Why don't we (or I) call Jim Mattison or Scott Tiemann and ask them their definitive answer on this matter?

Not picking sides, but this issue, matter, debacle or whatever anyone wants to call it is self destructive and pointless without solid proofs.

Other than that, this is pure opinion, speculation, hearsay and conjecture based on Canadian PHS, copied PHS and nothing of first hand nomenclature of ownership of a personal vehicle and progressed digging from a first hand owner of one or either a 69 HO or "RAIII" car.

I personally, and from years of seeing inspecting and potentially purchasing the rarer Firebirds can not say what is what. GM did seperate the GTO and Firebird billing within the Pontiac division billing codes, that I know for certain. GM also had errors from one plant to the other, that is also a known fact. So from Norwood to Van Nuys to Lordstown, there may have and likely most certainly have been oversights in billing codes and how the billing history was ascertained. Remember this was the 60's. Auto makers were rushing to compete and market. So what happened on GTO billing did not necessarily pertain to Firebird. As well GM did not recognize the RAIII as a "performance option" rather a differentation between the HO and "RAIII" by an RPO code which was the RA pans only. Part of this, if I remember correctly was from a conversation between Jim Mattison and I over an 8 hour period where I spent uninterupted time with him on a Sunday past at the Autorama.

So..since GM officially did not truly recognize the RAIII as an option per se for Firebird, GM did in fact take the HO and turn it into a "RAIII" by designation of the open air inlets and pans. There was some confusion regarding the designations of RA between the Firebird and GTO on billing...Take it FWIW. All a RAIII is is an HO with open air inlets and a supposed added RPO. I have not studied any of the billing histories, but one thing is likely certain. A "R/A" car can not be ordered without a 3.90 or 4.33 rear. I believe my 68 HO could not be ordered with a 3.90 or 4.33 rear based on the billing. If I remember correctly, a "R/A" could only be ordered with a close ratio and a numerically higher 3.55 to 4.33 rear. I may be wrong, but I do not have, nor do not want to go through 10 volumes of published reference material to prove or refute. So...with this, true "R/A" cars should (SHOULD) have the "can only be ordered with RPO code...options (rear end and trans) So...If they are true "R/A" cars, they should ALSO have the R/A mandated rear ratios and trans (close ratio)<speculation. So..the body brodcast sheet AND the billing history is needed to make an assertion of a claimed printed copy of A "R/A" car in my opinion. One must be able to tell what axle ratio came in a "R/A. I see the Commanche Firebird having RPO code 358 Close ratio trans, RPO 361/362 special order axle/posi and 348 R/A. Unless the Hydramatics have the PQ designation, it is an HO. Maybe someone can decipher a 69 order sheet and compare it to the ones posted here as I AM NOT a 69 expert and never owned one. But from looking at the other two, I see NOTHING other than a "R/A Firebird" on the billing history..no Special axle, no Close ratio trans..So to me those cars, other than the Commanche IS NOT a R/A 69 Firebird. Then anyone can argue "why is there no 611 RPO on that Commanche?" Well???

Not to single anyone out, but I find this, well, odd.



Ram Air IS NOT just an engine option, it is a package WITH the addition of a functional "RAM AIR" hood. Other than that it is an HO, plain and simple. Why else would it be called "RAM AIR" without the functional hood, scoops and pans? It would be then called an HO, wouldn't it? My WQ 68 is the same motor as the 69 WQ isn't it? same cam, long branches, head flow, valve size, minus open scoops and pans. I have a 68 HO/RA 68 Firebird then, minus the hood pans and scoops but I do not have the mandated axle and trans.

The rarest Ram Air cars...The 65 built in 67 had no numerical designation (L67 RPO) 68 had the RAI and RAII and 69 had the RAIV. All had the ram air pans WITHOUT exception. According to the above captioned statement, I am to believe that some of these cars DID NOT have a functional Ram Air hood with pans and open air inlets? Thats how I read the comment. So a RA II or RA IV without a functional hood is called WHAT? I just don't get it.

Personally, I find this all amusing with someone stating they seen Elvis at a diner outside Rolla Missouri and someone with common knowledge that he (Elvis) is in fact dead and has left the building.

Other than that, arguing a point based on copies and little if no first hand knowledge is tantamount to a stalemate. Logic defies reason ONLY if no descrepancies between the other plants which manufactured the Firebird exists.

I am CERTAIN to get some blah blah blah about this, but unless someone has indesputable written documentation stating there were absolutely NO misprints, differentation or "slight of hand" differences between the plants, I will dismiss any "conjecture or speculation" as opinion. We should also be prepared to read more speculation and mottled haze about supposed conjecture and refutation in order to save face and stature of third hand information twice removed by someones friends third cousin's babysitter.