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!
I took these pictures in Chicago around 2012 or so and forgot about them.
They were con"verted" long after the cars were 1st built.
Can't remember if I posted these or not, Enjoy.
I remember seeing those on the website of the company that did the conversions. They used the original cars and got donor cars for the vert parts IIRC. They looked like they were done right.
The TTA is actually one of 2... It is the car that was sold in California, It was converted before the first owner took delivery... The Cloth seat TTA was one of the 5 prototypes that was sent to ASC to be converted.
OR was this done by a private individual years after they were made is what you were saying?
The TTA is actually one of 2... It is the car that was sold in California, It was converted before the first owner took delivery... The Cloth seat TTA was one of the 5 prototypes that was sent to ASC to be converted.
OR was this done by a private individual years after they were made is what you were saying?
These were both made by a shop/individual. As said above there is a website somewhere that shows the work being done.
I would have used the ASC parts for the 84 conversion if they were mine.
These were both made by a shop/individual. As said above there is a website somewhere that shows the work being done.
I would have used the ASC parts for the 84 conversion if they were mine.
Although that would have resulted in a better looking car - I think the other method makes it more period correct. When did ASC start doing the third Gens - was it 1987 or earlier?
Although that would have resulted in a better looking car - I think the other method makes it more period correct. When did ASC start doing the third Gens - was it 1987 or earlier?
You are correct about it looking more period correct but to me, It kinda looks like a boat builder did the top cover on the 84.. Just kinda kit carish.
Not sure when ASC started for sure, John would know better than I.
The ASC is by far, a better looking setup .
You are correct about it looking more period correct but to me, It kinda looks like a boat builder did the top cover on the 84.. Just kinda kit carish.
Not sure when ASC started for sure, John would know better than me.
The ASC is by far, a better looking setup to me.
From talking with a person who owns one, he said it basically is boat parts.
Although that would have resulted in a better looking car - I think the other method makes it more period correct. When did ASC start doing the third Gens - was it 1987 or earlier?
ASC started doing conversions in 1986... mostly on the Camaro, I am aware of only a handful, and when I say handful, I mean 3 Firebird ASC Convertibles... Same goes for the Camaro, they had more of them in 1986, but not many more.
About a 1/4 of the 1987 Camaro convertibles are conversions, the other 3/4 have the RPO and VIN, but otherwise identical.
in 1987 ASC actually claims that the Firebird was a conversion FOR a GM Project. 1987 is really when they started production...
The ASC stuff was for quick and easy installation, probably to keep costs down. It appears they might have been or similar to the same extrusion pieces that they used on the Cavalier & Sunbird.
I did not see a pic where they showed the underside to expose the sub frame connectors
The ASC stuff was for quick and easy installation, probably to keep costs down. It appears they might have been or similar to the same extrusion pieces that they used on the Cavalier & Sunbird.
I did not see a pic where they showed the underside to expose the sub frame connectors
NOW it has me wondering what car they actually destroyed to make the TTA Vert happen... it was an 89, I can tell by the back seat belt hooks... And the interior was Tan...
NOW it has me wondering what car they actually destroyed to make the TTA Vert happen... it was an 89, I can tell by the back seat belt hooks... And the interior was Tan...
John
My understanding is its a TTop TTA (you can see were they removed the T-bar stuff from the windshield) and they added the vert parts.
That could have been really any year couldn't it?
To make the TTA, they needed an 89 Convertible. Why I conclude this
1) The rear spoiler and quarter-caps are definately 86-89
2) thru 88 the rear seats did not have shoulder harness belts.
3) The belts are clearly tan, I do not see many Camaros with Tan interiors... I would have to check, did they offer tan?
4) The backseat seat-belts are of the 89-91 design (remember they changed them in 1992)
My conclusion is they probably used pieces from an 89 Firebird, GTA, Trans Am or Formula Convertible. MOST of the 89's I see with the brown/Tan interior are GTA's... I just do not see many Formulas or Base Firebirds with the interior... it was available, but Gray and Black are far more common in the Base and Formula...
So I am making an educated guess that the TTA was a T-top and they used a GTA or Trans Am 1989 Convertible.
I would agree that most of the parts came from a 89 But the side speaker panels look newer than 89 for sure. My 89 has carpet on the lower part with a black trim thing sewn in and a plastic pocket for the lower seatbelt mount?
They look more like my 92 vert partss which are 1 piece covering. (not sure what yr side panels were upgraded)
Could have dyed the side panels and seatbelts.
It really does not matter... The parts could have been OTC 10 years ago... I got several parts OTC at the Pontiac dealership for my 89 Formula 350 Vert... It was funny, they did not even bat an eye, when I told them what I had and they plugged it into the computer...
Of course the part I had, did have the Part number stamped on it, and the computer said it was available that year... who knows.
This actually presents the question - Is this TTA convertible more valuable or less valuable than a t-top or hardtop TTA?
I had this conversation about a 69 TA yesterday with my buddy who was down at the Mecum auction watching the two verts go through, and it applies to these cars as well.
It happens all the time with the Ferrari Daytona Coupes - several have been turned into convertibles (one at a shop here in my town) and fall about mid way in value between the coupes & real convertibles. Where would the TTA's or the 69 TA's fall in line with value if you took a real car and made it a convertible?
I would think that if it was done to factory specs, it would probably fall like the Ferrari's about mid way between the "Factory Convertible" and the Coupe. Rumor has it that one of the two TTA Convertible sold for at least $40,000 recently, I do not think this car would fetch this much because it is not on the ASC list
The rule of thumb for convertibles is 1.5x to 2x the coupe price, historically if both cars are otherwise identical. A few years back 2 cars were on ebay (not the best of tests) one was an ASC 1989 GTA 350 convertible, the other was a 1991 Trans Am Convertible... The miles were within 1000 of each other and they sold for about the same price, IIRC the GTA may have fetched slightly more, but It was not significant.
If I thought I could convert a TTA into a convertible and use my 89 Formula Convertible or pick up a convertible for the pieces and make money, I probably would... Honestly it would not be that hard to do, once you got the pieces off and the car apart, it would just be some welding, paint and some undercoating and I would be done...
01-01-2016, 10:20 AM
