a question for the car guys

[keithbar 1]

first I will say that I make no claim to be a car guy . but I have the TV on and there's a car restoration show on . they're working on this car and they keep calling it a Firebird /Trans Am they said it that way several times even printed it across the screen that way . I know its just a badge issue . but the grill clearly has a badge that says Pontiac .does not that in and of itself mean its a Firebird and not a Trans Am?

i have on occasion been accused of pulling low . My response. Naw I wasn't low I'm just such a big guy I look closer than I really am .

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

No. Firebird is the car, Trans Am is the top end package. Depending on the year, T/A is decals & plastic (spoilers and such). All T/As are Firebirds, not all Firebirds are T/As (all made by Pontiac).

The Chev version (same platform, same basic car) is the Camaro. Top end package is the Z28.

Same thing. Some years there were actual performance differences, engine, transmission & suspension. Other years it was badges, interior and crap glued on the outside.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[keithbar 1]

ah okay that explains it I was wondering why they were calling it that. Thanks

i have on occasion been accused of pulling low . My response. Naw I wasn't low I'm just such a big guy I look closer than I really am .

[davjohns 1]

Exactly. It's like having a Jeep Wrangler, Rubicon edition.

The Camaro Z28 actually referred to a package code in the VIN in the early years. You could look at the VIN and find the Z28 as part of it. I once had a used car salesman try to convince me a 68 Camaro he had was a Z28. It had a ten bolt rear end differential. The Z28 had a twelve bolt. I pointed out to him the problem with the VIN. He stopped talking to me.

Camaro had about a dozen different packages including Berlinetta, RS, SS, RS/SS, etc. The only variants of the Firebird that I recall were the Firebird Formula and the Firebird Trans Am. Of course, there were convertibles and body variations like spoilers, hood scoops, T tops, and such.

The most famous Firebird Trans Am was probably the one from Smokey and the Bandit.

Like you note, the manufacturer was Pontiac. The Camaro was the Chevrolet counterpart. They were meant to rival the Mustang that pre-existed both of them.

David

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[GD64 1]

keithbar........a little more history, these cars, (Firebirds, Mustangs, Camaros, etc.) competed on the race track in a series started in the 60's called Trans Am(Trans American) Racing Series. The initial concept was to shove a five liter V-8 into an American stock based sedan and go racing. So Pontiac used/purchased the rights to use the name on it's "properly equipped" Firebird.

[davjohns 1]

Yup. I had forgotten that point. Almost like the IROC series that gave it's name to a properly equipped Camaro in the 70's and other cars later. I think the Trans Am was the IROC car in the late 90's and early 2000's.

David

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[jumpsalot-2 2]

Five liter V8 sounds kinda small for racing ( 302 cu in "Ford"). I would think more like a 6.3 or bigger. ( 383 cu in "Mopar")

Life is short ... jump often.

[muff528 3]

jumpsalot-2

Five liter V8 sounds kinda small for racing ( 302 cu in "Ford"). I would think more like a 6.3 or bigger. ( 383 cu in "Mopar")

Different sized engines ran in different classes, more or less. But the 302 engine for the Z28 was not your average stock driving-around-town production engine.

[ryoder 1,382]

jumpsalot-2

Five liter V8 sounds kinda small for racing ( 302 cu in "Ford"). I would think more like a 6.3 or bigger. ( 383 cu in "Mopar")

At first, the Trans-Am cars were modified versions of their road version. The competition was divided into two classes- an "Under 2-Liter" class (predominantly European sedans) and the "Over 2 Liter" class, 111 inch wheel base or less and displacement limited to 5.0 liters (primarily American pony cars)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Am_Series#Beginnings_.281966.E2.80.931967.29

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[GD64 1]

jumpsalot-2

Five liter V8 sounds kinda small for racing ( 302 cu in "Ford"). I would think more like a 6.3 or bigger. ( 383 cu in "Mopar")

jumpsalot-2.........I checked out Wiki after I read your comment. Initially yes, they were limited to 111" wheel base and 5 liter max displacement. You mentioned the Mustang, if I recall correctly the Camaro Z-28's were also 302's. In spite of being a smaller V-8 they were very hi-revving motors that were tweaked to produce horsepower in the 600 HP or so range (race cars), but were under rated for street use. B.S. the insurance company to keep rates down strategy.

