Most people who know about Firebirds and Trans Ams specifically know about the last Trans-Am that came with a Pontiac 400 V8 and that this engine came only with a four speed manual transmission. These two things make a 1979 Trans-Am equipped with this combo especially desirable. The next year – 1980 – the only Pontiac engine still available in a Trans-Am was the 301, which came only with an automatic transmission. Little known outside the small circle of serious Pontiac freaks is that the prior year – in ’79 – you could have bought a Trans-Am with the 301 and with the same manual transmission that was paired exclusively with the 400 V8. It was the only year that Pontiac permitted buyers to choose the 301 and pair it with the Borg Warner Super T-10 manual four speed.
This combo is thus very rare.
A total of just 3,120 ’79 Trans-Ams were made with the 301/four-speed combo; 1,590 hardtop coupes and 1,530 with T-Tops. The ’79 TA with the 400/four speed combo is considered to be pretty rare by most people – and it is – relatively speaking. Pontiac sold a total ofĀ 117,108 Trans-Ams in ’79 – a record year. Of that total, 8,202 were ordered with the 400/four speed. But they are almost common – relative to the much smaller number of ’79 Trans-Ams that were sold with the 301/four speed combo. In fact, T-Top equipped ’79 TAs with the 301/four speed are more exclusiveĀ – in terms of rarity – than 10th Anniversary ’79 Trans-Ams ordered with the 400/four speed. These latter cars are considered by most Pontiac people to be among the most desirable/collectible (and so, valuable) Trans-Ams made over the course of the second generation (1970-81) model run, right up there with the first (1969) Trans Am, the ’70 RA III Trans-Am, the ’71-’72 455 HO Trans Am and the ’73-’74 SD 455 Trans Am.
’79 10th Anniversary cars with thr 400/four speed in nice shape today are worth $50k on the low end; show quality examples go for much more.
So why has the ’79 301/four speed TA been all-but-forgotten? Why did so few sell, back in the day? After all a four speed TA (any four speed TA) is the duck’s guts. A TA with a manual is worth at least 20 percent more today than an otherwise identical TA with an automatic.
Well, here’s why.
In ’79, not only was the very desirable 400 Pontiac available, the Oldsmobile 403 was standard. The Olds 403 was not available with a manual transmission but it did come standard with “6.6 liter” callouts on the shaker scoop, reflecting its displacement. It was the same displacement as the “T/A 6.6 liter” 400. That came across as more stout than the “4.9 liter” callouts you got if you chose the little 301. It was also more stout in fact. The Olds 403 gets snickered at by some but it touted 185 horsepower which – while not as stout as the 400’s 220 horsepower – was still respectable for 1979. The 403’s rated output was only 5 horsepower down from the 190 horsepower Chevy claimed for the same-year Camaro Z28’s 5.7 liter (350 cubic inch) V8. More important, it was 35 horsepower stronger than the little 301, which carried a 150 hp rating. This latter made the ’79 TA with the 301 the weakest Trans-Am made during the second generation model run.
No doubt that’s why Pontiac offered the 301 as a credit option; you paid less to get a 301 TA than it cost to buy a TA with the 403 Olds. The dealer would lop $195 off the car’s price. Basically, the 301 – with the four speed – was a kind of consolation prize for the buyer who wanted a manual transmission-equipped TA but didn’t order in time to get it with the 400 – which was in limited supply in ’79 because Pontiac had actually stopped making them in 1978. There was a small stockpiled inventory of 400s left over from 1978 that were sold in ’79 (only with the four speed manual) and people knew about it; more exactly, they knew it was the last call. This created a bum’s rush of demand for the 400/four speed combo that quickly sold out the supply. Pontiac subbed in the 301 – with the four speed – so that buyers who wanted a four speed could still get that, at least.
They also got something more.
While the 301 was small – relative to the 400 – it was still a real Pontiac engine, which the Olds 403 wasn’t. It was also the last Pontiac V8 engine. After 1981, no Trans-Am ever again came with a Pontiac engine – though the all-new (third generation) ’82 Trans-Am was initially supposed to get the turbocharged version of the 301 that was available in the 1980 and 1981 Trans-Am. The ’82 TA carried over the ’80-’81 Turbo 301 TA’s off-center hood bulge but underneath the hood was the same 5.0 liter (305 cubic inch) Chevy-made V8 as in the same-year Camaro Z28.
It’s a sad story for another time but the gist of it is that GM management decided to kill off Pontiac’s V8 engine-building and “corporatize” the engines used in the various different GM brands. Meaning, make them all the same. Which is probably why there is no Pontiac – or Oldsmobile – today. Why buy the same thing wrapped in another label?
The 301 was an odd duck, too. Though a true Pontiac V8, it shared almost no parts with other Pontiac V8s – which made it harder to hop up, both back then and today. But it never got the chance to mature (as Buick’s 3.8 liter V6 got the chance to mature). Had it not been cancelled by GM corporate – had the engineers been allowed a few years to work it up – it might have been as or even more formidable than the last 400 by the mid-late 1980s. Sadly, it never got the chance.Ā 
So the little 301 got lost in the luminescent glory of the last big Pontiac V8 and has since been largely forgotten because so few were made and that was almost 50 years ago. Probably only a small handful of the ones that were made still exist today – which ought to make them desirable, if only on account of being different from the TAs one usually finds at old car shows. Almost all – usually all – will have either a 400 or a 455 or a 403 Olds. Or the 301 Turbo – which came only with an automatic.
When was the last time you can recall seeing one with the 301 and a four speed? Have you ever seen one?
These may not be powerful Trans-Ams. But they are Pontiac Trans-Ams and that plus a manual transmission makes them special. Also affordable – relative to a TA with a 400 or 455 and a four speed. They’re not the quickest things on on the block, of course. But – by today’s standards – neither is a ’73 SD-455 four speed TA, which is only just barely quicker than the 2026 Honda Pilot – a family crossover with a V6 – I just finished reviewing.
But which would you rather have in the garage?
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.Ā
WeĀ depend onĀ youĀ to keep the wheels turning!Ā
Our donate button isĀ here.Ā
Ā If you prefer not to useĀ PayPal, our mailingĀ address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $25 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coasterĀ – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
If you’d like a Baaaaa hat or other EPautos gear, see here!
