chazman

iTrader: (4)

So, I think I've pretty much driven every 3rd gen powertrain combo made over the years, - EXCEPT an Iron Duke. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, the last one I remember seeing up close was circa 1982. Everyone tells me that they're slow and gutless and my efforts may be better spent on something else, but I have this recurring itch to find one and restore, (stick only, of course).

Do I need an intervention by my TGO bros, or not?

pontiacguy1

I would think that finding a decent one of those would be extremely rare these days. They didn't make that many of them to begin with, and most probably wound up being junked out years ago.

I believe that 1985 was the last year that they were available, but it could have been 1986. One good thing about them... The 4 cylinder manual transmission cars got 3.73 gears, open differential though.

I think that having a nice Iron Duke 3rd gen with a turbo conversion on it would be cool, and definitely different. Whatever floats your boat, man.

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Yeah, the rarity of it is pretty neat. I sometimes can't believe the attention my Crossfire gets, let alone an Iron Duke.

yo soy el warg

They made approximately 1,508,561 Camaros from 1982-1992. Of these Camaros over 30% of them 467,433 cars were 4-cylinders built only from 1982-1986. That to me is a lot of cars? In fact from 1982-1986 514,445 V-6 and V-8 Camaros were built. During those first five years that third gen Camaros were built the 4-cylinders made up almost 48% of all Camaros. Surprisingly, very few are left!

navy02ws6

Sure, they're definitely rare and unusual (now anyways). Personally though, if I'm going to put my efforts into a car, I want it to be something that's going to be desirable when I'm done, and I can't see how a 2.5 F-Body would ever be desirable to a wide audience like an IROC or GTA might be.

If you're looking for something unusual, how 'bout an engine swap? Maybe figure out a way to get a supercharged series II 3.8 V6 or a Northstar into one of these cars.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

I've seen a ton of minty fresh 2.5 Camaros... All sitting in the junkyards during the early 90's. Those 2.5's liked to mess the bed at about 75,000 miles. They're unusual now because they were garbage then. I had an 85 Fiero with the 2.5, and an 85 S10, also with the 2.5, they were the most terrifyingly slow cars I've ever owned. My Mustang was a 1bbl carbed 2.3L 4spd manual when I got it, and it was a million times more drivable then any 2.5 Iron Duke I've ever driven. There's nothing inherently wrong with 4cyls, but GM's 2.5 was pure garbage in the years they were used in the Camaro/Firebird. The later 2.5's were better, but still lethargic.

irock88

Wow thats a very high number of 4 cylinders. To say 48% of camaros built in the first five years had a 4 cylinders. I have yet to see one and Ive scoured scrap yards for years .
I know the coupe came with the 4 cylinder as a standard engine with the 6 and 8 as optional equipment.
Just out of curiousity where did you find the engine production numbers for the Camaro.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

White Book..
1982 Camaro 4cyl 78,761
1983 Camaro 4cyl 63,806
1984 Camaro 4cyl 127,292
1985 Camaro 4cyl 97,966
1986 Camaro 4cyl 99,608

chazman

iTrader: (4)

I think I remember a discussion somewhere that the White Book figures were misleading. If I remember correctly, they list all base models as 2.5L, because that's how GM counted them, even if they had optional V6 or V8 power.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

That's probably right... They don't list an option for a V6 or V8 Sport Coupe.
If you add up the total production and subtract the V6, and various V8 production numbers you get a more believable total.

Actually, looking a little deeper... The White Book does list accurate 4cyl numbers, they're just above the pics for each year...

1982 Camaro 4cyl 21,802
1983 Camaro 4cyl 9,926
1984 Camaro 4cyl 10,687
1985 Camaro 4cyl 3,318

irock88

now that looks like a more realistic number for 4 cylinder production numbers

puma1552

iTrader: (1)

There was just a creampuff Iron Duke on bird on ebay with 7,000 miles. Sold for about 6 grand.

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Unmolested Iron duke I found in a Junk Yard

Drew

iTrader: (58)

The last one I saw in the yard was a minty 84 or 85 Camaro Coupe, red with red interior, flawless paint, clean interior, still had a dealership warranty disclaimer taped to the window. It looked like you could drop a battery in it and drive it away, but the paint pen on the windshield said "BAD MOTOR".

chevysquid

iTrader: (7)

Heres one for sale locally here in washington. Not mine or anything, just showing what is out there.

http://bellingham.craigslist.org/ctd/2101914505.html

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Financing available with $550 down. LOL! I have a feeling that one will be sitting awhile.....


Actually, if it were close by, I'd probably take a ride to check it out.

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Something like that sounds interesting.....

