scottmoyer

Courtesy of a previous post by Drew:





And the very few that made the 13's

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

Not sure of the source there Scott but a cursory scan of it reveals a 67 GTO equipped with a Ram Air III engine that didn't get produced until 1969, zero Firebirds/Formulas/Trans Ams and zero third gens.

Point was made, challenged & proven wrong. However, if it makes you feel better, Third Gens are the best, fastest cars ever produced.

Back to topic.

okfoz

Why was it that I have read more than once that the 1989 TTA has become to be known as the fastest stock Trans Am ever? I have seen it more than once that it was even faster than the 2002 ASC "Collector Edition" cars. There is a magazine article about how the 1985 IROC TPI was the fastest Camaro ever tested by the magazine.. The TTA was the first car not to need any performance changes or modifications to actually pace the Indy 500 (with the exception of the light bars)...

I would like to see actual real magazine articles from back in the late 60's and 70's that give real performance numbers for 1st and 2nd gens There is no telling what people have done to cars over the past 40 years. IMHO A Blueprinted, balanced engine is no longer "stock" it is a good idea as the engine will last longer, run better...

ray jr

iTrader: (2)

thats crazy how they rated horsepower back then .. in the early 90's my 1985 305 tpi automatic iroc with 215 horsepower went 14.7's with k&n filters,flowmaster muffler and a gutted converter ..

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

Purely PMD, you are dramatically underestimating the amount of preparation that goes into many of the serious Pure Stock cars. A good friend of mine prepares an olds engine for a guy that races a 70 Cutlass in Super Stock. There are so many tricks it's unbelievable. This 3600lb Cutlass runs 10.60s with "stock" heads, intake, carb and camshaft lobe lift. You mentioned earlier about late 70s W72 cars running 13s, I've been around tons of T/A 6.6 cars and they don't run anywhere near that unless they've been heavily worked. A good friend of mine has a '78 W72 4spd car that looks bone stock but runs 12.70s. It took decked heads, an 068 cam, long branch manifolds, a dialed Q-jet and a 3.73 gear just to get that car to go 14.0.

I have a book full of muscle car era articles from when the cars were new. The angriest cars were traction limited and usually ran mid 13s. With tune-up adjustments and slicks they could dip into the 12s, but we're talking Hemi Darts and LS6 Corvettes. Your regular big block chevelles and similar muscle cars were mid-low 14sec cars at best. Muscle car guys always seem to forget that.

dmccain

iTrader: (2)

My dad has a TRUE STOCK 68 Chevelle SS 396. Not altered in any way and no hidden performance enhancements. Now my 87 GTA was not stock, im just saying it ran 13.7s and I outran dad in it. Easily.. And this was supposed to be one of the top-notch musclecars of its day? Now, you go to putting headers, cams, gears, slicks, different intakes, etc.. and I know those muscle cars can go into the 12s. But... that wouldn't be stock now would it? And one more thing..the late 70s cars were WAY SLOWER than the 60s muscle cars. Period.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

John, if you want to modify your original comment to be specific to the TTA I may begin to agree with you, but your initial statement was a little too broad a stroke of third gen enthusiasm.

I'm not basing my statements on what some journalist flogging a car was able to accomplish back in the day & I'm not basing my comments on baseless experiences. I've owned these cars & continue to own, drive & race them.

My Pure Stock 71 455HO/TH400 GT-37 (originally a 350 2bl/3spd) was built with 8.5 CR, standard bore, stock crank, stock cam, stock stroke, 1.5 Rockers, 850 Quadrajet carb on the stock aluminum intake, no porting, no tricks! The trans was rebuilt using all NOS GM clutches & rings & has a no stall, 12" stock converter. My best with the (available) 3:73 geared 12 bolt with G60-14 Firestone Wide Oval's was a 13:22 @ 106 with a 2.20 60' and spinning off the line. I would have done better except I was afraid of breaking out (which I did) and lifted at the end.

