Author Topic: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a  (Read 17298 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RENOVATIONS

  • Administrator
  • Lifetime Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10563
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #45 on: September 13, 2011, 05:46:09 PM »
I haven't really seen any "elitist" type attitudes/posts in this thread...I've seen questions asked...questions answered...and the answers questioned.

There are many knowledgeable people here...take the info you find here and do with it as you choose...just my opinion ;)
Jeff

Projects:
_____________
1978 Trans Am
1970 Camaro
1970 'Cuda

Offline 78455

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 75
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #46 on: September 14, 2011, 06:54:32 PM »
I don't claim to be an authority on the subject, but I did own several Trans ams between 77-79 and they were all either brand new or slightly used. Back then the 6.6 Ltr decal was what you saw if the car had the lower performance Pontiac 400 or the Olds 403. The higher output Pontiac 400 always had the T/A 6.6 decal. The cars I remember not having any decals on the shaker were those with the chevy engine, and there were a few. I am a big fan of Pontiacs, always have been, can't tell you how many Pontiacs I've owned through the years, way too many to list, and I do believe that in todays market a 77-79 Trans am with the Pontiac 400 especially the ones with the 4 speed manual tend to be worth more. A 79 400 4 speed should be at the peak of the value charts as those fall in the low production catagory, plus they were produced late in the 79 model year. With all that said, and I probably won't make many friends here by saying this, but in my opinion the better engine was the Olds 403. Yes, it was rated with lower hp than the W72, but G.M also rated that power with less timing, as the 403 was produced by Olds rather than Pontiac, which obviously created a conflict. When the timing on the Olds engine was set at it's optimum, the Olds actually made more power. The Olds 403 also didn't suffer from bearing issues as did the Pontiacs. BTW, my latest project was selected specifically because it had a Pontiac engine.

Offline Hitman

  • Administrator
  • Lifetime Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8257
  • Referrals: 0
    • http://www.78ta.com
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #47 on: September 14, 2011, 07:30:22 PM »
In the end, this is what it's all about.  When people stop going to shows because some know-it-all says something is incorrect is an indication that the hobby is in danger of being taken over by elitists and is being hurt by such sanctimonious attitudes. No one here is an authority enough to say one way or the other what constitutes "correct" on items not documented on things like a build sheet in such a way as to completely discount evidence to the contrary.

First off I want to say one thing.... I never call myself an "expert" nor "authority" and never refer to myself as such. Whenever people call me an "expert", I correct them and say that I am just a "specialist". With that being said, yes, no one here is really an "authority" when it comes to these cars, we just do the best that we can do with the information we are provided with and what we can find and prove documentation wise. They only thing we can determine of what is "correct" is from what we see documentation wise. And we have the proof in documents from 1978 or any year that we are talking about. That is the "proof" that we can show.

There is ample factual evidence on both sides and there are real life examples like Bird Turd here who can affirm their car was a certain way when it was delivered.  My only argument has ever been that someone should not be telling someone else their car is not "factory correct" when there is so much evidence to the contrary and that the factory standards were not always followed. 


To me there is not "ample factual evidence" at all. To me someone's memory is not "factual evidence". I mean we are talking about memories that are 33 years old (referring to the 1978). Memories can be changed, forgotten, mistaken, and tricked relatively easily and has been proven so in scientific studies and experiments to show how easily the mind can be mistaken. Now, I am not going to make reference to them in the books and articles I have read (unless someone requests it) but it is to make a point. The point is that someone's memory to me does no constitute in any way shape or form "factual evidence". And even with that, to me there is also not "ample" evidence either. What we have is a few isolated incidents of things being different from what the factory documentation that we have. To me factual evidence would be maybe a memo from the plant managers to their line employees stating to install a certain shaker decal, or to install something other that what the factory deemed was to be on these cars. So to me a memo like that would be "factual" evidence of what some are saying. But we don't have any proof like that to show that it was the case. Another form of "factual" evidence would be photos from 1978 of the assembly line with cars with these "mistakes" on them. So a photo from the factory would to me be factual evidence. A photo of a car from the Dealer would not be because we know Dealers installed what was requested by the customer and even installed things that were not even availlable for the whole "F" body line (like car alarm systems which you can ask LOMILETA about). Another thing that would be considered proof would be someone's dealer order form that they could even order a certain thing on thier car. So something in writing from 1978 showing any of this to me would be factual. Another thing that maybe could be traced was if these "isolated incidents" could be traced back to a certain point. So these people that say they had something installed from the factory that way and the cars could all be traced back to a certain build date (or dates within a close period of time) at a certain factory could be the start of factual evidence. But we do not have that either. Again, the side of the argument we can take is proven by factory documents and memos. The other side of the argument is only proven by people's memories.

