Found this on ebay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1992-...QQcmdZViewItem

I was under the impression that the only 91-92 cars that came with an L98 and T-tops were the Formulas. This one seems legitimate though. And the 8th digit of the VIN is an 8. The only thing I can think of is that it's an aftermarket hack job. The tops do look factory though...

Nice looking car regardless.

 

very nice looking car either way, i dont know but sure does seem legit. kind makes sence to me that u would be able to go that on a gta, if hes right and only 226 gta's were made in 92, a 350 t-top gta isnt going to come up in alot of conversation for people looking for a factory 350 t-top car.

 

Canadian/export cars could have been made with the 5.7L and T-tops. There was a thread on it recently, or could be aftermarket.

I also notice it's not street legal, however, in Florida I don't think they do inspections. So if it's a Florida buyer there probably won't be any issues is transferring title. The airbag has been removed which is prohibited by federal law on vehicles registered for operation on public roads if originally equipped with the airbag. But I'm not a lawyer and that requirement may expire when a vehicle reaches a certain age.

 

TTops and L98 was only offered in a Formula with PW7 wheels right? Never heard of a GTA like this. Very interesting.

 

I just asked him to send me or put up a picture of the spid label, we'll see if he replies. If it is a B2L/CC1/Y84 car it's a pretty rare find, but without seeing the spid label who knows

 

I suspect a conversion...

Although I cannot tell by the pictures being Black/Black it does not look quite right to me... then in the interior pix you can clearly see Hard top sun visors, they do not appear to be the T-top type...

John

 

Another vote for a T-Top conversion because the molding around where the front t-Top pin for the drivers side does not look right at all, something is off.

It's a really clean GTA though although under the hood it looks like total crap and has rust and it's been molested to who knows what extent judging by the plug wires and a few other things.

 

I just noticed that the b-pillar emblems are gone, i would say the same thing that I've lookd at it again, conversion.

 

After looking at the pictures on the auction, I would have to say that it is a conversion.

 

I'm gonna have to vote conversion as well. There's no hold downs for the t-top bag either.

 

What's so bad about under the hood?

It looks like every other car its age that hasn't been stripped and cleaned.

 

Although I do not know for sure, (so I will ask) Did the GTA come with a map pocket that said "Trans Am"

In defence of the GTA emblems missing I have seen all original cars without them, the owner claimed it was that way when he took delivery and never botherd to put it on.

One thing that bothers me mostly about cars like this is
1) He claims to have the original steering wheel (granted they look like crap) but why not put it on for the sale. ALSO why does he have a GTA emblem in the middle of a Grant type wheel?
2) He also claims to have a factory CD player... why not take a pic of that for the sale too... heck someone might not like his "custom touches" at least give a purchaser the option to see the original stuff which was removed..

ok I will step off my box

As for the car being an authentic T-top 350 car there is NO bag, nor the hooks for the T-top bag in the hatch area... I am now 95% certain it is a conversion.

John

 

Actually, it's nt a C&C conversion John, the weatherstripping is wrong for the C&C and the cars I have that are C&C conversion, the sun visors come to the edge and not hang over. I'm going to say a t-top roof put on a hard top car.

 

Ok, I removed C&C from my previous post...

I wondered briefly that myself, about someone replacing the top with a factory top... find one in a junkyard and cut them off put it on your car, not a huge stretch.

It might explain the lack of emblems on the B-pillar, and the lack of the loops in the hatch area compartment. One thing that I can't tell well in the pic is the weather seal does not look like the late 1991/1992 style. Although the pix are not clear enough to see the 91-92 seal was slightly different than the 82-90. As a matter of (oh my gosh its crazy that I know this) fact Starting in Around October of 1990 GM revised the T-top seal to what you now buy as a kit. Starting with SN ML186669 & up (for Chev) & ML245243 & UP (for Pontiac) the weather seal had an extra set of drains built into the seal itself to reduce leaking. Looking at the pix it does not quite look like that seal, but there not defined enough to really tell. On the flip side the T-tops appear to be the 1991-1992 style with the plastic strip instead of the rubber piece which looked crappy. If you look at the pic with the tops on the seal does not look like it lines up with the top as well as it should... I bet it leaks.


