View Poll Results: What would you have had factory standard on a Third Gen
Fully Independent Rear Suspension (I.R.S)
9
33.33%
Rack and Pinion Steering
8
29.63%
Standard 4 Wheel Disc Brakes Across the Board
4
14.81%
Turbo Option
6
22.22%
Voters: 27. You may not vote on this poll
Third Gen Development "What If?"
#1
Third Gen Development "What If?"
If GM gave you a choice on what to add to the Third Gen's while they were being developed, but only had one choice, what would it be? (On the turbo choice, excluding the 1989 Turbo Trans Am)
Last edited by MY87LT; 02-21-2017 at 06:01 PM.
#2
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
None of the above...
Early... 350 Z-28 out of the gate in 82.... later LT-5 engine would have been a great way to send the body style off in style and create a performance legend in the process.
Early... 350 Z-28 out of the gate in 82.... later LT-5 engine would have been a great way to send the body style off in style and create a performance legend in the process.
#4
Supreme Member
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
A proper rear end and a proper manual trans.
Trending Topics
#11
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
i see everybody is going for the 5 speed and the 5.7 .. in reality we almost had it .. how far down was the 305 compared to the 350 in horsepower ? use 1989 as a reference year ..
#13
Supreme Member
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
Here are a few I can think of:
1. Subframe connectors
2. T5 or ZF 6-speed behind the L98
3. Simplified or better advertised optioning process for performance items - this is the biggest thing that hurts the legacy of these cars. So many people think they're slow and awful, but they were driving around in IROCs with low output 305/A4s, open diffs, highway gears, base tires, and drum brakes
4. Improved quality control at Van Nuys/Norwood
The stuff you list is all cool, but I don't think any of it is a critical miss on GM's part. The steering is surprisingly decent on these cars, the handling is their best stock performance attribute (maybe go Watt's instead of Panhard linkage), and a turbo was available on the Trans Am.
I also would have loved to see this thing get built (though with different paint schemes):
1. Subframe connectors
2. T5 or ZF 6-speed behind the L98
3. Simplified or better advertised optioning process for performance items - this is the biggest thing that hurts the legacy of these cars. So many people think they're slow and awful, but they were driving around in IROCs with low output 305/A4s, open diffs, highway gears, base tires, and drum brakes
4. Improved quality control at Van Nuys/Norwood
The stuff you list is all cool, but I don't think any of it is a critical miss on GM's part. The steering is surprisingly decent on these cars, the handling is their best stock performance attribute (maybe go Watt's instead of Panhard linkage), and a turbo was available on the Trans Am.
I also would have loved to see this thing get built (though with different paint schemes):
#15
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
I've driven several 305 and 350 TPIs through the years, and while I KNOW the numbers say they were very close, I've never mistaken an 350 for 305. Pretty big seat of the pants difference IMHO. ....and a g92 LB9 m5 is in fact pretty quick/close to a L98/a4, however...there again....the point of the convo. Manual behind the L98.
#16
Member
iTrader: (1)
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
Here are a few I can think of:
1. Subframe connectors
2. T5 or ZF 6-speed behind the L98
3. Simplified or better advertised optioning process for performance items - this is the biggest thing that hurts the legacy of these cars. So many people think they're slow and awful, but they were driving around in IROCs with low output 305/A4s, open diffs, highway gears, base tires, and drum brakes
4. Improved quality control at Van Nuys/Norwood
The stuff you list is all cool, but I don't think any of it is a critical miss on GM's part. The steering is surprisingly decent on these cars, the handling is their best stock performance attribute (maybe go Watt's instead of Panhard linkage), and a turbo was available on the Trans Am.
I also would have loved to see this thing get built (though with different paint schemes):
1. Subframe connectors
2. T5 or ZF 6-speed behind the L98
3. Simplified or better advertised optioning process for performance items - this is the biggest thing that hurts the legacy of these cars. So many people think they're slow and awful, but they were driving around in IROCs with low output 305/A4s, open diffs, highway gears, base tires, and drum brakes
4. Improved quality control at Van Nuys/Norwood
The stuff you list is all cool, but I don't think any of it is a critical miss on GM's part. The steering is surprisingly decent on these cars, the handling is their best stock performance attribute (maybe go Watt's instead of Panhard linkage), and a turbo was available on the Trans Am.
I also would have loved to see this thing get built (though with different paint schemes):
A lot of good suggestions.
350/manual combo has to be near the top.
Aluminum L98 heads on some models would have been nice (1LE maybe)
Something performance oriented for the 25th anniversary would have been nice like the scrapped anniversary edition quoted above.
