When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
ConvertiblesDiscussed here are problems and solutions to convertible specific questions, including difficult to find part numbers and other convertible tech help.
There are some early 1985/1986 ASC convertibles. If I understand correctly, it wasn't official until 1987 with the Camaro, but ASC did some conversions, on the dealership level, prior to that.
So it is considered a modified camaro. Not a true factory option ordered Camaro. Same as if some person bought a 1970 Camaro and had it chopped to be a convertible. Not sure that it has any particular collector value. I would rather have a 1987 Camaro as it is recognized as the first year of 3rd generation convertibles.
So it is considered a modified camaro. Not a true factory option ordered Camaro. Same as if some person bought a 1970 Camaro and had it chopped to be a convertible. Not sure that it has any particular collector value. I would rather have a 1987 Camaro as it is recognized as the first year of 3rd generation convertibles.
These were directly ordered by the Chevrolet dealer from ASC. Same could be said for the COPO Camaros or the Yenko Novas. Are those collectible?!? (YES!!) These are more rare than the '87s and built to the same standard. I would say the '86 ASC Camaro convertible is no less collectible than an '87.
These were directly ordered by the Chevrolet dealer from ASC. Same could be said for the COPO Camaros or the Yenko Novas. Are those collectible?!? (YES!!) These are more rare than the '87s and built to the same standard. I would say the '86 ASC Camaro convertible is no less collectible than an '87.
In 1986 the Camaro was not offered as a convertible, so how is this a factory option? COPO and Yenkos were option from the dealer/factory. I believe you could take your T-top Camaro to ASC in 1986 and have it turned into a convertible, but this was not not a option that could be done through the dealer/Chevrolet. Correct me if I am wrong???
on ebay now. How rare is that car, i thought 1987 was the first year for ACS verts? It's cheap too.
yeah cheap if you have all the parts to finish it. 87 had the 20th anniversary map pocket. If anyone gets this and wants to get some parts my 87 is sitting out back getting parted I will sell the nearly complete shell for $600. some guy is supposed to be getting the top and frame from it next week but not positive if he will show up until he gets here.
In 1986 the Camaro was not offered as a convertible, so how is this a factory option? COPO and Yenkos were options from the dealer/factory. I believe you could take your T-top Camaro to ASC in 1986 and have it turned into a convertible, but this was not not a option that could be done through the dealer/Chevrolet. Correct me if I am wrong???
You are correct that the convertible was not a factory option in '86. ASC sold them directly to Chevrolet dealers that year. They did not sell them to private car owners. This convertible is a "dealer option".
The COPO and YENKO (and many other hot muscle car specials) were dealer built special editions. They were not "factory options" but it makes them no less "collectible".
Give this car (and other convertibles like the AutoForm roadsters and the Matrix3 convertibles) a break. They were "dealer option" cars built to a high standard and were very expensive when bought new.
Not saying anything bad about them. Just saying they don't have the 3 in the VIN where it is suppose to be saying it is a convertible. So, they are a modification, not a convertible recognized by GM. Like any other Camaro convertible they are worth whatever someone is willing to pay.
Most of the ASC cars were converted prior to the original owner taking possession. Interestingly there is an article stating that the ASC conversion was actually a joint effort between GM and ASC engineers. Ultimately there were some things that had changed from the prototype, for example the very first converted camaro had the spears go all the way to the mirrors, the windshield trim piece was painted black instead of body color, etc... Ultimately the spears were shortened to about 8" or so, and then the caps were eliminated from the doors altogether in 1988 and the paint around the windshield remained body color. As the project took form and to make the order process easier for dealerships the option was created... An interesting factoid is the ASC converted cars are identical to the factory model, the only difference is the fact that the VIN has a 2 instead of a 3, but are otherwise identical.
The comparison of taking a 1970 hard top and chopping the top off is no comparison, as there was never a factory 2nd gen convertible... Even going backwards to 1969 or 1967, the convertible and coupes were made on the factory line and were in fact quite different in more than just a top being removed...
the fact is ASC made ALL of the "Factory" convertibles from 1987 thru 2002... yes even the 4th gens were a conversion. The biggest difference is the 3rd gen was done off site at an ASC facility. The problem was there was not enough room at neither Norwood or Van Nuys to actually do the conversion. The 4th gens were moved to Canada I believe in part because of this fact and the conversion took place on the grounds of the factory, so they consider the 3rd Gen a complete conversion, and the 4th gen a system supply.
