History / Originality Got a question about 1982-1992 Camaro or Firebird history? Have a question about original parts, options, RPO codes, when something was available, or how to document your car? Those questions, answers, and much more!

82-92 What year would you buy next time?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 02:00 PM
  #1  
jim s's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
82-92 What year would you buy next time?

I’m looking to do another Knight Rider conversion with a newer Trans Am. I have a 1983 with a cross fire and have never found it reliable. With the 10 year span of cars 82-92 what would you suggest I buy this time? I’ve be told an 89 formula might be the way to go.

Thanks for your help,

Jim
starbuck@gate.net

http://www.gate.net/~starbuck/kitt.html

Last edited by jim s; Sep 18, 2004 at 02:58 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 02:52 PM
  #2  
Dante93GTZ's Avatar
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,873
Likes: 5
From: East Tennessee
Car: 1992 Z28 Heritage Edition
Engine: L98
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.23:1
Get whatever you want - its only gonna be reliable if it was maintained. No year was better than any other, if i wasn't taken care of.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 03:07 PM
  #3  
Air_Adam's Avatar
TGO Supporter
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 9,067
Likes: 1
From: Saskatoon, SK, Canada
Car: '83 Z28, '07 Charger SRT8
Engine: 454ci, 6.1 Hemi
Transmission: TH350, A5
Axle/Gears: 2.73 posi, 3.06 posi
If I had to get another, I'd get either a '89/90 IROC with the 350, or a '91/92 Formula 350.

Maybe thats just me though.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 03:12 PM
  #4  
MdFormula350's Avatar
TGO Supporter
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 11,634
Likes: 3
From: Maryland; USA
91-92 camaro z28
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 03:25 PM
  #5  
nick418's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Car: 91 Z28 & 21 Hellcat Challenger
Engine: L98, Hemi 6.2
Originally posted by MdFormula350
91-92 camaro z28
i agree
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 04:36 PM
  #6  
yesfan2000's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Car: 1987 z28
Engine: L98
If you're talking about creating another Knightrider conversion with a newer f-body, I'd go with the 1990 Trans Am. I don't remember if the Knightrider had the ground effects or not. If not, I'd go with the 1984 Firebird or the 1984 Firebird S/E. I don't think the Cross Fire engines were available in 1984, so that wouldn't be a problem. Black, of course.

dave
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 05:17 PM
  #7  
cam-'s Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,519
Likes: 4
From: In the Garage
Car: Camaro
Engine: 6.2L
Transmission: T56
Depends pn what you want. Best chassis to start with for sheer performance is 91-92 cause they were glued as well as welded and they are the newest version having the most upgrades. If you only want to keep it stock then get anything that suits your fancy so long as it was maintained properly and is clean. About the only cars I would not recommend are the 2.8 carbed, or a tech four, or a crossfire car. happy hunting
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 05:23 PM
  #8  
Air_Adam's Avatar
TGO Supporter
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 9,067
Likes: 1
From: Saskatoon, SK, Canada
Car: '83 Z28, '07 Charger SRT8
Engine: 454ci, 6.1 Hemi
Transmission: TH350, A5
Axle/Gears: 2.73 posi, 3.06 posi
Originally posted by yesfan2000
I don't think the Cross Fire engines were available in 1984.

dave
Well, not in F-bodies anyway. The F-body only had them in '82 and '83.

The Corvette did have a CFI 350 in '82 and '84 though. (my uncle has an '84 Corvette with that motor)
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 05:26 PM
  #9  
jim s's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
So after 1990 is when they added the ground fxs? I have my 1983 as a donor car so I could switch over anything what wasn’t correct.

Jim
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 09:30 PM
  #10  
Greg99LS1's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
From: Arlington, TX USA
Car: 2012 Corvette Grand Sport 'vert
Engine: LS3
Transmission: 6L80
Axle/Gears: 2:73
I'd love to find my old '83 (my first new car)....and restore the body and interior to its original condition.

But under the hood, no LG4 this time around though.....an LS6/T56 and C5 brakes goes into it this time!
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2004 | 10:00 PM
  #11  
deadbird's Avatar
TGO Supporter
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 6,775
Likes: 27
From: So.west IN
Car: 87 Formula/ 00 Xtreme
Engine: TPI 305/ v6
Transmission: struggling t-5/ 4l60E
Axle/Gears: 3.08/ 3.23
Originally posted by 87roc_t56
[B]Depends pn what you want. Best chassis to start with for sheer performance is 91-92 cause they were glued as well as welded
Where do you get this from ?
Seam sealer (as everything produced since the advent of mass produced cars has), is not a glued together car (like a Lexus).

