[MikeNoun]

Everyone, I finally finished this web article I mentioned I was writing a couple weeks ago. Please check it out, and let me know what you think!

This in no way constitutes a "facts" page on the 1969 Trans Am, it's basically a walk through showing the concept and prototype cars that led up to the 1969 Trans Am, some variations, etc. The last page (page 5) is on the 1969 Firebird 455 H.O. Engineering Car, and some information on my own car (which many of you have read before). I also went into some detail about why Pontiac never built a RAIV 455.

Please feel free to e-mail me at mnoun@yahoo.com with any comments, suggestions, or feedback. I'd like to write a few more articles on 1969 Firebirds, and I would appreciate any contributions you may have.

http://musclecarfilms.com/1969_Fireb...ng_Cars_1.html

Thank you!

Mike

[1969T/A]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

This in no way constitutes a "facts" page on the 1969 Trans Am

I think you should have the above quote on the first page.
IN BIG LETTERS.....

[MikeNoun]

What I meant by this wasn't a "Facts" page was that this wasn't an article on production breakdowns, VIN number identifications, etc.

I'm summarizing the prototype and developmental cars based on Gary Witzenburg's and Michael Lamm's exhaustive research, and the interviews they conducted with those people that were involved with these cars.

[1969T/A]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

What I meant by this wasn't a "Facts" page was that this wasn't an article on production breakdowns, VIN number identifications, etc.

I'm summarizing the prototype and developmental cars based on Gary Witzenburg's and Michael Lamm's exhaustive research, and the interviews they conducted with those people that were involved with these cars.

I understand but some of the info your saying is true or "fact"..
I have talked to the people and the story they give is different then yours
and they were involved with these cars.
Thats why I said you should put
"This in no way constitutes a "facts" page on the 1969 Trans Am"
Its articles like this that can give out mis-information
and people then believe it as fact.

[fbirdinconcord]

Great article! Thanks for the link. Love those mule pics.

[Keith Seymore]

Another excellent job, Mike.

One of the things that I enjoy, and that your article highlights, is the "iterative" development of these products. A completed "Trans Am" package doesn't just fall out of the sky - you can see the genesis in a sketch or a suspension option, or a name that's close but not quite the same (ie, the "Firebird Can Am"); but when viewed with the benefit of hindsight you can almost visualize their thought process. Very cool.

A couple of those photos look like the inside of the garages at the Milford Proving Ground, rather than the Pontiac Engineering garage (based on the butresses along the garage wall) but I will admit it's hard to tell. The picture of the 'bird overlooking the city looks to me like South Mountain, overlooking Phoenix and the "Valley of the Sun" (quite possible since, up until recently, our Desert Proving Ground was located in Mesa Arizona).

Another tie in I see is that Herb Adam's group was called Pontiac's "Advanced Engineering Group", which is the same group my Dad retired from in 1989 after working on the "P2" program (at that time it was C-P-C). A guy back in the mockup area found some photos of the P2 and we are writing an article about that car and it's development, so look for that in the near future. (In fact, more pictures of the car have just arrived while I was composing this post ).

Thanks for pulling that together and posting, Mike.

K

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by 1969T/A

I understand but some of the info your saying is true or "fact"..
I have talked to the people and the story they give is different then yours
and they were involved with these cars.
Thats why I said you should put
"This in no way constitutes a "facts" page on the 1969 Trans Am"
Its articles like this that can give out mis-information
and people then believe it as fact.

You are certainly welcome to write your own article. I would look forward to reading it.

K

[boater bill]

Great work Mike!
Seeing the PFST information made me remember that I have a copy of the Motor Trend article from 1967 on the PFST. If you want, I will find it this weekend and scan it for you.
I got the article from the university article exchange. I was doing a technical paper on whether Pontiac should re-introduce the OHC-6 engine in the early 80's. After my research, I ended up talking with the Pontiac chief engineer of engine development. He said that many of the design ideas were scheduled to be used, but as a total engine, it was too tall to fit under the hood. The OHC sunbird came out soon afterward.

[428RA4]

Yes -

A lot of work goes into setting up a web site and collecting information. Thank you for sharing it. I learned a few new things. Regardless if it was accurate or not, you put forth the effort to share so that others can correct or discuss the validity of information so that we can preserve history.

