Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can't be as bad as 99% of the import crowd who go out to Pep Boys and put one of those 4 foot tall aluminum wings on the rear thinking it's some sort of performance mod.
Most cars like the Aztek or the Grand AM I concur could and probably should be dismissed. But the Trans AM.....IMO was the last real hurrah for Pontiac.
The GTO wasn't bad but it wasn't sporty and it desecrated a legend's name. It also didn't sell well.
I think Pontiac lost their edge years ago though. The 1973 Trans AM is considered the last true muscle car, though the 1989 Turbo trans AM was also a glimmering light for Pontiac, thanks from help from Buick. That glimmer returned again for 1998-2002.
I'd say the glimmer returned in 1993 when the Trans Ams and Formula Firebirds started spitting out 275HP. That was a huge leap from the previous generation and it was GM's proclamation that they finally figured out how to make big horsepower economically in the age of tight fuel economy and emissions standards. They had made some progress on that front before, but that was the year that everyone knew GM was back on top of the horsepower war.
If you call Pontiac "style", well, then thats your prerogative. And kicking out "stylish" cars like the ragingly cool Montana, laughable Sunfire, gawdy Firebird, yawnable G6, grotesque Aztek, etc, just wasnt "cool" OR "stylish", IMO. Ever heard the phrase "all bark and no bite"? That summed up Pontiac pretty well.
Don't get me wrong, those vehicles were ugly. But the T/A, and last Grand Am were the best looking cars by anyone inthe mass produced market. The replacement g whatever of the Grand Am is just another buttugly vehicle like EVERYTHING else in that market. Ad the replacement of the Grand Prix is another someone should be fired design. BUT design in the entire industry is terrible with few exceptions, like the Challenger, Mustang, Corvette, and the new 09 Dodge Trucks.
My age shows, there was a time folks, when a Pontiac GTO or Trans Am RULED (circa '69). I had both in my youth and regret that future generations will not know the pure fun factor of those cars. It is indeed a sad day to see the brand pass into history.
I'd say the glimmer returned in 1993 when the Trans Ams and Formula Firebirds started spitting out 275HP. That was a huge leap from the previous generation and it was GM's proclamation that they finally figured out how to make big horsepower economically in the age of tight fuel economy and emissions standards. They had made some progress on that front before, but that was the year that everyone knew GM was back on top of the horsepower war.
So what is your take on the 1989 Turbo Trans AM? It wasn't a V8 but it was definitley a wake up for Pontiac. That car I believe ran 13.4 seconds in the 1/4 mile bone stock. That was really humping for '89. I don't think even the Vettes of '89 had that much power.
So what is your take on the 1989 Turbo Trans AM? It wasn't a V8 but it was definitley a wake up for Pontiac. That car I believe ran 13.4 seconds in the 1/4 mile bone stock. That was really humping for '89. I don't think even the Vettes of '89 had that much power.
Well, notice that part of the equation I mentioned was "economical." The high-horsepower 3.8 turbo engine was an expensive little beast, thanks in some measure to use of a ceramic turbocharger. The GNXs and the TTAs weren't cheap. The GNX package was an $11,000 option over the standard T-Type. That was a lot of scratch back in 1987-- more than some whole cars cost. Adjusted for inflation, the MSRP of the GNX and TTA was above today's equivalent of $50,000.
Well, notice that part of the equation I mentioned was "economical." The high-horsepower 3.8 turbo engine was an expensive little beast, thanks in some measure to use of a ceramic turbocharger. The GNXs and the TTAs weren't cheap. The GNX package was an $11,000 option over the standard T-Type. That was a lot of scratch back in 1987-- more than some whole cars cost. Adjusted for inflation, the MSRP of the GNX and TTA was above today's equivalent of $50,000.
Just as you state, the little turbo'ed engine was expensive. That just backs up the statement that there is no such thing as a subsitute for cubic inches!!! And a big engine will always be cheaper gettig it done performance wise.
So what is your take on the 1989 Turbo Trans AM? It wasn't a V8 but it was definitley a wake up for Pontiac. That car I believe ran 13.4 seconds in the 1/4 mile bone stock. That was really humping for '89. I don't think even the Vettes of '89 had that much power.
Just as you state, the little turbo'ed engine was expensive. That just backs up the statement that there is no such thing as a subsitute for cubic inches!!! And a big engine will always be cheaper gettig it done performance wise.
There's no such thing as too many cubic inches when power is the name of the game!
That's why my twin turbo engine is starting at 517 c.i.d. !
That's great. It's good to see that there are people out there who still believe in cubic inches. I was born and raised on cubic inches and my opinion hasn't changed when it comes to building performance engines.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.