89 Trans Am

**Viper_ed** · 12-06-2006, 11:22 AM

A GM that I would like to own:

http://racingjunk.com/post/767332/19...al-miles-.html

**9002stang** · 12-06-2006, 01:18 PM

I like that body style. I always wanted the smokey and the bandit T/A. I believe that was a 78-79??

**somethingclever** · 12-06-2006, 01:32 PM

Originally Posted by 9002stang

I like that body style. I always wanted the smokey and the bandit T/A. I believe that was a 78-79??

1977

**madmaxin22** · 12-06-2006, 02:03 PM

i almost bought a wrecked 89 turbo trans am a few years ago at a local salvage auction... i went 2500 and it ended up doing 3k

**Viper_ed** · 12-06-2006, 02:12 PM

They were very impressive cars in 89. Capable of 12's right off the showroom floor. And the fact the have the Grand National motor boast very well for the enourmous amounts of power this car is capable of!

**Pure Stock** · 12-06-2006, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by Viper_ed

They were very impressive cars in 89. Capable of 12's right off the showroom floor. And the fact the have the Grand National motor boast very well for the enourmous amounts of power this car is capable of!

On factory good years????

**Viper_ed** · 12-06-2006, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by Pure Stock

On factory good years????

That's what they clain in every article I have ever seen or read about them. Light years ahead of a Dave Samick Special!

In fact, I think they are still the fastest Trans Am ever produced.

**87notch** · 12-06-2006, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by Viper_ed

They were very impressive cars in 89. Capable of 12's right off the showroom floor. And the fact the have the Grand National motor boast very well for the enourmous amounts of power this car is capable of!

Yes, those cars were incredible.

**Pure Stock** · 12-06-2006, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by Viper_ed

That's what they clain in every article I have ever seen or read about them. Light years ahead of a Dave Samick Special!

The claims are just that, claims. Stock GN's (no tire, no boost increase, no smashing the regulator to increase fuel pressure, no bigger shoes to hold more boost, no nothing) are high 13 to low 14 second machines.

Here is a quote from a turbo regal website.

"Baseline your stock combination at the track if possible. A strong running turbo Regal will run 14.30-14.60 1/4 mile times. Several factors, such as gas quality, weather, traction, and car weight can affect this, but as long as the car is in this range or better, it should be ready for the following Recipe:"

With "basically" the same engine and a curb weight "nearly" identical how in the h$ll is the Turbo T/A going to knock off roughly 1 sec. in the 1/4???

I am sure with some tinkering it would break out of the 13's BUT not factory stock.

**Viper_ed** · 12-06-2006, 02:44 PM

So why is it said they were the fastest Trans Am's ever built? We all know the LS1 cars ran better than mid to high 13's off the showroom floor. I'm sure the Trans Am is WAY more Aerodynamic that the Regal's & GN's.

**Pure Stock** · 12-06-2006, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by Viper_ed

So why is it said they were the fastest Trans Am's ever built? We all know the LS1 cars ran better than mid to high 13's off the showroom floor.

An LS1 would mop up an 89. 12.8's@107-108 BONE stock.

**madmaxin22** · 12-06-2006, 02:56 PM

Everything i have read show the tta's at 13.5 in the 1/4....

**Sonic03snake** · 12-06-2006, 03:03 PM

The Trans Am had different CYL heads if im not mistaken. They were not as good as the GN heads.

**Pure Stock** · 12-06-2006, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by Viper_ed

I'm sure the Trans Am is WAY more Aerodynamic that the Regal's & GN's.

So you are saying in essence that a little less coefficient of drag is going to drop elapsed times damn near a sec.?? That part of Monessen must have that good stuff.

**Viper_ed** · 12-06-2006, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by Pure Stock

That part of Monessen must have that good stuff.

Dude, I think you already smoked up all the good stuff!

BTW, did you ger the PM I sent you about the Parker Racing Intake?

**Stangman701** · 12-06-2006, 03:16 PM

I think I'd rather have a GN. Were any of those turbo GM's from back in the day available in a manual?

**Pure Stock** · 12-06-2006, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by Stangman701

I think I'd rather have a GN. Were any of those turbo GM's from back in the day available in a manual?

A quote from Pontiac Motor Division on the Turbo T/A

"A manual trans prototype was built but wasn't produced for a number of reasons, including cost and reduced performance."

**Rodeheaver's** · 12-06-2006, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by Viper_ed

They were very impressive cars in 89. Capable of 12's right off the showroom floor. And the fact the have the Grand National motor boast very well for the enourmous amounts of power this car is capable of!

don't believe it, my old friend from Pittsburgh has one and he ran it at the track a few times and he has mods, It went 14s all night.10k car...

**03 OW SVT** · 12-06-2006, 05:42 PM

I know that when I had my 87 GN, it ran 14.01 in the 1/4 with just a couple of minor mods. I know if I would have had drag radials it would have probably run high 13's. I could kick myself for getting rid of that car. The next time I get one it will have an X on it...As in GNX.