Furthermore, the Firebird was not offered as a convertible because of fuel economy as it would not have met the necessary CAFE fuel economy ratings of an average of 22.5mpg, this is ALSO the reason why GM did not offer the 350 in the car, and why in 1987 the Chevrolet was only offered with the LG4 with the automatic and the LB9 with the manual. It also had to do with price of testing and the fact that those combination would have satisfied most customers at the time. There were several 1987 dealer conversion made, and I believe that there were also aftermarket conversions for Chevrolet dealerships along side the "Factory" convertibles... As there is supposedly a 1988 Camaro convertible that was not factory. (not verified)
Also the comparison to a Yenko or a Motion, or some other dealership conversion is an appropriate one as Yenko being the most popular in fact did take a regular Camaro, pull the engine and install another engine that was not originally installed in the car that was not available and install a larger engine in its place... However A COPO car is different. COPO stands for Central Office Production Order, in contrast RPO is Regular Production Order. In effect to get a COPO car you had to get permission from the central office (GM) to get the car made, so those are in fact GM authorized.
If on a scale from 1 to 10, if a factory convertible (VIN 3) was a 9, and an otherwise identical Camaro, that was an ASC conversion but had a VIN 2, I would give it a 8.5. However if the Camaro with the 2 was unique, say a 350 powered car then I would give the 350 vert a 10... Yes there were just shy of 200 of them made... 4 KNOWN Camaro's in 1987, and about 180 Firebird convertibles...
Another factoid is if you needed parts for your "not recognized" Camaro, or Firebird you could go to your dealership and purchase parts for your converted car... All of the parts had a GM part number, the only parts on my "non factory" car that I have not seen a PN is the spears, and some other pieces that I have not disassembled... I was actually able to go to the dealership, tell them what I had and order the clips for the sub-frame connector... Whether that is still the case as they are removing older cars from the system is not known, but it was a few years ago.
I am very much a traditionalist. I like my vehicles as stock and original as they are. That being said, I prefer a convertible with a 3 in the VIN. Just my opinion though. I have no intrest in the pre 87 vertibles because again in my opinion they are aftermarket. But to those who like them I am not saying there is anything wrong with them. It is just the way I view them. To each his own...
I am very much a traditionalist. I like my vehicles as stock and original as they are. That being said, I prefer a convertible with a 3 in the VIN. Just my opinion though. I have no intrest in the pre 87 vertibles because again in my opinion they are aftermarket. But to those who like them I am not saying there is anything wrong with them. It is just the way I view them. To each his own...
I can understand & respect that.
Normally I would agree with your stance as typically the problem with an aftermarket conversion is getting the specialty parts.
SO DOES IT MEAN THAT IN 15 YEARS IF YOU HAVE 87 TO A 92 CONVERTIBLE FACTORY MADE THAT IT WILL BE MORE WANTED THAN THE ONE THAT WERE NOT MADE BYE THE FACTORY??....PS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND FOR FUTURE INFO....THANKS
SO DOES IT MEAN THAT IN 15 YEARS IF YOU HAVE 87 TO A 92 CONVERTIBLE FACTORY MADE THAT IT WILL BE MORE WANTED THAN THE ONE THAT WERE NOT MADE BYE THE FACTORY??....PS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND FOR FUTURE INFO....THANKS
That would be the safe man's bet, but I wouldn't guarantee it. Vehicle condition will be the #1 value indicator. Since most of these non-“factory” convertibles were still ordered by the Chevy/Pontiac dealer and not the private owner, they do have a certain level of quality that most future collectors will recognize and feel comfortable with. The good conversions are as good (if not better) than the (factory) ASC conversions. Many reading this would disagree with me because they are from-the-factory purists. If that was important to everyone, then a dealer installed sunroof, air-conditioning or even pinstripe would hurt the value of a car. This is not the case for most future buyers.
I guess my point is that the non-factory convertibles have plenty of opportunity to become very collectible in the future. The ’87-89 GTA convertibles are an excellent example.
ok, if you want a rating here is how I would look at a given convertible, for the given years. I am looking at ASC to ASC, I never-mind the others, not because of any other reason than I really am not well schooled in them Slim is correct, I would think that some of the other conversions were better quality, I would imagine a greenwood would be a fine example as they are known for quality, at least that is what I have been told... BUT from looking at an ASC to a "Factory ASC" this is how I would rate them.
1985 & 1986
Since there was no official vert 4 stars
1987 & 1988
ASC conversion Camaro 3 1/2 Stars (except for the 4 IROC 350 verts (5 stars)
ASC Factory Camaro 4 Stars
ASC conversion Firebird 3 3/4 stars
1989
ASC Factory Camaro 4.5 Stars
ASC Firebird conversion 4.25 Stars (unless with a 350, then 4.75 Stars)
1990 - 1992
ASC Factory Convertibles 4.5 Stars
That is my opinion...
