http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1988-...3A1|240%3A1318 Definitely and interesting concept, but not worth 100 grand. 20 or 30 I'd gladly pay, but 100 is way too much. Not to mention the flaming fairy who picked out that color scheme. That car looks ugly as sin and is desperately due for a respray and new interior.

kinda ugly

Ya the paint is dated, but its one heck of a sweet ride otherwise. Since it is a one off, I would have to say its worth it to a collector, but id drive the piss out of it. Not what id be lookin for.

Did none of you notice that it has an LT5? I think all of you are missing the point of the car, the performance aspect.

It's kind of hard seeing GM sell off their concept cars like this. The colors of that thing are ugly as hell but I would rock that car in a heartbeat, it has an LT5! An engine that sounds even better than an LSx IMO. Parts are extremely expensive for them though.

Just so everyone knows, this car sold at Barrett-Jackson this year for $47300. That price includes the 10% premium. So in all actuality, the car sold for $43,000. I think the seller is a little off his rocker. Escpecially in this economy!!!

I could modify my own car and drop in an LT5 for less than 100 grand.

I could even buy a ferarri for 100 grand. Not that I'd pick one over my F body, but you get the point.

To a collector, yes. This piece of GM historhy might be worth 100 grand. But to the average joe who is looking for a BA daily driver, you can probably get a 2009 ZR-1 for cheaper than that.

Scott
Didn't it sell with a scrap or junk or whatever title too? So its practically useless unless you took it to the track or just displayed it in your garage with the occasional joy ride around the block. Would take alot of work to make it road legit I think, and I don't mean the mechanical side, I mean the paperwork side.

Comparing it with Firehawks and Buick Grand Nationals is a bad comparison. Those were production cars. This is a one off what if prototype....

Oh wow. What a nut job. Just took a second look. Funny part is that, if dude is trying to make that kind of money on it, he could at least buy, or fix the sagging door armrest's. How funny.

poor ronals..

I didn't mean it was worth a 100,000, I meant that everyone shouldn't be talking about how ugly it is, when that car isn't necessarily supposed to be liked for its looks, but it's performance.

Condition: Pre-Owned Clear Title

i thought all the concepts that GM sold were with no title? weird.

i reme that car being at the bowling green event a few years ago, i "think" i have a pic or few around here somewhere.
let em laugh at the paint, jaws drop and the BS stops at the click of the hood latch.

As Scott stated, I recall this car on Barrett-Jackson for their Scottsdale 2009 event. Here's the auction link with the price (as Scott said)
http://www.barrett-jackson.com/appli...111&pop=0&it=1

It was leaking oil on their museum floor....

Thats one ugly 3rd gen! The ZR-1 concept is cool. BUT who in the hell chose those colors and yellow rims too!!! My god! Its not worth close to 100K. SORRY!

im 99% sure that it was sold at bj with a scrap tittle. but on another note is that driver side floor pan modified for the exhaust?

I bid on that car at BJ but was still devistated after missing the twin turbo TA. IMO the ZR1 nuts drove the price up. If you look at prices for the concept ZR1's at Scottsdale and compare to Palm Beach you will see a huge drop in prices from the 2 auctions. There were a couple ZR1's that brought big money the night this LT5 went across the block....an I know at least one of the guys was bidding on this car.....just for fun.

The owner is a dealer and he emailed shortly after the auction to see if it was one of the 88 1LE cars. (it's not) He also bought a bunch of other cars at BJ. I don't know who buys cars at BJ to flip 'em? I'd take a very wealthy LT5 nut to pay even $50k for the car IMO.

Do you know who the Twin Turbo TA went to? I hope it went to a good home. That car was basically a car that would give Ferrari or any other exotic even today a run for its money. If I ever got the money in the future after college (I'm graduating this year) that was one of the cars that I would go after myself. I really loved that car when I read about it in Motor Trend several years ago. But I think I'm better off settling for one of the TTAs or if I can find one a Firehawk.

Still trying to find out where the Twin Turbo TA went. I'd consider selling a Firehawk for that car. It went 213mph before the rear end started lifting up. If planted it is said that car is capable of 238mph.

Oh yea. I got the Motor Trend issue that has the test in February along with several others for free. I still am astounded at what it was capable of with a then 10 year old platform. Another car that could be in that category would be the Sledgehammer Corvette at 254 MPH but now we are getting off topic.
All that top speed and it still ran 12.2 at 117MPH in the 1/4 with a top speed setup I can only imagine what it would have done with a good drag setup. I'll keep my eyes out for it for ya, unless I win the lottery.

I for one like the paint. It has the 80's look. I think it is unique and if I got the car, I would leave it that color. Sure it is different, but It is a hell of a look better that all the 3 color thirdgens I see around...

I remember reading in a magazine back in the early 90's that they had to modify the floorpan to fit the ZF 6 speed, don't know about the exhaust though.
I can't imagine that setup flowing that well.

I wanted to point out from BJ's page

John

i knew i seen that somewhere.

Just out of curiosity, I see LT5 engines (affordable too) going on ebay all the time.

How difficult would it be to swap one into one of our cars?

I'm with you on this. For one the car was made that way from GM. In no way would it get repainted. Plus the car is from the 80's. It was all about bright colors and standing out and being diffrent back then. I would rock it just like it is! Adam :-)

Surely this isn't a factory concept. The paint, the seats, the bright yellow wheels, the LT5 which still has CORVETTE lettering on it... sounds like a customised Camaro with an LT5 conversion.