Sparkytfl

I saw a Duke today, just not in an f body, it was an 80s oldsmobile cutlass ciera at pep boys. Big "Tech4" logo on the air cleaner. The thing sure was loud when they started it up. Not like bad exhaust, the motor was just loud.

whitedevilTA

iTrader: (8)

Hahaha, I got my laugh for today. 1495$ for a car that looks like it's been sitting at the bottom of the ocean for 10 years......and apparently this dealership sells thier cars already registered with plates! Man, thats gotta save a lot of waiting time!

White93z34

iTrader: (1)

I remember my old boss showing me the window sticker for his 1982 sport coupe he apparently ordered and bought brand new, blue on blue, Iron Duke, 4 speed manual, Limited slip rear end. Cost something like $7300 brand new. He said it was that or a cavalier... so he made the obvious choice.

Aaron91RS

iTrader: (2)

First camaro I test drove with my dad was an 82 iron duke 4-speed manual.
Good condition, but couldn't get out of it's own way.

AmorgetRS

iTrader: (6)

In WA a used car will almost always have plates. When you go and register the car you keep the same plates they just give you new tabs unless the plates are old enough to "need" replacing.

eseibel67

Although there isn't much market for no-performance 4 sluggers, the odd models seem to get a lot of attention at car shows. Something different.

This will be the case in the future for the early Third gen Iron Duke's. Especially the 4 speed models. Don't be shy if you're keeping one of these things alive.

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Yeah, I kind of look at it the same way. Who knows, I might find some really dusty 4 speed in my neighborhood, that someone parked in the garage circa late '80's, and forgot about.

Doubt it.

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

If you keep your eye out you'll find one. There was a mint '82 firebird on e-bay a while back over near Jim85IROC in CT I think. It was gold but I think it was an automatic. I'm sure there is something out there still. I also say, do what you want man. It's your money and your time, do what you want. You are 100% correct that a a 4cyl thirdgen will get lots of attention. Think of how many people would get a kick out of it at thirgenfest. Heck I'd want you to take me for a ride just so I could see what it was like LOL. Sometimes buying something like that ends up being more fun than you ever expected.

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Take you for a ride? Hell, I'll let you drive it.


It would be pretty neat to bring something that to thirdgenfest....

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Im thinking swap "the duke" with a version of this and a 6sp.

well I was trying to upload a turboed ecotec motor pic but photo bucket wont let me log on..
I think that would be a great swap !

here is a supercharged E-tec

Convoy25

iTrader: (3)

you could always get a roller then buy one from jasper or something right?

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Yeah, I've always thought a turbo Ecotec 3rd gen would be pretty neat. It would handle like a go kart I bet.


But that's getting away from the whole Iron Duke thing though.

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

Yeah, true but its like swapping a LS in a TPI 350 car..
You'd still be with the same number of cyls but just a newer version!

pontiacguy1

I knew there couldn't have been that many 4 cylinder 3rd gens out there. I only remember seeing three or four of them ever. Most people opted for the 2.8 V6, which up until 1986 wasn't much of an upgrade. I think that the carbed 2.5 was about 94 HP, and the Carbed V6 was only about 106 or so. Not too much better, but everyone seemed to 'opt up' anyway.

It would definitely be unique, and who knows, it might be worth having after a number of years. Do What You Like! Just be sure to have fun.

Jason E

Charlie...

You just missed not "an" Iron Duke...you missed THE Iron Duke! It was just on eBay a week or two ago. Its the one referenced above...a genuine 8k mile '82 Firebird S/E that even had the PMD seats in leather, t-tops, etc.

Sold for $5,900 on the second try

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Is this the one Jason?



Beautiful car. Tires look a little beefy though.

whitedevilTA

iTrader: (8)

Well I guess a noob just learned something new then!

I still stand on the "sitting at the bottom of the ocean" comment though, lol.

Dartht33bagger

Oregon keeps same plates as well.

gotabekidding

In 67-68 not many Firebirds came with a straight 6 cylinder, now they are desirable to the right collector.

will the 3rd gen 4 cylinder models fare the same, who knows?

I remember test driving a 2.5 with a manual when it was new.
I then drove a 2.8 V6 with an automatic.
I swore the 4 cyl was quicker.

The last one I saw (on the road) was driven by a friend.
Sent it to the junkyard with 175,000 + miles on it, because that is when the spedometer stopped workin.

The rarity of it will make it a memorable car to see at a cruise or show.
Just schedule a little more time getting to either one.

chazman

iTrader: (4)

After searching the internet, it's pretty apparent that history and previous owners were not kind to these cars - especially the previous owners. Makes sense I guess, when you buy a car for 300-500 bucks, you typically have no means or desire to maintain it properly. Most have had hack job smallblock transplants and $20 rattlecan paintjobs.

The search continues....

chazman

iTrader: (4)

And avoid headwinds.

