a motor that could do a decent job of pulling that boat along, but it would get much better mileage and be VERY easy to work on!

  11. #10
    N0DIH's Avatar
    N0DIH is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Automobile(s): 94 Fleetwood Brougham
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Age
    47
    Posts
    7,512

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    It made 200 hp, which isn't bad from 4.3L, and 245 lb/ft torque. The same year 4.3L v6 made only 180 hp and 245 lb/ft torque, so the 4300 V8 would have done better, and the V8 makes it power at lower rpms.

    Mainly to improve CAFE fuel economy I am sure. And people who buy big Caprices likely frowned upon the 4.3L V6 in them, they were lame. So having a 4.3L V8 would meet with more customer approval while helping CAFE some.

    I always felt the 3800 would do better in a RWD, finally they heard me grumble and did it to the F Body. Couldn't do it in the 80's, it would likely beat the 305's!!!

  12. #11
    UGOTIT is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    59

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    They used the 4.3 engines for the Busch series and stadium trucks years ago.

  13. #12
    I~LUV~Caddys8792's Avatar
    I~LUV~Caddys8792 is offline Moderator
    Automobile(s): 1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Roseville, MN.
    Age
    27
    Posts
    34,087
    Thread Starter

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    Quote Originally Posted by N0DIH View Post
    It made 200 hp, which isn't bad from 4.3L, and 245 lb/ft torque. The same year 4.3L v6 made only 180 hp and 245 lb/ft torque, so the 4300 V8 would have done better, and the V8 makes it power at lower rpms.
    Yeah I suppose it would have done better than the 4.3 V6, but it seems odd to make an entirely new motor when a proven, reliable motor of the same size makes just a bit less power. I could have sworn I read somewhere that GM had a H.O. 4.3 V6 that made 200hp and 260 lb/ft. Either way, the 4.3 V8 was a dog in those cars. 245lb/ft just isn't enough for a modern 4100 lb sedan. Would it have been possible to use the L98 4.9 V8 from the Cadillac in those? Or the S/C 3800? Either would have made more power than the L99 4300.

  14. #13
    BCs71's Avatar
    BCs71 is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): 1994 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham (some show and some go!)
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    607

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    The optispark has a really bad reputation which is unwarranted IMO.
    What other distributor can you name that has the benefits that NODIH has mentioned as well as being SERVICE-FREE for at least 100K miles? Many folks have had 200 or even 300,000 trouble-free and service-free miles from their opti.
    Also, it costs a tad over $200 from a GM service dealer in Ohio (Dal SLabaugh who sells at 10% over cost on all GM parts) - he is well known on the internet and ships all over the country, maybe all over the world.

    So for 100K or even 200K+ miles and $200 worth of parts, I'd say it's a fair trade-off.
    The only mistake GM made was locating it beneath the water pump on the front of the engine where it can be subjected to moisture. This also increases labor, as already mentioned in the initial post. But as NODIH pointed out, the issue of moisture was more a problem in the 1992-3 non-vented opti equipped F and Y body vehicles. The B and D bodies first got the LT1 in 1994 and the improved (and proven reliable) vented opti throughout its run.

    As for the 4.3 V8 in ONLY base model Caprices (lasted only 1994-6), I scratch my head at that often times. What sense does it make to completely engineer a whole new engine for only ONE model vehicle when it already was designed for the LT1 engine, and all of its cousin cars (caprice wagon, roadmaster sedan & wagon, Fleetwood, Impala SS) have the LT1 as standard??? It must have cost a fortune for that limited run production engine!
    I think NODIH hit the nail on the head, it must have had to satisfy some CAFE standard for fuel mileage or something. If GM just stuffed the LT1 into the Caprice as standard and never designed the 4.3 could they have made more money?
    Was a smaller V8 engine REALLY a good selling point? I mean, both are still V8 engines and that's all the unknowing public cares about who would buy base model caprices anyway. "My car has a V8".
    I still scratch my head that a 4.3 V6 from the Blazer/S10 was already avaliable and probably pulled in better fuel mileage (and was already in a truck mated to a 4L60E so it had planty of torque) but was not slapped into a Caprice.

    I guess the retooling of a whole new engine was cheaper than the retooling of the PCM/engine compartment components to fit the 4.3 V6 into a base model car and then having different logistics for an upgrade engine LT1??
    I dunno...

  15. #14
    N0DIH's Avatar
    N0DIH is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Automobile(s): 94 Fleetwood Brougham
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Age
    47
    Posts
    7,512

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    Tooling costs in the end probably cost them more than they ever could have saved. They must have thought the L99 program would have lived longer. I for one would have liked to see the L99 in a base Firebird/Camaro. And drop the V6. At least for the dud 3.4L they put in...I hate the sound of them!

    Bet it still out ran a base 4.6L Crown Vic....

    But custom rods, block casting, pistons, rings, all had to be pretty pricey to only run 3 production years. And the LT1 sharing Gen 1 parts like pistons and rings, that engine was likely cheaper too.

    So it had to be to satisfy some warped requirement, because it doesn't pass common sense!

    Quote Originally Posted by I~LUV~Caddys8792 View Post
    Yeah I suppose it would have done better than the 4.3 V6, but it seems odd to make an entirely new motor when a proven, reliable motor of the same size makes just a bit less power. I could have sworn I read somewhere that GM had a H.O. 4.3 V6 that made 200hp and 260 lb/ft. Either way, the 4.3 V8 was a dog in those cars. 245lb/ft just isn't enough for a modern 4100 lb sedan. Would it have been possible to use the L98 4.9 V8 from the Cadillac in those? Or the S/C 3800? Either would have made more power than the L99 4300.
    Later 4.3's did better, but year to year, in 1994-1996 I don't think they ever did. The 3800 was still the hp leader at 205 hp.

    SC's are $$, so a V8 with same hp/torque will always be cheaper than SC V6.

    GM should have saved the $$ on the 4300 V8 project and lightened the B/D carline 300-400 lbs!!!

  16. #15
    Stoneage_Caddy's Avatar
    Stoneage_Caddy is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): Gobi 01 Frontier/Ishi 96 Nighthawk/Gladys 94 Deville I Loved
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Undisclosed location in FL
    Posts
    14,603

    Re: Optispark?! What the hell?!

    There was a 4.3 V8 around in the mid 70s....Suppose it was really THAT engine with a few update ?

    I didnt realize tho that the 4.3 in the 90s caprice was really a v8 , i thought it was a 4.3v6 ....so does that mean that the el caminos and mote carlos in the 80s that had 4.3 badgeing really had a 4.3 v8 and not the 4.3 v6 ?

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Bookmarks

Cadillac Posting Rules

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Read about Lincoln | Buick | Kia Forte Forum
Need products for your Cadillac? Check out your options at the links below:

custom floor mats | Cadillac Chrome and Black Chrome Wheels | window tinting