First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List Re: Rant... by <hugoba@apcom.com> RE: Rant... by "Bob Cisneros" <Bob.Cisneros@Sun.COM> Re: Rant... by "Shawn Jeppson" <sfjeppson@earthlink.net> Re: Rant... by "Wayne Crist" <crist@flash.net> Re: Water Pump Plates by "Bob Cisneros" <Bob.Cisneros@Sun.COM> Re: Fuel Addative by "Wayne Crist" <crist@flash.net> Re: water pump plates by <BHA676@aol.com> Re Convertible Header Bars and Core support by "Gary Patrick" <Gary@tcworks.net> Re: Rear 1/4 Armrest Ashtray by "Gary Patrick" <Gary@tcworks.net> Re: Rant... by "Eddie Pettit" <eddie@thepettitfamily.org> front end rebuild advice and best way to drop 2 " check this out!! by <BHA676@aol.com> Make Azteks into hearses, only way I ll be in one by "Gary Patrick" <Gary@tcworks.net> water pump plate by "Craig" <coreman@uniserve.com> Re: Hot Rod Power Tour by "Andrew & Kate Panek" <panek@inil.com> RE: Todays progress again by "Mace" <macef@optonline.net> Re: dash light question by <T2AVLIS@aol.com> Re: Ram Air 101 by "saltydog" <saltyd@home.com> First Gen Rear Ends by "Jonathan Black" <jonathan@logicsouth.com>
(back) Subject: Re: Rant... From: <hugoba@apcom.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 14:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Unfortunately the fact that the F-body is EOL is no news. the rumor was abundant last year and has been pretty much set in stone this year. Unfortunately GM is run by bean counters that can't get their heads out of = their 10 bolt rear ends. I agree that the Aztek is ulgly but I guess they had to do a "me too" to = keep up with the other boys. Unfortunately they picked the wrong vehicle. The new El Camino'ish car that they are coming out with seems like a = pretty neat idea but I think that they could have re-tooled part of the f-body factory to handle these low production vehicles and still have kept the F-bodies. Oh well. I guess we have to appreciate what we have. Hugo > From Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com Tue Apr 3 11:58:59 2001 > From: "Jason Rogers" <jason.rogers@york.com> > To: "First Generation Firebird-L" <Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com> > Subject: Rant... > Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 14:17:03 -0400 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Priority: 3 (Normal) > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 > Importance: Normal > > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > Ok, now I am really P.O'ed. For years now there has been discussion on > whether to eliminate the Firebird and Camaro. Watching NHRA this past > weekend, I really think those bastards are going to do it. If Warren > Johnson is testing the new Grand Am, that tells me they are going to can = the > Firebird. I don't buy the reason that the Grand Am is more aerodynamic = or > more stable. The reason I am so pissed is they are spending money to = revamp > the Aztek to try and save it. HELLO people. Nobody wanted that car, a > bunch of magazines say the engineers at Pontiac didn't want to work on = it, > but it was pushed through by management. HELLO, If you have to pay your > sales people to drive them back and forth to work, something is wrong = here. > Then I read on their website: > > "Pontiac Aztek was named the "Best of What's New" 2000 from Popular = Science. > This annual award honors new products and technology developments in a > number of categories. The editors of Popular Science selected 100 = applicants > for distinction as the "Best of What's New." Pontiac unveiled the Aztek > concept vehicle at the 1999 North American International Auto Show. > Propelled by overwhelming customer demand, Aztek went into full = production > status for the 2001 model year. This multifunction vehicle offers = flexible > seating, and an available 22-way configurable net system and sliding = rear > cargo tray. Plus, it features a sprightly 185-horsepower engine, along = with > the available VERSATRAK All-Wheel-Drive system. There's no denying the > Pontiac Aztek is uniquely designed to keep up with your life." > > Overwelming customer demand? You must be kidding? They didn't ask me. = Is > that why you only sold 10,000 last year when your target was 70,000? = Who > did your marketing research? Maybe the big wigs should trade in their > Bonnies for Azteks? There are some really good ideas in the Aztek, but = come > on Pontiac. Oh, and don't be too quick to celebrate an Anniversary. = Olds > celebrated 100 years and they canned it. Well, atleast we will inherit = the > Quad 4 for the Sunfire. I hope someone from Pontiac reads this... > > I went to the Pontiac's at the Grove at Maple Grove Raceway last year, = and > Pontiac had a tent there to show off their new vehicles. I can't tell = you > how many people said, "OMG, is it supposed to look like that?" I walked = up > to the salesman and said, "Do you have to park that thing out front = where > everyone can see it?" The salesman said, "You don't like the Aztek?, it = is > a really nice driving car." Me, "Yeah but its really ugly". He then = turned > his back on me to talk to another customer whos first words were = something > to the affect of, "Eww that thing is ugly". > > Dear Pontiac, please put your effort and money into making the Firebird and > Camaro pass 2003 safety standards instead of wasting money on the = Asstek. > > I realize this is a first gen list, but I would like to hear the true > Pontiac enthusiast opinions. > > Sorry for the rant, ok I feel better now. Going racing on Sunday in the > 69', breathe.. breathe... >