The 3rdgen platform remained unchanged from 82-92. Tack on worthless mods were made but, basic structure... same. Of course.. that's only my opinion... could be wrong..
Reply
Old Sep 19, 2004 | 01:21 AM
  #12  
Agent13's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,302
Likes: 13
From: Chicagoland
Car: 1983 Daytona Trans Am
Engine: LG4
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Every year. From 67-02. Gotta love 'em all lol.

If I got more 3rd gens I'd probably want a GTA of some sort next or more '82-'84's!
Reply
Old Sep 19, 2004 | 08:40 AM
  #13  
cam-'s Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,519
Likes: 4
From: In the Garage
Car: Camaro
Engine: 6.2L
Transmission: T56
Where do you get this from ?
Seam sealer (as everything produced since the advent of mass produced cars has), is not a glued together car (like a Lexus).

The 3rdgen platform remained unchanged from 82-92. Tack on worthless mods were made but, basic structure... same. Of course.. that's only my opinion... could be wrong..
I learned about the body gluing on this Forum There is a post on here somewhere about it. Due to production tolerances on all the dies not fitting as nicely after ten years of use rather than retool everything when they knew a new model was coming they used a new sealer glue as well as welding the body together making them the most sturdy chassis. I believe only some of the panels were done in 91 but 92's were fully glued. Certainly not the final answer to rigidity as SFC's are far more effective but it still helps.

Last edited by cam-; Sep 19, 2004 at 08:45 AM.
Reply
Old Sep 19, 2004 | 10:42 AM
  #14  
MurcoRS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 690
Likes: 2
From: Minneapolis, MN
Car: 1989 Camaro RS
Engine: ZZ4 350
Transmission: T-5
Axle/Gears: BW 9-bolt w/3.73
I would go with a Norwood-built '87 if I got another 3rd gen. The earlier cars (82-87) had more durable interior plastics, no VATS, carbs were still available, plus IROCs,GTAs, and Formulas were all available in '87 and that was the best year for paint in the Norwood plant (Van Nuys started the water-borne paint that year - run away!). More horsepower was available later but how many of us leave motors stock? Airbags are of little interest to me and I didn't care for the yellow switch graphics and gauges in 91-92 Camaros
Reply
Old Sep 19, 2004 | 01:05 PM
  #15  
LAFireboyd's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 377
From: Las Vegas
Car: 1987 Formula (original owner)
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt/3.45
For a Knightrider conversion, I'd think you'd want a black(unless you plan on painting) '87-'90 Formula(or a base model Firebird from '82-'90). Those were the only years/models that had no gfx and were most similar to the '82-'83 Knightrider cars. And when you condsider the stronger engine you can get with a Formula(a TPI 305 or 350), that would be your choice.

Edit: Although the Formula's aero wing would have to be replaced with a base Firebird spoiler.

Last edited by LAFireboyd; Sep 19, 2004 at 05:07 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 19, 2004 | 03:06 PM
  #16  
PhAnToMs's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
From: you aint stealing my car..
Car: 1984 Z28
Engine: 5.7
Transmission: Auto w/ shift kit
i dunno i like the 91-92 gfx over all the others but then i like the 82-84 gfx over the 85-90 (on camaros) i always just though that i would get a 91-92 z28 with a 350. but i dont like the rear shoulder belts or the air bag. if i could get a good price id get 91-92

heres the ultimate car imo

91-92 gfx
91-92 z28 wing
early 80's interor without pull down hatch cover or shoulder belts
no split back rear seat
black interior
t tops
5.7
pw pl no ps



for a pontiac probally 90-92 GTA with the aero wing and t tops 5.7 BLACK or a
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 12:24 AM
  #17  
Mike454SS's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Car: 96 Caprice, 86 IROC
Engine: One has an LT1, one has an empty bay
Transmission: T56
Buying a car because carbs were still available is quite possibly the worst reason I've EVER heard for buying a car.

I'm gonna call the BS flag on the glue together thing too...my 86 has seam sealer from the factory all over it...but I'd only buy an 86 if I had a hatch from another year laying around somewhere (like I did)...the 86 third brakelight is hideously ugly, and even if you take it off, you've got 2 big holes to fill in the glass.

