BigKeg

I get this a lot ..people try to tell me you couldn't get a 350 with T-tops ...but the 8th number in my vin is a 8....but take a look at my profil to see what my 350 did to the iroc...

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

People are wrong. 350's did come with t-tops. What they didn't come with were manual transmissions.

okfoz

And believe it or not, you could even get a convertible with a 350, and all factory parts... not the 3 in the VIN tho.

luvofjah

iTrader: (2)

Yes, I've seen 350's with T-Tops...
And stress cracks from all the torque just by the corner of the T-top and rear / B pillar...

Get some SFC's

Raf

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

I've only seen that on hardtop cars or cars with aftermarket TTops that are shorter than factory units.

luvofjah

iTrader: (2)

My bad, you are correct! (not sure where my brain was)
I have a 91 305 Formula TPI with 5 speed, and the Spohn SFC's helped a lot, but I am going to add the Alston too

okfoz

Most of the cracks I have seen have actually been on the hard top cars, just about every one of them.

BigKeg

My car is factory T-tops ..look at my pics on my profile ...I pulled the weather stripping off and found rust and stress cracks ....its all fixed and I had U.M.I subframe connectors put in......

FueledSoul

iTrader: (18)

<- 305 t-tops had stress cracks

okfoz

The Craziest thing I have ever seen is a V6 car that had these huge cracks, about 1" long on each side... and it was a Hard Top to boot... The reason for the cracks is obviously it is a high stress area, when they made the cars, they should have put more reinforcement in that area, but most cars do not seem to see it until several years of use...

I am not sure if the 1992's with some structural enhancements had the same problem or not.

It seems to me that it was a no-brainer when they made the cars, and to simply change the shape slightly through that area or something to keep it from happening. I suspect it was a budgeting thing...

These same exact cracks is what brought down the deHavilland Comet aircraft, because sharp square corners create a high stress point they are more prone to cracking.

BigKeg

(((( I'm not sure if the 1992's with some structural enhancements had the same problem or not.*))) ????

What structural enhancements ??? Is ther something different about the 92's ??? With bracing???

okfoz

Although I have never witnessed it, as I never have owned a 1992, but from what I have been told In 1992 GM used extra glues and bonding techniques for the F-body.

As a very educated guess I suspect that this was in preparation for the new 4th Generation cars, GM used the last year of the 3rd Generation to test and refine the production techniques that were going to be used on the next Generation production. Since traditionally the last year of a generational run, production is lower, it is much easier to develop new techniques in a line that can be shut down for short periods to introduce new things. Also when you consider that they had the production down to a science after 10 years, it would be easier to add or take away production techniques on a proven system. It only makes sense that they would have used the 1992's as a test bed for the upcoming 4th generation. Also considering that there are many similarities between the 3rd & 4th gen cars one can easily conclude that this is more than likely the case. Otherwise why would they improve upon the last of the cars? Another example of this would be the weatherstripping for the T-tops, in mid 1991 they improved the seals, so they did not leak, why worry about it when the car was going to be cancelled, unless you were testing it for an upcoming new model. Keep in mind that the front fenders, doors, mirrors, etc, were going to be made from plastic pieces on the 4th gen and plastic is typically not as rigid or strong as metal.

Does that make sense?

BigKeg

No...it dose not..

I'll tell you why...first I know not every car plant makes cars the same way. I have seen pics of the f-body plant and I can tell there are thing in the pics that we have where I work ...

I drive forklift at the plant that assemble the chassis for the Jeep Wrangler...We make about 800 perday, 400 pershft...currently we are making 2013 but yesterday 6, 2014's came down the line...3per shift...the. 2014's are pilot jeeps ..they are for hirher ups, commercials, and test crashing ...a test/pilot car will never make it to a dealership ( yes some have by mistake but not the norm ) ..model change in all cars are mid summer..in January we start geting piolt parts in ...and between February and july we make pilot/test jeeps..along with jeeps to be sold to the public. ..and in july we change over to the 2014's...

So knowing this ..I do not think GM would " test " something and let it out just to see if it works...The better glue..could have been used on test cars in 91 and they liked it and then put it on 92's and all cars after that..again I'm going on what happens where I work...I talk to the engineers on things that go on because I took C.A.D classes at Owens C.C. and have an interest in this ...but we have engineers that have worked for other plants....

okfoz

I had this whole thing typed where I refuted your argument, and I decided it was not worth it. Honestly, I know of several Engineers that worked for GM, and it was not uncommon for this to happen... They would introduce a new process in order to prepare for changes for the next year. Not always, but in some cases. I happen to live in what was at one time the heart of Buick, where at one time the worlds largest factory once stood, some 2.25 miles long and .75 miles wide at one point. The truth is I have at my disposal a ton of retired engineers that I gather information from.

There is no reason why GM would decide to introduce the extra bonding in the process of the 3rd generation cars the last year of production other than to work out kinks and problems in an existing system. The cars were outdated then and scheduled to be axed. Why care about the last year?

BigKeg

I wasn't trying to argue anything...I was just trying to explain what I think...I haven't worked in a GM. Plant...and I dont know anyone that work in a 3rd gen plant...I did know a engineer that works in the GM transmission plant in Toledo...I'm simply saying what I think based off of 6plus years making jeep wranglers. ..I have read a lot of post on hear and seen where things like this turn in to a big fight ...if im wrong ...then tell me...I would be interested in seeing what you have to say...

BigKeg

You live in Flint Mi????
Anyway...I agree with you 100%....what I disagree with is, you saying that GM would release test cars, to the public. ..I'm sure the glue you talk about.. ( and I dont know if it was new or same in 92...I'm going off of what you said about new glue in 92 ) ...I'm saying if there was new glue in 92 ...it would have been put on cars before they where released to the public and tested ...crash test, wind tunnel, and other testing. ..
Think about this ...your driving your brand new 92 T-top...The glass flys out...hits the car behind you...if you put the top in and didnt lock it right ...your fault. ..if the glue holding the weather striping came undone. ..and glass came out ...its GM 's fault....

I dont know how we got to glue....when this thread was about 350 and Tops....I have a 87 and when you said there was added bracing on a 92 ...I was hoping to learn something new about bracing..cuz I want to make a Taga-top...

You sound like a smart person and have some knowledge of car factorys ...I'm not on hear to argue and fight with people ...just to exchange information ...if I'm wrong about something ...I want to know ...

okfoz

I was not referring to "Test Cars" What I am referring to is the glues. If it was considered a major change then they would have done testing in order to pass the regulations. Crash testing etc... Since this was more of a change in manufacturing than a change in design, they may or may not have had to do crash tests. I never suggested that they did not have to test the changes.

Just like when Hamburger installed the Dana in the back of the 1991 & 1992 Firebird Forumlas, SLP had to do backwards barrier crashes in order for them to be legal, it darn near bankrupted SLP in the process, having to wreck a car, but it had to be done. Likewise, I am reasonable sure that GM probably had to do some sort of testing to make sure that the new system would be safe...

My point was the that glues would have required a new manufacturing process, that information that they learned was going to be used on the new 4th generation. Instead of starting fresh with everything in the process, they more than likely used the 3rd generation as a test to work out how the process was going to be executed. That is all I am trying to say.

I am not upset, I did not think you were arguing, I just wanted to make sure that what I was trying to convey was clear.

And yes I live in Flint, MI. Drive by old Buick City every day. Sad really, it is now a large parking lot filling up with trees. There were so many people that said that they would never tear it down, but they did. Amazingly Buick literally had its own power plant for electricity.