My 73 Trans Am currently has in it a Well Used W72/T10 out of a 78 TA while I build the SD motor for it, and even with the 3:23 gears out back I'm pretty sure it would beat my 91 LB9/MM5 1LE if it didn't have 25 y.o. tires on it.

All that being said, this has turned into a pissing contest picking one particular item and comparing it to one other just to make a point and ego is getting in the way. I think John your original statement was a little too broad to be claimed as true. If you want to modify it and can back it up with something other than opinion that would be great. Other than that, the dust can fall wherever it wants & I'm fine with it. They're all pretty cool cars.

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

I know the 68 ram air II birds (drool) really had it all together and so did the 73-4 SD birds (drool x 2).
Only 2 3rdgens I know of that could come close to a better quarter mile time are the TTA and Firehawk. And of course, those are both partly assembled "off line" .

What needs to happen is a low mile all original (except tires for safety) shoot out between GM high tech (with new cars) and Muscle car (old cars) review as sponsors.
Give both cars the same fuel and same size sticky tire..
Let the games begin!!

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

That sounds like it would be fun Tony! Too bad the TA Nats don't have a track day associated with them. There are several tracks in the northeast here that I can travel to - Lebanon Valley, Atco, Englishtown, Island, even Maple Grove - and would be more than happy to bring one of my cars to. I'm sure if I got on the Performance Years board & laid down this challenge many would join in as well.

The 91/92 Firehawks really need to be viewed historically in the same category as the Berger or Baldwin Motion cars as they were not factory built & used many parts sourced from the Corvette & other parts manufacturers. The TTA's even though they were assembled by ASC, I think should still be considered factory built and would qualify.

okfoz

I was honestly not trying to be enigmatic, The top performing 3rd gens are kind of like the top performing 1st and 2nd gens. The 1st Gen had the rare COPO cars, and the Yenko Cars, and the 2nd Gens have the rare SD cars, of those there might be 1000 for each Generation, likewise there was 1555 TTA's and 25 Firehawks, which would be the top performers.

My comment of eating them for lunch, might be an overstatement, however, in comparison the TTA and the Firehawk in purely stock form would compete very well, to a purely stock COPO, or purely stock SD Trans Am's...

personal note: I am not keen on including the Yenko Cars, as technically they are not any more "factory" than my 1989 Formula 350 Convertible. I am also not keen on including OTC factory "hop-up" kits that you could buy back in the day either, like the Stage II Gran Sports, where you could buy from the dealer different heads, cam, & intakes to make a Gran Sports go faster. The Firehawk (unlike the Yenko) actually had an RPO (with the exception of the last 5), so I would be more inclined to include the Hawk.

From another perspective, you take those same COPO, or SD Cars, and you put them on a road course, I would think that even though the run of the mill 350 IROC with 3.23/3.27 gears is slower in the 1/4 mile by 1.5 seconds, might compete very well in comparison...

Not trying to argue, just pointing out that the third gen gets a lot of guff over being slow and underpowered, but in reality, most of the cars coming out of the 1st & 2nd generation were not much better. Very few real factory performance cars came out of that era... The advantage the 1st & 2nd Gen really have is how easy & cheap it was to change and modify them to make them go fast. The 3rd gen is definitely tighter, squeezing a BB in the engine bay is quite a bit more of a challenge...

okfoz

I agree, a race between the generations would be fun & interesting, has to be the top car (or 2) for every generation. Firehawk, TTA, SD, RA-II, COPO, Collector Edition, etc...

The T/A Nats used to have a race day on Saturday morning, they would meet over at Kilcare, Kilkare? raceway just east of town as you go to Xenia. That ended about 5 years ago, it was a Pontiac only day...

I would beg to differ that although both the TTA (PMD) and the Firehawk (SLP) both had appropriate RPO codes and VIN designations. The Yenko, Balwin, Berger, cars did not have an RPO or VIN designation, they were purely aftermarket AFAIK.

