'91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
#1
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 9
Likes: 8
From: Philly Suburbs
Car: 1992 Z28
Engine: 5.7
Axle/Gears: G92
'91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Hello everyone, not sure whether this is the best place to ask this question, but there doesn't seem to be a section about basic driving questions...
I have a '92 Z28, and am now considering a '91 which isn't anywhere close to me. My car is the only 3rd gen Camaro I've ever spent any real amount of time driving. My understanding is that '92 used lots of body adhesive which provided a "tighter" driving experience. Can anyone comment as to whether the difference is noticeable between '91 and '92, or does a '91 really feel pretty much the same on the road (including during "spirited" twisty road driving)?
Thanks a million for any actual experience-based input!
I have a '92 Z28, and am now considering a '91 which isn't anywhere close to me. My car is the only 3rd gen Camaro I've ever spent any real amount of time driving. My understanding is that '92 used lots of body adhesive which provided a "tighter" driving experience. Can anyone comment as to whether the difference is noticeable between '91 and '92, or does a '91 really feel pretty much the same on the road (including during "spirited" twisty road driving)?
Thanks a million for any actual experience-based input!
#2
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,408
Likes: 477
From: Pflugerville, Texas
Car: 92 Heritage Camaro Z28
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: auto
Axle/Gears: 3.23 Limited Slip
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
I had a 91 RS 28 years ago and was a fun car to drive. 305 5 speed. I now have a 92 z28 5.7
I did not notice much difference as I was young when I had the RS. Put almost 100k miles on it with no major issues.
The z28 is tight but does have a squeak here and there. But not major
I did not notice much difference as I was young when I had the RS. Put almost 100k miles on it with no major issues.
The z28 is tight but does have a squeak here and there. But not major
The following users liked this post:
F86 (01-18-2021)
#3
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 9
Likes: 8
From: Philly Suburbs
Car: 1992 Z28
Engine: 5.7
Axle/Gears: G92
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
I had a 91 RS 28 years ago and was a fun car to drive. 305 5 speed. I now have a 92 z28 5.7
I did not notice much difference as I was young when I had the RS. Put almost 100k miles on it with no major issues.
The z28 is tight but does have a squeak here and there. But not major
I did not notice much difference as I was young when I had the RS. Put almost 100k miles on it with no major issues.
The z28 is tight but does have a squeak here and there. But not major
#4
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,439
Likes: 169
From: Moorpark, CA
Car: '91 GTA, '92 T/A Convertible
Engine: GTA: 350 w/Vortec heads, T/A: 305
Transmission: Pro-built 700R4
Axle/Gears: GTA: 3.27, T/A: 2.73
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
I have a '91 GTA and a '91 T/A convertible. Nothing different really. If anything, I actually prefer driving the '91.
The following users liked this post:
F86 (01-18-2021)
#5
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 4,350
Likes: 303
From: NJ
Car: 92 Firebird
Engine: 4.8 LR4
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.45 9 Bolt
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
It's pretty much the same, no noticeable difference. Suspension and body mods are much more noticeable
The following users liked this post:
F86 (01-18-2021)
#6
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,484
Likes: 42
From: Danville, IN
Car: 1991 Camaro Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: 4L60E
Axle/Gears: Strange 12 Bolt, 3.42
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
I agree no real difference. The mileage, amount of abuse, and overall condition(especially the suspension components) has a lot more effect on how the car drives than what year it was made. Good luck, hopefully you will have another thirdgen soon.
The following users liked this post:
F86 (01-18-2021)
#7
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 9
Likes: 8
From: Philly Suburbs
Car: 1992 Z28
Engine: 5.7
Axle/Gears: G92
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Thanks everyone for your input. I've always wondered whether the body adhesive made a noticeable difference driving, or whether it just added a bunch of weight and goo...
Trending Topics
#8
#9
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 9
Likes: 8
From: Philly Suburbs
Car: 1992 Z28
Engine: 5.7
Axle/Gears: G92
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Yeah... Today I'm kind of regretting not hanging in a little longer, but I really try to keep some self discipline in auctions... Otherwise a different kind of regret can happen!
But that one really ticked boxes for me. Fixed roof, manual, G92, no stupid mods, no cracks in the sail panels. It didn't seem to have led a difficult life. Oh well.
But that one really ticked boxes for me. Fixed roof, manual, G92, no stupid mods, no cracks in the sail panels. It didn't seem to have led a difficult life. Oh well.
#10
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 715
Likes: 40
Car: 1991 base firebird
Engine: tbi 305
Transmission: 700r4
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
im going against the grain a little here and saying there is a difference. the way it drives and handles will be the same. the difference that all of the seam sealer (adhesive) they used on the 92 models is that it stops almost all of the squeaks that 3rd gens are famous for.