(back) Subject: RE: Rant... From: "Bob Cisneros" <Bob.Cisneros@Sun.COM> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 15:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Jason Rogers writes: >For years now there has been discussion on >whether to eliminate the Firebird and Camaro. Then goes on passionately about the Aztek... >Dear Pontiac, please put your effort and money into making the Firebird = and >Camaro pass 2003 safety standards instead of wasting money on the Asstek. No one at Pontiac or GM is saying much about the fate of the Camaro or Firebird. But sometimes it's what they don't say that's important. Enthusiast magazines have reported that neither car have been well represented at the Detroit Auto show for the last couple of years. This is where the auto makers brag about their products, and demonstrates the lack of interest in their marketing depts. Sales are another barometer. The numbers look worse each year, with total sales dropping since 1993. Most manufacturers can tolerate a minimum number of sales and still be profitable. The F car is falling below the number GM has decided that can justify continued production. So, the bigger question is why aren't people buying these cars? I bought one last year. And while the F car represents a real bargain with respect to performance for your dollar spend when compared to possible competitors, it is still an expensive car. Too expensive for the target market. Young people aged 18-27 can't afford a car that costs between $25 and $33K, and over $3000 a year to insure. In the meantime, the market is turning towards trucks, SUVs, and small sporty compact cars. Right or wrong, many in GM feel that a plant with the capacity of the St. Therese facility should be building trucks. Rodger Fromm writes: >I am really hoping that the firebird is not canceled, i was hoping to buy = a >new one in a couple of years. If you wait beyond 2002, the odds are poor. That's when the present contract at the assembly plant expires, and hasn't been renewed. Most crystal ball gaizers are saying no more production beyond that point. >The other rumor that i heard was that the vette will end up having its = own >badging and no longer be under chev... The Corvette is the flagship for Chevrolet, and has been since 1953. It is unimaginable that they will let GM spin it off as a seperate mark. >and that after a 1 year absence that >the camero would also go under the new vette badging... Wouldn't that be confusing? The Camaro comes back as what, the Corvette II? >I swear, they do this and kill the firebird, i am going to freak!!! You may have to be prepared to freak. Twice before, GM tried to kill the F cars. Back in the mid 1970s when gas prices, insurance, and emissions regulations killed the muscle car. A strike in 1972 kept production down to something around 30k units. But the F car came back strong and became a sales winner. Then again in the late 1980's when sales dropped again. A big campaign on the part owners and enthusiasts pursuaded GM not to pull the plug. But this may be the 3rd and final strike for the car. I personally would hate to see the end of such a great car. The Firebird has had a long and legendary history. While most of the other models that were around when the Firebird came to be are now gone, the Firebird has survived, becoming a better car than ever. -BoB San Jose, CA 1968 convertible bob.cisneros@Sun.COM
(back) Subject: Re: Rant... From: "Shawn Jeppson" <sfjeppson@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 19:12:02 -0700 I completely agree. I was talking to a GM engineer recently and he said = there are a whole lot of people within GM that are not happy with this either. Shawn Jason Rogers wrote: > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > Ok, now I am really P.O'ed. For years now there has been discussion on > whether to eliminate the Firebird and Camaro. Watching NHRA this past > weekend, I really think those bastards are going to do it. If Warren > Johnson is testing the new Grand Am, that tells me they are going to can = the > Firebird. I don't buy the reason that the Grand Am is more aerodynamic = or > more stable. The reason I am so pissed is they are spending money to = revamp > the Aztek to try and save it. HELLO people. Nobody wanted that car, a > bunch of magazines say the engineers at Pontiac didn't want to work on = it, > but it was pushed through by management. HELLO, If you have to pay your > sales people to drive them back and forth to work, something is wrong = here. > Then I read on their website: > > "Pontiac Aztek was named the "Best of What's New" 2000 from Popular = Science. > This annual award honors new products and technology developments