TrueIroc

I was wondering on the service certificate in the center console of the car, does it say 1LE anywhere? Some guy claims he knows someone who has a 1988 Iroc Z 1LE, but it doesn't say 1LE anywhere with the RPO codes.
I know in 1989 and up it says 1LE with the RPO codes. 1988 was the first year of the 1LE and that what make's them so rare. But because they made so few, did they actual put the 1LE in as a RPO code? I'm asking for anyone's help... thanks. Tim

Klortho

No 1LE in the RPO list, it's not a 1LE.

Willie

iTrader: (1)

A picture is worth a thousand words.... Here's your proof.

scottmoyer

Granted, Willie's pic is of an '89, but I would think that the RPO wold be there to designate it as 1. The line needed to know what parts were needed to make it the 1LE.

Apeiron

Since there were so few 88 1LE's and the fate of each of them is pretty well known, you can pretty much raise the BS flag whenever anyone tells you they have one.

Willie

iTrader: (1)

Since there were so few 88 1LE's....

Officially only FOUR.

Willie

okfoz

and 3 Trans Am's

TrueIroc

I don't know if they used the 1LE code for the first year.

Camaro sites have been telling me if the G92 and the C41 were ordered, than it automatically became a 1LE car.

Here are the RPO codes from the (SPI) of the 1988 Iroc Z:

AR9 B3W B6Q C41 DX3 D34 D35 D7J D80 E5Z E7Z E9Z FE2
GM3 G80 G92 J65 KC4 K68 LB9 MK6 MM5 NA5 NP5 N65 N96
PB4 QDZ T93 T96 UM6 UQ1 U79 VAN VK3 V73 WW1 W62 Z28
1AY 1SA 15P 4OU 6DB 7DB 8NN 82B 82I 829 9NN

Did they have a 1LE RPO code for 1988, or did that code not come out until 1989? If this car is a 1LE, than it would also have RPO's like JG1, N10, N64?? right?

okfoz

JG1 - Aluminum Driveshaft - Definately part of 1LE to my knowledge.
N10 - Dual cats - was a mid 1989 year addition, although some "Official" lit states that it was suposed to start from Day 1....
N64 - Aluminum spare - got me on that one, I would probably assume so, but if its a race car then why would you need a spare at all?

From looking at the list it sounds like a bare bones Red Z28, LB9, MM5 and G92 option...

ANY of the following may be the reason why its not a 1LE
AR9 - Luxury Seats:
1SA - Option packate #1

John

John

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

Dude, this is THE Camaro site, right here. Whatever you saw on any other site, unless it belongs to GM, is not likely to be more accurate than what you'll find here.

1LE is a RPO code. If it was not a RPO code, then there would be no such thing as 1LE. If a car's RPO codes don't include 1LE, then the car doesn't have the 1LE RPO, period. Believe it. No matter what some web site somewhere says. If the web site says anything different from that, it's wrong. Wouldn't be the first time in history some web site had something untrue written on it; "I saw it on the Internet, so it must be true". Yeah right.

Same for people who "claim" stuff about their car. People "claim" all sorts of things all the time, whether true or not. Sounds to me like all you've located right there, is a case of diarrhea of the mouth. Fortunately, even though it can be a serious disease, it's only contagious if you ALLOW yourself to be infected.

In other words, let him run off at the mouth all he wants; it's not hurting you in any way; all he's doing, is making a fool of himself. You don't have to take onthe responsibility of being some kind of "RPO police" or something.

TrueIroc

The thing that got me was no JG1 rpo... if it had that aluminum drive shaft than I'd really think it could be a 1LE.. but it seems likes it's not now.

Thanks for the support guys. By the way, how much do you think this car is worth. It's a 1988 Iroc Z, 305 TPI, 5 speed, 10,000 original miles, mint, no options....?

Apeiron

Even with JG1, it wouldn't be a 1LE. The only thing that could possibly make it a 1LE would be the 1LE RPO code. Without that, it's not a 1LE, it's just another run-of-the-mill Camaro.

scottmoyer

The facts on the 4 1988 1LEs are not really known by all yet. We already know that the 1LE came without foglights, however, 2 of the 1988 cars had foglights. Does anyone know for sure that 1988 had 1LE on the SPID?

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

Of course it did. Federal requirements.

1LE involved THE BRAKES. The SPID label had to tell what replacement parts were required.

David M

Where in the production run was this car built... early???
I like the fact that this car has no A/C, no power accessories, and that it's a decal stripe delete car. But it's got the 1AY ordering code for a dealer stock unit. If it's not a 1LE it's darn close!!!

okfoz

THE ONLY way to really see if it has the 1LE brakes would be to measure the front and rear brakes, they will be around 11.5" the NON-1LE cars were 10.5"

John

Apeiron

The only way? Why not just look at the calipers.