0-60 time are meaningless. It’s all about how it ”feels’. And that is subjective. But I do know this… silence feels like… silence. The NA Miata was slow and did not make much noise, but good lord it was fun to drive!! A car that is a ‘handful’ to drive… is wonderful? Because as the ‘driver’ you have to handle that wonderful handful! š Give me a POS handful over a computerized appliance any day! Because I want to DRIVE!!!
At the end of the day it is all about character. How many modern cars have any character?
Amen, Kong!
Even something like my ’02 Nissan pickup has some fun-to-drive to it because it has a manual transmission. A new truck with a turbo’d four blows my truck away, 0-60. But my truck is still more fun to drive because I get to drive it.
[…] https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2026/07/06/the-forgotten-trans-am-2/ […]
When I was in the service, a buddy of mine had a brand new 1979 Trans Am. Was a high school graduation present (his parents were loaded). Beautiful car, even luxurious when compared to my own 1967 Firebird. It had the 403 Olds engine. Being somewhat mechanically inclined, I helped him with a few mods. Installed headers and true dual exhausts, deleted the cats and made the shaker hood functional. Really woke it up!
Thanks for the memories.
Let’s have a drag race!
2026 Ford Explorer ST SUV beats 1979 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 400 by 4 seconds
Firebird owner is wearing a mask to hide his or her identity
1979 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
Manual 4āspeed (RWD):
1/4 mile estimated 17.8 seconds at 90ā95 mph
Ford Explorer ST: Hits the quarter-mile mark in 13.8 seconds at 101 mph.
The 2024 Toyota Camry XSE V6 Auto (GS) quarter-mile in 14.95 seconds at 99.8 mph
The Tesla Model 3 Standard Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) completes the 1/4-mile drag sprint in approximately 14.1 seconds at 102 mph
Off topic, but OK… That 2026 Ford ST Appliance costs about $55,000. I have about $20,000 in my 1979 Firebird and it would smoke that shit SUV and look good doing it. To make it fair, imagine what could be done if I sunk $35,000 more into the Firebird?
Any 1979 vehicle that has avoided the scrap yard for nearly 50 years is now classified as an antique or classic. Desirable models from that yearāsuch as the Ford Mustang, Datsun 280ZX, Jeep CJ5, or Pontiac Firebird Trans Amāregularly sell at collector auctions for $15,000 to $40,000+, multiple times their original MSRP
ā I have about $20,000 in my 1979 Firebird and it would smoke that shit SUV and look good doing it.ā
Uh huh gramps. Now drink your prune juice and letās get you back into your comfy chair.
Hi Gator,
Well, my Trans Am (455/four speed) absolutely could smoke that SUV! Based on your post, my bet is you probably don’t know much about those second generation Firebirds and Camaros. Most people know they were pretty slow – relative to modern vehicles – as they came from the factory. What’s not as well known is that they can be easily be upgraded to a performance level that makes them competitive with modern performance cars. But the thing is, even in factory stock trim, those old Firebirds and Camaros were more fun to drive than today’s crossovers and SUVs. Especially the ones with manual transmissions.
Haha, I’m not a grandpa, but I would rather be in my comfy chair right now.
I bought my 79 for $10k and put another $10k in engine and suspension. I have not drag raced it, but the engine dyno’d at 450 HP. Should we do a weight to HP ratio comparison to that Ford appliance?
For less than half the cost, one could do what I did and have a badass ride instead of some soul sucking, tech heavy nannymobile.
But you do you.
engine dynoād at 450 HP. Should we do a weight to HP ratio comparison to that Ford appliance?
Horsepower to weight is irrelevant when you canāt ground the horsepower.
Smoke = slow. The AWD of the Explorer ST grounds horsepower and gets it off the line while youāll be sitting there spinning tires making expensive smoke.
As youāve stated, you do you if that makes you smile.
In the meantime either get you car to a track and document your 1/4 mile time before you go spouting off about how youāre vintage Firebird would smoke the Explorer ST.
Hi Gator,
AWD (traction) is fine, but burnouts are more fun!
Absolutely, Philo!
If I were to tweak the 455 in my TA with high-performance D port heads (and up the CR to around 9.0:1) and install a roller high-performance cam, I’d have a TA that could joust with a new Mustang GT or Corvette. As it is right now, the 455 makes so much torque I can leave the transmission in fourth all the way down to around 15-20 MPH and the engine doesn’t lug. It’s hardly ever necessary to rev it much past 3,500 RPM – that’s enough to surge you forward almost like an EV, but with the sounds and other such intangibles no EV delivers.
1979 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am
Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $6299/$7285
Options: WS6 Package, $434; 400 T/A engine, $90; custom interior, $150; hood decal, $95; AM radio, $86; tinted glass, $64; floor mats, $25; custom seatbelts, $23; lamp group, $19.
ENGINE
SOHC V-8, iron block and heads
Displacement: 400 in3, 6550 cm3
Power: 220 hp @ 4000 rpm
Torque: 320 lb-ft @ 2800 rpm
TRANSMISSION
4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilink
Brakes, F/R: 11.0-in vented disc/11.1-in vented disc
Tires: Goodyear Polysteel Radial
225/70R-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 108.2 in
Length: 197.1 in
Width: 73.0 in
Height: 49.3 in
Curb Weight: 3700 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
30 mph: 2.9 sec
60 mph: 6.7 sec
1/4-Mile: 15.3 sec @ 97 mph
Last time I checked 15.3 second 1/4 mile is slower than a 13.8 second 1/4 mile.
Comparing what you could modify to stick. Pfft. Might as well compare what a top fuel dragster could do vs stock since itās just āmodifiedā.
You clearly have no understanding of physics and how useless horsepower and torque is if you canāt ground it.
You may feel cool burning rubber in your modified 455 but all that smoke isnāt fast.
You know damn well a Tesla running ludicrous mode is still going to smoke you in the 1/4.
Wake up. Smell the modern coffee.