Why would GM sell off a one off concept car? Surely if it were a one off custom it would have ended up in the National Corvette Museum or somewhere similar - like the 1983 Corvette and the V12 Corvette concept cars.

This is indeed a GM built car. Why would they sell it? Maybe you haven't heard...GM is BROKE!!! GM has been unloading a lot of cars from their collection and this is only one of them.

Sure, it could have went to a museum if they were high bidder but it didn't. It obviously went to some moron who thinks he can "flip" this car for a profit.

thats gonna be a hard sell if he plans to flip the car being it has no title. when the sale goes down and he cant produce a title ither the seller is going to back out or he will end up in legal issues.

The only thing I don't like is the painted wheels. Other than this I've always loved this car as well as the other concept 3rd gens! I'd buy it for $40K if had that kind of money to burn.

Does anyone have a Carfax account? I'd be curious to see what the report look like....... there's a link directly from the auction.

I like it. . .I'd take it in a heartbeat. And leave it alone.

For all those who hate it for the paintjob/wheels, its a helluva lot better than that "puzzle" car that I saw on here a while back. . .But to each his own.

Even got a factory CD player. . . and the armrest, that could be an easy fix. But for $100,000. . .Pfft, good luck selling it. . .

Oh yeah, that car was hideous... As far as the wheels, you could easily swap those out.

Wow can't say I like the way it looks. But i'm all for performance.

Umm sorry to sound like a youngster or w.e but what is an Lt-5?

It was the 32 valve quad overhead cam V8 that was used in the C4 Corvette ZR1 hence the topic ZR1 camaro. They used it from 89-95 with slight improvements along the way. Lotus was involved in building the engine.

and my two cents on the looks.....I would leave it and show it off as it was made from the geniuses at the engineering departments. If you change anything then it could be looked at as just another souped up camaro. If you leave it then you have the magazine articles to back up the story.

VIN 1G1FP21F2JL106219
Year/Make/Model: 1988 CHEVROLET CAMARO Body Style: COUPE Engine Type: 5.0L V8 TPI OHV Manufactured In: UNITED STATES


that what the vin says...... cant you transfer vins numbers?

the paint is a little wild but so was everything else in the 80's! the wheels look like they come off of the 95 impala ss.
i wouldnt buy it for 100 grand but i would love to drive it!!!!
also, looks like someone has been into the bottom of the dash on the drivers side, it hanging a little low plus there is a screw in the floor.

nah, the screws in mine fall out occasionally

Actually the wheels appear to be the same as the 91-92 Firehawk

John

Wow, thats an early VIN.

I'm surprised at how trashed the under carriage looks for having less than 8000 miles. Looks more like 180,000.

You must have never seen the underside of a 180,000 mile car, that car looks to me like any other 8,000 mile car would.

It has less than 8000 miles, and for that low you should be able to eat off it. There's tons of dirt and grease. The fender skirts looked trashed already, there's radiator water rust on the left wonderbar bolts etc... And it's been mentioned that this car is actually on it's second home after leaving the GM Heritage Museum. I would really be suspicious about those miles.

Something thats also interesting are those Goodyear GS-C tires, they weren't even introduced until 1992, four years after that car was built. The '90 and '91 ZR-1 Corvettes used the Eagle ZR "Gatorback", Goodyear's first "ultra-performance" radial tire design, introduced on the '84 Vette. In 1988 they would have used the "Gatorback" and with such low milage you would think they'ed still be on the car.

I wish my 180,000 mile car looked as good as the ones that you have seen.

guys keep in mind this is a GM engineering prototype...those kinds of cars get the $*#& beat out of them in all kinds of tests. An example I can think of that I believe John told me about was Firehawk #1 which he said that it was beat up because it was the magazine test car. Another example (not related to third gens but related to prototypes and test mules like this) is the Viper Prototype #2. I believe it still exists but it had all kinds of damage to it even when the journalists were riding in it.

If the car was driven hard and beat to hell then it doesn't matter how many miles are on it it will look like crap.

My car is a northeast car and it has 172,XXX miles on it. My floorpan is in worse shape than that one but its not that much worse. If a car was stored on pavement or kept dry or whatever chances are it won't rot that fast.

There is a Title of Ownership, but DMV records will basically show it as "junk car status", meaning it is not eligible for road use/inspection/emissions testing......Not for ANY legal road use (unless you count parades).

No.....No legal issues with selling it.

it says this car was a test project in 88 then it was modified in 90. this could explain why it doesnt have the original tires.

I did a story on this car for a local magazine around 1990. Chevy told me that they would crush this car once all it's PR and engineering duties were done. I'm glad it survived.

Back then, a 375 hp, LT-5 in an IROC-Z was the stuff of dreams.

I also kind of like the paint job. Not because its cool but because it screams 80's. I typically like bone stock but I graduated high school in 1989 (dating myself) and there is not one guy who wouldn't have given his left xxx to have a car like this back then. With that drivetrain I wouldn't have cared if it was polka dotted. This car represents the 80's well and it then represented the future of GM perfomance. Would I buy it even if I had 100 grand? No. But looking at it makes me smile.