It would be better to stick to the big items like engine sizes, transmissions, interior builds etc. (things documented on the build sheet), and leave the small things like decals, emblems, and shaker hood decals (things not documented on the build sheet) alone. 

Ok, some of these things can be traced back and proven or not proven (possibly). For example, in 1979, the 3" sail panel bird had a part number of 10006138, the 6" sail panel bird had a part number of 100002976. Now, although part numbers are not listed on the build sheet they did have different prices. The 3" bird was $14.55 and the 6" bird was $20.05. So there could possibly be proof there on a dealer invoice if you compared two different sail panel birds and see a price difference on two different cars. And who knows, maybe there is a way to tell on the build sheet, but we are not authorities enough on them to determine the codes. Either way, we can again only go by the documentation that we have and can prove.

Prudent leeway should be granted here based on the knowledge that "factory correct" is a near useless term when there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that the factory didn't always follow it.

Factory Correct is not a useless term because we have Factory Documents that show what Pontiac and GM said was what the Factory was to build. So I do not think that term is useless at all because again I do there is NOT "plenty of anecdotal evidence" to show otherwise. We have isolated incidents with no documentation to show what was installed and just rely on people's memories. Now, we can go back and have people find their photos of their cars when they were new from 1978 and I would be willing to bet that if we got 100 photos that 95 of them would show what is shown in factory documentation and maybe only 5 photos to show something different. And out of those 5 photos, there is no proof that the Dealer did not do it and not the factory. So again, to me that is not "plenty of anecdotal evidence" nor "ample factual evidence". Again, there is a difference between what the "Factory" did and what "Dealers" did to these cars back when they were new.

By letting this cancer eat away at the hobby is only going to drive more people away from sharing their cars. I like that the T/A Nationals actually allows cars to be considered "stock" that have a whole host of changes and things added by others that were not added by the factory -- like open hood scoops, stereos, exhaust (not headers), shifters, etc.  This was smart on their part. We should be encouraging more people to participate in shows regardless of the small items like shaker hood decals instead of turning people away with elitist attitudes.

I do not think there is a cancer at all. The only cancer lies on those people which care nothing about the car and only care about winning trophies. And to me that is still a small number of people out there. I said in an earlier post that I don't think I was getting my point across clear enough and I still don't think I am. I could probably still type for hours regarding this issue of "Factory" correct and not "Factory" correct, but now my fingers hurt from typing. I am not an authority nor an expert... I am just a specialist and only go by what I can prove and not my memory. I have worked on/owned/bought and sold over 100 Trans Ams so I have a good base, but still am not an expert.
Brett Campbell
"Hitman"
www.78ta.com
www.ohiofirebirds.com
1978 Trans Am

Offline Burd Turd

  • Lifetime Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3817
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #48 on: September 14, 2011, 07:45:50 PM »
Since this is still going on I will put one more post on this, I'm not going on memory, the shaker decals came up at Trade school, in 79 I bumped into another 78 y88 and it had the TA6.6 decals. We talked out side of school about it, since I was new to the car, and hobby at that point, and didn't know about the engines, and tag teaming me isn't going to change my memory about this either.
Born and Raised in South Detroit Bitches

Offline Hitman

  • Administrator
  • Lifetime Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8257
  • Referrals: 0
    • http://www.78ta.com
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #49 on: September 14, 2011, 08:02:49 PM »
Since this is still going on I will put one more post on this, I'm not going on memory, the shaker decals came up at Trade school, in 79 I bumped into another 78 y88 and it had the TA6.6 decals. We talked out side of school about it, since I was new to the car, and hobby at that point, and didn't know about the engines, and tag teaming me isn't going to change my memory about this either.