in a > number of categories. The editors of Popular Science selected 100 = applicants > for distinction as the "Best of What's New." Pontiac unveiled the Aztek > concept vehicle at the 1999 North American International Auto Show. > Propelled by overwhelming customer demand, Aztek went into full = production > status for the 2001 model year. This multifunction vehicle offers = flexible > seating, and an available 22-way configurable net system and sliding = rear > cargo tray. Plus, it features a sprightly 185-horsepower engine, along = with > the available VERSATRAK All-Wheel-Drive system. There's no denying the > Pontiac Aztek is uniquely designed to keep up with your life." > > Overwelming customer demand? You must be kidding? They didn't ask me. = Is > that why you only sold 10,000 last year when your target was 70,000? = Who > did your marketing research? Maybe the big wigs should trade in their > Bonnies for Azteks? There are some really good ideas in the Aztek, but = come > on Pontiac. Oh, and don't be too quick to celebrate an Anniversary. = Olds > celebrated 100 years and they canned it. Well, atleast we will inherit = the > Quad 4 for the Sunfire. I hope someone from Pontiac reads this... > > I went to the Pontiac's at the Grove at Maple Grove Raceway last year, = and > Pontiac had a tent there to show off their new vehicles. I can't tell = you > how many people said, "OMG, is it supposed to look like that?" I walked = up > to the salesman and said, "Do you have to park that thing out front = where > everyone can see it?" The salesman said, "You don't like the Aztek?, it = is > a really nice driving car." Me, "Yeah but its really ugly". He then = turned > his back on me to talk to another customer whos first words were = something > to the affect of, "Eww that thing is ugly". > > Dear Pontiac, please put your effort and money into making the Firebird = and > Camaro pass 2003 safety standards instead of wasting money on the = Asstek. > > I realize this is a first gen list, but I would like to hear the true > Pontiac enthusiast opinions. > > Sorry for the rant, ok I feel better now. Going racing on Sunday in the > 69', breathe.. breathe...
(back) Subject: Re: Rant... From: "Wayne Crist" <crist@flash.net> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 18:13:57 -0500 Put this into perspective. One of the marketing gurus sent to 'save" Oldsmobile in the late '80s early '90s is now the head of Pontiac. Dump the cutlass, 88 etc. and go a new direction. Dump the popular Firebird and go a new direction with Aztec hmmm . . do we see a pattern. Could she be a chevy plant? I love conspiracies Wayne TX
(back) Subject: Re: Water Pump Plates From: "Bob Cisneros" <Bob.Cisneros@Sun.COM> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 16:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Jason Rogers writes: >I just went through this myself. If you have the "early" style pump (I >believe it has 8 bolts: 67') you will have 2 plates but no connecting >grommets. Pretty close. 1969 was when Pontiac switched to the 11 bolt style timing cover/pump. 1968 and earlier used the 8 bolt, with 2 divider plates, one gasket, and no tubes. >Just use monkey snot to glue it to the block with the gasket >inbetween. The pump to timing case uses only 1 gasket. On the later = pump >(I believe 11 bolts: 68' or 69+), you need to use the grommets that = straddle >the timing cover to block and the gaskets go on either side of the plates >and get sandwiched between the timing cover and pump. The grommets = usually >only come with the "cam replacement gasket set" and not in the "intake = set". The 1969 11 bolt design used only 1 divider plate, 2 gaskets, and 2 rubber tubes or sleaves. See your service manual for the appropriate year engine/car you have to see an illustration. -BoB San Jose, CA 1968 convertible bob.cisneros@Sun.COM
(back) Subject: Re: Fuel Addative From: "Wayne Crist" <crist@flash.net> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 18:17:51 -0500 Hey guys I work for a environmental company that is clean both those chemicals out a cities groundwater (very toxic and expensive to get out). It doesn't take much to do allot of damage so please be careful. Wayne Tx
(back) Subject: Re: water pump plates From: <BHA676@aol.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 20:28:48 EDT Wait a second... can someone explain the 67 one grommet water pump? Ive changed mine before and never heard of it. Anything at all please. brad 67 400 convert