TrueIroc

The 1988 Iroc Z, alleged 1LE VIN # is: 1G1FP21F6JL154810.

I love this site, you guys are a big help. But I still can't be sure it's a 1LE or not, if it's not it is sure darn close.

I'm going to go look at the car next week. I will measure the front and rear rotors, but they could have swapped 1LE brakes aftermarket. 1LE Front brakes should be 11.86 inches, and rear 11.40 inches.

If it's not a 1LE, what do you think it's worth now?

Apeiron

The same as any other car.

There's no "close" to 1LE. It either is, or it isn't.

Considering how few 88 1LE's there were, and that there's no 1LE RPO code, that car is not a 1LE.

okfoz

What makes the 1LE so special is it is a race package, unlike a regular Z28/IROC, T/A or Formula, in theory they were made for one thing... going fast.

With that in mind the 1LE in essence should be a stripped down car without the luxury options, no radio, no AC, no power locks or windows. Although this is not the rule by any means... 1LE cars have had AC, Cruise, Power seats, Power Windows, Locks defrost, and just about every other option under the sun. Why is this???

As we were discussing above... The 1LE was INTENDED for race service, like back in the 60's the idea was you could go to a dealer, get a car that was already set up for racing. Many of these cars went to Canada and wer used in the Players Challenge... Mark would have to fill in that gap. There were some cars that were ordered by individuals and by going through the hoops and got loaded 1LE equiped cars. Of course the most popular 1LE equiped car was the 1555 TTA's made in 1989, second is the Firehawk, which some were not originally equiped but upgraded at SLP.

In my personal opinion the 1LE code is not as important as having a striped down 1LE, who cares if it has larger brakes, call Baer, buy 12" fronts and rears and stop even better. A loaded 1LE car to me is not as desirable as a striped down 1LE, and a non 1LE stripped down car is not as desirable as a loaded non-1LE. I have seen e-bay ads where some guy has a low option car and thinks it should be worth a million, in reality its just another car. I like my creature comforts, but for collectability a 1LE race car would be a cool car to have in my stable. There are exceptions, like the fore mentioned Firehawk or TTA...

John

Mark_ZZ3

The 1LE came from the roots of racing. The stock cars did not perform compared to other manufacturers or simply that they were not safe (IE. brake fade). Hence the racing programs in Canada and the US led the way to factory provided "race ready" options so that the cars were legal to compete. By 1991, GM was advertizing the 1LE option saying "you too could own the same options as the race car!"



The "essence" of 1LE comes from the race on Sunday, sell on Monday. While there are many cars with 1LE, the ones without any options represent the true spirit of racing. Player's Challenge cars were provided with options (PW/PL,tilt, etc.) so that the teams had a chance of selling the cars when they were done racing. No one would buy a stripped down car.

Mark.

SheldonZ28

iTrader: (1)

My Dads 1LE R7U, is one of the 32 Made for 91.

The car still has:
Tilt
Power Windows
Power Locks
Electic pull down hatch
Radio

The car has more options then my 85 Z28!

kaptinkafeen

iTrader: (2)

From what I have read, R7U's needed the pw to clear the roll bar that was installed in the car. Manual window cranks wouldn't work. My '91 1LE has pw,pl, UN6 radio, DC4 rear view mirror with the dual lights, 1SC inter pack ... not a heavily option car - but not bare bones either. It's a Canadian car - heck it even has rear window defrost.
-Andrew

Mark_ZZ3

Indeed the PW were a bonus with some roll bars designs. In 86, they all were crank windows. In 87, a driver could choose no options, or upgrade to opt level 1 or 2. By 88, it was more of a package. In 89, there was no choice other than color.

Mark.

nascarfan7

Poking around used Camaro sites I happened upon this...

http://www.cars-on-line.com/43209.html

Appears to be the car talked about in this post. Around 11,600K on it currently. Not to sure what to make of the "dealer" installed headers ect. story but seems like an intersting car none the less.

The asking price, for a few grand more you could of had that '89 TTA at the BJ Auction recently

881SA

Probably like mine early 88, they played with the design through out the year and the true 4 - 1LE's with the big brakes were produced late in the year. I read that the 1le secret code led to the true loss if the IROC label mid 90.

Mine has all the same codes/the auto 350 and the 1AZ for special order and was built in February stamped 02/88. My first two numbers of the last six sequence of build in the VIN were 14, what are yours True Iroc?