There are so many factors to consider. Condition is a huge deal. I have seen 2 ebay listings, one was a 1989 350 GTA ASC vert, the other was a 1992 Trans Am Vert, both the same color, both apparently same condition, both about the same miles on ebay at the same time... The GTA ASC 350 Vert sold for more than the 1992...
Its all opinion, I would have no qualms purchasing an ASC vert, I know I can get parts, They have been crash tested (unlike some other conversions) so I know they are reasonably safe (as safe as a vert can be for that year) The ASC's were made in the highest quantities, the Autoform cars come in 2nd...
The major problem that I would see for most other conversions is the lack of parts, if you break something, good luck, you probably have to make it yourself or take it to someone that can do some fabrication.
right now is the time to buy an 89 GTA, Formula or Trans Am vert with the 350, I know of many people that are looking for nice ones, they are not impossible to find, but they are being snatched up when in nice condition...
It would be an 87 then... What exactly is your question?
I understand it's an 87. After reading numerous threads & post (lots by you) you refer to pre 87 cars. Starting in 87 they were then Anniversary cars. You seem to have lots of knowledge & much input, thought you might like more information to add to your database.
Personally I already know it's an 87 & I don't have a question for you but appreciate your quick "smart" response.
Glad I'm not new to this board OR 3rd gens because your response is not required & held you in much high regards prior to this response. You take the information I provided & then added a smarta$$ twist. What was the purpose of that?
No one on TGO has ever come up with firm answers as to when the 87 anniversary cars were available because we ALL know they sure weren't shown as available in the brochure. People also have so many conflicting answers: some say ASC would NOT allow customers off the street to utilize a conversion, that is had to go through a dealer (According to ASC).
THE 86 cars I understand were just converted by ASC but for 87 why didn't customers just buy the 87 Convertibles? I'm sure GM required ASC to NOT build anymore of these once a contract was signed.
Rarebmx,
Honestly I was not trying to be smart, rude or quick in the response I made. The question you asked was "How about a 1987 ASC convertible that is a VIN #2 car?" in a thread that no one has looked at or thought about for 5 years was perplexing for sure. My comment was in effect a reflection of what I consider a poorly worded quandary. My first reaction was to look at the the previous post that I had made which was a comment of opinion in regards to the 87-88 ASC conversion cars getting 3.5 Stars , and I have a comment about the factory convertible getting 4 stars etc.... Were you referring to that? or were you referring to something else in the thread? It is obviously not an 86 as per your comment and ultimately the topic of the thread. Furthermore you knew that it was an ASC conversion with the 2 in the VIN, not a Convertible VIN, so it was not a question of what kind of car it was.
If there would have been quote or some other means as a reference to base your question on it may have made more sense to me, but it did not, I scanned the thread for some utterance of the potential possibilities of what you were referring to without any particular connection. I then realized that the vagueness of your question in comparison to the complexity of a thread with 18 posts was not quickly answered I had to explore more into the motive behind the question at hand. Therefore I had come to the conclusion that there was a lack of information to base an intelligent response to the question and I had to ask more about what you were looking for before I started spewing out information that could take days.
Everything on your car should be exactly the same as a car with a 3 in the VIN with the exception of the VIN itself. Finding pieces and parts should not be a problem if that was your question. Does that answer your question?
Again, I am not trying to be rude or smart, I want to understand, I am sorry if I ticked you off.
Rarebmx,
Honestly I was not trying to be smart, rude or quick in the response I made. The question you asked was "How about a 1987 ASC convertible that is a VIN #2 car?" in a thread that no one has looked at or thought about for 5 years was perplexing for sure. My comment was in effect a reflection of what I consider a poorly worded quandary. My first reaction was to look at the the previous post that I had made which was a comment of opinion in regards to the 87-88 ASC conversion cars getting 3.5 Stars , and I have a comment about the factory convertible getting 4 stars etc.... Were you referring to that? or were you referring to something else in the thread? It is obviously not an 86 as per your comment and ultimately the topic of the thread. Furthermore you knew that it was an ASC conversion with the 2 in the VIN, not a Convertible VIN, so it was not a question of what kind of car it was.
If there would have been quote or some other means as a reference to base your question on it may have made more sense to me, but it did not, I scanned the thread for some utterance of the potential possibilities of what you were referring to without any particular connection. I then realized that the vagueness of your question in comparison to the complexity of a thread with 18 posts was not quickly answered I had to explore more into the motive behind the question at hand. Therefore I had come to the conclusion that there was a lack of information to base an intelligent response to the question and I had to ask more about what you were looking for before I started spewing out information that could take days.
