If I squint, it kind of looks like an FC RX7. A 305 HO and a 5 speed could be fun. I wonder if I could stand being seen in one? They are dirt cheap...
If I squint, it kind of looks like an FC RX7. A 305 HO and a 5 speed could be fun. I wonder if I could stand being seen in one? They are dirt cheap...
Is your Mullet Strong? No seriously you could have some fun with that, don't see the FC thing but then again I don't see a lot of things just ask my wife.
My father in law had a IROC back in 87. A 305 and a 5 speed is a hoot and the IROC was quick.
The FIL was going bald but I'm pretty sure I could have been accused of sporting something similar to a mullet. 
Can the Camaro handle?
Long front end, b pillar and hatch are similar. The RX& is a bit classier (well, maybe not this one).
You have to make sure to get one that looks authentically ragged out for that trailer park urban camo survivor look. That's the only way I think a 3rd gen Camaro can look at this point.
Then throw nice suspension in it and blow the doors off Porsches.
In reply to RoughandReady:
Sure you can. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2dFvKM9BpI
1k, engine knocks, Z28 (Whatever that means). What straight drives came in these? t5?
I have a friend who is entirely too obsessed with these cars, owns at least 6 of them.
My observations...
Hope you like legs straight out in front of you driving position.
Non-automatics are difficult to find
Non-automatics that fit the car that can handle power are pricey (t56 from 4th gen is $1200 or more)
Rear axle becomes a hand grenade at the 400hp level or less (aparrently) and upgrading is over $1200.
The tune-port intake quickly becomes a bottleneck, good news is carb is easy.
Limp chassis, look into subframe connectors.
Those are my impressions at least. I helped him build one, but not really my thing.
Can it handle? Well, it did dominate road racing for a decade or so in SCCA Showroom Stock GT, SCCA American Sedan and Firehawk. Yeah, it can work.
By the way, hopefully JG will chime in. He knows those cars well.
Apexcarver wrote: I have a friend who is entirely too obsessed with these cars, owns at least 6 of them. My observations... Hope you like legs straight out in front of you driving position. Non-automatics are difficult to find Non-automatics that fit the car that can handle power are pricey (t56 from 4th gen is $1200 or more) Rear axle becomes a hand grenade at the 400hp level or less (aparrently) and upgrading is over $1200. The tune-port intake quickly becomes a bottleneck, good news is carb is easy. Limp chassis, look into subframe connectors. Those are my impressions at least. I helped him build one, but not really my thing.
Pretty much all of this, but I'll add that the factory carbureted models were garbage. TPI is a better solution than a factory carb, but an aftermarket carb is probably a better solution than both.
305s were pretty meh. Weak valve springs and guides, and hard to make power past 5k rpm without serious work, like different heads.
Chassis were floppy to begin with, so stay away from T-top cars if you can (it'll be tough, because there's not many good V8 hardtops out there).
They can be had with 4 wheel disc brakes as well. Mostly 88+ IROCs and 84+ Trans-Ams. You could get discs prior to those years, too, but they were super rare. Also, not all rear disc setups were the same. Sizes and calipers varied from year to year.
I'd rock one - on the ChumpCar circuit. Interiors on the early cars are about as crappy as you'll find on American cars of any era.
RoughandReady wrote: Can the Camaro handle? Long front end, b pillar and hatch are similar. The RX& is a bit classier (well, maybe not this one).
Oh baby. 
In reply to JG Pasterjak:
Y'all make it sound like a Caprice would be a better choice.
Needs primer.
I'd consider them somewhat from a nostalgia point because I was born in '80 and there were still plenty of these roaming around when I was a teenager but that's about all of the love I would give them. A beat up 3rd Gen F-body just screams "trailer park" especially in primer.
For some odd reason though I'd still love a mid 80's G-body though.
You definitely wouldn't want to live with the shame of having something like this:
Or this:
My name is Curtis and I'm a GM enthusiast.
... and you couldn't pay me to own one of these.
Even the most potent 305 HO was a horrifically pathetic 180 hp. Upgrading a 305 is a completely losing venture because as soon as you buy an upgraded heads and intake, you realize you could have dropped in a 350 with twice the HP for the same money.
Then you realize that the F-body is paramount in body limpness, second only to a convertible K-car.
Apexcarver mentioned that the rear axle explodes at 400 hp, which is not really correct. The 7.5" rear axle explodes with traction. I've seen 7.5" rears in Camaros and G-bodies that blew the carrier out the diff cover with just a swap to stickier tires. At least with the G-body you can easily adapt anything into it. The F-body uses a torque-arm suspension that means swaps come from the aftermarket and cost three arms and two legs.
As a nostalgic cruiser, sure. Expect 0-60 times in the afternoon range, and expect insanity-inducing squeaks and rattles. Autocrossing will be a joke. Expect to lose to a 1950 Plymouth Sedan with $500 in suspension mods. And a flathead. With bald tires.
I'm sorry... I misrepresented myself in the above post. What I should have said is: F-BODIES SUCK (in my opinion)
curtis73 wrote: Even the most potent 305 HO was a horrifically pathetic 180 hp.
Not accurate. In the later years the LB9 305 put out 225hp and 290tq. In these same years the L98 was putting out 235hp in the F bodies. I don't think anyone is saying that these were the pinnacle of late 80's performance but they weren't all bad either.
SEADave wrote:curtis73 wrote: Even the most potent 305 HO was a horrifically pathetic 180 hp.Not accurate. In the later years the LB9 305 put out 225hp and 290tq. In these same years the L98 was putting out 235hp in the F bodies. I don't think anyone is saying that these were the pinnacle of late 80's performance but they weren't all bad either.
Ok, I stand corrected on the HP numbers, but yeah... they were all bad :)
I have nothing against 80's wheezers since they are compatible with very non-wheezer-ish engines. I do take exception to the F-body since (in my opinion) its wet-noodle chassis and specific rear axle tend to make it expensive to upgrade to "real" street or track status.
You could just convert an lt1 intake, its a common upgrade. But you would probably be better off just buying an lt1 powered 4th gen. They really aren't worth anything.
I've had one for like 7 years and finally last year I did a full suspension refurbished and upgrade and I have rekindled my love for the car.
In the spirit of full disclosure I did grenade a rear when i was full bolt ons dig racing a c6 on an unprepped surface. Mine has more power now and I haven't killed one since but I dont dig race as much and when I do I dont leave as hard.
The Thirdgen F body is a Fantastic Chassis. Trans AMs and IROC's with TPI and a 5speed are fun great handling cars that handled way better than other comparable cars from that era. A Thirdgen Trans Am looks way more like an FC than a Camaro does to me.
As far as handling Potential goes, Mark Madarash Drives a 1988 Trans AM, and he has won the ESP Solo National Championship in 1999,2001,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012.
A 1987 Trans Am is also one of europes fastest street cars. The Pollysport Trans Am Hit 253MPH
Heres a link to the video of it making a 215MPH run in the RAIN http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWl6QGcJOf0
And Racing a Rocket
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8qhx8tVwR8
You'll need to log in to post.