The following users liked this post:
ev305tpi (01-22-2021)
#11
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,439
Likes: 169
From: Moorpark, CA
Car: '91 GTA, '92 T/A Convertible
Engine: GTA: 350 w/Vortec heads, T/A: 305
Transmission: Pro-built 700R4
Axle/Gears: GTA: 3.27, T/A: 2.73
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
My '91 is quieter than my '92. The '91 has C&C T-tops and a set of outer SFCs. The '92 is a convertible and has both inner and outer SFCs.
#12
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 731
Likes: 225
From: Hilton Head Island, SC
Car: 1988 Pontiac Trans Am GTA
Engine: 5.7 liter V-8
Transmission: 4 speed auto
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
im going against the grain a little here and saying there is a difference. the way it drives and handles will be the same. the difference that all of the seam sealer (adhesive) they used on the 92 models is that it stops almost all of the squeaks that 3rd gens are famous for.
I thought the adhesives came along with the '91s, but I'm probably wrong. I thought I'd remembered hearing about the adhesives in some of the press about Pontiac rolling out a convertible for the first time in years for 1991. One of the reasons given that Pontiac finally did launch a convertible was the tighter, quieter feel produced by these adhesives.
#13
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
I thought the adhesives came along with the '91s, but I'm probably wrong. I thought I'd remembered hearing about the adhesives in some of the press about Pontiac rolling out a convertible for the first time in years for 1991. One of the reasons given that Pontiac finally did launch a convertible was the tighter, quieter feel produced by these adhesives.
#14
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,484
Likes: 758
From: South Ms
Car: 89 Firebird
Engine: 355 TBI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 10 Bolt.Posi-3.73s
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
My 91 T-Top car was the tightest Thirdgen I ever drove even at over 100k mi. Ive always believed it got the adhesive treatment.
#15
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 237
From: South Windsor, CT
Car: '89 GTA
Engine: ZZ6TPI
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: Borg Warner 3.70:1
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
I’ve driven many different thirdgens of varying ages, conditions and mileage and would say that condition and mileage has more of a factor on the squeaks and rattles than anything else.
A low mileage, babied 1982 hardtop is going to be a more solid car than a 150K mile T-Top daily driver 1992.
All things being equal though, I would say there seems to be little perceptible difference in squeaks/rattles and structural integrity from about 88’ and later. The earlier cars did seem to be looser.
My Dad had a 92’ RS that he bought in 1994 with 34K miles on it and that’s the newest, lowest mile thirdgen I recall experiencing back when they were relatively new cars. Other than the T-Tops squeaking on cold days, it seemed to be a pretty solid car and didn’t have too many squeaks and rattles. I bought my 89’ GTA in 1999 with 100K miles and at that time, my Dad’s RS also had about the same mileage. Both cars were in similar condition (well cared for daily drivers). Honestly, both cars felt about the same as far as squeaks and rattles. The 92’ may have had adhesive in the seams and the 89’ didn’t, but it wasn’t very noticeable.
I had an 86’ IROC before the GTA and with 100K miles and even being a hardtop, it squeaked, rattled and creaked quite a bit. It definitely had a harder life than the GTA did, so that probably had a lot to do with it as well. Back then I also had various friends with an 83’, 84’ and an 85’ and they were more like my 86’ than my 89’ or the 92’.
So, take my personal observations for what they’re worth, but I would not consider the added adhesive a decision factor in which year car to buy. It just didn’t seem to make much of a perceptible difference, although I’m also remembering from many years ago. In any case, mileage and condition are going to be bigger factors.
A low mileage, babied 1982 hardtop is going to be a more solid car than a 150K mile T-Top daily driver 1992.
All things being equal though, I would say there seems to be little perceptible difference in squeaks/rattles and structural integrity from about 88’ and later. The earlier cars did seem to be looser.
My Dad had a 92’ RS that he bought in 1994 with 34K miles on it and that’s the newest, lowest mile thirdgen I recall experiencing back when they were relatively new cars. Other than the T-Tops squeaking on cold days, it seemed to be a pretty solid car and didn’t have too many squeaks and rattles. I bought my 89’ GTA in 1999 with 100K miles and at that time, my Dad’s RS also had about the same mileage. Both cars were in similar condition (well cared for daily drivers). Honestly, both cars felt about the same as far as squeaks and rattles. The 92’ may have had adhesive in the seams and the 89’ didn’t, but it wasn’t very noticeable.
I had an 86’ IROC before the GTA and with 100K miles and even being a hardtop, it squeaked, rattled and creaked quite a bit. It definitely had a harder life than the GTA did, so that probably had a lot to do with it as well. Back then I also had various friends with an 83’, 84’ and an 85’ and they were more like my 86’ than my 89’ or the 92’.
So, take my personal observations for what they’re worth, but I would not consider the added adhesive a decision factor in which year car to buy. It just didn’t seem to make much of a perceptible difference, although I’m also remembering from many years ago. In any case, mileage and condition are going to be bigger factors.