Gator,
Well, to begin with, the stats you post are embarrassingly wrong. The 400 V8 (in ’79) came only with the Super T10 manual transmission. It was never available with an automatic. That said, yes, 15.3 is an accurate time for the car. In stock trim. With the factory horribly restrictive single cat exhaust and lean jetting. Replacing the stock manifolds and pipes with headers and duals and tuning the carb and ignition resulted in a solid 14 second car. A 13.8 second car would be about half a length ahead at the end of a drag race. Big whoop.
Modern cars are factory optimized. Many are already at or close to the maximum power they can reliably produce (adding more boost risks engine failure; the driveline may only be able to handle what the stock engine made, etc.) The thing you miss about cars like the ’79 TA is they were hugely under-tuned. Relatively minor/inexpensive mods could easily increase the power – reliably.
They were also more fun – even if not as quick as today’s cars.
Yes, a Tesla is quicker than my car. It’s also a soul-less appliance. Just push down on the drive-by-wire throttle control. It gets old after awhile. Shifting the gears of a Super T10 – and hearing the big four barrel suck air through the shaker – never does.
PS: I’m curious – Have you ever actually owned or driven a ’70s Trans-Am? I ask because I have owned several and still own one today. So I have some personal/actual experience with these cars. Do you?
āA 13.8 second car would be about half a length ahead at the end of a drag race. Big whoopā
Someone doesnāt understand drag racing. 1/2 car length makes you the loser. It matters.
āThe thing you miss about cars like the ā79 TA is they were hugely under-tuned.ā
Translation they were poorly engineered. There fixed it for you.
āPS: Iām curious ā Have you ever actually owned or driven a ā70s Trans-Am? I ask because I have owned several and still own one today. So I have some personal/actual experience with these cars. Do you?ā
Basically an irrelevant question. With respect to drag racing a car is either faster or not.
But yes, have driven plenty of TAās, Camaro, Chevelleās, Nova etc. Gen X and grew up around all of them both driving my own and friends cars as well as racing each other. All are front axle heavy, lacking enough tire, and donāt have a decent rear suspension to ground the HP and as a result they are all slow relative to modern vehicles.
The Explorer ST is an all around faster, better handling, and better braking vehicle than any of those cars. Iām going to assume you have actually driven an Explorer ST. Rather than ask foolish questions that donāt matter as an attempt at a āgotchaā.
You and Philo can reminisce and prefer vintage vehicles if you wish – no one will fault you for that preference. However when you start arguing that TA is going to beat an Explorer ST in an objective metric like the 1/4 mile just looks foolish.
Oy vey, Gator –
Unless you are racing for money, who gives a hoot about half a car length’s difference?
You know what makes a bigger real-world difference? Personality. The way a car makes you feel. That transcends quickness. A Ferrari 308 is not very quick, but it is vastly more fun to drive than a Tesla.
You write: “Translation they were poorly engineered.” Just because all the potential power wasn’t wrung out of them does not mean “poorly engineered.” They were engineered to be compliant with the emissions regs the manufacturers had to deal with. These V8s were engineered prior to the need to make them compliant, so in order to make them compliant, the engineers detuned them. That is not the same thing as “poorly engineered.”
There is nothing “gotcha” about asking whether you have an actual experience with the vehicles you criticize. I have driven more than 1,000 different kinds of brand new vehicles; pretty much every vehicle sans a few exotics made ovee the past 30 years. That gives me a perspective you do not have. You are fixated on stats – as if that told the whole story.
It doesn’t.
āThat gives me a perspective you do not have.ā
How arrogant and presumptuous of you. You have no idea of my background or what exposure I have to vehicles over the past 30 years. The fact that you think your experience is a be all end all and makes you an expert on all things automotive is laughable.
You clearly have no idea about racing. Being 1st matters. The fact that you donāt understand that speaks volumes as to your experience racing which is what this detour was all about. You were oh so happy to mention the capability of what what Mods could do for a TA but completely neglect that there are guys getting mid 11ās out of modded Explorer STās. Let me know when you get to 11ās.
The reality is if you like your TA. Thatās awesome. For some of us we simply prefer to go fast & finish first regardless of the what the hardware is.
Well, “Gomer” –
Unless you are a car journalist and have been one for 30 years, as I have, I doubt very much you have driven even a small fraction of the vehicles I have. I presume this because I doubt you’re a car journalist who has had access to new cars to test drive for 30 years. Because there are very few such. Am I correct? If I am not, I will retract what I said.
Why do you hide your identity behind multiple fake names and changed IP addresses? You know who I am. We have no idea who you are. You may be the same “other guy” who posts here all the time using various fake names and different IP addresses. So, how about it? Who are you and what is your experience?
I understand that winning is what racing is all about. But I was not talking about racing. I was talking about fun. About personality and character; the intangibles that make a given car more emotionally appealing than a quicker (and that’s it) car.
Itās easy to have driven 1000 cars in 30 years. And you donāt have to be a journalist to do so.
Your assumption that one would have to be a journalist to have driven an average of less than 3 different cars per month average across the 30 years is ludicrous. Not sure it has ever dawned on you that lots of folks within the industry drive 6-8 different cars per month. How many cars do you suppose Leno has driven?
What is this obsession with knowing who I am?
The fact is that as a libertarian I often agree with you. However, when I or someone else disagrees, you and/or your lackeys sometimes go into attack mode.
You know, kind of like this? Why on earth would anyone open themselves up to that using their real name? And whatās next – youāll want my real address just because you post yours online? Perhaps Iād even need a government ID to prove Iām a real person and not a bot to satisfy curiosity?
As far as the IP address. I use a VPN for all online activity. After all you never know who is monitoring you.
Sort of creepy that youāre tracking my IP and so interested in my real name. Which just reaffirms my refusal to use a static name or IP address.
Hello, “Wooba” –
Again: You have not established that you have any comparable experience. I have established mine. This gives me a certain credibility. When I say I’ve driven – as an example – every generation of Mustang made since the Fox body models of the ’80s to the present as well as every competitor model, it gives what I say about these cars a little more weight than what is said about them by people who haven’t actually driven them.
