I was under the assumption (I heard it through the grapevine) that all 3rdgen convertibles started out as a CC1 (T-top) car before going elsewhere for the conversion.

After looking over my RPO codes, I DO NOT have CC1, but I know its a factory 'vert cause I have a "3" as the 6th character of the VIN (3 annotates a 2-door convertible) and I also have 62T (Top color: Lt Beechwood) as an RPO code. Obviously, this disproves the old wives tale, but is there any more information on that?

 

Hi'ya

I commented on this subject and the replies indictate that T-tops were used more then not, I think one reason being additional underbody reinforcement required, although probably more so for convertibles.

Mine is an ASC 1989 custom.

I have a theft recovery so the original VIN isn't available.
I would say there have been some orders from full top cars, but not the majority

(a guesstimate)

Bill S.

 

I believe CC1 was infact true until they started to authenticate the firebird 'verts by their vin designation.Cars prior to the "3" in the VIN were to be original CC1 cars. There are a few members on these boards that could verify that have verts prior to the "3" designation. But your car would not show CC1 on the SPID. This is why Firebird 'verts always seem to drum up so much commotion. Between the years of 1987 and 1990 there was no code on the RPO list to verify the car was a 'vert and the VIN was no help either. But your car can be easily verified by the VIN.

 

I had suspected that parts from earlier 'official' Camaros were used for custom late 80s Firebirds. I see convertibles that do not resemble a factory ASC style. The parts used on Camaro and third gen (ASC) 'Birds are the same aren't they?
I had known the info on the official 90s Convertibles early on (I think prior to buying my car, but can't recall anymore)

Bill

 

No CC1 on my official GM IROC vert.

I was under the impression that the T-top cars did not have 'additional underbody reinforcement' underneath as stated above, they just used a rubber **** on the inside of the door to tighten up the body.

 

I didn't research it, was just throwing a guess out.
Mine has obvious chassis reinforcement coming from ASC though.

I'm still miffed by the inclusion of some stickers...as an example; the rear deck lid donut spare instructions seem partially removed, as if a failed attempt, the ASC sticker on driver door jam remains, and tire specs on door, underhood serp. belt diagram, but nothing else.

The mystery to be solved.
Bill S.

 

My experience is as follows: August 7, 1992 toured the Van Nuys assembly plant. When we got to the end of the line each of us got to "ride" in an F-car as it did the roll test. I got into a white RS and noticed that there was no headliner and this was a hardtop car. And you could see all the wiring for the dome lamp. After a close inspection of the build sheet that I swiped on this car it was a convertible Z03 heritage car headed for New Hampshire.

 

Speaking of old wives. My wife is so old that when she looks in the mirror it breaks!

 

All thirdgen verts started out as T-top cars. Every last one of them.

BTW, for those in disbelief... there are numerous pictures floating around of thirdgens sitting outside of the ASC 'factory', T-top cars in all. Some people (like Lon for example) drove by there numerous times while the cars were being made. I had even been by there. There werent any hardtops.

 

IROCMonkey did a quick search on my VIN off the PA special plate issued for theft recovery.

I wasn't sure on it, but he used the following:

PA special plate VIN

43076262401
TITLE
16(G?)2FS2188KL250774
VIN PA.

Mine has the ASC sticker still in door jam, but he listed it as hatchback, although I'm pretty sure that doesn't preclude T-tops.

-Bill Schwenke (AKA Speed)

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by madmax
[B]All thirdgen verts started out as T-top cars. Every last one of them.

Madmax is right and I was sadly mistaken! The 'verts were t-top cars. I remembered some shots we took of some carriers leaving the holding lot and sure enough I've got two loads of 'verts and they're ALL t-top cars.

 

Agreed that they were all t-tops cars. But the question is, did GM stop using the CC1 RPO for cars destined to be converted? I know my '87 has CC1. We need to take a poll to see which years' had CC1 and which didn't to see if we can come up with a pattern.

Willie

 

I have a 92 RS Convertible, There is no CC1 Designation on the car for t-tops, so how would that be explained? I can provide pictures of the rpo tag as well as the asc tag if it helps.

 

If I recall right, all GM cars that are verts, started off as hardtops. Even the good old Cavaliers and Sunbirds were like that. Started of life as a hard top, then became a vert. No wives tail here. Just confusion. I did some body work on a 87 Cavalier Z24 vert. The drviers door got totalled. We had to order a special door to replace it. They start off as a normal door with the wrap around the window type frame. It was then cut from the factory and new rubbers had to be ordered

 

What about the '84-'96 Corvettes? they all start as Targa top that were converted to ragtops too?

 

You got me on that one. I'm not sure about the Vettes. After all they are basically hand made. Hmmm Anyone?????