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)

 

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.

 

T56 gearbox behind the 350.

 

A proper rear end and a proper manual trans.

 

5.7 Liter With A 5-Speed.

 

This realistically HAS to be the obvious choice. ...obviously we all have our own wants and needs, but from GM's point of view, it's gotta be the manual option for the L98.

 

Enough room for a proper exhaust system!

 

This ^

 

Of the options I was given the Turbo.
But L98 Manual would be my first choice.

 

This...

 

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 ..

 

Evidently more than you realize.

 

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):

 

​​​​​​​ya a whopping 10 horsepower

 

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.

 

That's a good one.

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.

 

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

 

I Believe 3.73's Were Only Available On 1983-1986 Model Years.

 

Advertised peak horsepower. The epitome of performance output.

 

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.

 

^^^^this, plus an optional 3:73 rear end

 

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

Torque also..

 

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.

 

yours or jerrywho's?

 

In 1989 One Version Of The 305 Had The Same Horsepower As One Version Of The 350,But The 350 Has The Torque Advantage.

 

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

 

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.

 

I prefer my 3.08 rear tpi 5 speed. It suits my current and future needs perfectly.

 

T5 with 350s
carbs with 350s
stronger rear end
1LE brakes standard
posi standard

 

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.

 

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

 

I'd take sub-frame connectors, especially when t-tops are ordered.

 

Subframe connectors gets my vote also.... What is wrong with the strut setup?

 

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.

 

Well designed cupholder

 

Ok, this one I have to agree wholeheartedly.

 

Welcome to the 91-2 firebird door map and cupholder

 

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.

 

You don't ask for much do you? LOL

 

Who has the intake in dynodons picture? I know jerrywho had one.

 

Would have been great setups that could have elevated the game for our beloved long hair cars!

 

This is the above intake, I think I'm the only one actually running it

 

I would like one of those intakes for my stash.