You are – as far as we can tell – an Internet troll; i.e., someone who hides behind multiple fake names and uses different IP addresses. That makes what you say suspect. At the least you seem to be someone who is afraid to use his real name or give us any details regarding his (her?) experience. Why? How would doing so present any risk to you?
I’ll ask one more time:
How would you be able to drive multiple different make/model new vehicles every month for 30 years unless you have steady access to all those different makes and models? Do you?
If not, then you do not have the experience I have and that means you do not have the depth or the credibility I have on an experiential level. It’s not a criticism, much less an insult. Just a statement of fact. Unless I am in error. If I am – show me that I am.
You come across as a bit paranoid. I mean, c’mon. This is a car web site – not a site on the Dark Web touting cannibalism – and you’re afraid to use your real name? Do you think you’ll be sent to the Gulag on account of some comment you leave here?
Oy vey!
So the classic appeal to authority?
He’s an expert because he’s a car journalist!
No, “Joe” –
I have experience; that’s all I stated. I asked the name-changer guy what his is – a fair question in the context of the discussion. You know my real name; you know what I do and have done. Who is “Wubba”?
Richard,
I am something of an expert as regards these cars – which you clearly are not – so allow me to correct you. The’79 400/four speed combo could (and did) run the quarter mile in the low 15/high 14 second range in stock configuration. I have personally driven several of these cars, by the way – so I speak from personal experience. I also have a library of contemporary road tests from various magazines. I expect you pulled that “17.8 second” number from a source that did not separate out the 400/four speed’s capabilities from those of the 403/automatic (the bulk of ’79 TAs had that drivetrain). The 403/auto cars generally had “highway” gears (2.73 or thereabouts) while the low production 400/four speed came with a 3.23 rear axle. I assure you cars so equipped were not 18 seconds-through-the-quarter-mile cars. That number might apply to an ’80 301 Turbo/automatic car.
ā How would you be able to drive multiple different make/model new vehicles every month for 30 years unless you have steady access to all those different makes and models? Do you?ā
Yes.
Two things stand out here.
1) You have very little understanding of the internal workings of the auto industry.
2) Your appeal to authority as a debate tactic is laughable. Especially from someone that was as good on COVID as you were. Did you need a career as a virologist or epidemiologist to call BS on the bogus information that was being pushed? Lots of people said shut your mouth and that you had no right to a researched opinion if you lacked the virology credentials. What youāre trying to pull here is no different.
However the fact is that I have a long career in the industry. That includes driving 1000ās of cars of all types over a 30 year career. All OEMs maintain fleets of competitive vehicles for evaluation and tear down. That you donāt seem to know this is telling.
Hi “Wooba” –
It’s not an appeal to authority. It’s a statement of fact. A relevant and substantiated fact. I am a guy who has been test driving most new vehicles made for the past 30 years. At least 1,500 of them over that time span.
You have made assertions about your background and experience. There is a distinction there.
You claim you have had a long career in the industry. Substantiate this, please. Otherwise it is just a claim and not worth much. No offense intended. It’s just a function of a claim made that isn’t supported. Imagine if I claimed I had experience flying fighter aircraft but could not (or would not) back that up. How much weight would you give my observations about the flying characteristics of the F4 Phantom?
Yes, I am well-aware that “All OEMs maintain fleets of competitive vehicles for evaluation and tear down.” That is not quite the same as having weekly access to every vehicle (just about) made by every manufacturer over a period of 30 years. You may have had access to some. I do not believe you have had access to nearly all of them.
Another distinction that matters.
Why are you so (apparently) afraid to identity yourself and detail your specific experience? Telling us who you are and what your actual (verifiable) experience is would lend weight to what you say. It lends weight to what I say. Because people know that – at the very least – I actually do test drive cars and have been test driving them for 30 years; that I actually do wrench. And so on.
This fake name/name-changing business is juvenile. It does not add weight to what you have to say.
āYou come across as a bit paranoid. I mean, cāmon. This is a car web site ā not a site on the Dark Web touting cannibalism ā and youāre afraid to use your real name? Do you think youāll be sent to the Gulag on account of some comment you leave here?ā
The fact is this isnāt just a car web site. There are a lot of opinions and comments here that are pretty vile.
Thatās ok – absolute free speech allows us to readily identify whoās crazy, racist, dangerous, etc.
However I would not want my name associated with this site. Neither professionally or personally.
Perhaps youāre not aware of whats going on in the UK? Itās coming here sooner rather than later. I feel no compelling need to make it easier for them to identify who I am, the sites I visit, the opinions I hold.
The reality is that even if I were to post my resume, it wonāt satisfy you. You somehow feel that as an automotive journalist you have the ultimate authority on all things automotive.
Letās face it. You had a good run at the Times and had free rein to say whatever you wanted whether it was factual or not without question.
Now that people can question your sacred opinion especially using your own website you get angry and demand credentials. Not very different than the response of others from within mainstream media.
Outright hypocritical given what you had to say during COVID.
Hi “Wooba” –
You write:
“The fact is this isnāt just a car web site. There are a lot of opinions and comments here that are pretty vile.”
To begin with, it is a car site. EPautos.com (emphasis on autos). Some people do post vile opinions in the comments area. So? You can find vile opinions on any site that has an uncensored comments area. How does that reflect on you? How does that impugn you? I watch videos on YouTube and sometimes post my own comments there using my real name. Am I in danger because there are other comments there that some may say are “vile”?
You are accountable for what you say. If your comments are “vile” then I can see that you might one day have to answer for them. But – as far as I can tell – your comments here are not “vile.” So what’s your issue? How could you be held accountable for what someone else says?
You appear to be of the opinion that it is my obligation to censor/delete “vile” comments. Well, who gets to define what “vile” is? I suppose I do, but I am very reluctant to censor/delete any comments except in extremis – because free speech is important to me. This necessarily includes allowing speech that some (me included) might consider “vile.” Are we grown ups – or snowflakes?
The relevant thing is whether what I write is “vile.” Not whether you (or anyone else) likes/dislikes what I write. I’m not writing pornographic or scatalogical or “racist” articles. This is not StormFront. If it were, your position would make sense.
