carmudgeons.com  

Go Back   carmudgeons.com > Automotive Forums > Car Talk > Perseverators Anonymous

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-28-2020, 06:16 PM   #2931
JST
195
 
JST's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 24,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick M3 View Post
yeet
Honestly, though, these things were cool af back then. It may be that I was only 11 or so at the time, and it may partly be because of Knight Rider, I'm not going to lie, but even I recognized that this and the contemporary C4 were astoundingly better cars than their immediate predecessors.

I didn't realize they came in UPS brown, but it's an interesting color. And this photo might be the nicest pic ever taken of a brown Trans Am.

JST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 10:24 AM   #2932
robg
Carmudgeon
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by JST View Post
Honestly, though, these things were cool af back then. It may be that I was only 11 or so at the time, and it may partly be because of Knight Rider, I'm not going to lie, but even I recognized that this and the contemporary C4 were astoundingly better cars than their immediate predecessors.



I didn't realize they came in UPS brown, but it's an interesting color. And this photo might be the nicest pic ever taken of a brown Trans Am.





My dream car when I was 8 for sure. I can’t even imagine how much of a wet noodle this car must be with its roof cut off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
robg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 10:51 AM   #2933
JST
195
 
JST's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 24,593
The good news is that it's slow enough that it probably doesn't matter that much.

As a Ford guy, I quickly decided that the Mustang was the much better car, and it still is. The 84 Mustangs were a little weak, but by 85 when they had the Quadra Shock for the rear axle, the 5 speed, and the 200 hp V8 (correct me if I get the details wrong, clyde), they were leagues ahead of the Trans Am. That only increased with the changes in 87 (to fuel injection, a better interior, etc).

This Trans Am would get more attention at Cars and Coffee, but give me a clean LX 5.0 convertible as a summer cruiser, all day every day.

EDIT: OK, maybe FI arrived in 86, pre-facelift? And Quadra Shock in 84?
JST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 11:22 AM   #2934
lemming
Western Anomaly
 
lemming's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Carmudgeonly Ride: White Orca
Posts: 16,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by JST View Post
The good news is that it's slow enough that it probably doesn't matter that much.

As a Ford guy, I quickly decided that the Mustang was the much better car, and it still is. The 84 Mustangs were a little weak, but by 85 when they had the Quadra Shock for the rear axle, the 5 speed, and the 200 hp V8 (correct me if I get the details wrong, clyde), they were leagues ahead of the Trans Am. That only increased with the changes in 87 (to fuel injection, a better interior, etc).

This Trans Am would get more attention at Cars and Coffee, but give me a clean LX 5.0 convertible as a summer cruiser, all day every day.

EDIT: OK, maybe FI arrived in 86, pre-facelift? And Quadra Shock in 84?
The LX 5.0 is the car the defined this period. Yes. The Firebird/Camaro of this era is weak sauce.
__________________


lemming is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 12:07 PM   #2935
FC
Solving problems
 
FC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Carmudgeonly Ride: M5 / 718 GTS / Cooper S / GTI / LR4
Location: Metro Boston
Posts: 25,216
That car will always be K.I.T.T. to me since you never saw them in Peru growing up.
FC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 02:40 PM   #2936
John V
No more BMWs
 
John V's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Carmudgeonly Ride: Ram, MS3, CX-5, RX-8
Location: Glenwood, MD
Posts: 14,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by JST View Post
The good news is that it's slow enough that it probably doesn't matter that much.

As a Ford guy, I quickly decided that the Mustang was the much better car, and it still is.
I chuckled when I read this, because yes of course you'd say that. I guess it depends on your priorities? The 80's F-bodys were much, much better handling cars than the Fox-body stuff and aside from a complete suspension and chassis re-engineering there isn't much you do to a Fox body to make them not terrible. In terms of acceleration they were both pathetically slow back then, but few of these cars were hurting for aftermarket bolt-on go-fast stuff back then (or now) and even in the 90's it was hard to find one that wasn't modified under the hood.
John V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 03:52 PM   #2937
clyde
Chief title editor
 
clyde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 26,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by JST View Post
The good news is that it's slow enough that it probably doesn't matter that much.

As a Ford guy, I quickly decided that the Mustang was the much better car, and it still is. The 84 Mustangs were a little weak, but by 85 when they had the Quadra Shock for the rear axle, the 5 speed, and the 200 hp V8 (correct me if I get the details wrong, clyde), they were leagues ahead of the Trans Am. That only increased with the changes in 87 (to fuel injection, a better interior, etc).

This Trans Am would get more attention at Cars and Coffee, but give me a clean LX 5.0 convertible as a summer cruiser, all day every day.

EDIT: OK, maybe FI arrived in 86, pre-facelift? And Quadra Shock in 84?
I *think* the quadrashock deal was a late addition to one of the 1984 suspension packages. Was definitely in place for 1985, though.

The 85 used a 7.5" rear and was the final year using a carburetor. It made 210/275.

The 86 used a 8.8" rear and was the first with fuel injection. It made 200/300.

The 87 was rated at 225/300 and stayed there for a couple years before being rerated at 220/300 for the 302's outgoing years for reasons that were never made clear.
__________________
OH NOES!!!!!1 MY CAR HAS T3H UND3R5T33R5555!!!!!!1oneone!!!!11

Team WTF?!
What are you gonna do?
clyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 03:57 PM   #2938
Nick M3
Relic
 
Nick M3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Bethesda, MD
Posts: 12,439
200 does not divide by 5L in any way that makes sense.
__________________
2011 M3
2006 Sierra 2500HD 4WD LBZ/Allison
2004 X5 3.0i 6MT
1995 M3 S50B32
1990 325is
1989 M3 S54B32

Hers:
1989 325iX
1996 911 Turbo


Nick M3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 04:38 PM   #2939
John V
No more BMWs
 
John V's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Carmudgeonly Ride: Ram, MS3, CX-5, RX-8
Location: Glenwood, MD
Posts: 14,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick M3 View Post
200 does not divide by 5L in any way that makes sense.
Does it help that the SBF isn't actually 5.0L? 4" bore (101.6mm) by 3" stroke (76.2mm) equals 4,942ccs.
John V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2020, 08:12 PM   #2940
Alan
Carmudgeon
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by JST View Post
Honestly, though, these things were cool af back then. It may be that I was only 11 or so at the time, and it may partly be because of Knight Rider, I'm not going to lie, but even I recognized that this and the contemporary C4 were astoundingly better cars than their immediate predecessors.
Loved the Trans Am, at 19 I bought a 2 yr old used 86 and after a couple of months realizing I get screwed and bought a car that had too many issues decided to go get a brand one ... had the 88 with the TPI engine and LOVED that car but the quality and dealer service was horrible ... I went through transmissions and rear differentials like they were oil changes, these service guys could never get it right ...

Never was a Mustang guy back then though the current models are pretty sweet
Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thoughs on Cheap Sporty Cars (thread break) lupinsea Car Talk 40 02-07-2014 02:36 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Forums © 2003-2008, 'Mudgeon Enterprises - Site hosting by AYN & Associates, LLC