Derth Deboblo

It's a 3rd gen....why would in be a collectible?? Seriously?

AmorgetRS

iTrader: (6)

The same question was asking in the 70s of 1st gens and in the 80/90s of second gens.... yet somehow they are today.... go figure.

You obviously have zero regard for you car judging from the description of it in your profile, so why not just leave it at that?

89RS_82Z

iTrader: (2)

i was going to say exactly that, but wanted to see where this went

92 Camaro

iTrader: (1)

he's the same guy that told another member to not fix the rust on their car.

Derth Deboblo

lol, why would I care about the 3.1/auto setup in the car? Excluding the LC2 Turbo BUICK motor in the TTA and the engine in the Firehawk, the stock engines are garbage. I like these cars, they are a great chassis to build from. You just have to remove all the crap that the factory tagged on. (ie. everything, including paint) '80s GM build quality at it's finest!

I'll assume you mean this thread...
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/fabr...ons-input.html

I don't really care if he fixes it. His $$$ not mine. He asked for opinions and I gave mine. I just don't see the point with a car that far gone.

Meh....whatever.

okfoz

Derth,
I guess you do not have a 350 or a LB9/M5 car, as those are pretty respectable cars on their own. Sure as you posted they are not a 427 GT in the other thread... But you fail to realize that a Formula 350, or an 87 IROC 350 was no slouch either. I find it amazing how people thought Gee the cars from the 60's were SO FAST!. In reality very few cars could get below the 15's off the show room floor even back in the 60's. There were some rare exceptions, like a swiss cheese car from Pontiac, and some of the specialty Mopars, but those cars were more or less specially made race cars an were not intended for street use... And thirdgens had some of those too, we have the TTA and the Firehawk which more or less will stomp all over any other generation car. Interestingly after 1982 Camaro never got anything better than the 350, but even so, I think they deserve more respect than what you are giving them...

I will take my Formula 350 Convertible up against any all stock non-factory race car unmodified down to the tires original car from the 60's and we will see how well they compete... Back in 1985 they had articles about the 1985 IROC and it was te fastest Camaro ever! I bet we would surprise many people. Unfortuantely most people are like you and do not understand the cars. There were harsh emissions standards that had to be abided by and they still seemed to make a Performance car... Go fig.

I believe the problem with the third generation is the early cars were slow, I will give you that, and by far the majority of the cars with a V8 were either the doggy LG4 or LO3. You throw in the fact that only the third gen was available with a 4 Cyl, and that is like a death sentence... On the other end of the spectrum, when people ponied up (no pun intended) they could have opted for a real street fighter... For any Generation.

In the end we had the Fastest car and the slowest production car... Unfortunately people forgot the fast ones because they are so uncommon.

John

flippermtc

iTrader: (1)

John,
You are absolutely correct. Our cars were good on performance in their time. Even today with a few modifications[ Easily correctable should you want to go back to stock] our cars will move pretty good. I have seen 3rdGens surprise some current cars.

tekkitan

iTrader: (1)

There is a difference between opinions and being outright rude. It's obvious he wants/wanted to fix his rust damage. But you decided to point out, in your opinion, how his car was worthless. Seeing how you talk about third gens in your threads and even your signature, it's obvious you have nothing positive to say to anyone on these forums. I'm still wondering why you own one in the first place and continue to bash the generation of car you drive.

Derth Deboblo

How was what I said rude?? He asked for opinions, so he got them. Ok, my first post was a little up front. I'll admit that. But every other post I made in that thread was not even close to being rude. Yes, I still think the car isn't worth anything. Oh well...his $$/time/effort. More power to him.

I've never said I didn't like 3rd gens. I believe they are a great platform to build. (Why do you think I have one??) I just hate to see people waste time/$$/effort on cars that should NEVER see the road again. Go into the Body forum and look at some of the projects. Rotted out windshield pillars, rockers (inner and outer), t-top frames, floors...list goes on. All that before you get into really 'building' your car. What's the point?!?! Yeah, rust free cars are getting harder to find here in the salt belt. But, they are still around. Like I have said time and time again..look a little bit, save up $$ and find your self a rust free car. They did make tons of 3rd gen's after all

I guess I'm the only one who thinks this way

tekkitan

iTrader: (1)

If you want a rust free car, go buy a 2009. These cars are around 20 years old or older. You'd be in the same situation if you bought a 60s or 70s camaro. You act like just because the cars are starting to rust out, the car should just die. If the frame and most of the body is in decent condition, why throw it away? If we did that, I wouldn't see some beautiful Camaros and GTOs I see in my area driving on the road. What I am trying to say is, you make no sense. You own a third gen, but tell people it isn't worth it to restore them. Yes they made a lot of third gens, but they also made a lot of first and second as well. They are a VERY popular model and have been ever since they came to be. The third gens in a few years will be where the first and second gens are now. I don't get why you insist on trashing everyone who wants to keep the generation alive.