No one is "tag teaming" anyone. You say you are not going by memory, but yet you state that this came up back in 1979.... so if it happened in 1979, how can it not be from memory? Even if it happened yesterday... it is still from your "memory" from yesterday isn't it? I am not trying to change anyone's memory, I am just saying memories can be mistaken, especially when they are 30+years old.
Brett Campbell
"Hitman"
www.78ta.com
www.ohiofirebirds.com
1978 Trans Am

Offline winks79

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 503
  • Chad
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #50 on: September 14, 2011, 08:26:59 PM »
Thank you Hitman. Good job! Very well said. Sorry you had to write a book! ;D Thanks 78455, i have always loved the 403 and agree with what you said. The 403 always gets put down for some reason, i guess because it's not a Poncho engine. I've had them both and have always had less problems with the 403, but guys i love them both, so don't send any hate posts. I just prefer the 403.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2011, 08:33:18 PM by winks79 »

Offline SgtRock

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 160
  • 1979 T/A WS6
  • Referrals: 0
    • Link to my photo album
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #51 on: September 14, 2011, 08:32:16 PM »
Since this is still going on I will put one more post on this, I'm not going on memory, the shaker decals came up at Trade school, in 79 I bumped into another 78 y88 and it had the TA6.6 decals. We talked out side of school about it, since I was new to the car, and hobby at that point, and didn't know about the engines, and tag teaming me isn't going to change my memory about this either.

No one is "tag teaming" anyone. You say you are not going by memory, but yet you state that this came up back in 1979.... so if it happened in 1979, how can it not be from memory? Even if it happened yesterday... it is still from your "memory" from yesterday isn't it? I am not trying to change anyone's memory, I am just saying memories can be mistaken, especially when they are 30+years old.

My earlier comments were not aimed at this board, but at those people at car shows that spend their time riding down other contestants because they have the "wrong" shaker decal on. I have no doubt that the people on this board would never, and have never engaged in such behavior.  Regardless, despite repeated requests, I still have not seen any documentation on this or any other site that states what size sail bird went on which models, or anything about the color of the front end emblems (red or gold).  All I have seen is comments from people who have said thay have seen such documents.  Could you please scan and post these documents sometime?  I have seen the shaker one you posted before.  That was very helpful.  One last item, in the absence of factual written documents stating such, eye witness accounts do provide factual evidence, as they are excepted in a court of law all the time.  Although people have false memories, they still constitute facts absent any contrary evidence.  All a document will tel you is what the regulation was supposed to be. It doesn't tell you what factory workers or plant managers actually did in practice.  And there has been some testimony here, and across the web, and at other venues about the production practices in the 1970s. Even if there was a 5 percent mistake rate in the 100 photos you received as in your example above, that still represents over 1400 vehicles in 1979 alone that mighta had different sail panel birds -- that's not a statistically insignificant number.

Offline Hitman

  • Administrator
  • Lifetime Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8257
  • Referrals: 0
    • http://www.78ta.com
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #52 on: September 14, 2011, 09:37:37 PM »
I have a busy few days but I will search through the documents I have to see what I can find on the sail panel birds and the front nose emblems. Give me a few days to get past Saturday and then I will search.
Brett Campbell
"Hitman"
www.78ta.com
www.ohiofirebirds.com
1978 Trans Am

Offline SgtRock

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 160
  • 1979 T/A WS6
  • Referrals: 0
    • Link to my photo album
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #53 on: September 14, 2011, 09:50:14 PM »
Thanks man, that would be great!

Offline John Witzke

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 269
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #54 on: September 14, 2011, 10:16:44 PM »
I am somewhat offended as my comments are being pased off as some know-it-all.  Well this know-it-all has been researching the 1977-79 W72 Performance Package for the better part of the last two decades.  I have spent countless hours and resourses researching and obtaining factory documents about the W72 engine option.  My documentation includes internal memos, bulletins and real engine engineering documents that were probably used at Plant 9 engine plant.  In fact some of my engine engineering documents use to be Mike Hicks, Pontiac Engineering. When I share information about this engine package it is not based on memory but actual factory documents on how they were built.  

