Hi,

I'm doing a report of third gen Camaros, and Firebird/Trans Am's for my 9th Grade English class, and this site is the biggest help for getting information for it, but before I use the information I wanted to see if it was okay to use the info from this site if I cite in the report who the rightful owners of the info/pictures are.

Also if there are any others that could throw in some extra information that could be helpful about the third gens, it would be greatly appreciated.

The report will be titled, "The End of an Era"
my thesis statement is, "The third generation GM F-body was the last of a kind in muscle car history, when the last one rolled off the assembly line in 1992 Muscle car era concluded to a tragic ending."

This part won't be in the report, but the rice ruined the muscle car, I know my 87 T/A will have some burnt rice coming out the tailpipes, hehe

Thanks,
Damien

 

Not sure about the legalities, but I would think that if I upload pics to a site such as this, they are fair game to use for a school project.

I'm not too sure you want to use the "last of a kind in musclecar history" quote if your talking about a 92 third gen. A 1993 fourth gen is very similar, yet superior in every way mechanically. If you want to compare looks however, a 93 TA or Z28 sure is ugly when it's sitting beside a 92 TA or Z28.

I admire your gumption though Damien. Good luck on the project.

 

I think you will have a hard time arguing that the third gens are the end of the muscle cars...since i can go down to the ford dealership now and buy a 5.0 mustang gt right now brand new as well as go to a gm dealership and get a SS camaro. I think to have an accurate thesis statement regarding third gens your going to have to think about how they differ from 4th gen camaros/firebirds and what muscle cars can be bought off the showroom floor today.

As for citing this site in your report, you may want to ask your teacher what the limitations on websites are. I know when i was in highschool (too long ago at this point lol) there were only a select few websites that were acceptable to cite in reports. Since this is a website full of enthusiasts, some of which do not have their information correct, your teacher may tell you its a no go.

 

I guess I never really thought about the newer stuff mainly just wanted to do a report on third gens, because I'd have one over the new 5.0 Mustang, or the new camaro...But I know 100% it will be about third gens, and we are allowed to use websites like this just have to be catious of what information we use.

Lets start fresh again after rethinking it I'm just going to do a report about the third gen itself, I guess you could say the hidden muscle car, So one quick question, why do you like third gens? I want to get some opinions about them (love or hate) to include in the report.

And with next week is spring break for me so while a lot of others are at the beach I'm going to be working on getting my 350 spruced up to put in my 87

 

A few quickies.

Pros:
Styling
Handling
V8 powered RWD
Cheap

Cons:
Too much breakable plastic everywhere
Crowded engine bay on TPI with A/C
Disrespected by the general population

 

I would think it interesting to cover to controversy behind the 3rd generation and the ensuing product being quite a gamble that arguably paid off.

The muscle car was in turmoil during its development. Emissions regulations had choked the old way of making power and engineers really had to rewrite what the pony car was. A lot of die hard fans really saw it as the demise of the f-body and it required a fresh perspective to fully appreciate it; no doubt GM saw it as an opportunity to tap into new markets. I wonder if there some staff lingering around at GM who would comment on such things - kinda like that guy off of the Trans Am GTA Source Page who worked on marketing the GTA.

There was all the talk about the car being FWD and being cancelled altogether. Then aerodynamics and handling became things to seriously think about and you can tell the developers went to great lengths with these concepts. You could probably write a weighty paper about the marketing program alone (high-tech, jet plane, european finesse themes from brawn, patriotic ones)

It probably was the biggest departue of the generations from the previous generation. Well maybe the 5th from the 4th is a bigger leap but then you could argue there was a 10 year hiatus!

 

You brought up some good points that could potentially be the point of his report. The third gen was really a lot of firsts all at once. It had the largest rear window up until that point. It was the first really mass produced fuel injected car (yes there were fuel injected cars before it but not mass produced). It was really the first american performance car that handled. the mustang really wasnt on the same level of handling that the camaro/firebird were on. As was said im sure a lot of diehard muscle car fans were put off by the fact that 190 hp was toted as "fast" when only 12-13 years prior most fast muscle cars were in the 375-450 hp range. In the end though....GM really made out big with the third gens. They were a huge success which is why they went unchanged for the most part style wise for 10 years. That in itself says something.

