[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

[trackbird]

I ran (and am currently running) the Moog Problem Solver idler arm. I've not had any issues with either of the ones I've used (two different cars). Your results may vary.

[T.O.Dillinder]

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.

My 83 has Camber Plates.
I worked with SLA's on three GT-1 cars, two super late models (short track) and a couple of older Monte Carlos in Street Stock for short track racing. With a SLA you can adjust Camber, Toe, and Caster.
Caster can effect how the car reacts during braking.
With my limited experience with strut set ups, you have Camber and Toe adjustments, correct?
My 83 Camaro is set up at - 2.0 Camber and 1/16" toe out. A friend of mine that has raced 3rd gens in MWC and NASA for six years now suggested that I can go 1/8" toe out for a tighter turn road coarse.
Yes losening 2 bolts is quicker than four.

[slowTA]

In my eyes the perfect combination would be 4th gen power and wheel fitment, in the lighter 3rd gen frame that sports a rack and pinion. I think the 4th gen suspension is pickier to maintain (have to try a few different camber bushings to find one that lasts) and the bearings have been talked about already.

The few things I don' t like about my thirdgen are the lack of affordable large rims, the narrow transmission tunnel that wont accept the Unbalanced Engineering Torque Arm, recirculating ball steering, the fact that the computer and harness are getting old and frail, and that mine has a 9 bolt instead of a 10 bolt. I think the struts cost more than 4th gen front shocks.

My 350 TPI and T5 combo has held up well together. The engine has Dart Iron Eagle heads with a Comp Extreme energy cam (just about .500 lift) with 4,000 miles one it, the T5 is stock with almost 100,000 miles. The tires break loose before any damage is done to the T5.

One thing I specifically don't like about 4th gens (that hasn't been listed yet) is the huge dash board that is hard to see over.

[firehawkclone]

One more thing......PCM's

4th gen is much easier to reprogram.

[prockbp]

well, I am simply faster on the autocross course in my 3d gen than i was in my 4th gen..

Both cars had similar investments: Dampers (Koni SA's both cars), Wheels/tires (17x11 CCW with 315s on 4th gen and 16x10 CCW with 265s on 3d gen, Victoracers on both), Rod-End Panhard Bar, Max Camber (-1.7 on 4th, and -2.5 on 3d), Hawk Brake Pads

My 4th gen had extra investments: Rod-end Control Arms, G2 Springs to max out camber, G2 Torque Arm


The 3d gen was simply faster- by a lot... not a real technical post, but I spent significantly less money on the 3d gen and I was faster- that's the nuance that i like (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)


the thing I miss most about my 4th gen is 'brake-pedal-stabbing-ability'... not that stabbing the brake pedal is a fast way to drive, i just have a tendency to miss braking zones

i will also add that going over 110mph in my IROC scares the shit outta me... while i felt confident enough to take the 4th gen up to 150mph....

This post has been edited by prockbp: Dec 7 2007, 01:06 AM

[jeffburch]

Wow.
Alot of comments to ponder here I'll tell ya.

The only thing I can add is; it's a good idea to load the front wheels when any measuring is happening.
I will run a long cheapo cinch strap thru the wheels and anchor them aft.
Not alot of tension but some.

jb

[trackbird]

i will also add that going over 110mph in my IROC scares the shit outta me... while i felt confident enough to take the 4th gen up to 150mph....

I've felt comfortable at well over 110 (and faster than your 4th gen speed as well) in my 3rd gen. It's as stable as anything I've driven.

[V6RSR]

i will also add that going over 110mph in my IROC scares the shit outta me... while i felt confident enough to take the 4th gen up to 150mph....

I've felt comfortable at well over 110 (and faster than your 4th gen speed as well) in my 3rd gen. It's as stable as anything I've driven.

Agreed, I could never get my 3rd gen fast enough to be close to scary. Down hill with the wind behind it I has done 138 mph- but is stability is far from an issue. my car is far from stock though except for the tire width. Matter of fact there is not a stock part left under the car.