Obviously you're going to want a firebird...so I say if you're concerned most about reliability, go with the newest least milage best maintained car you can find...I'd look for a factory speed density car myself, it's one of GM's best ECM's ever.
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 12:55 AM
  #18  
MurcoRS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 690
Likes: 2
From: Minneapolis, MN
Car: 1989 Camaro RS
Engine: ZZ4 350
Transmission: T-5
Axle/Gears: BW 9-bolt w/3.73
Originally posted by Mike454SS
Buying a car because carbs were still available is quite possibly the worst reason I've EVER heard for buying a car.
I mentioned it as '87s had both fuel injection AND carbs available, some people prefer options... I personally like carbs and can make one perform as well or better than most F/I set-ups. The extreme difference in price between a typical F/I set-up vs. a carb set-up makes little sense to me when there is little performance difference. Just my opinion.
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 09:17 AM
  #19  
phess11's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 966
Likes: 2
From: NE Ohio
Car: 83 Z28
Engine: 305 (LG4)
Transmission: THM700R4
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt, 3.23 non-LS
1983 with an L69
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 09:33 AM
  #20  
cam-'s Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,519
Likes: 4
From: In the Garage
Car: Camaro
Engine: 6.2L
Transmission: T56
Buying a car because carbs were still available is quite possibly the worst reason I've EVER heard for buying a car.
The precise reason I bought an 87 LG4... the last year for carbs.

I'm gonna call the BS flag on the glue together thing too...my 86 has seam sealer from the factory all over it
Seam sealer has been in use in some form or another since the early days of Henry Ford but that does not mean all sealers are alike. Just like the great advances paint has seen so has rust proofing and body assembly. practically all new cars built today use a strong glue polymer type sealer as apposed to the tar/oil based black stuff you speak of. That is indeed seam sealer only. Go and look at a 92 and see for yourself. Very different product that is hard and WAY more like glue than just a plain old sealer.

Any further doubt and go watch Boeing build jumbo jets... Glue glue and more glue.
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 11:55 AM
  #21  
megaracerx's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
i would go with a 87-89 GTA hardtop...those are bad ***
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 05:34 PM
  #22  
aaron7's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,467
Likes: 7
From: MA, USA
Car: 83 bird
Engine: 305/383
Transmission: WC T5
Axle/Gears: 3:42
89 Iroc. Maybe a 90, but I'm undecided. Best handling, most power from what I've found!
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 06:00 PM
  #23  
IROCZTWENTYGR8's Avatar
Administrator
25 Year Member
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 7,386
Likes: 1
From: In a mint Third Gen!
Car: Red 87 IROC-Z28 T-Top
Engine: 5.7 Tuned Port Injection
Transmission: 700R4 Auto
Axle/Gears: BW 9-Bolt 3.27
Originally posted by aaron7
89 Iroc. Maybe a 90, but I'm undecided. Best handling, most power from what I've found!
IROC-Z suspension was the same 85-90. (although I think 87-90 had different bushings) The 90's do have the most power, not much of a difference though.
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 07:27 PM
  #24  
nick418's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Car: 91 Z28 & 21 Hellcat Challenger
Engine: L98, Hemi 6.2
Originally posted by IROCZTWENTYGR8
IROC-Z suspension was the same 85-90. (although I think 87-90 had different bushings) The 90's do have the most power, not much of a difference though.
from what ive been readin the SD were noticable when it came to power
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 09:31 PM
  #25  
GTADave's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 175
Likes: 3
From: Roseville, Ca USA
Car: 1989 20th Anniversary Trans Am
Engine: 3.8 ltr Turbo
Transmission: 200r4
I would buy a 91/92 Firehawk.

- Dave
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 11:05 PM
  #26  
89rsragtop's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 412
Likes: 1
From: Long Island, N.Y.
Car: blue
Engine: LS1
Transmission: 6 speed
Axle/Gears: 3.73 posi
1989 last year before air bags.
Reply
Old Sep 20, 2004 | 11:34 PM
  #27  
camaroguy21's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: Florida
Car: 1992 Camaro 5.7L Z28
Engine: L98, G92 option
Transmission: Pro-Built 700R4
The top three on my wish list...

1. 1992 Z28 with T-Tops. Man I miss having T-Tops.

2. 1990 5.7L Iroc Z - with T-Tops of course!

