When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
History / OriginalityGot 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!
Although my pictures went a little off subject of Firebird development and concepts, the first couple of the Aerovette and the Corvair Monza were the cars I was most interested in seeing and showing.
I believe they show the mentality of the designers for GM and other manufacturers starting in the 50's and continuing to the 3rd Gens and beyond in aerodynamics. Sleeker lines, better suspensions, and lowered bodys for reduced drag and better control.
Though at first designed for style and looks, by the time these cars were built, the oil embargo and Japanese imports got Detroit designers looking at fuel economy seriously. Throw in the smog requirements and the end of lead in gas, reduced drag and weight were the only real chance for quick performance improvements. As HP decreased, these became even more important.
One of my Uncle's was a designer for Chrysler from the early 60's - late 90's. As he told me, Detroit designers didn't live in a Vacuum. They were all highly competitive between companies, as well as divisions within their own company. They watched with real interest what everybody else was up to. So within GM itself, you know Pontiac was watching Chevy's XP program with interest. Copying and integrating design improvements with their own.
Though the mid engine direction was dropped, many aspects of these cars seem to be another move closer to the first designs for the future 3rd and 4th Gen Firebird concepts and eventual designs.
Fords contribution to aerodynamics in the 80's The Probe
Looks like the stole the Bowling Ball hubcaps from the original 3rd Gen Camaro's!
How about the aerodynamic yellow Superbird in the Probe's reflection? I'm all GM through and through, but you gotta give credit to those old Mopars for some designs that increase your pulse rate by just looking at them.
There were two at the show. One Superbird one Daytona. The Superbird was restored, The Daytona (not one shown but same color) was mostly original including paint!
I've been collecting photo's of concepts from the other worldwide divisions of GM and other manufacturers showing some of the development of aerodynamics through the years. I'm still looking for a few things but will update this thread sometime this winter. I've found some interesting cars and some neat things on our third gens too. It should be fun.
^ History of automotive aerodynamics would justify a new thread.
The rounded and sloped cars of the late 1930's were actually very aerodynamic before style took over post-war. Third gens would definitely have a spot on that timeline. I remember seeing my first 1982 Camaro when I was in 9th grade. The 60 degree rake on the windshield looked pretty radical at the time.
Believe it or not the 82 3rd gen Firebird Trans Am still is more aerodynamic than the new corvette. They tested an 82 Trans Am, dropped it by 1" and it came in .29 cd... IIRC the new corvette is something like .35
^ History of automotive aerodynamics would justify a new thread.
The rounded and sloped cars of the late 1930's were actually very aerodynamic before style took over post-war. Third gens would definitely have a spot on that timeline. I remember seeing my first 1982 Camaro when I was in 9th grade. The 60 degree rake on the windshield looked pretty radical at the time.
Yes and no. They definitely had less drag, but their lift numbers were horrid on some of them. Much of their aerodynamics came from the tear-drop shapes they were using. Which helped with delamination of the boundary layer behind the car. I watched an interesting documentary about it. I'll have to remember the name, it was on the History Channel of course.
Originally Posted by okfoz
Believe it or not the 82 3rd gen Firebird Trans Am still is more aerodynamic than the new corvette. They tested an 82 Trans Am, dropped it by 1" and it came in .29 cd... IIRC the new corvette is something like .35
The 82 TA achieved those figures because of the bowling ball turbo fin wheels. The regular TransAm was .32, and later 85-90's were .34 I believe. The deep dish wheels that we love, weren't so great for drag. Still, the thirdgen is pretty stable at speed. The 85-90's are excellent high speed shapes with positive downforce figures.
Willing to bet that even at its .35cd the Vette has better downforce numbers.
Last edited by Thirdgen89GTA; 01-11-2016 at 12:03 PM.
Looking up the official drag co-efficient numbers revealed some interesting things. The chart on Wikipedia shows the 1984 Trans Am with Aero package and N89 cast wheels at .29. The present Vette is at .286.
Whats interesting though is the other GM cars that are lower.
The 2015 Cruse Sedan comes in at .28.
The 1989 Opel Calibra 8 Valve comes in at .26
The 1996 EV1 electric comes in at .195
When talking about aerodynamics low drag does not always equate to a fast stable design. How the air flows over the body and where it exerts downward force on the car is even more important. Carroll Shelby learned this fact when he first started racing the Sedan Cobra. They welded a steal metal plate on the tail of the car to protrude above the end and cause a snap turbulence and downward push to stabilize the car.
Paul Jaray was one of the first pioneers in this field. His designs for Tatra and Audi were revolutionary and he inspired the looks of early Mercedes and the original VW. Here is a look at his earliest designs. Aerodynamic at under .26, they would be highly unstable at high speeds and vibrate violently.
In contrast here is the Firebird Twin Turbo concept that held the fastest track time for many years. Test drivers only had trouble with stability above 210 mph. The fastest Firebird used this body with the 89 spoiler and made 300 mph at the salt flats.
How we get from Jarays vision to these cars is where I will concentrate the next part of this thread. Mostly on GM efforts and the designs that lead to the 3rd Gens. I will add others but only to show development of design that influenced the cars we love so much.
Most of the thirdgen aerodynamics tests were only performed to about 200mph. Which was well past the designed top speed for the car.
My Focus ST is a hatchback and its CoD is only .28. But thanks to its hatch-back design it generates lift on the tail due to the massive vacuum area on the hatch glass. But the hatch design does make interior space so usable. So I'll forgive the issue. Besides, I had it close to 160mph on I-88 in IL and car was rock solid. *Yes, make another thread if you want to argue about a 4 banger reaching near 160.
The fast back design helps with keeping the airflow boundaries from creating drag. Most tail shapes for modern cars are designed with clean breaks instead of curved ends. It helps smooth airflow and allow it to merge back together smoothly behind the wake of the car.
I have read where the rear "wing" on the 82-84 Trans Am and the Base Firebird wing from 1986-1992 actually reduced the CD by something like .1 and it gave 100# down force at 100 Mph. The 85-90 Aero Spoiler was more for garnish, but it probably helped with downforce.
The Banks Turbo car that went 300mph actually used a non factory spoiler that was very similar to the MSE Cars.
06-28-2015, 09:39 PM