I'm sure as the series aged the displacement numbers you mentioned and higher were allowed.

[GD64 1]

jumpsalot-2...... it looks like muff528 and ryoder are a lot quicker on the key board than I.

IMO the TransAM series started out with a good idea and some GREAT drivers. But when the rules allowed for the switch to tubular chassis and the like, costs skyrocketed and I believe the series has had it's ups and downs financially since then.

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

Hi Dave,

Quote

the IROC series

The original IROC series cars were Porsches. The American drivers looked ridiculous when driving them against the European drivers. The concept was about to be a bust due to the poor performance of the American drivers. They switched to American cars to ensure greater attendance by Americans at the races; and to give the American drivers a chance at winning.

Jerry Baumchen

[GD64 1]

davjohns

Yup. I had forgotten that point. Almost like the IROC series that gave it's name to a properly equipped Camaro in the 70's and other cars later. I think the Trans Am was the IROC car in the late 90's and early 2000's.

David

I agree with what I think you mean about naming a production car or option package after a racing series (IROC, TransAm). But there was quite a bit of difference between the two....equipment aside. IROC was mainly a NSCAR "warm-up" event run mainly on ovals, and TransAm was more of a sports car based event sanctioned under SCCA, and run mostly on sports car tracks (like Elkhart.....on of my personal favorites).

[keithbar 1]

thanks for all the good information guys when I started skydiving Parachute Club at Fort Campbell Kentucky in the early eighties we had a first lieutenant that had a Trans Am with a 6.6 liter engine I only know this because it was written on the hood scoop.we had some European guys come through the club and they were just shocked and amazed by that a car could have a 6.6 liter engine .as an aside this particular butter bar was kind of a dick so I had to chuckle to myself when after about a year in the sport he had an opening that was spinning a bit he was real quick on the chop and when we landed we all asked him if he had tried to unstow his brakes and clear the spin he was adamant that he had tried everything and couldn't get it to stop spinning long story short we recovered his cutaway main canopy one break unstowed and ne break still stove he never came back and made a single jump after that he just disappeared

i have on occasion been accused of pulling low . My response. Naw I wasn't low I'm just such a big guy I look closer than I really am .

[muff528 3]

Well, he did unstow one brake line and that didn't fix the spin. Why waste valuable time and altitude fooling around with the other one!?

[lurch 0]

When I was 18 I had a neighbor with the legendary T/A 6.6. Let me drive it once in winter.

The car was unfortunately almost totally helpless in 3/4 of an inch of snow. I could back that thundering beast out of the parking spot... drop it in Drive, and as soon as I took my foot off the brake it would begin to orbit it's own nose and spin in circles on the front tires. Took me ages to get it to go in a straight line.

On the highway though, man that thing was fun. Big, heavy old-school American iron.

What's funny is, those cars weren't nearly as fast as we remembered them. Not knowing any better at the time, I thought that thing was the fastest thing I'd ever driven. All that roar and thunder. And granted, it -was- the fastest thing available at the time... in the mid-70's when automakers, strangled by new emissions laws, were trying to convince the american public that a 145 HP 305 smallblock was an acceptable substitute for the 440 HP big block muscle cars they grew up with in the 60's.


A few years back I yanked the old 4.0 I-6 block out of my jeep and dropped in a 4.6 I-6 stroker built as a musclecar block. Bored stroked ported compression jacked, lumpy cam, 24 lb injectors and more, good to just under 300 HP and 320 ft lb, in an otherwise stock Grand Cherokee. Fun truck. Can rip all four tires loose on a wet road in 4wd.
Runs quietly, no mods to exhaust, only giveaway is a very throaty rumble from the cam.

I was surprised when, in my mid-30's I looked up that T/A 6.6 and found out it was only packing about 220 HP.

My 6 cylinder jeep is actually way faster than that car. It just doesn't feel like it because there's no drama when you step on it. No thud and thunder, no big-V-8 sound, no heavy burbling sound at idle, it just goes.

The thing about the 6.6 is it's all about character. Our modern cars are faster, but they're definitely missing something.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[JohnMitchell 14]

muff528

Well, he did unstow one brake line and that didn't fix the spin. Why waste valuable time and altitude fooling around with the other one!?