jim s

I’m looking to do another Knight Rider conversion with a newer Trans Am. I have a 1983 with a cross fire and have never found it reliable. With the 10 year span of cars 82-92 what would you suggest I buy this time? I’ve be told an 89 formula might be the way to go.

Thanks for your help,

Jim
starbuck@gate.net

http://www.gate.net/~starbuck/kitt.html

Dante93GTZ

iTrader: (5)

Get whatever you want - its only gonna be reliable if it was maintained. No year was better than any other, if i wasn't taken care of.

Air_Adam

If I had to get another, I'd get either a '89/90 IROC with the 350, or a '91/92 Formula 350.

Maybe thats just me though.

MdFormula350

91-92 camaro z28

nick418

i agree

yesfan2000

If you're talking about creating another Knightrider conversion with a newer f-body, I'd go with the 1990 Trans Am. I don't remember if the Knightrider had the ground effects or not. If not, I'd go with the 1984 Firebird or the 1984 Firebird S/E. I don't think the Cross Fire engines were available in 1984, so that wouldn't be a problem. Black, of course.

dave

cam-

Depends pn what you want. Best chassis to start with for sheer performance is 91-92 cause they were glued as well as welded and they are the newest version having the most upgrades. If you only want to keep it stock then get anything that suits your fancy so long as it was maintained properly and is clean. About the only cars I would not recommend are the 2.8 carbed, or a tech four, or a crossfire car. happy hunting

Air_Adam

Well, not in F-bodies anyway. The F-body only had them in '82 and '83.

The Corvette did have a CFI 350 in '82 and '84 though. (my uncle has an '84 Corvette with that motor)

jim s

So after 1990 is when they added the ground fxs? I have my 1983 as a donor car so I could switch over anything what wasn’t correct.

Jim

Greg99LS1

I'd love to find my old '83 (my first new car)....and restore the body and interior to its original condition.

But under the hood, no LG4 this time around though.....an LS6/T56 and C5 brakes goes into it this time!

deadbird

Where do you get this from ?
Seam sealer (as everything produced since the advent of mass produced cars has), is not a glued together car (like a Lexus).

The 3rdgen platform remained unchanged from 82-92. Tack on worthless mods were made but, basic structure... same. Of course.. that's only my opinion... could be wrong..

Agent13

iTrader: (6)

Every year. From 67-02. Gotta love 'em all lol.

If I got more 3rd gens I'd probably want a GTA of some sort next or more '82-'84's!

cam-

I learned about the body gluing on this Forum There is a post on here somewhere about it. Due to production tolerances on all the dies not fitting as nicely after ten years of use rather than retool everything when they knew a new model was coming they used a new sealer glue as well as welding the body together making them the most sturdy chassis. I believe only some of the panels were done in 91 but 92's were fully glued. Certainly not the final answer to rigidity as SFC's are far more effective but it still helps.

MurcoRS

I would go with a Norwood-built '87 if I got another 3rd gen. The earlier cars (82-87) had more durable interior plastics, no VATS, carbs were still available, plus IROCs,GTAs, and Formulas were all available in '87 and that was the best year for paint in the Norwood plant (Van Nuys started the water-borne paint that year - run away!). More horsepower was available later but how many of us leave motors stock? Airbags are of little interest to me and I didn't care for the yellow switch graphics and gauges in 91-92 Camaros

LAFireboyd

iTrader: (3)

For a Knightrider conversion, I'd think you'd want a black(unless you plan on painting) '87-'90 Formula(or a base model Firebird from '82-'90). Those were the only years/models that had no gfx and were most similar to the '82-'83 Knightrider cars. And when you condsider the stronger engine you can get with a Formula(a TPI 305 or 350), that would be your choice.

Edit: Although the Formula's aero wing would have to be replaced with a base Firebird spoiler.

PhAnToMs

iTrader: (2)

i dunno i like the 91-92 gfx over all the others but then i like the 82-84 gfx over the 85-90 (on camaros) i always just though that i would get a 91-92 z28 with a 350. but i dont like the rear shoulder belts or the air bag. if i could get a good price id get 91-92

heres the ultimate car imo

91-92 gfx
91-92 z28 wing
early 80's interor without pull down hatch cover or shoulder belts
no split back rear seat
black interior
t tops
5.7
pw pl no ps



for a pontiac probally 90-92 GTA with the aero wing and t tops 5.7 BLACK or a

Mike454SS

Buying a car because carbs were still available is quite possibly the worst reason I've EVER heard for buying a car.

I'm gonna call the BS flag on the glue together thing too...my 86 has seam sealer from the factory all over it...but I'd only buy an 86 if I had a hatch from another year laying around somewhere (like I did)...the 86 third brakelight is hideously ugly, and even if you take it off, you've got 2 big holes to fill in the glass.