(back) Subject: Re Convertible Header Bars and Core support From: "Gary Patrick" <Gary@tcworks.net> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 20:28:17 -0400 Subject: Convertible Header Bars and Core support From: "Ed Pittman" <epittman@pvcc.cc.va.us> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 10:58:46 -0400 Greetings to all! I have been away from the list for a while and am now finally in the = process of restoring my '68 400 convertible. I have a couple of questions: 1. 1968 header bars on the windshield were dull finish on the inside. I have just had mine replated by Tri-City and they did a great job. = However, they are now bright chrome all over. This may have been discussed before but I missed it and I need to know how is the best way to return the back side to a dull finish. Some have said that it is painted on but mine did not appear to be painted before I sent them to the platers. 2. I also need to know how the radiator is attached to the core support on the left or drivers side. There are two large holes that appear to have = had some form of grommet with bolts as compared to the right side that is attached to the two welded cage nuts. Any suggestions? Also, does anyone know where you can find the rubber grommets that contain the nuts for attaching the voltage regulator? Thanks to all in advance, Ed 68 400 conv. Ed Try Aveco for all the misc fasteners. They are an OEM supplier. The rubber grommets or well nuts are a fairly common item,used by many GMs to hold various items like mirrors, luggage racks,etc. As for the extra holes in the core support that was because the 400s used a larger(wider and deeper) radiator. This then necessitated two sets of mounting holes. Remember that the Camaro also shared the same core support. As for the dull finish on the mouldings the grey paint has most likely = worn off leaving a tired chrome underneath. 68s were mandated to have no more glare in your = face, so alot of changes were made to things viewed from the drivers = compartment. Gary
(back) Subject: Re: Rear 1/4 Armrest Ashtray From: "Gary Patrick" <Gary@tcworks.net> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 20:30:24 -0400 Subject: Re: Rear 1/4 Armrest Ashtray From: <David_Kiklis@abtassoc.com> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 11:07:13 -0400 Just one more note - these ashtrays changed size in 69. The 67-68 ones are noticeably larger than the 69 ones. I know this cuz the 67 set I = found in a junkyard don't fit in my 69 bird. So I have a spare set in decent shape - email me off list if you are interested in them. I am in the = midst of buffing a lot of trim and chrome - I'll throw them onto the pile and see how they look. Actually Dave it was 68 that changed. 67s are the large ones. Gary
(back) Subject: Re: Rant... From: "Eddie Pettit" <eddie@thepettitfamily.org> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 20:38:34 -0400 IMO, the Camaro/Firebird will make a return after a few years... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Rogers" <jason.rogers@york.com> > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > Ok, now I am really P.O'ed. For years now there has been discussion on > whether to eliminate the Firebird and Camaro.
(back) Subject: front end rebuild advice and best way to drop 2 " check this out!! From: <BHA676@aol.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 20:44:20 EDT Ok Ive decided to replace the front end or actually you have no choice = when the tires you bought only 2 months ago are showing wire already. I'm = going with grahite impregrnated polyurethane and want to know about what kind of = lubricant to use in the install to cut the chance of squeaking. Also Ive heard of people cutting grease channels or fittings into them and REALLY = need to know how to do that. I dont want my car constantly squeaking. Im = probably going to put a bigger front sway bar on also. I havent decided on a = company yet but am open to suggestions. My front springs are original and need to be replaced. I would like = to get a 2" drop spring kit. Anyone have any experience using this? I considered drop spindles but they seem expensive. What are the pro and = cons of both methods. Cost is a factor. I want to be as informed as possible before attempting this project so i dont run into many unforseen difficulties. Thanks as always to all the members of this list who have helped me out in = the past without their advice I would probably have given up on trying = many other repairs myself. brad 67 400 convert
(back) Subject: Make Azteks into hearses, only way I ll be in one From: "Gary Patrick" <Gary@tcworks.net> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 20:58:34 -0400 Subject: Rant... From: "Jason Rogers" <jason.rogers@york.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 14:17:03 -0400 Ok, now I am really P.O'ed. For years now there has been discussion on whether to eliminate the Firebird and Camaro. Watching NHRA this past weekend, I really think those bastards are going to do it. If Warren Johnson is testing the new Grand Am, that tells me they are going to can = the Firebird. I don't buy the reason that the Grand Am is more aerodynamic or more stable. Jason, the plans for switching to Grand Ams and Cavilers happened at NHRA long before rumors of the F body demise. Believe it or not Grand Ams and Cavilers are GMs best sellers. GM has no plans for an F body replacement so unless they see a banner year = in sales 2002 will be a "collectors edtion". Speaking of which the 2001 10th anniversary Firehawk will be the last one. Sure to become a collectors item. Now if I just win the lottery I ll add a black one to my other birds. Saw Warren run some pretty good runs at Gatornats in that GA Gary PS I think the AH SH*T (aztek)stinks too.
