I've been shopping for a 91 or 92 Firebird convertible and I know nothing about these cars so I've been doing a lot of reading on this site. I understand GM made some improvements to the body for 92. Was the change significant or was it mostly marketing? Should I hold out for a 92? Can anyone who has owned both comment?

The only changes I know of that apply to the verts are a special "bonding agent" GM used to stiffen up the cars and stop most of the squeeks and rattles. The hard-top and T-top cars got rubber "snubbers" on the rear hatch frame to make the hatch more stable, but of course that doesn't apply to verts. Everything else was just cosmetic, I think. I read all of this a while back on Wikipedia, so I assume it's true.

The setup of the rear seat belts is MUCH better in 92 Vs. 91 also. The seatbelt is a 2 piece in my 91 and it was the standard belt in my 92 Camaro and I assume the same in the Firebird. I notice the body was much stiffer in the 92 Camaro also. Still love the Bird though

Interesting I thought the bonding agent began on the 1991 models. Also neither of my 1991 hatchback cars had the rubber snubbers for lid to shut on.

That's because they didn't get put on until 92.

All the information I have about the bonding agent I got from Wikipedia ... take it with a grain of salt.

I do know that mid way through the 1991 model year they changed the weather seals on the T-TOP cars... Much needed improvement... Actually as a replacement part thats all GM sells now, is the late Seals.

I know that my 1987 has some sealer on it all over inside the car where they bonded parts... I really do not know what else they would change, I have actually never seen anything official to confirm or deny the existance of the updated 1992 cars.

John

And what do you base this on???

Considering davemutt wants a 1991 or 1992 he can't buy an IROC convertible from one of those years... ASC converted BOTH cars from 1987 - 1992, and almost all articles I read contradict your statement...

John

I have to respectfully disagree with you. And you obviously don't know your third gen's. This guy is asking about '91 & '92. Did you mean Z28? Because the IROC name belonged to Chrysler Corp. those years.

Is your caps lock stuck?

Can you backup your statement?

I think ultimately he is new to the site, he is apparently unhappy with a 383 build and wants to go to TPI... I have done the swap and its straight forward if you buy the car like I did... I want to give him some slack but drom what I can tell his CAPS LOCK is well... apparently LOCKED on...

John

also in 92, the tonneu cover release switch was relocated to the tonneu cover, right by the slider that releases the back of the top. it makes it more convenient to raise/lower the top because from 87-91, the swtich was on the center console, inbetween the window switches, in the spot for the rear hatch release on the coupes. you would have to get out, pop the back of the top, then reach in if you can or get back in and flip the tonneu release switch. it's easier on the 92s cuz the switch is right there, by the top release slider.

I can see that being a plus, but other than that the cars are virtually the same. I know it is a hassle sometimes when I'm by myself putting the top up and down because I have to hold the back end of the top up with my right hand and with my left hand, hit the tonnue cover release switch. It's a good thing I have long arms...

My 91 has the release switch in the flip lid, not the center console. I thought that was a 89-91 change?


I always thought the 91/92 was the same except for the badging on the dash?

I suppose it might have been a midway '91 change. I know that some '91's have different rear speaker panels than others, due to some changes made to the convertibles in '91.

Maybe that would be why all the stereo computers list 6x9's even for verts. Yet mine is 6" or 6.5". Mine is a very very late 91.

Yea, I know for a fact mine are 6x9's because I replaced them with aftermarkets long ago. So that would probably explain why they changed the whole panel.

Whats the date on your conversion?

Hmmm, I'm not sure. I'd have to do some research. I know it was an early 1991 model though.

It should say on your asc tag in the drivers door. Mine was july or august 91. Which makes it at the end of 91's. The vin code is a very high number as well.

Hmm...I will check this weekend when I start my custom grill modifications.

My car is a June '91 ASC conversion and it has the switch beside the slider on the tonneau; don't know how far back in the model year this change goes though.

My switch is on the tonneau cover next to the slider and the ASC conversion date is March 1991.

Same as above and my ASC conversion date is July 1991.

The 92's do have a tighter build quality. The ragtops really needed it too. Ever try to drive up an inclined driveway apron at an angle? If you go straight, you'll clip the nose. At an angle, and..... ccrreeeaakkkk. In the 92, the creak is much less. Of course, it also depends how much abuse and mileage the cars have, and how many creaks they have under their belt. I would assume that each time it gets a little worse. The structural adhesive was upgraded, and reported upon in press releases from GM, as well as the automotive press in general. Read car and driver or motor trend etc, they had an issue for all the 1992 new cars. Just one little section for each model car. since there was very little to report for 1992, they mentioned the improved structural integrity, and said it was partly because of the adhesive. i have owned 9 3rd gens, some rags some not. 92's always tighter. And they stay tight longer. I got my 89 new, and in the beginning it was like a lexus, then after about 80,000 miles it was totally loose. The converts have the biggest benefit from the upgraded structural adhesive.