The idea that it might be a Canadian car I am skeptical about because of lack of evidence, since no one has ever come forward with a "Factory" T-top 350 car that was not a Formula after 1989.

Who knows he might have a SPID sheet showing otherwise... doubt it but anything is possible, and we might be able to figure out why if so too...

John

 

Not every. People who love and take pride in their cars take the time to clean under the hood when their wash their car. Here's mine at over 150,000 miles and it looks EXACTLY like that now at 196,000 except the coolant overflow needs to be replaced again. Mine has NEVER been stripped and cleaned either. Just rinsed every time I wash the outside and some Eagle 1 tire gloss used every 6 months or so. My car is a daily driver too!!!

I'm just saying that he could have at least cleaned it for picture, I can see bloody RUST. It REALLY makes one wonder what the rest of the car is hiding...

 

Here are some pix for future reference

 

These are of my car and you can see the lip on the edge is different than the lip on the car in the Ad. On his GTA look at the weatherstrip at how it comes to a point, then if you look at my car which sports the 1991-1992 style strip the point is clearly different. THere is actually a small pocket for the water to run into.

John

 

Wow, excellent engine bay!

My engine bay looks about the same as his does, and it's not even the original motor!

 

Thanks!

 

Since we have no SPID sheet, I will call my guy at a dealer tomorrow and ask him for a RPO breakdown.
That has to be a TTOP roof on a non TTOP car, there is no bag to speak of and no provisions for mounting it in the rear. Even aftermarket conversions had some anchoring system, right?

 

Well, I couldn't wait till tomorrow so I called a dealer, raise the flag on this one guys, no CC1 on the SPID! So it must be a conversion or a ttop roof on a non ttop car.
I'll say though, if it was a CC1 B2L car, I would have bought it already.

Funny story about this that some of you may enjoy, it is 8:30 here in Chicago, my parts dept is closed, so I searched for a dealer in California and the only parts dept still open was at Rydell Auto Group on Van Nuys Blvd in Van Nuys! So I talked to them. Just think that's interesting.

 

There are no clips visible on the floor of the hatch area. That was a giveaway.. I didn't think it was a factory T-top car.

But.. Just as a point of interest, almost all third gens came with provisions to mount the T-top hold down clips.. Even hard top cars have them.. If you pull up your hatch carpet, you can see the metal tabs where the anchor clips screw down on..

 

anyone notice the one peice rear seat whats up with that isn'tthat only on earlier thirdgens?

 

Somebody had posted up a thing in an owners manual about a t-top holder like in a 4th gen in a 3rd gen owners manual if it is original, it could have those.

 

I am not sure where you got this information but I am pretty sure about 90% that the 1 piece rear seat was an option thru 1992... I have owned a few 1991's, an 89 and they have all had the 1 piece rear seat.

I suspect that it is a Trans Am loaded out with all the options and someone may have put the GTA emblems on as well...

Interesting car nonetheless.

John

 

Yeah my GTA has the 1 piece rear seat. It's not an option though, it's standard according to my original window sticker. The split rear was the option.

Alex

 

even if its not a factory t-top car, for the price its going for i still think the buyer is getting a pretty nice car, its at about 4,250 when i last looked(3 hours to go) ive seen 350 conversion cars with t-tops sell for that around here for nice shape cars-meaning not rusted out) and ive seen them go alot higher, so even i fits not orignal its still a nice car for the price

 

Correct...
I did technically say that the 1 piece was an option, what I should have stated is what you have said. In some cases the 1 piece rear seat may have been a credit option as it may have been standard with some interior trim levels for some years. For example the "Deluxe" interiors that I have seen usually come with the 2 piece rear seatback. The base interior usually comes with the 1 piece rear seat back. I might be wrong, I would have to do some serious research but that is consistant with my findings.


John