[T.O.Dillinder]

This should be fun.
Your opinions on the pros and cons between the 3rd and 4th gen F-bodies.
These are my opinions, and I could be way off with a couple of items.

Engines:
4th gen wins this one. Racing groups keep forgetting that the LT1 350's were a option in the later 3rd gen years, but keep forcing the 305s of being the only option for racing.
The 4th gens have the 350s as the only V-8 option.

Transmissions:
5-speeds; Tremec and the World class T-5's help make it a 3rd gen pro.
Dependable enough, weighs less, and since when do you need 6 speeds for road racing.
The only time I have actually shifted into fifth is at Road America running a 3.73 gear ratio.

6-speeds; weigh more, more dependable than regular BW 5 spd.


Front Suspension:
4th gen hands down.

Rear Suspension:
Tie, they are the same for both generations.
I do use the 4th gen Koni Yellow rear on my 83 Z-28 because I do not have to remove the rear shock to adjust it.

Overall Weight:
In stock trim I know for sure the 3rd gen has the advantage. I have not seen actual weights for stripped down 4th gens so it may be close.

Brakes:
Out of the box I would give the 4th gens the advantage.

Parts Availability:
4th gen. They are everywhere.
Aftermarket parts were really not available for the 3rd gens compared to 1st and 2nd gen cars. It just seems the Aftermarket Companies really never worked hard for the 3rd gens.
The 3rd gens are still competing in large numbers and you have to look hard for performance parts. If I had the money......

Ease of maintenance:
I give the pro to the 3rd gens.
The 4th gen engine compartment is a pain, and the dash is as big as a pain.

Overall Looks:
The 3rd gen looks sleek and fast.
The 4th gen looks like a beast and would grab the competiition and beat or eat it.
My favorite 4th gen commercial was the Pontiac Ram Air Trans-Am.
Pulls up behind a Ferrari, revs and swallows the Ferrari and sends it out through its tail pipes. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/lmao.gif)
I love the looks of the 2000- 2002 RA TA's. They are just plain mean lookin'.

Interior:
Pro to 4th gen. The interior just seemed more refined compared to the 3rd gen.

Your turn.

This post has been edited by T.O.Dillinder: Dec 6 2007, 05:40 PM

[Shortcutsleeping]

Front Suspension:
4th gen hands down.

Say what?

Wins how? What are the parameters for claiming victory?



Costas
cars and such...

[T.O.Dillinder]

Front Suspension:
4th gen hands down.

Say what?

Wins how? What are the parameters for claiming victory?

I just feel the upper and lower control arm design is better than a MacPherson Strut front end.
Easier to make suspension adjustments.
Plus being The later model years, the 4th Gen has a load of aftermarket parts.

I have wondered at times if the MacPherson Strut design and also the beginning of the electronic fuel injection systems kept Aftermarket Manufacturers at a distance from the 3rd Gens when they were new.

The original post is intended to get your personal opinions about the two generations. I am not trying to start any sort of arguement. It is more about finding nuances between the two.
I have test drove the 4th gens, but I have not had the oppurtunity to work extensively on one. I know from watching a couple of aquaintcences with theirs', the Windshield coming over the engine compartment makes working on one a pain when working in that area.

[Shortcutsleeping]

I just feel the upper and lower control arm design is better than a MacPherson Strut front end.

What car won the CMC title again?

From a purely theoretical point of view, an SLA is better if it is designed that way in the first place. You are trying to compare an already built SLA that has some shortcoming to a strut that also has shortcomings. While I'll never argue an LS1 wins vs my 305tpi, I feel you've got the front suspension one wrong.

Easier to make suspension adjustments.

Tell you what, you change camber on a 4th gen and I'll change camber on a 3rd gen and let's see who has time to go get a track burger. I won't even need to reset the toe when I'm done.

Plus being The later model years, the 4th Gen has a load of aftermarket parts.

Because it NEEDS a load of parts to get decent settings (good neg camber). Thirds can typically get -2.0 stock and with camber plates you can get anything you need. And its all up top and easy to get to and adjust. On the '89 ASedan I built and crewed I (1993 here...) had scribed lines on the towers for various camber settings. It took me, at best, 4 minutes to change camber on both sides of that car. No time re-setting toe either.

The original post is intended to get your personal opinions about the two generations. I am not trying to start any sort of arguement. It is more about finding nuances between the two.

Well, nuances are typically, at least in part, based on fact. You are saying that the 4th is easier to make suspension adjustments on, but unless you have done it on both (I have...too many times to count, as I'm sure many on this board have also) then you are just guessing. Why not just put that you are guessing on that topic and ask for feedback?

The motor stuff is simple (ls1), the trans stuff is simple (big power? t56. Lower power and need light weight? t5). I've put a DA system on several fast 4th gens and have never seen initial turn in rates (in deg/sec) that will match a 3rd gen. <shrug>

As far as bearings/rotors, the 4th wins when it is time to swap rotors, but for bearings I've yet to have to replace mine in a 3rd. Good bearings, packed well and adjusted correctly will give a LOT of use (track and hard street is what mine sees).

I'm with Kevin. 4ths always feel heavy (except Scratcher...and that doesn't count) to me and much less nimble. Back to back at similar levels of prep at an AX I've always done better in a 3rd. Road course is pure 4th just for the power aspect. Unless it is equalized then see 'CMC'.

Now looks IS a subjective thing. Late 3rd gens win that one easily. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)


Costas
cars and such...

[marka]

Howdy,

Tell you what, you change camber on a 4th gen and I'll change camber on a 3rd gen and let's see who has time to go get a track burger. I won't even need to reset the toe when I'm done.

Thirds can typically get -2.0 stock and with camber plates you can get anything you need. And its all up top and easy to get to and adjust. On the '89 ASedan I built and crewed I (1993 here...) had scribed lines on the towers for various camber settings. It took me, at best, 4 minutes to change camber on both sides of that car. No time re-setting toe either.

Huh? I've not done this on a 3rd gen, but on every single other strut car I've ever worked on changing camber via cc plates certainly affected the toe...

I used to use that in fact on our old E36 bmw (front steer) so that when I knocked the camber in at an event I'd get some toe out for free.

Certainly a strut car w/cc plates is easier to adjust static camber/caster than most anything else. I don't know that I'd call that superior though...

Mark