https://www.thirdgen.org/rides/index...ew&rideid=1780

 

I drink to those picks, that is a nice 3000 GT in the back ground as well, my dad has a VR4 just like it.

 

oh yeh, these pics were prior to having the flowmaster, and quad tips installed.

 

looks like night rider....

 

pretty sweet .Is that a real dark blue or black ? I think the color on my puter is kinda off ...whichever it is , looks good
Wayne

 

I REALLY LOVE the fallen leaves.
I miss Fall so much!
Great looking ride.
I'm jealous!

------------------
Chat Soon,
KED85
Karl
1985 Firebird 2.8 to 3.4 swap project for Smog Happy LA, CA

 

well the car is actually black, on that last pic you can probably notice that the door wasn't all the way closed, always hated that pic, but thought i'd show you guys the taillights so everyone could get an idea of those 82-85 lights. And the guy in the 3000GT really freaked me out, he was just sitting there doing nothing for like 30 mins. While i parked, photographed, moved, parked, and photographed my car time and time again. lol, he was giving me that death ray also, hmmm...who knows. Thanx for the compliments all.

 

take this with a grain of salt but man, them are u.g.l.y you aint got no.......
tail lights.

it just looks wrong for some reason.

------------------
http://PCperformance-usa.com/86bird/86bird.html

--

 

...I see tail lights ...Looks good to me .Its neat to see a firebird in such good shape .

Oppinions are like as*holes , sometimes they stink !

 

as far as the taillights go, you either like em or you don't. NO offense taken there, i like em cause they tie the car back to teh second gens. They're a design that was carried over from the second gen birds, and placed on a new body style, it could almost be "retro" yeh right. Anyway, that's all. just wanna get the pix back to the top to see if anyone else looks. lol.

 

Nice car, man! I really like the wheels; they make the car look mean! And I'm jealous of the paint...

I had the same thing happen to me, in an area that looks like where you took your shots. It was an off-the-beaten-path parking lot in a state park; I park, and start taking pictures. Two cars pull up and DON'T LEAVE! I had to work all my shots around 'em... dammit. The pics didn't turn out too well anyway; back then, the paint was really good, and it reflected the trees way too much in the hood/fenders/doors/roof.


------------------
-Tom P (Hot rodded 1986 Firebird 2.8l)

 

That car is awesome! I really like your rims. Does anyone think those would look good on a camaro? Well anyways, keep your car looking good, there's too many ugly thirdgens rolling around giving us all a bad name! Mines not that bad though.....

------------------
1992 Polo Green RS 3.1L K&N conical and working on the ram air....

"Yeah, it's a V6 SO WHAT!?"

 

lockdown in 10,9,8,7,6,5,4.............

 

I also have the original style tailights on my 1985 Firebird.
I like that look. Never associated that taillight style to the 2nd Gen.
Now that I get to catch Rockford on the tube at night, I know exactly what ya mean.
And the newer style tailights (86 & above) also look good, too.

------------------
Chat Soon,
KED85
Karl
1985 Firebird 2.8 to 3.4 swap project for Smog Happy LA, CA

 

Thats a gorgeous car man...

What rims are those? Are those mudflaps standard or did you buy them?

------------------
1985 Camaro SC - 2.8L, auto.

C'mon, spin 'em for papa...
http://www.xenodrgn.f2s.com/Frontright.jpg

 

I wish i knew what type of rims those were, they're starting to look a little gankey, but i like the design and would like to keep them on the car or get a new set of them. Mudflaps, what mudflaps? actually i didn't notice any in the pics, there used to be some on there, which were probably still on when the pic was taken, and it was factory. They said firebird on the back side of them, i know the airdamn's downthere, but that's about all.

 

thats a nice ride man, but in your description it says its .040 over and is a 177. im not tryin to be a ***** but .040 over on a 2.8 is 179.92 (180ci)

173x.040=6.92
6.92+173=179.92 (180ci)

just thought youd like to know (the only reason why i picked up on it at all is my 86 camaro is also .040 over

-Bruce

 

well lets see. 173 is the complete displacement of the engine, if we multiplply the entire thing by .040 that would increase full displacement. Instead we've gotta increase the bore of the motor. increasing total displacement would mean increasing the stroke also. Because the bore of the motor, is 3.500 inches, it's gotta be increases to 3.540 inches, which raises displacement to 177. somehting, i might be backwards. But that's the way i think of it.