3. 1990-1992 Z28/Iroc Z vert. (No T-Tops required.) :lala:
Reply
Old Sep 21, 2004 | 12:48 AM
  #28  
grngryoutmyway's Avatar
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,024
Likes: 3
From: Marietta, GA
Car: 92 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.73 10 bolt
92 heritage edition vert... w/ leather and a 5 speed!! pref black on red
Reply
Old Sep 21, 2004 | 02:08 AM
  #29  
IROCZTWENTYGR8's Avatar
Administrator
25 Year Member
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 7,386
Likes: 1
From: In a mint Third Gen!
Car: Red 87 IROC-Z28 T-Top
Engine: 5.7 Tuned Port Injection
Transmission: 700R4 Auto
Axle/Gears: BW 9-Bolt 3.27
Originally posted by nick418
from what ive been readin the SD were noticable when it came to power
They had a little more power, not much more, and not due to the SD either.
Reply
Old Sep 21, 2004 | 11:58 PM
  #30  
nick418's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Car: 91 Z28 & 21 Hellcat Challenger
Engine: L98, Hemi 6.2
Originally posted by IROCZTWENTYGR8
They had a little more power, not much more, and not due to the SD either.
o ok, i knew the 90-92 came with diff CAMS and lighter pistons and 5 to 20 hp diff (dependin on which MAF year) From what ive been readin alot of stock 90-92 L98s run low 14s in good running tune and alot of MAF ones run mid to high 14s. I dunno i guess it depends on the driver. I would deff love to own a 1987 L98 T top tho. First yr of the L98, T Tops of course and great Iroc Suspension If i saw one up for sale i would buy it, to bad i have no cash
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2004 | 12:23 AM
  #31  
RSFreak's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,262
Likes: 0
From: Renton, WA
Car: 1985 Camaro, 1986 Trans Am
Engine: 5.0L carbed and 5.0L TPI
Transmission: TH700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 and 3.27 posi
I miss my '85 the most out of all the Camaros I've owned. I will get another '85 someday (probably once my buddy James decides that he didn't really want a project car afterall! )
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2004 | 06:27 AM
  #32  
IROCZTWENTYGR8's Avatar
Administrator
25 Year Member
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 7,386
Likes: 1
From: In a mint Third Gen!
Car: Red 87 IROC-Z28 T-Top
Engine: 5.7 Tuned Port Injection
Transmission: 700R4 Auto
Axle/Gears: BW 9-Bolt 3.27
Originally posted by nick418
o ok, i knew the 90-92 came with diff CAMS and lighter pistons and 5 to 20 hp diff (dependin on which MAF year) From what ive been readin alot of stock 90-92 L98s run low 14s in good running tune and alot of MAF ones run mid to high 14s. I dunno i guess it depends on the driver. I would deff love to own a 1987 L98 T top tho. First yr of the L98, T Tops of course and great Iroc Suspension If i saw one up for sale i would buy it, to bad i have no cash
Plenty of people have ran low 14's with MAF L98's too, including 87's. BTW, you just described my car.
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2004 | 09:54 PM
  #33  
nick418's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Car: 91 Z28 & 21 Hellcat Challenger
Engine: L98, Hemi 6.2
Originally posted by IROCZTWENTYGR8
Plenty of people have ran low 14's with MAF L98's too, including 87's. BTW, you just described my car.
yeah i didnt say what color tho
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2004 | 02:43 PM
  #34  
Quick6's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 0
From: Oklahoma
Car: 1991 Camaro Z28
Engine: L98 5.7 V8 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Originally posted by nick418
yeah i didnt say what color tho
Bright red of course..
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2004 | 09:25 PM
  #35  
nick418's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Car: 91 Z28 & 21 Hellcat Challenger
Engine: L98, Hemi 6.2
Originally posted by Quick6
Bright red of course..
why not black
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2004 | 11:38 PM
  #36  
IROCZTWENTYGR8's Avatar
Administrator
25 Year Member
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 7,386
Likes: 1
From: In a mint Third Gen!
Car: Red 87 IROC-Z28 T-Top
Engine: 5.7 Tuned Port Injection
Transmission: 700R4 Auto
Axle/Gears: BW 9-Bolt 3.27
Red and red only.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2004 | 03:43 PM
  #37  
nick418's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Car: 91 Z28 & 21 Hellcat Challenger
Engine: L98, Hemi 6.2
Originally posted by IROCZTWENTYGR8
Red and red only.
\

i love red as well, Cant Beat a Shiny Black tho
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2004 | 05:12 PM
  #38  
ES87iroc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,228
Likes: 2
From: Your neighbor's hood, MD
Car: 1987 Camaro Z28 IROC-Z
Engine: 5.7L TPI
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42:1
Originally posted by nick418
\