 

dont forget about the windshield being sloped more than the vette too

 

If anything, i would talk about the leaps and bounds that were made in the 80s which gave us our prized LS1s.

Due to the restrictions and bars that they had to meet, they had to kill horsepower in exchange for fuel economy. Starting with the Crossfire(well carb first of course), Then TBI, TPI, onto the LT1s and Vortecs and now the LS family, 300+ horsepower with 19-20 MPG City and capable of 30 Highway.

3rd gens along with the Vette were the guinea pigs

 

No doubt that fuel and spark control evolved during the third gen and LT1 eras, and then made a huge leap forward with the LS1. But the real magic in an LS1 is mechanical - the design of the cylinder heads.

 

+1. The Third Gen wasn't the end of an era, it was the beginning of a new era. When it came out, the muscle car had been dead for 10 years already. 1982 saw the first Third Gen and the first 5.0 Mustang GT, probably the first things resembling proper muscle cars since 1972 (except maybe the 220 horsepower Trans Ams of 1978-79).

After that, cars gradually became fun again -- 5.0 H.O. in the F-bodies, the Monte Carlo SS, Hurst/Olds, turbo T-Birds, etc. And then those evolved into the TPI F-bodies, EFI 5.0 Mustangs, and intercooled GNs, and so on and so forth.

I'd style my report like that or you will get a D, LOL!

 

I concur -- IMO, the last muscle car (at least in the original sense of the term) was the 1979 Trans Am since it was the last year you could get an engine larger than 350ci. Third gen's are more about handling, features, and technology than cubic inches anyways.

 

positive - lots of parts still available, great community here for support and details even many mechanics in years past would not know.

negative - Back then GM was dealing with a lot of pollution control and economy (mpg) rules that forced thirdgens to be pretty lethargic.

angle - how do thirdgens compare to other cars of the day? Were they really the "muscle" cars of their time?

 

Pros: Mostly simple to work on and modify. Fun cars to drive
Cons: Almost everybody hates on 3rd gens for being slow but guess who doesn't have a 3rd Gen? The haters it seems like lol.

You can talk about the last Camaro built and how GM went to great lengths to please the buyer and how it was autographed at each stage of being built. Hope you make an A+

 

All good points, but I agree most with the statement that third gen cars were the guinea pigs. You would do better to argue that the thirdgens were the beginning phase of the return of muscle car performance.

 

muscle cars have/had that reputation that if you knew your stuff, you could easily work on them... and this is still very true when it comes to 3rd gens.

With todays "muscle" cars however, they got those motors packed in there so tightly, I imagine that it'd be a complete nightmare to pull a motor out...

 

No doubt that the 60's muscle cars were easy to work on. Third gen with TPI, A/C and all emissions equipment in tact - not so much. Although I've never wrenched one, I looked under the hood of a 5th gen SS, and it appears to be quite serviceable.

 

yeah but he could make a point of referring to the earlier carbed 3rd gens

 

Anytime someone uses information that's not their own, they should cite where they got their information from. I don't think it matters from where the material was sourced. This web site is an excellent source for material.

 

the thirdgens also ushered in the aerodynamic body styles that continue today, and 16 inch rims.

 

This is where I'm at currently.



Thesis Statement – The third generation GM F-body is a cheap fun, and affordable car, that will one day be known among others, as the 67-69 GM F-Body is known today.


A. Pros

I. Cheap

II. Used parts are plentiful as millions were made between 82-92

III. Most have V8 power, and the V6's are easily swappable to a V8

IIII. V8 Power, manual transmissions available, and Rear Wheel Drive

IIIII. Cheap, Fun and Affordable


B. Cheap Fun and Affordable

I. Although it will increase significantly an average one in decent shape is only worth between $3,000-$7,000 if mostly original, and can be found for under $1000 at times.

II. Good platform for swapping in later model engines, like the LS1, LS2, LS3 (most popular swaps)

III. Using the engines noted above in these cars can make big power and still get 25 MPG highway

IIII. Its a sleeper

a. They're seen so much and most are no show, no go cars, so people think they're slow, because of that with little modification, it can beat most factory 2012 vehicles, in a straight line race and sometimes in the turns too.