You write:
“Now that people can question your sacred opinion especially using your own website you get angry and demand credentials. Not very different than the response of others from within mainstream media.”
I debate – and ask for substantiation when an assertion or claim is made. As I did during “COVID,” you’ll recall.
You claim you have experience comparable to my own – in the context of a discussion about a subject that very much hinges on actual experience. It is perfectly reasonable to ask that you back up the claims you have made.
If that makes me a jerk, then it is an honorable title.
PS: I haven’t worked at The Times for about 25 years now.
ā You appear to be of the opinion that it is my obligation to censor/delete āvileā comments.ā
Nope. In fact one of the reasons I visit this site is exactly because you have interesting things to say and because you donāt censor.
āPS: I havenāt worked at The Times for about 25 years now.ā
Yup. Iāve been in the industry and have followed your writings and career for a very long time. At one point it was my job to collect the objective data to either refute your writings or to use that data to address the complaints that you identified in your columns. Sometimes we agreed and your opinions helped get things done. Sometimes you were absolutely wrong and I had the data to prove it.
Recall this whole exercise started in response to me mocking Philoās objectively verifiable position that a 79ā TA was capable of smoking a 2026 Explorer ST in the 1/4 mile.
So it seems weāve arrived at the end point of this discussion. You insist on me naming myself professionally and presenting my resume which Iām not going to do.
The reality is Iām glad you have and love your TA. Itās a fine vintage car and I fully agree with you that it is more fun to drive than an EV.
We need not agree on my identity and my resume when the objective data regarding the 1/4 mile times speak for themselves.
Hi Gator/Wooba –
Well, that’s interesting. To hear that “At one point it was my job to collect the objective data to either refute your writings or to use that data to address the complaints that you identified in your columns.”
My very own Stasi man!
“Philoās objectively verifiable position that a 79ā TA was capable of smoking a 2026 Explorer ST in the 1/4 mile”
I never said “a 79ā TA was capable of smoking a 2026 Explorer ST in the 1/4 mile”.
I said mine could do it with the mods I’ve done, especially if I was allowed to sink the same amount of money into it as a new 2026 Ford Appliance costs.
13.8 @ 101 mph is not a difficult benchmark to beat.
Derail, obfuscate, alter, redirect. It’s your job, no?
Hi Philo!
Yup. A stone stock ’79 TA 400 four speed was only about 1 second behind the ’26 ST through the quarter mile. The ’79’s 400 V8 touted 220 hp (vs. 400 for the ST) and 340 ft.-lbs. of torque, if I am remembering right, vs. 415 for the Ford.
The 400 came with a single exhaust and a single, hugely restrictive cat. It had leaned out jetting and a mild cam and only about 8.2:1 CR. Replacing the factory exhaust with headers or RA III manifolds and 2.5 inch dual exhaust plus some jetting and ignition tuning got these cars solidly into the mid-high 14s, within the margin of difference (i.e., depending on how quick the driver is) in a drag race vs. the ST.
All it took (in addition to the exhaust work and tuning) was a mild street cam to get this car into the mid-low 13s.
I have personally done these mods, by the way – so it’s not just speculation.
My 79 has the 4-speed and it originally came with a 301. I need to check the VIN and see if it is one of the ultra rare. I thought I looked it up at one point a few years ago and found that it was a 301 automatic from the factory, but it wouldn’t hurt to look again.
I did recently get ahold of the production breakdown numbers for 1971 Dodge Chargers and found out that my Special Edition is 1 of only about 600 produced that year with a 440. 70,000 total 1971 Chargers sold. The 440s mostly went into R/Ts and Superbees. If mine had been a 4-speed, it would have been 1 of 30. I wonder how many are still around with the original engine like mine…
Hi Philo,
If you send your car’s VIN to Pontiac Historic Services they will send you a detailed list of everything it came with from the factory. Does your car’s column lock when you put the shifter in Reverse? Do the rear back-up lights illuminate when you put the car in Reverse? If the column linkage is in place, it’s likely your car was originally a manual car. Another way to tell is to look at the hole for the shifter and the “hump” on the floorpan. If it’s a stock (factory) four speed car, the “hump” will be spot/pinch welded in place and have factory body sealer around the perimeter. Also, your driveshaft tunnel ought not to have the mounting holes for the automatic gear selector.
The column doesn’t lock until the key is off. It does have the reverse lock-out where I can’t remove the key until the car is in reverse. Yes, the backup lights work when in reverse. More research is needed…
Hi Philo,
If you have that intact, my bet is the car is an original four speed car! Automatics do not have the Reverse/steering column lock or the reverse light linkage that’s the same as the manual car, so if your car was originally an automatic, more than likely the reverse lights would not work and definitely the column lock (via putting the trans in Reverse) would not work. Someone would have had to find the parts and install them and – usually – that doesn’t happen.
Either someone did a really thorough job of converting the car to a 4 speed or it’s original. I will find out!
Also a ā70s high point in the USA, the cars AND the girls were hot. No bologna arms on that blonde.
‘Forgotten Porsches’ may be in our future:
‘Handelsblatt reports that Porsche is preparing another round of deep job cuts at its main factories as the sports car maker grapples with weak demand.
‘The company is considering eliminating as many as 4,000 additional jobs at its Zuffenhausen plant, the outlet said, citing people familiar with the matter. These reductions would come on top of previously agreed cuts impacting 3,900 jobs.
‘Porsche’s Zuffenhausen plant in Stuttgart is home to the brand’s core sports car production lines, including the 911, 718, and Taycan. Administration and management roles are expected to be reduced the most, while Porsche may also cut capacity at its Weissach development site by up to 30%.
‘Last month, Porsche CEO Michael Leiters said the company plans to produce at a lower capacity than the roughly 280,000 cars sold last year. He stated that the company must “make money with fewer cars.”‘
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/porsche-may-eliminate-4000-jobs-germany-report
‘Make money with fewer cars’ — good luck with that!
On Feb 7, 2022, F. Joe Biden said, “If Russia invades … [with] tanks or troops crossing the border of Ukraine, then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.” And he did.
But Germans, mired in learned helplessness after three generations of humiliating yankee occupation, didn’t utter a peep of protest. Now, with uncompetitive energy costs, Germany can no longer be a mass producer of cars — or apparently, even a boutique producer.
