|
|
|
|
|
Go back and vote on this image.
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=2813 |
|
| Comments: 16 (Read/Post) Favorites: 1 (View) |
Submitted
on: 03-31-2002
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Car |
|
|
Description:
Ultra-rare car, a 68' Firebird 4-speed convertable with overhead cam! |
Showing page: 1 of 1
[ 1 ]
 |
| #2 |
4-10-2002 @ 03:28:56 AM |
| Posted By : 500plus |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Pontiac had a 250" inline 6 cylinder based on the old Chevy 250" six, but it had an O.H.C. cylinder head with a Quadrajet, 9:1 compression, dual exhaust and a forged steel crank. They made about 230 horsepower. It was optional only on the Firebird and I think only in '67 and '68. A friend of mine had one of these engines. The head was a nice piece of work. It was a crossflow design as opposed to the standard 6 cyl head. This in addition to it being OHC made for a very nice engine. They are indeed very rare.
[Edited by 500plus on 4-10-2002 @ 03:30:20 AM]
|
|
| #3 |
5-06-2002 @ 06:38:07 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Yeah, they were nice engines, but most Firebird buyers at thet time preffered the big blocks and other 8cyl offerings, hence thier rarity
|
|
| #4 |
5-06-2002 @ 06:41:26 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Awesome car, but am I the only one who thinks the grilles on '67-'68 Firebirds didn't quite look right?
|
|
| #5 |
5-06-2002 @ 06:42:51 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
That's my favorite Firebird back there along the curb, 77 or 78 TA, very nice........
|
|
| #6 |
5-06-2002 @ 06:48:34 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
2nd gen Firebirds were cool, and had plenty of potential (changing the exhaust alone yielded impressive performance). I don't care for the '79-'81 models, though. They looked kinda funny.
|
|
| #7 |
5-06-2002 @ 06:50:34 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
THe 77's and up need work to coax power out of them, I've got a 77' Formula with a 400 olds engine, but it's been decompressed from the factory, only running 7.6:1, for fuel economy, at 3500RPM, it's lucky to hit 190HP stock, plus, they only put one catalytic converter on them, so the dual headers were forced into a Y pipe, and then split back after the cat, talk about a performance choker!
|
|
| #8 |
5-06-2002 @ 06:52:37 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Well, I was specifically thinking of Trans Ams, I should have specified. They used a 220 horse 400 (until the early '80s, when they started using those bastard 301 turbos).
|
|
| #9 |
5-06-2002 @ 06:53:51 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
You're still right though, they lacked power stock, but had potental in the hands of a competent mechanic, damn those federal regulations! Big blocks were last offered for the 79' model year, and the infamous 301 turbo was good for a boat anchor and little else
[Edited by Low-Tech Redneck on 5-06-2002 @ 06:56:42 PM]
|
|
| #10 |
5-26-2002 @ 12:58:26 AM |
| Posted By : 500plus |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I remember those 301 boat anchors. When they were new I beat one. From a 30 mph roll with a stock, worn out 283 powerglde in '67 Impala. now lets see, he had less weight, a slightly bigger motor, 4 barrel, dual exhaust (sorta) and turbo charger. and he couldn't beat my tired old 283 that had almost 200,000 miles on it! What pos!
|
|
| #11 |
7-21-2002 @ 11:04:00 AM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
ENOUGH ABOUT CYBER!!!! It's driving you all insane! Now then, please be soothed by this pic of a real car.........
|
|
| #13 |
7-21-2002 @ 11:05:06 AM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Oooh, and there's another in the background!
|
Showing page: 1 of 1
[ 1 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