IIIII. Gave hope for the GM loyal muscle car guys and gals, in the time where emissions choked every ounce they could out of the muscle car market. GM came through, as well as ford with the mustang, but thats a different story.


C. They helped bring the 21st century Technology to reality

I. They were GM's “Guinea Pigs”

II. They were used to test the new LT1, which led to the LS1, which brought technology where a V8 powered vehicle could get 30 MPG, now how much mileage does the Avg. Hybrid get? My point exactly

III. Advancements like the digital dash helped make the speedometer technology we use now.

IIII. These cars were to be the last of a breed, GM planned on trying to kill off the f body, by making it a FWD economy car, but with several threats from the general public, GM kept the V8 RWD sports car. 10 years later they released yet another F-body thanks to the third gen.

IIIII. GM didn't follow others with the path for their muscle cars, like Chrysler did (went to Front Wheel Drive as muscle cars, they were quick but couldn't light the fire for die hard RWD fans)

IIIIII. GM took risks on this car like the way they sloped the windshield, it was sloped more drastically than any other American vehicle at the time, creating a lower drag coefficient, which made the car go faster, and the lower drag coefficient helped with fuel economy as well creating less rolling resistance


for all the help, wouldn't have been able to get the outline put together this well w/o TGO

 

Why are you specifying over and again that these cars are cheap? They might be inexpensive in some areas, but I don't believe they are cheap. Also, Roman numerals uses a IV to represent 4, V to specify 5 and VI for 6.

Average cars in decent shape aren't in the $3k price point. At $3k, it will need work. If it needs work, then it isn't "decent", it's only "ok".

 

Yeah I was kind of in a rush piecing it together, thanks for telling me I'd forgotten about that completely, good thing it doesn't have to be turned in I guess. The report on the other hand I gotta do perfect, so thanks for the your input every bit helps.

Thanks!

 

And on the Prices I was using an Avg. of KBB, and Nada for values and Ebay, and Clist adds, and I should've done a bit more research as I'm seeing now searching the classifieds on here

 

I beg to differ.

http://macon.craigslist.org/cto/2944511828.html

I want that car so freakin' bad, but it's not time to buy one yet. Gotta stop looking at classifieds.

 

Seriously? If you think that car is decent, then you need more experience in the used car world. That car is "ok", but not decent by any shape.

It needs a repaint. You can tell it's already been repainted once. If you see the car in person, you can tell how good or bad of a paintjob it was. The center console is ripped up. You can't see the seats, but with that console and steering wheel, I'm assuming the driver's seat bolster is probably shot. The hood louver inserts are missing, The AC doesn't work, the engine looks all hacked up, the outer window sweeps are shot, the instrument cluster is screwed up (look at the tach), etc.

I take it back, this piece isn't even "ok". This car is a "good" project car. It needs everything! The $3k the owner is asking is way too much for this car. By the time your done fixing up everything and making it complete again, custom or stock, you will have over $8k into the car. And it's still a high mile car. We also have no idea what the suspension or drivetrain is like. I'm going only on what I can see.

 

I think that you should mention their handling capabilities given the technology at the time and how they still more than hold their own today. Should also mention that they have climbed in value despite the economic times.

 

Interesting that you would call these muscle cars, they are not by purist definition. A muscle car originally was an intermediate family car released as a 2 door with a very large engine (typically big block). Example would include GTO based on the LeMans, Chevelle SS from the Malibu, and so forth. Mustangs and Camaros originally were Pony Cars and were a bit smaller. I suppose in the 80s these lines are blurry and the general media calls everything a muscle car now if it has power or even chrome rims. As a thought you could devote a section of your paper to discussing the terms and how you arrive at 3rd gens being considered muscle cars. Just my 2cents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_car

 

Yeah, muscle cars were good for straight line performance, not for handling. I don't remember the term "muscle car" back in the day. The term seemed to come later, and is quite arbitrary.

 

I'd replace the word 'cheap' with 'inexpensive'. It sounds a little better. Also, there is a thread on here about the last 3rd gen camaro to roll off the assembly line. If you need some pictures for your report they would be good ones... the car is signed by many of the GM staff and kind of goes to your point about the 'last of a breed'. (there are still muscle cars, but no more 'third gens').