Obviously you're going to want a firebird...so I say if you're concerned most about reliability, go with the newest least milage best maintained car you can find...I'd look for a factory speed density car myself, it's one of GM's best ECM's ever.

MurcoRS

I mentioned it as '87s had both fuel injection AND carbs available, some people prefer options... I personally like carbs and can make one perform as well or better than most F/I set-ups. The extreme difference in price between a typical F/I set-up vs. a carb set-up makes little sense to me when there is little performance difference. Just my opinion.

phess11

1983 with an L69

cam-

The precise reason I bought an 87 LG4... the last year for carbs.

Seam sealer has been in use in some form or another since the early days of Henry Ford but that does not mean all sealers are alike. Just like the great advances paint has seen so has rust proofing and body assembly. practically all new cars built today use a strong glue polymer type sealer as apposed to the tar/oil based black stuff you speak of. That is indeed seam sealer only. Go and look at a 92 and see for yourself. Very different product that is hard and WAY more like glue than just a plain old sealer.

Any further doubt and go watch Boeing build jumbo jets... Glue glue and more glue.

megaracerx

i would go with a 87-89 GTA hardtop...those are bad ***

aaron7

iTrader: (7)

89 Iroc. Maybe a 90, but I'm undecided. Best handling, most power from what I've found!

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

IROC-Z suspension was the same 85-90. (although I think 87-90 had different bushings) The 90's do have the most power, not much of a difference though.

nick418

from what ive been readin the SD were noticable when it came to power

GTADave

I would buy a 91/92 Firehawk.

- Dave

89rsragtop

1989 last year before air bags.

camaroguy21

The top three on my wish list...

1. 1992 Z28 with T-Tops. Man I miss having T-Tops.

2. 1990 5.7L Iroc Z - with T-Tops of course!

3. 1990-1992 Z28/Iroc Z vert. (No T-Tops required.) :lala:

grngryoutmyway

iTrader: (1)

92 heritage edition vert... w/ leather and a 5 speed!! pref black on red

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

They had a little more power, not much more, and not due to the SD either.

nick418

o ok, i knew the 90-92 came with diff CAMS and lighter pistons and 5 to 20 hp diff (dependin on which MAF year) From what ive been readin alot of stock 90-92 L98s run low 14s in good running tune and alot of MAF ones run mid to high 14s. I dunno i guess it depends on the driver. I would deff love to own a 1987 L98 T top tho. First yr of the L98, T Tops of course and great Iroc Suspension If i saw one up for sale i would buy it, to bad i have no cash

RSFreak

I miss my '85 the most out of all the Camaros I've owned. I will get another '85 someday (probably once my buddy James decides that he didn't really want a project car afterall! )

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

Plenty of people have ran low 14's with MAF L98's too, including 87's. BTW, you just described my car.

nick418

yeah i didnt say what color tho

Quick6

Bright red of course..

nick418

why not black

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

Red and red only.

nick418

\

i love red as well, Cant Beat a Shiny Black tho

ES87iroc

Until you have to clean it!

nick418

:werd: yea your right, Black is such a bitch to clean. But let me tell you. Black can be the most beautiful color on any car, esp a 3rd gen. When i think of red, I think of a Corvette more

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

When I think of red, I think of the nicest color on almost every sporty car or musclecar. Like a red Lamborghini, Ferrari, Camaro, Corvette, 70 Chevelle SS's with black stripes, and so on. When you have red on a Camaro you get all the contrast with it. Black headlight pockets, louvers, grill, stripes, all the trim, etc. When you have one in black, it's all just black and you can't see those things. Kinda plains it out. Red and black is pretty much the most attractive combination. Now on the other side, I like Firebirds better in black. They don't have so much black offsetting them like a Camaro does. Black tends to look better on a car that has less contrast, like 68-72 Novas. There's no stripes or anything to really set them off besides the grill. It really depends on the car, red and black are usually the nicest colors on any particular vehicle but there are exceptions. I like other colors too but they're my favorite.

IROCThe5.7L

Oh stop foo, your just jealous my car is more shinny then yours


A nice black paint job = Smooth/Clean look.



J/k, you got a nice ride there!


Anyway, if I ever got another IROC besides black, id like a 350 in this color:




Something I really love about that color.

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

LOL, don't think so. Bright Red shines just fine. (and all the black contrast does too!)

Put your AIM on for a change!

IROCThe5.7L

I'll be on later, g2g study now.

nick418

Isnt that Scotts car? Thats got a 350 in it, I love your car irocthe5.7 :hail: :hail: Hey IROC, get some pics of your car