QUICKCHICKEN

iTrader: (12)

a fella near where i work has a stupidly clean inside and out duke bird. its ither an 82 or 83 and i talked to him about it and his only complaint was the auto trans, hes had it built twice.

the duke in my 86 S-10 runs like a champ and cruze comfortably at 80. its low end is not bad but the mid range is a bit soft but othewise i like my 2.5. over on s-10 forum there is a complete section for the 2.5 motor and those guys are sharp.

eseibel67

Ha! Wouldn't think a Duke would produce enough twist to damage an auto trans! He must be abusing it.

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Well, maybe not BS, but hard to believe. lol

85mph was the absolute top speed of my 85 S10... Assuming it was a perfectly flat stretch of highway AND I had it to the floor. My trek to work took me down in a river valley and up the hill on the opposite side. If I wanted to be doing 55mph at the top of the hill (my off ramp) I had to floor it on the downhill side and get it up about 20mph over the limit (65mph). I had it out on the highway for a couple 5 hour road trips, if I had to slow down for anything it took forever to get back up to speed. Fortunately I only had it about two months before it got totaled. I pulled out into traffic without enough power to get out of the way. I replaced it a year or so later with a 92 S10 2.8 5spd that was much more reasonable.



Remember Terminator 2 when they're trying to get away in an S10...



If I remember right the speedometer said they were doing about 60mph. LOL

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Wow, were they really that painfully slow? I can imagine an '82 with an A3 and 2.93 gear would be a slug, but an M4 or M5 with a 3.42 or 3.73 would be more tolerable.

Drew, was yours and automatic or stick?

irock88

I know with certain other makes of vehicles that if they had a 4 cylinder in a 3400 lb vehicle the 4 cylinder had to work that much harder to get that car around that you actually had worse gas mileage than you would had it been a 6 or 8.
Im wondering if this holds true for the Camaro....does anyone have the specs for gas mileage for the 4,6 and 8.

Pillsbry10

iTrader: (1)

haha drew, it was only going 60mph because earlier in the movie john conner tells him that he can only go that fast in a vehicle

however....with his big metal butt in that s10 im sure it wouldnt get up to more than that anyways

Drew

iTrader: (58)

The 2.5 did get better as production moved along, and the 5spd's were more tolerable. Paired with the auto they were total slugs...

I once had to ride from Sioux Falls to Minneapolis in an EARLY 2.5 stick S10, it had to be an 82 or 83... A normally 3 hour drive was closer to 5 crammed on a bench seat with the driver and another passenger... It too lost momentum going uphill to the point of impeding normal interstate traffic (75mph).

My 85 was an auto, and had a million more options, cloth interior, headliner, carpet, rear speakers, A/C, etc... It was the Tahoe edition. I believe Edward Furlong COULD get out an run faster then that POS under most conditions. The return spring on the TBI was so stiff it was like lifting the stack on a weight machine.

A friend of mine had a 91 or 92 2.5 stick that was in a whole other category. It actually would burn the tires pretty good in first gear, and didn't have trouble on the interstate.

Getting back to that "early 2.5 bad, late 2.5 better" thing... My 85 Fiero (2.5 auto) was a nightmare, much like the several 84's my room mate at the time had. We G-teched one because it seemed really peppy for an 84 Fiero and it clicked off a 27 second 1/4. Anyway, mine was one of those cars where you'd hit the gas and wait... It'd make a growling noise and a few seconds later it'd finally start moving. It was so slow it made you want to stop pressing the gas and try again because, ya know, maybe something didn't take the first time? The later cars ran a lot better, they didn't rattle as much, or smoke as much, and the ignition system was distributorless with coil packs. But all the thirdgen 2.5 years were the junk version.

I'm sure you can look up the 2.5 mileage on the .gov website... Actually, it shows 19 city, 29 highway for the 2.5, 16/24 for the 2.8, 15/21 for the 305. Those are the new numbers, the old numbers were 16/23 305, 18/24 2.8, 21/31 2.5. So figure 3-5mpg better economy under ideal conditions for the 2.5... Hardly worth it.

QUICKCHICKEN

iTrader: (12)

i'll be glad to have a friend film my speedo and send ya the link. BTW mine is a 5 speed so that will account for some of its pep. i'v had friend amazed how peppy it is for such an old truck. its no speed monster by any means but for what it is, it does well.

go over to s-10 forum.com and check out the duke section, there are plenty of guys there that have duke trucks that run as well as mine.

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Yeah, there's one guy on S10 forums with 1.3 million miles on his Iron Duke.

Jason E

Charlie,

Yes, that was the one. Indeed, the tires do look too big. FWIW, I always thought of Iron Dukes as being pretty tough. In driver's ed I drove an '88 Skylark with 212k on it (this was in '96). The instructor was the owner of the business, and said the hood was never opened for anything but oil changes...

daveb123

Don't forget that mail trucks are powered by the ID. When the 82s first came out, by buddy & I tore down to the Chevy dealer as soon as we heard they had one- It was a 4cyl auto!

eseibel67

Bahhh ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!