I'm wondering what the build quality is like on the 3rd generation camaros and firebirds. My brother owned two fourth generations, a 93 and a 97 and both were pretty cheap. Both of them felt like the door handle was gonna break off in your hand when you pulled it. The interiors were cheap plastic and both ashtrays in the center console broke when putting weight on them. The rear ends made awful noises in both. That said I like the looks of the fourth generation better but, I'm wondering if the 3rd generations are easier to work on and better built? Thanks for the help. And sorry if this in the wrong forum. I wasn't sure where to put it.

 

Well in pure honesty, both the 3rd and 4th gens were built during some of GM's worst quality control eras.

In my opinion (and not much more), 3rd gens are a little more "solid," I like the interior and exterior a little better than my 4th gen. However, I've had some pretty significant issues with paint quality on 3rd gen.

That said, the youngest 3rd gens are 18 years old, the oldest are 28. There are a terribly small amount still in existence that don't need a very large amount of work. These aren't turn key automobiles anymore, and their original build quality matters very little at this point. Your either buying a restoration project, or someone else's former project/restored project.

 

I agree; Build quality on these cars SUCKED.

You'll be hard pressed to find on that doesn't squeak/rattle down the road and one where the door doesn't sound like its getting hit by a truck when you shut it. Simple facts on these cars.

 

I agree, I have 4 and 3 of them are terrible, only my low mileage canadian LB9 is completely rattle free, it drives like a brand new car.

 

GM build Quality for that Era?? All I can say it was QUESTABLE. However: I still own the car I originally bought in 1987. So I have a 23 year old car that I think I rebuilt over the years.

 

How difficult are the third generation cars to work on? I changed the plugs on one of my bro's camaros and jc, I never wanna do that again. I heard gm tried to tighten the bodies on the 92's, adding extra welds and caulking.

 

So its not just the fourth generations that sound like they have a million loose pieces in the door when you shut it?

 

I have an 01 ws6 ta and that car is like a rock compaired to any third gen I have ever been in.

I f you doors make all that noise somthing is wrong. I would pull the door panel off and check it out rather that live with the noise.

sub frame connectors help alot with all f bodies gen 1 to 4

 

The newer the car is, the better it will be, even if the body style stays the same. I think just about every year the 3rd gen was produced something, big or small, was made better. a 91 or 92 will be a much more advanced car than an 82 or even an 86.

 

My 98 with 180k miles is more solid than my '87 GTA with 150k miles on it, the GTA rattles and creakes, the doors are solid (but had to replace the pins in the driver door) but the rattles may be due to the aftermarket t-tops.

 

Having both I can safely say the fourth generation cars typically felt like they had better build quality overall. Like the fourth generation cars, third generation cars got better over time. A 1992 car typically feels more solid and has slightly better build quality all around than say a 1984 car. Of course this is looking at the cars 18+ years after the fact. My fourth generation car was only a couple years old when I had it. Most of the third generation cars have door panels that are falling apart, sagging headliners, deteriorating headliner backing, and 20 years of squeaks and rattles. Not to mention our center consoles are total crap. Fourth gens have door panels that are nearly as bad but the center consoles are better. New vs. new we might be saying the fourth generation cars are worse. I can't say for certain. However, the interiors on these cars are relatively cheap to restore. With ABS door panels and headliners, new carpet, and recovered seats these cars can gain a feeling of improved quality over stock.

As for working on them the third generation is hands down the easier car to deal with. The engine bay is much better as the engine isn't halfway under the dash. Its still cramped in TPI cars, but you can still manage.

 

3rd gens and build quality are mutually exclusive My '97 with 68k on it is tighter than my '88 IROC with 21k. I am shocked how many small individual squawks my t-tops have in the IROC. My 31k mile '86 TA with a hardtop is tighter, but still not as rattle freee as the '97 with t-tops.

Build quality in every way on 4th gens is significantly better.

 

Yeah the squeaks and rattles vary a ton by car. I had an 87 Trans Am with 74,000 miles on it that hardly rattled at all. In contrast my 87 with 139,000 miles didn't rattle that much more. My 1992 Formula rattles a little bit more than any of my other cars did but I can tell its all in the hatch area. The hatch on this one is in much worse alignment than it was on my other cars. My 2002 Firehawk on the other hand didn't rattle that much, but did so about as much as my 74,000 mile 87 Trans Am did.

Despite the hatch rattles, the body seems more solid on my 1992 Formula than it did on my other thirdgens.

 

What's weird to me, is I'm seeing a lot of you guys talking about build quality being better on the later cars. IMO, my early 3rd gens were built much better than my later ones. My 91 was built extremely poorly and it reverberated throughout its lifetime. My 96 had problems with the dash getting loose and the LT1 was nonstop trouble. In contrast, the body on my 84, while a bit rusty, is rock solid.

Unfortunatly, with GM, there's a lot of factors, as I don't think quality control was much of a priority during the 3rd and 4th gen runs, so your left with individual variables, like the day of the week, the specific workers, and any other individual factors.