i love red as well, Cant Beat a Shiny Black tho
Until you have to clean it!
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2004 | 07:03 PM
  #39  
nick418's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Car: 91 Z28 & 21 Hellcat Challenger
Engine: L98, Hemi 6.2
Originally posted by ES87iroc
Until you have to clean it!
:werd: yea your right, Black is such a bitch to clean. But let me tell you. Black can be the most beautiful color on any car, esp a 3rd gen. When i think of red, I think of a Corvette more
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2004 | 07:21 PM
  #40  
IROCZTWENTYGR8's Avatar
Administrator
25 Year Member
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 7,386
Likes: 1
From: In a mint Third Gen!
Car: Red 87 IROC-Z28 T-Top
Engine: 5.7 Tuned Port Injection
Transmission: 700R4 Auto
Axle/Gears: BW 9-Bolt 3.27
When I think of red, I think of the nicest color on almost every sporty car or musclecar. Like a red Lamborghini, Ferrari, Camaro, Corvette, 70 Chevelle SS's with black stripes, and so on. When you have red on a Camaro you get all the contrast with it. Black headlight pockets, louvers, grill, stripes, all the trim, etc. When you have one in black, it's all just black and you can't see those things. Kinda plains it out. Red and black is pretty much the most attractive combination. Now on the other side, I like Firebirds better in black. They don't have so much black offsetting them like a Camaro does. Black tends to look better on a car that has less contrast, like 68-72 Novas. There's no stripes or anything to really set them off besides the grill. It really depends on the car, red and black are usually the nicest colors on any particular vehicle but there are exceptions. I like other colors too but they're my favorite.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2004 | 07:25 PM
  #41  
IROCThe5.7L's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 5,225
Likes: 70
From: Buffalo, NY
Car: 1988 IROC-Z
Engine: 427 SBC
Transmission: ProBuilt 700R4
Axle/Gears: Moser 12 Bolt / 3.73 TrueTrac
Originally posted by IROCZTWENTYGR8
When I think of red, I think of the nicest color on every sporty car or musclecar. Like a red Lamborghini, Ferrari, Camaro, Corvette, 70 Chevelle SS's with black stripes, and so on. When you have red on a Camaro you get all the contrast with it. Black headlight pockets, louvers, grill, stripes, all the trim, etc. When you have one in black, it's all just black and you can't see those things. Kinda plains it out. Red and black is pretty much the most attractive combination. Now on the other side, I like Firebirds better in black. They don't have so much black offsetting them like a Camaro does. Black tends to look better on a car that has less contrast, like 68-72 Novas. There's no stripes or anything to really set them off besides the grill. It really depends on the car, red and black are usually the nicest colors on any particular vehicle but there are exceptions. I like other colors too but they're my favorite.

Oh stop foo, your just jealous my car is more shinny then yours


A nice black paint job = Smooth/Clean look.



J/k, you got a nice ride there!


Anyway, if I ever got another IROC besides black, id like a 350 in this color:




Something I really love about that color.

Last edited by IROCThe5.7L; Sep 27, 2004 at 07:29 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2004 | 07:28 PM
  #42  
IROCZTWENTYGR8's Avatar
Administrator
25 Year Member
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 7,386
Likes: 1
From: In a mint Third Gen!
Car: Red 87 IROC-Z28 T-Top
Engine: 5.7 Tuned Port Injection
Transmission: 700R4 Auto
Axle/Gears: BW 9-Bolt 3.27
LOL, don't think so. Bright Red shines just fine. (and all the black contrast does too!)

Put your AIM on for a change!
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2004 | 07:31 PM
  #43  
IROCThe5.7L's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 5,225
Likes: 70
From: Buffalo, NY
Car: 1988 IROC-Z
Engine: 427 SBC
Transmission: ProBuilt 700R4
Axle/Gears: Moser 12 Bolt / 3.73 TrueTrac
Originally posted by IROCZTWENTYGR8
LOL, don't think so. Bright Red shines just fine. (and all the black contrast does too!)

Put your AIM on for a change!

I'll be on later, g2g study now.



Reply
Old Sep 27, 2004 | 08:15 PM
  #44  
nick418's Avatar
TGO Supporter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Car: 91 Z28 & 21 Hellcat Challenger
Engine: L98, Hemi 6.2
Originally posted by IROCThe5.7L
Oh stop foo, your just jealous my car is more shinny then yours


A nice black paint job = Smooth/Clean look.



J/k, you got a nice ride there!


Anyway, if I ever got another IROC besides black, id like a 350 in this color:




Something I really love about that color.

Isnt that Scotts car? Thats got a 350 in it, I love your car irocthe5.7 :hail: :hail: Hey IROC, get some pics of your car
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jharrison5
Engine Swap
5
Aug 19, 2015 05:53 PM
89lsc
Interior Parts for Sale
0
Aug 14, 2015 04:58 PM
Zachattack0925
Tech / General Engine
2
Aug 12, 2015 09:54 PM
Zachattack0925
Transmissions and Drivetrain
4
Aug 12, 2015 09:52 PM
MENINBLK
Transmissions and Drivetrain
6
Aug 5, 2015 11:58 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:27 AM.