BradandBrooks

Smoky and the Bandit... I want a 1977 Trans Am now... LOL!

Brad

WindsorFox

BradandBrooks wrote:
> Smoky and the Bandit... I want a 1977 Trans Am now... LOL!
>
> Brad
>

The real ones don't run like the one in the movie. I think they all
had the 403 in them <kaff>

--
"You seriously need to pull your head out of your ass
more often and look at what is going on around you." - KJK

RSCamaro

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 05:33:01 -0600, WindsorFox
<windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote:

>BradandBrooks wrote:
>> Smoky and the Bandit... I want a 1977 Trans Am now... LOL!
>>
>> Brad
>>
>
> The real ones don't run like the one in the movie. I think they all
>had the 403 in them <kaff>

Not quite true. Trans Ams could be had with the Olds 403ci with an
automatic and a Pontiac 400ci with the 4 speed, and possibly a Pontiac
350ci though I'm none too sure about the 77' model.

...Ron
--
68'RS Camaro
88'Formula
00'GT Mustang

Backyard Mechanic

"BradandBrooks" <BradandBrooks@shaw.ca> wrote:

> Smoky and the Bandit... I want a 1977 Trans Am now... LOL!
>
> Brad

Ah, it's all subjective.... butI class that design in with the steroid
editions like the '73 Mach.. and they straightened it out well in 82.

If you think the best human bodies are on the cover of 'Pumping Iron' mags,
then all's well....

Dont like 68 model vette's either.. Liked the 80's version; but that's just
geezer me.

;)
--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

WindsorFox

RSCamaro wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 05:33:01 -0600, WindsorFox
> <windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>>BradandBrooks wrote:
>>
>>>Smoky and the Bandit... I want a 1977 Trans Am now... LOL!
>>>
>>>Brad
>>>
>>
>> The real ones don't run like the one in the movie. I think they all
>>had the 403 in them <kaff>
>
>
> Not quite true. Trans Ams could be had with the Olds 403ci with an
> automatic and a Pontiac 400ci with the 4 speed, and possibly a Pontiac
> 350ci though I'm none too sure about the 77' model.
>
> ...Ron

Either way they ranged from 180 to 200 horse power. Like I said the
real ones do not run like the one in the movie.


--
"You seriously need to pull your head out of your ass
more often and look at what is going on around you." - KJK

66 6F HCS

"Backyard Mechanic" <pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote
> Ah, it's all subjective.... butI class that design in with the steroid
> editions like the '73 Mach.. and they straightened it out well in 82.

Except that in '82 they started dropping in that POS boat anchor 305. I
owned an '83 Z-28 t-top and it was a complete SLUG, that is until I dumped
in a SBC 400 out of a '78 Caprice wagon. Then it became a freakin' stump
puller with boatloads of torque.
--
Scott W.
'66 HCS Mustang 289
'68 Ranchero 500 302
'69 Mustang Sportsroof 351W
ThunderSnake #57
http://home.comcast.net/~vanguard92/

RSCamaro

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 15:14:49 -0600, WindsorFox
<windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote:


>> Not quite true. Trans Ams could be had with the Olds 403ci with an
>> automatic and a Pontiac 400ci with the 4 speed, and possibly a Pontiac
>> 350ci though I'm none too sure about the 77' model.
>>
>> ...Ron
>
> Either way they ranged from 180 to 200 horse power. Like I said the
>real ones do not run like the one in the movie.

But like many engines that were around for a number of years it was
and is quite easy to make them breathe, for less than it would cost me
for a short block GM LS1 or Ford Modular motor today.

Of course the newer engines are a more advanced and efficiently
designed compared to old tech carbureted engines.

...Ron
--
68'RS Camaro
88'Formula
00'GT Mustang

cprice@here.com

66 6F HCS wrote:

> "Backyard Mechanic" <pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote
>
>>Ah, it's all subjective.... butI class that design in with the steroid
>>editions like the '73 Mach.. and they straightened it out well in 82.
>
>
> in a SBC 400 out of a '78 Caprice wagon. Then it became a freakin' stump
> puller with boatloads of torque.


Are you sure you dont mean 'pud puller'?

Spike

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 09:17:40 GMT, "BradandBrooks"
<BradandBrooks@shaw.ca> wrote:

>Smoky and the Bandit... I want a 1977 Trans Am now... LOL!
>
>Brad
Then it is definitely time for you to go rent Bullit and Gone in 60
Seconds, watch them in one evening and get your head straight!!!!!
LOL : 0 )
--

Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
w/Black Std Interior, A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok;
Vintage 40 16" rims w/225/50ZR16 KDWS BF Goodrich
gForce Radial T/As, Cobra drop; surround sound
audio-video...
See my ride at....
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/003_May_21_3004.jpg
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/005_May_21_2004.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/d..._11_05_002.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/E...ebuild_006.jpg

66 6F HCS

<cprice@here.com> wrote in message news:31gwf.271720$ki.240649@pd7tw2no...
> 66 6F HCS wrote:
>
>> "Backyard Mechanic" <pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote
>>
>>>Ah, it's all subjective.... butI class that design in with the steroid
>>>editions like the '73 Mach.. and they straightened it out well in 82.
>>
>>
>> in a SBC 400 out of a '78 Caprice wagon. Then it became a freakin' stump
>> puller with boatloads of torque.
>
>
> Are you sure you dont mean 'pud puller'?

Not once it was rebuilt. I actually broke a motor mount with it. I think I
got about 8mpg. ;)
--
Scott W.
'66 HCS Mustang 289
'68 Ranchero 500 302
'69 Mustang Sportsroof 351W
ThunderSnake #57
http://home.comcast.net/~vanguard92/