[z28evans]

Sounds like adding a ls1 / t56 & rearend to a 3rd gen is the perfect way to go (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)

*Hated working on my 4th gen, always felt bloated. Stock 3rd gen got beat by my wife's Grand Prix GTP

Plus, it's proven that 3rd gens look better (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[dailydriver]

Sounds like adding a ls1 / t56 & rearend to a 3rd gen is the perfect way to go (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)

Would they allow this hybrid/conversion in CMC 2??

A fully dry sumped, modded LS7/worked T56 would be cool in a clean, gutted, late model 3rd gen (rules notwithstanding of course).

[StanIROCZ]

Sounds like adding a ls1 / t56 & rearend to a 3rd gen is the perfect way to go (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)
Plus, it's proven that 3rd gens look better (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Jackpot (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)

[nape]

Less bench racing, more wrenching. Forget about aftermarket parts, get that CMC car on the track. The more of the season it spends in the garage vs. at an event, the slower you'll be (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[T.O.Dillinder]

Less bench racing, more wrenching. Forget about aftermarket parts, get that CMC car on the track. The more of the season it spends in the garage vs. at an event, the slower you'll be (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I'm gett'n there, I'm gett'n there! Jeez be patient will ya.LOL!!!
I should be done with the wiring this weekend, if not Monday night.
A big THANKS goes to Bob Denton.
Machine shops sure have gotten expensive since the last time I needed one.

[Sam Strano]

I believe that the question of which is better depends on what you are doing with the car, what the rules are (if any), what the costs are to do what you want.

3rd gen's can be lighter, but not a lot. My '91 1LE was only about 20 pounds less than my 2001. They are more flimsy, and have crappy steering setups and a front suspension that hates bumps. They have less power, but are easier to work on. They are easier to see out of too.

4th gens have better steering. Front end works bumps much better, but has the stupid "caster" bushing. Obviously a power advantage, as well as stonger manual gearboxes. Piss-poor hubs.

Back in 2003, I had to decide whether or not to finish building my '91 for ESP, or do my '01. I chose the later because of the power and gearing, I would have had to spend a LOT of money to get the power near LS1 levels, and always be stuck with some pretty short gearing. Now, that's ESP where you can't slap a built engine in a 3rd gen. Pick some other use, your car choice might change.

[wannafbody]

Which gen makes the best autocross or track car? Why?

[BumpaD_Z28]

WOW ! Can of worms question here ...

But for me 3rd gen (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

~DaVe

[firehawkclone]

Some think the best AI car would be a LS1 3rd gen!

[axoid]

1LE 3rd gen.

[trackbird]

I sold my 2002 Camaro and bought a 1992 Z-28.

For autocross, the 4th gen cars have wheel wells that will swallow 17x11" wheels and tires. The 3rd gen will really only (easily) fit 275 series tires on a 17x9.5 wheel. I know Axoid has 17x11's on the rear of his 3rd gen...

For road racing, I don't think the 315 series tires and 17x11's are as much of an advantage. The 3rd gen is narrower, typically lighter and has no ABS, and therefore no ABS problems (or "no ABS to have to remove if your racing class doesn't allow it). The 3rd gen is easier to work on (under the hood) and small block Chevy parts are really quite inexpensive. And, the 3rd gen is much easier to see out of and you can tell where the corners of the car are located. On the other hand, the LSx engine has much more potential, and far more potential with better heads, etc. It will cost you more for LSx parts, but you'll build big power more easily with that engine. The 4th gen does have a better front suspension (geometry wise), but the castor bushing is a bit of an issue with that design. And, if you use enough sway bar/spring rate/roll stiffness in a 3rd gen, the front suspension on those cars can be made to work very well (in spite of the design differences).

If you stick and LSx in a 3rd gen... That could be the right answer.

Just my thoughts, others may not agree.

[CMC #37]

I would agree! I think for RR on big speed tracks the 4th gen I like better. For tighter tracks and autox I like the third gen better.