Everything on your car should be exactly the same as a car with a 3 in the VIN with the exception of the VIN itself. Finding pieces and parts should not be a problem if that was your question. Does that answer your question?
Again, I am not trying to be rude or smart, I want to understand, I am sorry if I ticked you off.
Point taken & I understand the quandary. You're right that out of context & lack of reference made it difficult.
This thread out of ALL the it her threads had the most intelligent & informative reaponses. I've done a lot of searching without much information on the VIN 2 cars. I compare it to my VIN 3 car and like you said above, no big difference except my car has G92 4 wheel disc, overhead console, cargo cover & auto dimming mirror.
I just wonder if in fact this original owner wasn't aware of the vert conversion until after he ordered the car?
It's highly equipped but then to send it off to ASC and eliminate some options was strange to me.
It may have been ordered before GM was ready for production. I am not sure when the 87 "3" cars actually started honestly. I would imagine that ASC had a set number of Dealer orders ("2" Cars) already in place when GM started using the VIN, so ASC would have probbly had an agreement to fulfilled those orders side by side with the 3 Vin cars with GM.
I believe in 1987 you could get the G92, G80 and the J65 (rear Disc brakes) on the Convertibles, it was not until 1989 when the G92 went away.
The cargo cover, I assume that you are referring to the little door in the back, not the shade. It seems like a redundancy to have both, but who knows. Normally Dealers would order a car, have it drop shipped to ASC to be converted then delivered to the dealer, these cars would have no use for things like the cover, shade, overhead console, and rear defog. However there were some dealers that had cars in stock and would send them to ASC to be converted, I have seen that as well based on the information I have. I suspect this may be the case with this car, otherwise what would be the point of the options that would be discarded anyway. Talking to someone that worked at ASC, they often removed the BOSE system and installed a regular stereo because they could not use the BOSE speakers in the back seat. I would be curious if your car came that way.
The auto dimming mirror may or may not have been an issue with the cars. I know the factory cars ended up being a competition to see how efficient and light they could make them, so it may have been an option that was NA on the "3" cars.
Is your car a 350 car? It would have been possible and there are 5 that I know of. Also is it an Automatic trans or Manual trans?
Thank you for the detailed response.
I am actually on the same thought process you are with being an early 87 car. My thoughts were someone had ordered this car OR the dealer had it sitting & sent it off.
This was also my thoughts about when did the VIN 3 cars actually start their run. There is a ton of speculation and a ton of pieces to be put together but I have to assume GM didn't sign the deal with ASC on Jan 1st 1987. I'm purely speculating that deal was signed probably in the 1st quarter.
My car had the cargo shade , not hard cover. It was not equipped with Bose.
On the J65, I thought GM didn't produce any J65 cars on the VIN 3 cars.
350 car....nope, 305 auto.
Ultimate car would be an 87 350 or 305/5 convertible in yellow or blue. Actually considering painting it factory yellow because it will never be a 100% original car again since paint is really faded but the body is razor straight.
I have all my RPO codes deciphered & will upload them.
Other curious thing about this car is: floorboards of the car are silver but it's a factory black car. I'm wondering if the car was selected off the line to be a Black IROC. every other 3rd gen I've owned has had color matched floorboards to the exterior color except this one.
I'll upload RPO codes.
And agin, sorry about yesterday & think we can figure out more with every car that shows up.
Well it has not been determined yet in regards to collector value. It is no different the a 1967 or 1968 Yenco, Baldwin Motion cars among others. I would guess it will hold an higher value the the Autoform 2 seater convertibles. Since it was made by ASC and they made the 1987 version I would say it should be comparable comparable car from 1987. If I had the money I would bet on it and buy.
Guys, I have found the convertible I asked about. This is here. Does anyone know anything about American Custom Coachworks Limited???
ACC was probably the most prevalent builder of convertibles in the late '70s to mid '80s. They converted Celicas, Skylarks, Cadillacs, TBirds, Lincolns and many others. They converted some F-bodies as well, but other builders built more than ACC. The quality was good, but not great. If you are asking about value, then I would say it is worth about the same as a comparable condition hardtop. Most enthusiasts wouldn't want it, but some would, making the pool of buyers less, but still attractive to some that want to be different and like convertibles.
Guys, I have found the convertible I asked about. This is here. Does anyone know anything about American Custom Coachworks Limited???
Off topic but did anyone notice the magazine flipped the Thunderbird and Fifth Avenue pictures from the description below? Even more so, I thought that looked like a Cougar and not a T-Bird based on the grille alone.
05-21-2010, 09:17 PM