But again as I said before, original build quality doesn't matter so much anymore on the 3rd gens. All of them, save a very few, are going to be unreliable, squeeky and in trouble, unless they've already been worked on. The build quality on 3rd gens now is much more a question of the individual restorer's quality than the factory's.

 

Well I think that the build quality on the thirdgens was decent. I have an 88 GTA hardtop, 350TPI, leather, and a digital dash. My car has 84K on it and its almost rattle free. With the windows down, there are a couple rattles from the glass inside the door. With the windows up its just as quiet as a brand new car. I was amazed! There is no wind whistling through the weather stripping, no rattles at all, it feels amazing. When I close my doors they don't feel or sound cheap like all other thirdgens I have seen. There is no water that comes in at all. The engine has never been opened up, and I have just a few little things done to it. Getting on the on ramp today I dropped the shifter to first, and drove normally till about 3500, then I punched it and the back tires started squealing and the back end of the car was going side to side.. I did the same thing when I got off the freeway but I dropped it down to 2nd gear and at about 3500 I punched it and it went like a rocket... I love my car, you just have to find one that hasn't been abused. Mine has 84K and still feels new..

 

I've heard from a few people that the pontiacs had better build quality than the camaros. My father owned an early 70s formula and he said someone told him they were built better than a camaro. I remember hearing someone else say the same, but I can't remember who.

 

As far as third gens built in Van Nuys, Calif. I think that Firebirds and Camaros were built side by side, I'm probably wrong? But, if they were, how could the quality be much different? Since the same people built them. Unless you were a Camaro fan or a Firebird fan, you might make one piece fit better than another or one bolt tighter than another according to your preference of GM third gens?

 

Quality can vary. But for example with the doors, things like the hinges, window supports, springs in the door handles and the rod retainers loosening over time etc. They are more likely to rattle. The doors on my '85 are pretty rusty, but they shut like they were brand new -nice and solid. Either way they were mass produced as a consumer product and the intention wasn't to build something that would last for decades.

But I bet many of the after market products for these cars pale in comparison to the OEM equipment it came with. The deluxe version of carpet had rubber so thick that it retained it's shape just sitting on the ground.

Check out the difference:

 

I've only owned two third-gens, an '86 Z28 hardtop LG4/MD8 Van Nuys built car, and the current '84 Z28 hardtop L69/MD8 Van Nuys built car. The '86 was a solid car. Owned it from 53K to 78Kmi with minimal rattles/squeaks. The guy who bought it from me put an additional 120k mi on it. Don't know the condition it was in though. My '84 has plenty of rattles and squeaks even though it has gone through a body restoration and suspension replacement. Control arms, springs, sway bar end links, idler arm, pitman arm, etc... 126k on this one.

 

I've owned all four generations throughout the years, though it's been awhile. Newbie here who has been following along because I'm thinking of picking up another 3rd Gen as a secondary collector car

I recall my '87 Formula 350 being pretty solid. Of course, it was a non-T-top car, which probably served to seriously reduce the squeaks and rattles caused by flexing over time. I wouldn't say it was well built -- it had some rust on the lower doors, it did squeak a bit (mostly from the suspension), the doors froze shut constantly, and the hatchback struts were shot -- but it was ok.

My '99 Camaro SS was a T-top car but had been well maintained so it too wasn't bad. Probably about the same quality level, though its interior seemed more plasticky to me than the Formula's did.

To be fair, both were better built than the first two generations. For example, I bought a '78 Z28 in the early '80s and it got pretty bad pretty fast. The doors started to sag, the power steering pump and windshield wipers failed, the door armrests were coming apart, the window cranks and seat belt holders had broken, and the rear leaf springs were starting to sag. It was also starting to rust around the rear wheel lips by the time I sold it in '86 or so.

I think by now, it depends more on how the particular car was maintained and driven. Most of these were driven hard, so unless you spring for a very low mileage and well maintained car, I don't imagine it's going to feel like a new BMW, particularly if it has T-tops.

 

Your door skin is lose from rust then, I now have 1 good solid rust free door and it shuts nice, the other sounds like that........

 

Only big flaw is I hated al lthe cheesy spot welds 4-6in apart, if you ever gut your car, go to town with a welder on it and it will feel much more solid.

 

Actually, you can get carpet with the OEM style rubber backing. It just costs more and most people opt for the ACC crap. In any case things like the aftermarket door panels which are backed by ABS plastic instead of fiberglass, are VASTLY superior to the OEM stuff. The same goes for the headliners, assuming you get one that fits right. All the ones I've seen do but some people complain that they don't.

 

The worst on these is the crappy seam sealer, for some reason all the rust starts under the seam sealer.

 

Having owned both third and fourth-generation cars, I will vouch for the fourth generation having a more solid body structure. GM applied new manuafacturing technology to the fourth generation and I think it paid off. I drove my '99 T/A (with T-tops) for 100K miles and had no rattles at all. The paint quality was also way better. Even my 8K-mile, solid-roof '92 has a surprising number of squeaks and rattles. As mentioned before, the center console in the thirdgens is especially cheap and flimsy. Not a problem, really, just an annoyance.