John

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

Maybe you misread my post John - I am of the opinion that the TTA's are or should be considered factory cars, whereas the Firehawks should not. Simply because they have an RPO code (for most of them) they were still shipped to another company where the entire drive line was swapped out. In contrast to that, the 69 Yenko's arrived at the dealership with the 427 engine, trans & 12 bolts already installed in the cars from the factory.

The RPO code they carry is simply for accounting purposes. Cool cars however & I still want to own one.

Your comment regarding road courses is absolutely true, the newer cars have the luxury of a larger contact patch, better rubber compounds and suspension to get them through the twisties.

BTW - don't leave out the RA IV or 455HO cars either - they are top performers (in a straight line) for sure!

okfoz

From my understanding, Yenko started out in 1967 & 1968 ordering L-78 Camaros and then swapping in the 427, You are correct that 1969 Chevrolet allowed them and came delivered to the dealer under the COPO program. You specified the 1969 Yenko Camaro in your comment, Would you also consider the 67 & 68 Yenkos under the same umbrella as the 69 or not?

Honestly, I think the TTA and the Firehawk perform about the same. The Firehawk would edge out the TTA (in stock form) on the twisties, but straight line performance could go to either.

bjpotter

Why stop at the top performers. Just like real racing have classes. I would be interested in seeing what older 350's and 305's run stock against 3rd or 4th gens with similar engines. That would be more instructive as to what the different generations of cars were capable of.
That said, I have always enjoyed road courses more than drag racing. With that in mind, I can't think of too many muscle cars that could hang with me on a twisting roadway with sharp curves. Like most older cars, the suspensions and braking don't hold up to newer cars in that venue. Lots of roll and poor balancing were common place features 3rd gens don't have. That's what attracted me to them in the first place.

bjpotter

One other aspect not talked all that much about, but makes a big difference in performance is original tires. The Difference between bias ply tires and the Radials that have replaced them. If you are truely looking at comparing performance of these cars as stock, period tires also make a difference.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

You are correct John & my comment was specific to the 69 Yenko - the 67 & 8's I would lump into the same category as the Baldwin Motion & Berger cars - modified by an outside company not "as delivered" by the factory.


It should be open to the other cars - the 69 350HO Firebird motor was a solid performer and pretty quick too - the big valve #48 heads that came on the RA III 400 CID were perfect on the 350 and it was rated at 325 Gross HP, only 5 HP less than the base 400. Set up with an M21 & 3:90 gears it would surprise the hell out of bigger motored cars!

AmorgetRS

iTrader: (6)

So that means you wouldn't define 4th gen SS, WS6 and Firehawk cars as factory since they were shipped to SLP or ASC to get their SS/WS6/Firehawk parts put on them?

scottmoyer

Something to consider regarding "factory" modified cars is to look at whose specs were the cars built to. The TTA, WS6, SS, etc were put together by a 3rd party, but they were to GMs specs, so there is an RPO associated with them. Just like the Grand National GNX, GM was involved in the build specs of these cars. The Baldwin-Motion, Nickey, Berger, Blackbirds and Yenko cars were built to the aftermarket company specs, not GMs. There is no RPO for these cars and GM provided the cars and some of the parts, but they were not to GM specs.

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

The 4th gen SLP cars really didn't have much put on them, performance wise, compared to the 3rdgen Hawks with their complete drivetrain swaps.
4th gen Was mostly appearance stuff like a air box, hood and wheels. You could get a Catback, Y-pipe (lt4 cars could get extrudhoned stainless exhaust manifolds) and sometimes shocks/springs.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

We're still trying to split hairs here - No, I would consider the 4th gens all factory cars although I'm not sure where the LT4's fall into line because I don't know enough about them. I do however know where the pilot car is & saw it just a few weeks ago.

