Go to car


Latest Comments
Car: 91935   By: DiRF   Comment: "I actually kinda liked these when they came out, b..."
Car: 85938   By: DiRF   Comment: "Normally I can find aspects of a squarish, blocky ..."
Car: 96594   By: Skid   Comment: "If I could have any 911, it would be the short-nos..."
Car: 44941   By: DiRF   Comment: "So, North Wilkesboro has been refurbished, and ret..."
Car: 96905   By: Adambomb   Comment: "This things been sitting at an oil change place ne..."
See last 25 comments
 Go to

Next picture
Ricecop Home
Linkage
Plates
Bling Bling
Photo
Free Post

 Top 10

Top 10 Ricers
Top 10 Non-Ricers
Top 10 Other Good
Top 10 Other Bad

 New & Retired

Newest Images
Retired Images

 Other

Submit a picture
Profile Lookup
FAQ
Site Log
Leader Board
Site Stats

 Online Now

1 Ricecops
1 Guests

Detailed List

 Login

Username:

Password:


Remember Login?

Sign up!
Why sign up?
Forgot my password


View this image at full size
Click here to let us know if the image above is broken.


Go back and vote on this image.

Picture Information
URL: http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=96159
Submitted by: Adambomb
Comments: 7  (Read/Post)     Favorites: 0  (View)
Submitted on: 05-23-2017
View Stats Category: Car
Description:
Pontiac Trans Am


   Comments

Showing page: 1 of 1
[
1 ]

#1
5-25-2017 @ 02:44:59 AM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
I don't know what it is, but as time goes on, I hate the 79 - 82 styling more and more. And this is probably the most unflattering angle that proves what a mess the front fascia is compared to 78.

#2
5-25-2017 @ 04:08:05 PM
Posted By : Obsidian Reply | Edit | Del
#1, You're not alone. I've always hated this fascia. The emblem is given too much prominence - and the now separated halogens look like shit. I know the halogen is virtually identical to any of the millions of GM vehicles that have had them in their 30-50 year run - but every time I see these late 2nd gen TA - I think of an old Chev20 Van from years ago when I was a child. Up close - the van headlights looked cheap - ill-fitting - and built to a price. I get the exact same impression looking at the above TA.

#3
5-25-2017 @ 06:34:10 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
Not only is it horrendous, but it immediately followed one of the BEST looking fascias of the era...

#4
5-25-2017 @ 09:10:50 PM
Posted By : wannabemustangjockey  Reply | Edit | Del
That's kind of how I feel about the 2nd gen Firebird in general.
70-73, love. 74-76.... no. 77-78, love. 79-81.... no.


#5
5-26-2017 @ 03:20:23 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
Apparently James Garner agreed. Even though Jim Rockford had gotten a new Firebird every year since 1974, he stopped updating the model years after 1978 because he hated the look of the 1979s so much. And the performance....the cars used from season 2 onward were Formula 400s redressed to look like Esprits, and the Formulas in California weren't available with anything better than the Oldsmobile 403 starting in 1979. The show ran until 1980, and even in the reunion movies in the '90s he was still driving a '78 Firebird.

#4, My favorites are the 1974-1976s. There, I said it.


#6
5-26-2017 @ 05:37:43 PM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
Funnily enough, 79' was the best year for the 2nd gets, saleswise.

Adding to the reasons to hate them, three words: Turbo 301 Pontiac


#7
5-26-2017 @ 05:55:15 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
#5, To be fair, I love EVERY year of Firebird and Trans Am, except for the '79-'81...

Showing page: 1 of 1
[
1 ]


Login to leave a comment

Classifieds 
Click here to post your own classified ad






Want to send some feedback? Click here.

Server time: Thursday, March 28, 2024 07:36:18 PM

All pictures on this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright © 2000 - 2024 Ricecop. All rights reserved.