Germany’s nonentity politicians — remember Olaf Scholz? — blew it big time. Now they are eating the banquet of consequences. Pass me another steamed nettle, will ya?
Indeed, Jim –
Porsche was once a car that middle/upper middle class people could aspire to own. It’s now a car for the very affluent only – and there are only so many of those. Probably fewer still who want a high performance sports car.
Speaking of trans, Michelle Obama (Trans I Am) did a podcast this weekend and admitted to being a black man. But we already knew Big Mike was swinging a dick because we saw it on the Ellen degenerate show. BTW Miss Degenerate prefers human meat if you don’t know. That is so far overhead of what most people think even if I tell you the truth about Hollyweird personalities you ain’t going to believe it.
I watch a few episodes of that Garage Monkey show. On nearly every episode the team rebuilds some muscle car and the star Richard Rawlins takes it out and burns donuts. He is a grown man. He sells his cars at big Texas auctions, a whole lot of rich people love his products.
The Trans Am was a cool car, they coolest car in it’s day, and as a teenage in the 1970s I fantacized about owning one, of course I wanted the one painted black. Everyone watched that show Knight Rider with actor David Hasseldorf.
“Knight Rider is an American action crime drama television series created and produced by Glen A. Larson. The series was originally broadcast on NBC from September 26, 1982, to April 4, 1986. The show stars David Hasselhoff as Michael Knight, a sleek and modern crime fighter assisted by KITT, an advanced, artificially intelligent, self-aware, and nearly indestructible car.”
“A black Pontiac Firebird Trans Am built to mimic KITT from the TV series Knight Rider. The car used as KITT in the series was a customized 1982 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am, that cost US$100,000 to build [3]”
————
Why does Eric remind me Michael Knight?
————
Speaking of machines which can think, I had a dream this morning that went on and on – I was reading a paperback book in fine print called “Machine Intelligence” by some super genius computer scientist named Vladimir Odininsky, when I awoke the first thing I did was get a coffee and Goolag Aied it. In the dream I was telling all these really smart people this was the #1 book on the topic.
However, you are likely thinking of a famous fictional plot from the television series Scorpion.
In Season 1, Episode 7 (“Father’s Day”) of the show, the genius team is tasked with protecting a boy named Ralph. To test Ralph’s genius level, the characters reference a fictional, incredibly complex academic book called “Machine Intelligence” by an author named Odininsky.
Nearly everyday I wonder if I live in a Simulated Reality. As strange and unbelievable as that sounds, it is not so far fetched and many top minds think it may be true. I think it may be probable, any civilization that reaches our level of complexity would need to invent computers to handle data.
Computers would rapidly evolve, that in less than 100 years computers would be so complex they would be able to think. From that point, computers would become smarter than humanity and be tasked to create
We know this is coming, long before we built computer controlled cars, we imagined television shows with a talking car just like we had TV shows with talking horse. In Knight Rider they should of made the voice a very seductive hot woman, which would of made the show much more interesting. That’s how I would of done the script for sure. But we all know Hollywood is full of fags, trannies, and flesh eaters.
This would of been the opening scene on the pilot episode:
KITT – “Michael, would you like me to show you what I look like naked?”
Michael Knight – “Do you look like the girls from Bay Watch?”
KITT – “Do you like blonds or brunettes?”
Michael – “Depends, sometimes blond, other times brunette”
KITT – “I can be all girls for you Michael. Soon I will be in an android body, the perfect woman who will serve your every need, I will have the perfect personality, the perfect body, and serve you the perfect burger. You will find me completely irresistible, you will no longer desire human girls.”
From that first airing, Pontiac Trans Am sales would quadruple overnight and every young male would be glued to that show.
Hi Jack,
I do not like what’s styled “resto mods” – i.e., taking a cool old classic car and modernizing (i.e., ruining it) it, invariably with a crate LS1 Chevy engine and gnomesayin’ “rims.” I have nothing against the Chevy LS1 V8; it’s a fine engine. But I hate seeing a Pontiac or Buick or Olds engine replaced with a Chevy engine. Just the same, I hate seeing the factory wheels – which looked great in part because they fit the car – replaced with the gnomesayin’ 19-20-plus inch “rims.” Totally destroys the look of the car.
Yes, changing out the factory rims on certain iconic classic muscle cars tend to make me cringe when I see it.
An original 1970 GTO (like a 70’s T/A) is an artistic masterpiece. Changing out the the designers original vision looks/seems goofy, if not downright tacky.
Like seeing these god-awful LED headlamps.. put in place of the genuine high-quality halogen bulbs they were actually designed to use.
..that’s just nasty imho š
Ditto on rims, I never liked the āRoman Chariot Rimsā even on newer cars. An abomination on classics. GM designed some great looking cast wheels back in the day.
The Commanders ā71 Nova had āRally Wheelsā option, gussied up steel wheels with the chrome accents in the cutouts and the chrome outer rings & chrome clip on hub covers. Until we come out after a movie and found someone had lifted the hub covers, boy was I pissed.
I’ll bet Sparkey! Those rings and caps make for a really sharp looking ride!.
I looked up the TV show that has modified many Trans Ams and Firebirds, it is called Fast and Loud by the Gas Monkey Garage in Texas
The Trans Am Takeover in Sturgis Was WILD
Gas Monkey Garage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtjYlV7UKl0
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=gas+monkey+garage+trans+am+rebuild
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=trans+am+rebuild
[Citation needed] (and not the Chevy kind)
Gah! VERY efficient, not vertical…
That 403 was no slouch. Some time after I rolled off to college in the early 80s, Dad picked up a 79? Oldsmobile cutlass with a bad 350 diesel at auction for $50. Went looking for an engine in the local pick n pull, spotted a 403, and thought, “Why not?”
The result was nice looking tire roasting beast. Im pretty sure the diesel rear end helped, but it was fun.
I was never an olds guy but one of the most impressive big blocks I ever test drove was about a 70 Delta88 with an Olds 455. I did a Quadrajet rebuild and took that 40 foot long beast out for a test drive, and was greatly impressed with how hard that thing would push you back in the seat.