I like the idea of some subframe connectors from the factory.
#17
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
depends on how they would implement the turbo option. I feel like they would of just stuck a detuned 3.8l turbo from the grand national in there which wouldn't really be the turbo'd 305 or 350 that we'd all hope for.
IRS was my choice out of those listed but it would of taken away from the corvettes glory at the time.
I like what others have said with subframe connectors, stronger transmission than the t5 to go with the 350's.
Didn't they only put 3.73's in a couple years only? would be cool if they made the 3.73 10 bolt standard on the fancier trim packages
IRS was my choice out of those listed but it would of taken away from the corvettes glory at the time.
I like what others have said with subframe connectors, stronger transmission than the t5 to go with the 350's.
Didn't they only put 3.73's in a couple years only? would be cool if they made the 3.73 10 bolt standard on the fancier trim packages
#18
Supreme Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: CT
Posts: 2,742
Received 258 Likes
on
149 Posts
Car: 1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z28
Engine: 5.0 Liter 4-BBL V8 High Output
Transmission: 5-Speed Manual
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
I Believe 3.73's Were Only Available On 1983-1986 Model Years.
#20
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
My choice was the IRS rear end too. Everything else would have followed suit like it did with the engines over time. They gave up on the 1980 and 81 Trans Am and Formula Turbo 301's which could have been good if they have worked on them more. The 1989 Turbo to me was like saving grace and F.U. to the Corvette.
I did see that Motor Week comparison with the Z28 and a Porsche 928 on you tube. It was pretty close.
I did see that Motor Week comparison with the Z28 and a Porsche 928 on you tube. It was pretty close.
#22
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 2,663
Likes: 0
Received 239 Likes
on
179 Posts
Car: 1987 Formula (original owner)
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt/3.45
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
Another vote for the L98/manual trans.
Regardless, my LB9/manual has been a very strong combo, never disappointing; I've always been very happy with it.
Regardless, my LB9/manual has been a very strong combo, never disappointing; I've always been very happy with it.
#23
Supreme Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Il
Posts: 11,692
Received 746 Likes
on
505 Posts
Car: 1989-92 FORMULA350 305 92 Hawkclone
Engine: 4++,350 & 305 CIs
Transmission: 700R4 4800 vig 18th700R4 t56 ZF6 T5
Axle/Gears: 3.70 9"ford alum chunk,dana44,9bolt
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
Iron head L98 and a dana 44 for auto trans
aluminum head L98 (prototype intake DD posted above) with ZF6speed and a 12bolt for manual trans cars
1LE standard on each of these with optional A/C
aluminum head L98 (prototype intake DD posted above) with ZF6speed and a 12bolt for manual trans cars
1LE standard on each of these with optional A/C
#24
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: South Ms
Posts: 4,419
Received 721 Likes
on
490 Posts
Car: 89 Firebird
Engine: 355 TBI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 10 Bolt.Posi-3.73s
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
350 in every V8 F-body across the board like they did with the 4th gens. 305s belonged in caprices and light duty pickup trucks. Limited slip differential standard. Better rear-end. Maybe the full SLP package T-Ram and all with 113 aluminum heads on the 1LE cars and a run of 25th anniversary cars. Room for true dual exhaust system. SFCs. All these would have been nice.
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: France
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 1984 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
Engine: V8 5.0L HO (L69)
Transmission: B&W T5
Axle/Gears: 3.73 limited slip
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
The torque is what you feel the most, 350s have much more torque than the 305.
I'd say stronger parts all around : rear end, transmission, subframe connectors
A Turbo V8 option would have been great in 1982. They didn't have many solutions to squeeze power from the engines they had with the CAFE restrictions.
I'd say stronger parts all around : rear end, transmission, subframe connectors
A Turbo V8 option would have been great in 1982. They didn't have many solutions to squeeze power from the engines they had with the CAFE restrictions.
#28
Supreme Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: CT
Posts: 2,742
Received 258 Likes
on
149 Posts
Car: 1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z28
Engine: 5.0 Liter 4-BBL V8 High Output
Transmission: 5-Speed Manual
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
#29
2011 Norwood Gathering
ThirdGen Firebird Rep
ThirdGen Firebird Rep
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sarasota FL
Posts: 3,435
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Car: 99 WS6 / 00 SS / 11 CTS-V / 13 300
Engine: LS1 / LS1 / LSA / 5.7 Hemi
Transmission: 4L60E / T-56 / 6L80E / W5A80
Axle/Gears: 3.23 / 3.42 Auburn / 3.23 / 2.62
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
1) 350 with a manual
2) Rear discs and posi should've been standard with anything Z28/TA and up. 4th gens did it right having posi and discs standard with all V8s
2) Rear discs and posi should've been standard with anything Z28/TA and up. 4th gens did it right having posi and discs standard with all V8s
#30
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
As others have mentioned, certain options should have been standard with the high performance models.