My stipulation has always been if the engine was installed in the GM plant - it's factory, if it was installed someplace else, then it's not. The TTA gets the pass here because although the engines were built at PAS and the final modifcations were done there too - the engines were shipped to the Van Nuys plant and installed in the cars on the line.

bjpotter

We can argue all day about who built what and installed when, I think the defining answer should be could you order the car from GM! For instance Copo's would not qualify under that because the public could not order them, only executives of GM. Firehawks, yes. And so on and so on.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

That definition may be fine for you, but it doesn't work for me for the comparisons we are looking at here.

COPO's weren't there for the customer, they were for the dealers to order them. Fred Gibb & his 9560 ZL1 Camaros & Don Yenko's 9561 Iron Block 427 cars are every bit factory and I think you would have a hard time convincing anyone who owns one (and most people that don't) that they are not. And yes a customer could order just about anything they wanted including special paint colors or even bodies in primer as long as the dealership were willing to pursue it.

As for customers ordering COPO's - the Central Office Production Order system is still in place today & it's how fleets are ordered including most local Police cars and DPW vehicles - so I would think if you were ordering enough of them, you could have a COPO built for you too - I think the magic number for fleets is a minimum of 5.

The executive or employee purchase system was a different system all together and many special & loaded up cars were built through that system as well. A great reference book is Echoes of Norwood it will shed a lot of light on this for you. http://www.norwoodassemblyplant.com/order.html It's also a fascinating read for any F-body enthusiast.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

So after all of this, does anybody want to race?

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

I'm certainly down to watch some action!

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Anyone else lost trying to figure out how far off topic this thread has gone?

Kevman

I check it every now and then.. It's definitely taken an interesting turn.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

Sorry

What have you done with the car? Is it already gone?

Bob88GTA

iTrader: (2)

What car......? Oh, The 1987 IROC-Z 5.7 TPI with T-tops! Silly me.

okfoz

Definitely went down a rabbit hole here didn't we....

Kevman

I fell in love with it.. Ordered a new T-bar piece, as mine is rusted out.. Floor is immaculate.. After I figured out the MAF code.. All I have to say is.. The fastest thirdgen I've ever driven..

I know the guy I bought it from very well, he told me he swapped in a 3:73, and a chip.. It explains why it's so quick.. Especially off the line..

Most people I talk to can't believe I only paid $4000 for it.. It's a great little car, it's fits me perfectly.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

Cool! So you're keeping it?

3:73 ought to chirp 2nd pretty easily in that car even with the auto.

Kevman

Yeah, it does, it has a TransGo shift kit, as well.

okfoz

I put the 3.73 gear with my LB9 and it made a huge improvement... sucks lil more gas, but I don't drive it every day...

scottmoyer

My car chirps second with the 3.27 gears. I'd like to play with 3.45s or 3.73s myself.

MJS422

The shift kit makes a big difference. I put one in my 89 RS Camaro with 2.8 20 years ago. It would bark second all day long. Keeps the line pressure up and helps preserve the clutch packs. Good for a auto trans that sees any abuse. Put a mild one in a 350 TPI car and it will knock the fillings out of your teeth.

Kevman

Oh yeah, I had one in my 91 T/A back in the day, just feels so much faster, almost like a drag car when it's going through the gears..


The downside.. When the roads are a bit damp, it's a 50/50 chance it's going to randomly try and put you sideways.. That's what I love about these Thirdgens.. They're always trying to kill you.

okfoz

Especially a fresh rain after a period of no rain. The 3.73 has turned me sideways more than once turning a corner and getting on it in the rain. Never has done it in a straight line, if you take it easy it is no problem... Has to do with the wide tires, and the extra torque of the taller gear. I am used to driving in the snow, and I like to go to parking lots in the winter and practice my drifting skills in my Tahoe, so turning it sideways really does not bother me, and I know how to react.



Still worth it IMHO. Find a good trans/gear shop, and have it done for you, I hear Precision gears are good... Avoid Richmond Gears as they will whine. In all honesty, I am not sure if you will get a better 1/4 mile time, but when was the last time in real world scenarios you had to go 0-100? Around town and just getting on it is so much fun...