And that is the whole point of car collection.

Here is my best effort in trying to preserve the art of auto re-creation.

mike

http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...pictureid=3677

[John V.]

Mike, excellent article, very enjoyable. Contains a LOT of inside info that I have not been exposed to previously.

A couple thoughts that came to me after reading it;

1. You may want to add copies of the original Car Distribution Bulletins No. 12-6 and 12-11 that first informed the Dealers of the coming TA and the Pontiac Sales Bulletin 69-53 as the first Press Release announcing the TA.

2. These documents all suggest an alternate reason for the addition of the chin spoiler, that is to aid in engine compartment cooling. I have read that the '68 Corvette was originally planned for '67 intro but was delayed in part by a problem with aerodynamic lift of the new body shape. Resolved by the addition of a small chin spoiler. Conceivable that the TA chin spoiler was a result of the same concern, but I think you should at least acknowledge that the contemporaneously "announced" reason was for cooling. Lift concerns sounds more "edgy" but with a max. speed on the order of 120(?) for a production TA and given the rear air foil design, hard to imagine they generated sufficient rear downforce to affect the attitude of the car. But if so, why not say the chin spoiler was to improve handling rather than for cooling?

3. Although the CDB documents point to a planned production start on or about April 1 and the Sales Bulletin was dated April 1, you might want to mention that it appears that the TA might not have actually begun production until May. At least, I am not aware of any TAs documented as being produced in April. Production of the Firebird ended at Lordstown in late March as had been planned (even CDB 12-6 in early Feb states the TA production would take place at Norwood and Van Nuys). Tooling was moved to Norwood and Firebird Final Assembly production commenced there in mid to late April. I have not seen a TA documented from there until May. Van Nuys produced so few TAs, it is my opinion that they would have produced many more if production hadn't begun so close to the May strike start and in any event, the Van Nuys TAs I have seen have all been 05A so far. This is just speculation on my part, but I think it is germane to any discussion of the TA development to know when Final Assembly production actually commenced.

4. I'm sure you know of it but for those that don't, Kenny Gregrich maintained an excellent member page at Classical Pontiac;

http://www.classicalpontiac.com/members/2/

where he presented much good info about the TA starting on page 4.

http://www.classicalpontiac.com/members/2/4.html

He mentions the air foil striping "controversy", he has never seen an unrestored car with stripes. But wasn't there a recent thread here with a claim of an original car that had always had the stripes on the air foil? The Assembly Manual illustration is plain evidence of the intent (no air foil stripe) and predates production start. But one thing that keeps sticking in my head, isn't it possible that production of "pilot" cars had occurred, especially at Van Nuys, to work out any production "bugs", even before the final striping illustration was produced? And isn't it possible that these were VIN'd saleable vehicles? And that they were painted over the air foil as seen in the pre-production cars? My idea is that one of the "bugs" was some difficulty in painting the air foil so that step was eliminated. But perhaps some such "pilot" builds got the air foil striping and were sold that way? Any such TA would have an exceptionally early VIN of course and would have to be a Van Nuys car (since Norwood production could not possibly have begun prior to the release of the stripe illustration) so it would be pretty easy to establish whether any TA was possibly an early "pilot" build or not. A VIN prior to L117000 would be what to look for, IMO.

5. There are couple grammar errors not worth mentioning, but one on page 5 needs to be fixed. At the end of the story on Test Car #9723, you say "for all intensive purposes". This is a common corruption of the correct phrase, which is "for all intents and purposes".

Mike, kudos for publishing this. 1969T/A, your criticism is by innuendo. It would be more helpful to Mike and all of us if your criticisms were specific. Who did you talk to and what specifically did they say that conflicts with what Mike has published? It would be pointless to do a lot of research and never publish the findings for fear that you may have missed something or came to a wrong conclusion or included some misinformation. Only by publishing the work can you expose your research to peer review. IMO.

[John Haley]

Very nice work!

[MikeNoun]

Thanks guys, I appreciate the feedback.

John, thank you for your input, it's always welcome. That grammar error has been corrected.

Yes, I'm aware of Kenny G's Trans Am page, in fact I contributed some of those scans he used.

On the topic of the front spoiler....