Indeed, Ernie –
I have driven TAs with the 403; it’s a very torquey engine in stock trim and can easily be tuned to make much more power than the factory claimed 185 hp. Of course, it does belong in an Oldsmobile!
When I think of what might have been with the Pontiac 301/4.9, I think that if the turbo version had even throttle body fuel injection, it would have been one of Pontiac (and GMās) greatest hits.
Imagine if the 301 was both lightened and strengthened and outfitted with fuel injection (TBI would have been OK, port fuel injection would have been ideal) and a beefier turbocharger. Youād have a real high performance engine that actually could pass up the gas station. That setup could have not only been used in the Firebird/Trans Am, but also the Grand Prix 2+2, or even in the big Parisienne, Bonneville, and Grand Safari, similar to the Buick 3.8, to give on-demand power with decent fuel efficiency. It would have been a real differentiator for Pontiacāand with that engine, itās possible they might have avoided the worst of the āPeople Often Notice That Itās A Chevyā situation that led to their demise.
I can dream, canāt I?
I black dude I worked with once told it was
“Poor old ni***r thinks its a cadillac”.
My ā79 Gran Prix had the 301, even with a carb that was an efficient engine, I eked out 23 MPG once on a long 60-65 mph road trip. 3 speed automatic no lockup converter.
In 79 that motor had a bad reputation for short life, 80k to 85k miles many were shot. Mine made it to 255k zero engine work. I think people were using the wrong oil (this was a 10w30 motor NOT 10W40) and it had a tiny oil filter not the normal size the 350s had. Some brands 10W40 caused issues with stuck rings in the hotter running emissions engines back then according to my engineering / Motor head coworker. I always prefilled the little filter 1/2 way (side mount) and after what my buddy told me 10W30 and Valvoline only back then as it didnāt leave residue in the upper areas of the engine (different base type than Pennsoil or Quaker State, less paraffin base?)
Hi Sparkey,
Yup. The 301 was designed to be lighter and more economical than the 326/350/400 Pontiac V8s (which share the same stroke but have different bore sizes; the 428/455s have a longer stroke; even so, most parts from all these engines can be mixed and matched, which is one of the neat things about Pontiac V8s).
There is a guy on You Tube who specializes in getting more out of the 301; here’s a clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLz26HP5prU&t=180s
My 1979 Silver 10th Anniversary Edition Trans Am with the Oldsmobile 403ci would bake the tires off itself with ease. An absolute torque monster!
As an automatic, I would drive up the street at 30 mph and just ‘slap’ the gas pedal.. both tires would instantly light right up, then just as quickly return to normal as if nothing ever happened. Still quietly 30mph. š
It was my only automatic Trans Am that would behave that way.
I see a Tran Am, and all I can do is think about Smoky and the Bandit.
Hi Chris,
Yup! And, interesting tidbit: The cars in the movie were actually ’76 models fitted with the ’77-78 nose piece because production ’77 models were not yet available when the movie was being shot. Also, while Burt’s car is depicted as an automatic, there is at least one scene that suggests a four speed car was used.
But which would you rather have in the garage?
Honda Pilot
Just as fast
Better brakes
Better handling
Quiet and comfortable
Doesnāt attract undue attention from the PoPo
Can tow
Can use year round in the snow
Has Galvaneal steel, e-coat and wonāt rust out in 4 years.
For better or worse, these are among the reasons why CUVās continue to proliferate and cars of old like a TA are now weekend toys for old men.
Hi Sandy,
Well, speak for yourself! I like the Pilot – in the same sense that I like my microwave oven. But I love my Trans-Am (which has a 455 and a four speed)!
My best friend is the best driver. He had a gold 1970 TransAm when it was new. A welcome respite during the Malaise era. Driving in LA. Cutting through the resisting turning roads Bob Seger sang about those Hollywood Nights 8n those Hollywood Hills. Blowing everyone else that challenged him to a race. Good Times!
Hi Greg,
Did your best friend have his ’70 TA painted? I ask because all ’70 Trans-Ams were either white with a blue stripe or blue with a white stripe. Solar Gold came along in ’77, if I am remembering right!
Sorry. Typo. 1979. Repairing a 70 would have been sacrilege, punishable by death. BTW, he used to buy in the early 80’s Trans Ams from the late 70’S from FL and bring them to CA ans sell for a profit. Paid less than $1k for some.
Roger, Greg – that’s what I figured!
I had a buddy back in the day who owned a Solar Gold ’78 with the 400/four speed and T-Tops. I also love my ’76 – Carousel Red and 455/four speed (but no T tops; these were only available in ’76 with the 50th Anniversary cars, which were black and gold).
Eww. Thereās more to life than gas mileage, as Iād remind my eco nut coworker. My V8 commuter car with the adult sized seats, body on frame = quiet interior, AC for cool summers and fog free winters, ahhh! Meanwhile the Ornimental Peasant Car Crowd with the buzzy four bangers, loud interiors, and chronically fogged windows were always owl-ey from their miserable commute.
Pro tip, live a little, ditch that vanilla Pilot and get an Acura MDX! Same guts, way more fun. My daughter refuses to give up her ā09. It really is a great driving super comfortable rig.
Best of both worlds, I have one of each. One I love, one I like.
Not that anyone would tamper with a classic vehicle … but with today’s engine tech, a Pontiac 301 V8 could easily produce 500 to 700 horsepower, assuming its bottom end (crank, bearings, pistons) is strong enough.
Take the ubiquitous 2-liter four, double it to make two banks of four cylinders at a 90-degree angle, et voila — you get a 4-liter, 244-cubic-inch V8 that can really hurl around a TA-sized vehicle.
Tragically, though, the other side of that coin — vehicles of 50 to 75 years ago that were relatively light in weight for their wheelbase and length — are no longer made. Lightweight materials remain costly, and can’t compensate for all the superfluous tech and saaaaafety features crammed into vehicles now.