1.) 1LE Brakes standard.
2.) V8 cars should have posi standard.
3.) Dual cat exhaust standard.
4.) L98 or carbed 350 available with both automatic and manuals.
5.) V8 cars rears should have came with 3.23's, 3.45's or 3.73 gears.
1.) 1LE Brakes standard.
2.) V8 cars should have posi standard.
3.) Dual cat exhaust standard.
4.) L98 or carbed 350 available with both automatic and manuals.
5.) V8 cars rears should have came with 3.23's, 3.45's or 3.73 gears.
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: ARIZONA
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Car: 92 Trans Am Conv
Engine: LB9
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.08
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
As others have mentioned, certain options should have been standard with the high performance models.
1.) 1LE Brakes standard.
2.) V8 cars should have posi standard.
3.) Dual cat exhaust standard.
4.) L98 or carbed 350 available with both automatic and manuals.
5.) V8 cars rears should have came with 3.23's, 3.45's or 3.73 gears.
1.) 1LE Brakes standard.
2.) V8 cars should have posi standard.
3.) Dual cat exhaust standard.
4.) L98 or carbed 350 available with both automatic and manuals.
5.) V8 cars rears should have came with 3.23's, 3.45's or 3.73 gears.
#33
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
1. Subframe connectors
2. Stronger rear axle
3. Stainless steel body
4. LT1 in 1992 - Might have made my engine swap easier?
5. Trans Am taillights that don't de-laminate (guess they made these in 1982-84)
6. Knight Rider front bumper option
But out of the 4 choices in the first post - I would choose IRS because of how weak the rear axles were.
2. Stronger rear axle
3. Stainless steel body
4. LT1 in 1992 - Might have made my engine swap easier?
5. Trans Am taillights that don't de-laminate (guess they made these in 1982-84)
6. Knight Rider front bumper option
But out of the 4 choices in the first post - I would choose IRS because of how weak the rear axles were.
#34
Supreme Member
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
1- 8.5" ring gear.
2- proper SLA front suspension instead of the strut setup.
3- decent brakes on performance versions.
most of the other factory 3rd gen design/engineering goofs are an easy fix
2- proper SLA front suspension instead of the strut setup.
3- decent brakes on performance versions.
most of the other factory 3rd gen design/engineering goofs are an easy fix
#37
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 2,327
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
5 Posts
Car: 1988 GTA
Engine: LB9
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.45
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
Modified McPherson strut used on all third gens is a good compromise between compact packaging, durability and good performance. Short-long arm suspension has much better control of wheel geometry in every situation.
#41
Member
iTrader: (1)
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
IRS would've added thousands to the price, likely not align with the target market, and make the car sit far too close to the coat tails of the Corvette
It would've been great to have the buick turbo motor available more widely but again likely get killed off by the protectionist exec's fearing it usurping the 'vette.
How about rack and pinion steering. I did everything to my GTA steering wise and the dead-zone on centre still was pretty bad. Mustang's of the same era had it. I think it would've helped 'complete' the handling of the car by introducing some concept of precision into the steering in line with the 'hi-tech' / sophisticated spiel the marketing dept. was going for and the top brass probably wouldn't have cared much past the bottom line.
It would've been great to have the buick turbo motor available more widely but again likely get killed off by the protectionist exec's fearing it usurping the 'vette.
How about rack and pinion steering. I did everything to my GTA steering wise and the dead-zone on centre still was pretty bad. Mustang's of the same era had it. I think it would've helped 'complete' the handling of the car by introducing some concept of precision into the steering in line with the 'hi-tech' / sophisticated spiel the marketing dept. was going for and the top brass probably wouldn't have cared much past the bottom line.
#46
Supreme Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Il
Posts: 11,692
Received 746 Likes
on
505 Posts
Car: 1989-92 FORMULA350 305 92 Hawkclone
Engine: 4++,350 & 305 CIs
Transmission: 700R4 4800 vig 18th700R4 t56 ZF6 T5
Axle/Gears: 3.70 9"ford alum chunk,dana44,9bolt
Re: Third Gen Development "What If?"
I would like one of those intakes for my stash.