#16
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,925
Likes: 931
From: Il
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: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Was going to post a picture of the "glue" but I can't seem to find it. Maybe tomorrow
#17
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 732
Likes: 18
From: MA
Car: 92 & 91 Z28 1LEs, 87 IROC-Z, 90 ZR1
Engine: L98, LT5
Transmission: 700R4, 6-speed
Axle/Gears: 3.45, 3.42, 3.73, 3.27
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Having owned a few 92s and my 91 (which have nearly the identical miles and options), driven back to back, the 92s have far less squeaks and rattles than the previous year cars. My cars have within a couple thousand miles from each other and similar option. It's a big deal to me.
#18
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
The ’91 Firebird convertible was available with the LHO 3.1L V6, the L03 5.0 V8, and the LB9 5.0 V8. Production improvements led to use of new body sealants that added to the rigidity of the body.
#19
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 4,674
Likes: 817
From: MICHIGAN
Car: 1988 Trans Am
Engine: L03
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 10 Bolt 2.73 Open
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Long before there was an internet (at least that I was aware of), I too was under the impression that the body adhesive started sometime in '91, and that my '91 RS had it. Did a lot of reading and research on the cars before I bought mine, but I really can't recall where I thought I saw that.
#20
Supreme Member
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 262
From: Florida
Car: 1991 Z28
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3:42 Auburn
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Mine is a late 91, July, and it is loaded with adhesive. It is a vert so that may have something to do with it but it is definitely visible on my car.
#21
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,284
Likes: 170
From: S. UTAH
Car: 1989 IROC-Z 305 LB9 AT Convertible
Engine: LB9 305
Transmission: AT
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
So what did the factory do, adhesive wise? I assume they glued all the areas where panels were lap welded together? Was the adhesive applied before or after welding?
Was the adhesive semi flexible, in cured form? Like a polyurethane adhesive?
Was the adhesive semi flexible, in cured form? Like a polyurethane adhesive?
#22
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 349
Likes: 7
From: KS
Car: '91 Firebird vert
Engine: 305 TBI
Transmission: auto
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
In college I had a 92 Firebird convertible with 75k miles on it. Now I have a 91 Firebird convertible with 75k miles on it. There's no difference that I can tell, it still squeaks/rattles/talks to you.
#23
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,925
Likes: 931
From: Il
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: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Here is the picture I was looking for. I've seen this on the front and rear "frame rails" and a few other spots. What a surprisingly great product.
The following users liked this post:
ev305tpi (01-24-2021)
#24
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,284
Likes: 170
From: S. UTAH
Car: 1989 IROC-Z 305 LB9 AT Convertible
Engine: LB9 305
Transmission: AT
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
So as I thought I recalled, GM applied the adhesive before welding the panels together. NICE!
#25
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 4,674
Likes: 817
From: MICHIGAN
Car: 1988 Trans Am
Engine: L03
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 10 Bolt 2.73 Open
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Hmmm...I don't think I have a way of determining when my RS was built. I don't have the car any more, but do have the window sticker. Doesn't "seem" to have a date on it, but it does have a FEB in the lower right corner of the lower left box. Not sure if that means February or not.
#26
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,408
Likes: 477
From: Pflugerville, Texas
Car: 92 Heritage Camaro Z28
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: auto
Axle/Gears: 3.23 Limited Slip
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Hmmm...I don't think I have a way of determining when my RS was built. I don't have the car any more, but do have the window sticker. Doesn't "seem" to have a date on it, but it does have a FEB in the lower right corner of the lower left box. Not sure if that means February or not.
#29
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,408
Likes: 477
From: Pflugerville, Texas
Car: 92 Heritage Camaro Z28
Engine: 350 TPI
Transmission: auto
Axle/Gears: 3.23 Limited Slip
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
It was the 57199th camaro built out of 70007. The is 82% of the way thru production
#30
#32
Supreme Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 47
From: CA
Car: 1991 Camaro B4C
Engine: 305
Transmission: T-5
Axle/Gears: 3.42
Re: '91 vs. '92 Driving Experience
Having owned a few 92s and my 91 (which have nearly the identical miles and options), driven back to back, the 92s have far less squeaks and rattles than the previous year cars. My cars have within a couple thousand miles from each other and similar option. It's a big deal to me.
I got some time in his 91 and 92 1LEs, both in mint condition (6-8k miles). It's rare to get a chance to experience comparable cars back to back these days. The 92 was noticeably better in terms of noise, vibration, harshness, squeaks, rattles... The car felt tighter. It won't equate to faster lap times, but the driving experience is of a slightly higher quality.
Again, this is some nuanced stuff and most people won't notice it; furthermore, this stuff is unnoticeable on the average beat up old thirdgen.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post