And yes, on a THIRD GENERATION forum, you are the only one that thinks this way. This is why I am confused why you are here.

okfoz

I think Derth has a point, if you are going to build a car, then yes, find one that is rust free as possible. They are still out there, my Yellow car has no rust except what is on the K member...

Consider two cars... ONE car is a really nice V6 car, the other is a rather uncommon IROC-Z with some interestingly rare options, L98, T-tops etc... THe V6 car is clean, but the IROC has some superficial rust, no holes... My opinion is to take the V6 car and make it into a racer, or build a nice car from that. The IROC would be a better canidate to restore. THere are limitations to what is worth restoring, the car in the other thread, I would have never bought to restore, I would have bought it for parts, I would not care if it was a TTA or a Firehawk, as there comes a point to where the car is too far gone to actually try to restore, all you do is spin your wheels because everywhere you fix will eventually come back 3 times faster than if you started with a clean car. Of course it would depend on what the cars are really like, and your skills, or how much money you have. I think ultimately you have to ask yourself, is it worth restoring a $5K 100K mile TTA if it takes $10,000 to restore, when you can buy a rust free version for around $14K? I think there has to be some perspective when looking at a purchase. In my experience a $300 IROC will more than likely cost more than a $8000 Iroc, if you want a perfect car...

John

tekkitan

iTrader: (1)

We are in the History/Restoration forum though

Not everyone thinks about it monetarily. Some people actually restore cars to make themselves feel like they accomplished something and/or learned something. Maybe body work isn't what you're into, but a lot of people that are into restoring would rather do the work themselves. I don't know about you, but I would feel very proud that I was able to fix such a horrid problem and hang on to an original IROC instead of cramming stuff into an old V6. To me, that feels like cramming a bunch of junk into a Honda to make it go faster. The IROC is a symbol to some, which is why they will choose to got to such lengths to restore it to it's once beautiful self.

Also, while I see your point (and part of Derth's), it is fact that he is rather rash about how he goes about it. That is why some of his posts were deleted from the thread

scottmoyer

Actually, his posts were deleted because he stated the cars are third gens and not worth anything. Not that there was anything wrong with his statement as much as the reaction to his statement. He's entitled to feel this way. Drew, the moderator I replaced feels the same way as do many other people. Many people thought the 1st gens were junk also, but today they are worth lots. Nobody knows which cars will be worth money someday. We all speculate and think we know because of this fact or that trend. Right now, the lower mile cars are going up in value because of the 40 something crowd. The Camaro and Trans Am were the car to have in the 80s. The younger generation just sees them as older used cars. I see the Monte SS, Buick GN, Olds 442, etc from the 80s as the cars to get my hands on.

In regards to rust. I agree and have stated many times that it is sometimes better to spend more up front and get a mint example than to get a piece of junk and try to make it mint. You can enjoy the mint example today, while the junk will require lots of work and more money to still have a high mile car that may start rusting again if not taken care of properly during the repair process. The cars that really deserve to be fixed regardless of condition are the special cars. To me that would be an 88 1LE and the such. A run of the mill 88 Sport Coupe for $500 that has rust all over it is not worth restoring in my eyes either. It will cost more than it will ever be worth. If it's just for the project and satisfaction, then so be it and enjoy it.

okfoz

--- read with your best imagination of Andy Rooney reading it---
I can comprehend the idea that restoring something and claiming it as your own is a fulfilling experiment in achievement. However to state that some people do not think about it monetarily is kind of like going to School, getting a masters and then say they really do not want to make any money. I know of people like that and honestly it is really a lie, and honestly I would tell them that I want my money back because they probably used government grants to pay for it...

The original reason why people restored cars was they believed that it will be less expensive than buying one already done. In the end it rarely is less expensive, and along the way they cross a threshold where they might as well finish it because they have so much invested already.

I suspect that you can do things in a way that make a car look good, but it really isn't, and it will hold up for a year or two if you try not to drive it on more than a sunny day. You can skimp on paint, on materials, on parts, but in the end it is still the same rusty car underneath, unless you completely disassemble it, extinguish the cancer and reassemble it.

The hard truth is, the panels & pieces that are rusted will never be like a new one, no matter how much you weld, pound and apply bondo. It is ultimately one of those harsh truths that the original paint, and sealers, no matter how crappy they were, are generally better than what we put on them now as a replacement. The paint was applied in a factory, with perfect conditions with perfect temperatures, in a perfectly clean environment, without peoples hands all over the parts...

I am not trying to be harsh, or a pessimist, and I am not trying to dishearten any would be restorer. It honestly belongs in the hands of the person that owns the car.