I'm not sure the addition of the 69 Trans Am front spoiler was for cooling. I know the original announcement to dealers made a reference to that, but the Firebird 400's already had upper core support filler panels, and a lower baffle pan, for added cooling. The Trans Am used the same engine(s) as the Ram Air Firebirds, and I'm not aware of Firebird 400's suffering any abnormal overheating issues at that time.

Herb Adams and crew designed the front spoiler from the beginning as an aerodynamic device to balance the downforce of the rear wing. Now from a labor standpoint, perhaps that front spoiler was deemed unnecessary by sales and marketing (after all, the Judge didn't use one), and while the addition of that simple flat piece of plastic may seem innocent and cheap, from a labor standpoint, it meant setting up a template, drilling holes, 8 sheet metal screws, and the guys in the "pit" had to attach it on the assembly line. Perhaps it was sold to the sales and marketing department as a "necessary item for cooling", and that's how they portrayed it, I'm not sure.

And I'm also curious whether 1969 Trans Am's were delivered off the trailer with the front spoiler on, or perhaps it was an item placed in the trunk to be installed by the dealer. Seems like that spoiler would scrape pretty bad coming off a ramp, and probably crack or break. If it were a rubber skirt, there wouldn't be a problem, but it was plastic.

I agree on the "pilot" car comments with stripes on the rear wing, and I think I conveyed that as "pre-production" cars that the media used. And those 1 (maybe 2) cars may have been resold, but I think the point of that segment of the article is that production line cars did not get wing stripes.

Thanks again for the feedback, it's very much appreciated!

[jcruz]

Mike, a great article! Very enjoyable read.

Just a couple very minor nits:

1. There's a type-o on the 1st page: "The GM Design Staff built a 1968 Firebird to showcase what would become known as the "Brabham 400", and odd name considering this Firebird did not have a 400 cid engine!"

2. On the 2nd page, the last sentence in the 1st paragraph spills over into the photo (in Firefox 3.5.7)

John

[MikeNoun]

John, thank you!

I corrected the "and" typo on the first page. I'm not sure which part on Page 2 (1st paragraph, last sentence) is spilling over onto the photo. I too am on Firefox, and I also checked the page in IE7, and it looks ok. Is anyone else having this problem?

Mike

[428RA4]

Can confirm in Firefox that the type is laying over the image.

[MikeNoun]

Thank you guys. I'm not sure what that is, because it appears fine in either one of my browsers, but I put some space between the first paragraph and the first pictures. Maybe that will help.

[Kurt S]

The front spoiler would be for downforce. See http://www.camaro-untoldsecrets.com/...article_fs.htm for actual data (link is bottom of page).

The dates in the AIM are just drafting dates.
From JohnZ:
The date in the revision block only indicates when Engineering Graphics released the revised sheet; the actual implementation date on the line was handled through the NPC (Notice of Production Change) system. Those were internal documents, and seldom saw the light of day. Generally speaking, implementation occurred after the revised sheet was released, but some changes occurred prior to the revisiion date; you'd need the signed-off NPC (which had the VIN of the first car with the change implemented) to know for sure.

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by Kurt S

The front spoiler would be for downforce. See http://www.camaro-untoldsecrets.com/...article_fs.htm for actual data (link is bottom of page).

The dates in the AIM are just drafting dates.
From JohnZ:
The date in the revision block only indicates when Engineering Graphics released the revised sheet; the actual implementation date on the line was handled through the NPC (Notice of Production Change) system. Those were internal documents, and seldom saw the light of day. Generally speaking, implementation occurred after the revised sheet was released, but some changes occurred prior to the revisiion date; you'd need the signed-off NPC (which had the VIN of the first car with the change implemented) to know for sure.

Thanks for posting, Kurt. That's interesting -

Just to comment, we had a similar system at truck, called the "Engineering Change Authorization" (or ECA).

What was funny about this, at least to me, is that the system seemed to to be set up (like they knew in advance - as indicated by it's very name) that there was only going to be one initial release and that it would then be changed hundreds of times after that....

[428RA4]

I have a quick question in regards to the Camaro web site posted.

Did the JL 8 disc break rear end accept 14 inch stock wheels?

thanks

[jcruz]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

T...I put some space between the first paragraph and the first pictures. Maybe that will help.

Fixed it.