However, in terms of mechanical reliability, I think the thirdgen can be on par with the newer cars, provided you can get one that has been taken care of. And in my experience they are much easier to access, disassemble and work on.

 

Rust isn't a problem depending on where you live.

 

My 88 IROC w/32k miles is except for the t-tops a pretty tight car. The ride is fairly good for a 22 yr old car w/a sport suspension. The doors and various plastic parts solid.
My vert on the other hand does shake rattle & roll...I have spent a lot of time working on these issues but there is only so much you can do to a car that has had its top sliced off.....

 

I think this post says it best. I don't care what any car manufacturer claims ALL cars are designed to wear out. Which sucks for us but look at it from their prospective if a car never wears out why would you ever buy another one? I think build quality on every car is much better today than it was 10 years ago and the further back you go it only gets worse. I think the reason the car manufacturers are struggling today is because of the better quality, from my perspective why would I buy a brand new car when I could buy one that's 2 years old with 30,000-40,000 miles for probably 5-10k cheaper? I think that most people have that attitude nowadays since most cars today if well maintained can push 200,000 miles with few problems. My dad told me back in the 60s and 70s if a car had 100,000 miles on it that thing was completely wore out rusty body, engine burned oil and the seats had springs poking through.

One statistic I heard years back was "on average it takes a car 13 years to go from showroom to junk yard" I'm not sure if this includes cars that get wrecked or not as that could definitely skew the results. But if you look at it from that aspect 3rd gen cars have exceeded their designed lifetime and so have most 4th gens.

As far as rattles go the way most of these rattles were designed to not happen was with rubber and foam gaskets and pads which by now has been pretty well worn out.

If you're looking for this car as a daily driver I would steer clear of a 3rd or 4th gen personally. If you're looking for a project just get whatever appeals to you. I would say in general a 3rd gen is much easier to work on but I know you said you had problems changing the plugs on a 4th gen, well I changed the plugs on a 87 GTA with a TPI engine and that wasn't much fun either as we had to do it from underneath and it was still tough.

 

dry rot isn't either

 

Hardon85 makes a excellent point on the quality of cars today. My wifes Mazda crossover is coming off a 3 yr lease at the end of June..It has 30,000 miles and i am purchasing it for half of what the list price was when new. The car has been mantained by Mazda & runs like new. I couldn't touch a new car with all the options this one has for less than $30k. And, i get a break on my insurance as they now consider it a "used car".
-
I also agree that if you are looking at a daily driver a 3rd gen is probably not a good choice...These cars were designed when gas was probably .85/gal?? The fuel costs are significant. Plus, depending on the part of the country you live in weather and F-bodies don't mix well all year round.

 

I drive old american steel all day everyday, my camaros, an 83 stepside truck, 2 C4 corvettes....I alternate between rides. Hasn't let me down ever. Before that I drove a modern coupe fiat, that pos left me stranded a couple of times. Fuel costs about $9 a gallon here in comparison. I will never drive an econobox ever again

 

I've owned econo cars and the good gas mileage they get is a plus but when you make a long trip, like the one I made to the beach yesterday, they beat you to death. I drove a cadillac down and wasnt that tired or worn out when I got back. When I make that trip in my corolla it wears me out physically. Besides, a couple of guys on the board claimed they have gotten 30 miles to the gallon with a 305 and 5 speed.

 

Would you happen to have a link or other contact for the carpet you mentioned? I'd appreciate it.

 

Ask and you shall receive: http://www.carmotorsports.com/carpet.htm

 

Thirdgen build quality isn't really relevant. It was from 1982-1992 when you could buy them off the dealers lots, but now the original build quality matters much less then the actual current condition. A thirdgen that's been beaten to death from the moment it drove off the lot is going to be garbage compared to one that's been pampered.

Thirdgens are one of the better platforms from their time period. They have their quirks, but they're much easier to work on then most cars of the same vintage. Some of the closest competitors are just garbage in comparison.

If anything, the 4th gen platform is just a band aid applied to the thirdgen. The cosmetic changes are just that, an attempt to make the car look more modern. Build quality from what I've seen was just as bad if not worse. I've seen a bunch of junk 4th gens, and they just keep getting more ghetto as time rolls on. A nice thirdgen, next to a nice 4th gen, it's going to come down to personal preference.

 

Thank you, it's much appreciated!

 

My 92 hardtop is probably 98% rattle free...my 88 vert is probably 90% free...not bad for old cars with style....besides I just turn every bolt I can see....amazing what that does for rattles....if you seek the rattles out and attack them you can make your car rattle free....

 

I have found the quality of the thirdgens to be quite
varible-some are really good,some are quite bad-have
seen plenty of brand new ones back in the day too.
The early cars seem to have better quality of the sheet
metal stampings while the later ones,especially '90-92,
have higher quality plastic moldings
On my late march '82 build van nuys car the assembly
quality was quite good-only major quality let-down is
the klutz plastic paneling out back,but that is more a
molding issue than assembly quality.the seats are very
well made and have held up good
my '69 camaro was just ghastly quality wise

 

i think this is still acc carpet?