If you really think about it, at the end of the day, there is a threshold to when a car is worth restoring, and a car that should be for parts. Where that threshold is, ultimately, is determined by the person that is willing to do the work, or pay for the work. To think that a really nice low rust or rust free car requires no work to restore and there is no satisfaction in the achievement of simply removing everything painting it and restoring it to original condition and then reinstalling it, I think they would be overwhelmingly surprised in how much work and enjoyment that alone can bring.

my more.

John

92 Camaro

iTrader: (1)

seems like the only points brought up are restoration and race car. what about the inbetweens?

bitchin_buick

>> <<

Derth Deboblo

I agree, why scrap a car if it need a simple floor patch (not talking the whole pan though). Needs doors/fenders?? Sure replace them the thousands of rust free ones around! When I talk about scrapping/parting a 3rd gen it's because they are that bad. When you can see the sub frame from inside your car.....I mean c'mon. What's the point???

IMO, excluding the TTA and Firehawk's, no they are not worth restoring. Yes, keep the low mileage/survivor condition ones close to stock if you wish. They will be nice to look at and reminisce about. Drive/Mod/Cut the rest.


Your right....they did.

Source - http://www.camaro-registry.com/production.htm

Camaros
First gen production#'s ('67-'69)
699,138 (est.)

Second Gen #'s ('70 1/2-'81)
1,936,869 (est.)

Third Gen #'s ('82-'92)
1,525,917 (est.)

Firebirds-
Source - http://www.transamworld.com/bird-prod-numbers.php

First Gen ('67-'69)
276,683 (est.)

Second Gen ('70-'81')
1,179,408 (est.)

3rd Gen ('82-92)
839,718 cars (est. Source -http://www.nookandtranny.com/ProNo_8292Firebird.html)

F-body Production Totals (est. not including 4th gens)

2,365,635 Total 3rd gen production (est.)
3,116,277 Total 2nd gen production (est.)
935,821 Total 1st gen production (est.)

Quote me where I trash people. People ask opinions...I give them. Simple. Maybe I'm a little brash sometimes, I don't know.

The only one who see's a rot bucket as a waste of time/talent/$$$?? lol....I think not. Though sometimes I seem to be part of the minority.

Good post. He get's it.

In closing, I'm NOT trashing people and the decisions they make. I give opinions when asked (ie. "is this worth fixing/keeping....blah blah blah). In the end, it's their car/$$/happiness. Not mine.

92 Camaro

iTrader: (1)

if they can do it themself, what's the big deal?

tekkitan

iTrader: (1)

Yes but I didn't ask for your opinion or ANYONE'S opinion on the value of my IROC. Yet you decided to reply to my thread and say it's worthless, not worthy of being a collectible. You keep arguing and these people keep saying they agree with you, but NO ONE IN THIS THREAD ASKED FOR YOUR OPINION. I simply asked why other 87 Camaro models were in the NADA collector's guide and not the IROC.

Like I asked you in the first reply to your post, stop posting in my thread please.

Iroctopless

To restore or not is a personal thing. The only correct answer is to do what gives you the most enjoyment from your hobby. Even if others think you're for doing it.
Whether you . . .
- scrap it
- park it
- drive it
- restore it
- restomod it
- part it out
- race it
- leave it as is
. . . the options and ideas are as varied as the owners. Not worth getting heated over but it does makes for a good debate.

I agree with regards to NADA. They definitly seem to be missing the boat on this one.

Derth Deboblo

lulz.....

Someone made a new topic under my screen name and used all my posts in it. Awesome. (thank you mods)

So, since I "started" this post then someone answer my original question....why restore a 3rd gen??

campin1983

iTrader: (4)

Why restore anything? Why care at all? Why not just let all cars rust and get crushed when they are done?

1) We care. These cars mean something to us. For some of us we have great memories, for some of us, we think they looked really cool. For some of us, they are our chosen platform for mods.

2) Money. Believe it or not, 3rd gens just might be worth something. Today's trash is tomorrow's treasure. I've got a 5 cent airmail stamp that's worth $20. At one point, it was just garbage on a used envelope. Just because you don't see value today, doesn't mean there's not value tomorrow.

3) Hobby. Maybe we think this is fun. Maybe this is something that we just happen to enjoy?

4) Experience. As you've said so many times, 3rd gens are pretty cheap right now. If I've never done any body work before, why start on a 68 Camaro when I have cheap, plentiful parts for an 88?

Trolling a forum dedicated to 3rd gens asking why we don't trash them doesn't make any sense.

scottmoyer

Keep watching NADA and see if my email does any good. Until then, this thread has run it's course.

okfoz

They do not have Firebird for 1987 either, but they have 1986 Friebird, and T/A and 1988 Firebird, T/A, GTA and Formula... And the 1992 Firehawk is worth a laughable $8xxx

John