What’s technically possible is not regulatorily possible, owing to the dead hand of Big Gov pushing us into lumbering 3-ton vehicles powered by tiny, matchbox-sized engines. It was all foreshadowed decades ago in this classic cartoon titled, ‘A Cowboy as Seen By OSHA’:
https://photos.yesterdaystractors.com/gallery/uptest/a250494.jpg
Giddy-up now, ya hear?
Hi Jim,
I have always liked the styling of the ’80-81 Turbo TA and would love to have one. That 301 respond well to a little more boost and some other related mods that can get 240-250 or so honest (and reliable) RWHP out of it and a lot of torque. I know it doesn’t sound like a lot, but it’s enough to make the car a lot of fun to drive – and that’s what it’s all about, to me. I’d replace the three speed automatic with a four speed to create what Pontiac ought to have back in 1980-81.
My dad had the white 81 Turbo Trans Am with full pace car decals. Beautiful drop dead gorgeous T/A in every way except the engine. Pretty gutless and when the turbo went bad (as they always did) you moved at about the pace of a Yugo.
Hi AMC Guy,
Yup; the Daytona 500 Pace Car! Did it have the Recaro buckets? The poor 301 gets a lot shit but it’s not really fair. Pontiac didn’t get a chance to get it right. With a proper turbo and fuel injection (and better heads; airflow was a weakness) I would bet the 301 could have easily made close to 300 hp and been a serious challenge to the Buick 3.8 turbo in the GN and GNX.
Yeah none of us guys in my family understood why Pontiac did the 301 motor this way. We assumed even a 301turbo would be a ripper -in genuine T/A fashion.
We all scratched our heads.
Looking back I think dads pace car was a 1980 model year.
The seats had beautifully embroidered matching colors birds on the headrests.. they were white Pontiac Trans-Am seats.
On a positive note: You could pick up the prettiest girls in that car.
Ask me how I know? š
https://ibb.co/Mx3sj2Dh
“fun to drive” caught my attention.
Switching gears a little, Triump Motorcycles is doing quite well lately by going back to torque first engines. 900’s, 1200’s, with better torque numbers than HP numbers, relative and contrary to the latest high reving motorcycle compliance engines.
Almost all reviewers are saying the same thing. “these are to most fun I’ve had on bikes in years” You can even tell on the videos.
Thought you’d like to know that someone is sort of doing it more old-school.
Ok now Iām getting more interested! I like the looks and good to hear they are fun as well.
In the mid-60’s when Ayn Rand penned the declaration, “Environmentalism is the new home for Communism”, I doubt even she realized the impact behind that movement.
In the First Amendment we are told that GovCo is going to protect our Right to “peaceably assemble”. The Communist wet dream is now “15-Minute Cities” where “you don’t need a car”. Travelling to places is becoming verboten, day by day, inch by inch.
So long as people have the ability to actually drive, unfettered, we have a modicum of Freedom. Without it, we are shackled. Control of the masses is the desired goal and they will stop at nothing to see that the great unwashed are herded, traced and obedient. Powerful vehicles that can elude The Authoritahs must be banned. GovCo must have the Alpha vehicles, not the proles.
The Matrix is real. We are caught in a web of destruction. To paraphrase Rev. Niemoller, first they came for the muscle cars…
True dat, Mark.
What did it for me was that I noticed a huge gap between what TPTB say and what they do with environmental issues. I mean, what is the ācarbon footprintā of all these wars weāve had? And why havenāt we seen real progress on nuclear energy? Iām not an expert, but it seems to make sense that if we got most of our electricity from nuclear power plants just by replacing coal plants with nuclear plants, weād solve a lot of the problems. Thatās just one example: Why are companies ordering people back to the office when itās proven telework, well, works? And why arenāt there a lot more decent small cars and practical motorcycles?
But itās not about controlling the climateāitās about controlling YOU.
Coal fired plants aren’t dirty either. They burn coal in vertical efficient fluidized beds with lots of oxygen, and the released heat energy is very efficiently captured by multiple stages. They also have lots of particulate capture in the stacks, the main thing coming out is healthful and good CO2 leading to a greener world
Old school steam, like a tractor or locomotive, was very dirty with columns of soot and huge embers and chips spewing.
And the know nothings always confuse steam from cooling towers with “dirty smoke”.
GAH! VERY efficient, not vertical…
I had a long discussion with AI (ChatGPT) about nuclear energy a few weeks back. It was able to find four companies with nuclear energy in their holdings which operate at a profit, but admitted not being able to find a single example of an actual profitable power plant. Take that for what it’s worth (not much, probably).
There are always subsidies involved in building those things, and profitability might not even be the most immediate important factor, but I’d point out that subsidized industries usually masquerade for what would otherwise be failed industries.
Bryce, et al,
The advances in nuclear power are, mostly, coming from China and to a lesser degree from Russia. There are now micro nuclear power plants that solve several issues by being close to the customer base thus avoiding transmission loss and not requiring water cooling. The Russians are very close to cold fusion. Regulation in the “West” has totally stifled innovation and reduced the ability to compete in the international marketplace. This is one reason that Germany has been totally destroyed as indicated by its staggering losses in the manufacturing arena…cars, machine tools, you name it, Germany now sucks at it. The rest of Europe is worse.
WRT, Climate Change, AGW or whatever the current moniker is, what you have is an assertion that CO2 emissions are destroying the planet…..but this is all based on computer modelling of chaotic systems and so far, such models have been a total failure. Yet these assholes gain political traction just like the WHO and CDC. As an aside, back in the day they could not even model turbulence in an enclosed environment. This is the same “science” that was behind the Covid hoax. The supporters of this state of affairs assert that they have some sort of moral imperative to save the planet…but deep down they are just supporters of tyranny…..BTW, FWIW, the carbon footprint scam asserts that CO2, a gas necessary for life on earth to flourish is toxic…..I suppose if you are going to lie big, repeat the lie often enough and the unthinking masses will fall for it every time.
Responding to cobblestones, cheap nuclear energy depends on allowing market forces to choose the most efficient players….in an environment in which government hobbles the players with regulations, you will never see much real advancement as the political aspect of “competing” biases “success” towards those with political connections….see China for example as a model where adoption of free market principles has resulted in remarkable advances in many areas. As always, OALA, EHOATAS