I have brought forth information that was never known about the W72 Performance Package to the hobby outside of the factory.  How many people knew that very early 1977 W72 engines, 2,136 to be exact (1,806 WA code & 330 Y6 code) engines were built with non-baffled oil pans.  The change over to baffled oil pans began with engine unit number 131040 produced on 10-20-76.  Or that all W72 engines built prior to 9-28-76 had the base L78 40 psi oil pump, solid cap main dowels and non-baffled oil pan instead of the W72 60 psi pump, spring pin main dowel caps and baffled oil pan. These are factory mistake documented by Pontiac Engineering.  

I was also the first to desipher 1977-79 W72 Firebird Formula production numbers, and accurate 1978 W72 production numbers.

This isn't my first rodeo, and I will not take a back seat to anyone on this board!

 
John Witzke

Offline hada76

  • Adv. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2808
  • '79 WS6 W72 M21
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #55 on: September 14, 2011, 10:38:45 PM »
and thuis the only way to have an "original" version of the car is to have it match the "factory correct" standard.

bingo
So just so I understand your position, if a car had dealer installed side moldings that were NOT installed by the factory, this would no longer be considered a "factory correct" car?

yes...factory correct w/ dealer installed option.  and hood bird was also a factory option, but ill bet dealers installed hundreds of em. (didnt effect shaker decal)
'76 T/A 455 4sp   sold
'78 T/A Y88 auto  sold
'79 T/A WS6 4sp
'70 Z/28 4sp

jeff

Offline Burd Turd

  • Lifetime Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3817
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #56 on: September 14, 2011, 10:51:05 PM »
I'm going to put up my over beaten piece of bloody pounded thin prime meat back up here, so where did my imaginary shaker decals come from?
Born and Raised in South Detroit Bitches

Offline hada76

  • Adv. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2808
  • '79 WS6 W72 M21
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #57 on: September 14, 2011, 10:56:13 PM »
I don't claim to be an authority on the subject, but I did own several Trans ams between 77-79 and they were all either brand new or slightly used. Back then the 6.6 Ltr decal was what you saw if the car had the lower performance Pontiac 400 or the Olds 403. The higher output Pontiac 400 always had the T/A 6.6 decal. The cars I remember not having any decals on the shaker were those with the chevy engine, and there were a few. I am a big fan of Pontiacs, always have been, can't tell you how many Pontiacs I've owned through the years, way too many to list, and I do believe that in todays market a 77-79 Trans am with the Pontiac 400 especially the ones with the 4 speed manual tend to be worth more. A 79 400 4 speed should be at the peak of the value charts as those fall in the low production catagory, plus they were produced late in the 79 model year. With all that said, and I probably won't make many friends here by saying this, but in my opinion the better engine was the Olds 403. Yes, it was rated with lower hp than the W72, but G.M also rated that power with less timing, as the 403 was produced by Olds rather than Pontiac, which obviously created a conflict. When the timing on the Olds engine was set at it's optimum, the Olds actually made more power. The Olds 403 also didn't suffer from bearing issues as did the Pontiacs. BTW, my latest project was selected specifically because it had a Pontiac engine.

one word "siamesed"
'76 T/A 455 4sp   sold
'78 T/A Y88 auto  sold
'79 T/A WS6 4sp
'70 Z/28 4sp

jeff

Offline John Witzke

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 269
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #58 on: September 14, 2011, 10:59:22 PM »
Between the time you car was built whenever in 1978 and Nov 1979 (1980 models already out) when you bought your car is anybodys guess.  The 1979 6.6 LITRE shaker decal was available during that time.  I also find it odd that your car was produced without a jack, spare tire and inflator can.  Now there was a time in early 1977 these cars were delivered with full size spares instead or space saver tire.  
John Witzke

Offline Burd Turd

  • Lifetime Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3817
  • Referrals: 0
Re: 6.6 liter vs 6.6 t/a
« Reply #59 on: September 14, 2011, 11:08:51 PM »
No, I agree w/ you, I think the person had all that taken out for more room in the trunk, I made them put all new stuff in before i signed off on the car, I went back to the dealer, from the invoice it was a stock car and they said it was one of the general mgr's car for a year. John, I wasn't referring to you when I made the pebble beach comment, that was a show here in Mi, I would love to have a couple with you and talk TA's!
Born and Raised in South Detroit Bitches