(back) Subject: water pump plate From: "Craig" <coreman@uniserve.com> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 19:50:57 -0700 OK , i may be wrong about the 1 grommet. I thought tere was one in te 67 and prior.let me check that and get back to you, Craig
(back) Subject: Re: Hot Rod Power Tour From: "Andrew & Kate Panek" <panek@inil.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 21:49:37 -0500 HUBO- LET ME KNOW WHERE YOU ARE PLANNING ON STAYING ONCE IN CHICAGO. WOULD'NT MIND SEEING THE CAR IN PERSON. ANDREW PANEK 69 CONV
(back) Subject: RE: Todays progress again From: "Mace" <macef@optonline.net> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 22:57:08 -0400 Not for nothing but if you are not looking for the OEM look, The = paint looks pretty cool....That is how custom show cars do it. Glad to see I'm not alone. (see link). Man, who ever painted this car the last time painted I mean everything burgandy. I'll fix up the engine compartment with that flat/ satin black while I have everything off. Might as well do the blower motor and heater core while I'm at it... Have fun. Jeff. http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=3D1290580&a=3D9574748&p=3D45648790&Se= quence=3D 0&res=3Dhigh
(back) Subject: Re: dash light question From: <T2AVLIS@aol.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 23:04:00 EDT Please dont go to too much trouble. I could do the same but I was hoping someone would have a dash apart and be able to give me the answer easily. = Of course If you do go under there I will be thankfull. Tony 69 conv
(back) Subject: Re: Ram Air 101 From: "saltydog" <saltyd@home.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 22:10:05 -0500 Just out of curiosity on what others have to say, I believe we have discussed this before and actually you can get more air from the back of = the hood near the windshield because of a low pressure in this area and that right out on the front of the hood is a high pressure area. Does anyone remember something about that? I definately wouldn't argue with the statement that it looks better out there on the front. hehehe. .. That is why the Ram Air setup on the Trans Ams is much better than the ram air hood on the SS. On the SS the air has to turn around and come = back toward the front of the car to enter the maf, whereas on the TA it gets rammed right up the snout (argueably looks better also).
(back) Subject: First Gen Rear Ends From: "Jonathan Black" <jonathan@logicsouth.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 23:25:11 -0400 This weekend I am going to be attending the Charlotte Auto Fair at Lowe's Motor Speedway, which has a massive swap meet. I was planning to keep an eye out on a better rear end for my 68 Bird, which has a 2.56 peg leg. I thought I would keep my eyes open for a posi (safe-t-trac) with a better ratio. Ok for ID'ing the rear. I assume that the rear is different from an = A-body because of suspension. How can I tell a 1st gen from a 2nd gen or a = pickup (is it a different length)? Also, are there any other identifyable = features of a 1st gen rear (I have yet to pull mine and take a look at it = unattached to the car)? I know how to ID the stamp codes on 1st gen pontiac rears, is there a easy link to do the same for the Chevy codes so I can be prepared? I am away from my bird right now, and I was wondering if someone would measure the length of the first gen rear ends for me (and where exactly = your measuring from, with or without the brakes) so I can double check anything = I find up there. Jonathan Black 68 Firebird 400