# 1987 gta



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

Hey all!

Our club has a contest every year where we go around and pick a kit to have finished at the end of the year. My choice for this year is a kit of a car that I always wanted when I was younger, a *1987 Pontiac GTA*! I remember being in love with these cars, and there aren't many of them left now.

I had a chance to test drive a couple of them in the past few years, and now I know for sure I'll never own one; they are waaaay to punishing a drive to be fun, and my 6.0L G8 is faster! Regardless, I'm glad to have a GTA in my scale garage, even if not in my real one, and I even got to choose my paint and interior just the way I wanted them! By the way, the red interior with flame red paint is legit.

Check out the link above and let me know what you think!


----------



## v8pwrdz28 (Feb 27, 2013)

very nice!!!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Awesome detailing in the interior  The instrument panel looks real.

Great looking ride!


----------



## thundercat (Nov 14, 2011)

Very clean. Love the match of color between the interior and exterior.


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

Thanks guys!

This car is essentially a clone of one I found in a "For Sale" listing online. I think it was with Hemmings. I was so blown away by the match of the interior and exterior that I HAD to have one just like it. Thankfully, this one didn't cost me tens of thousands of dollars, and I didn't have to drive to California to get it! :dude:

Thanks for the praise on the interior. I always like to try and make my interiors as realistic as possible, given the constraints of the kits, even though it's hard to see them. I mean, I'm a bit of a car guy, and I spend all my time IN my cars, so I tend to appreciate the "front office" more even than the mechanicals. 

At car shows and the like, people always look into a car to see and imagine what it's like to own/drive it, so I want to capture that spirit in my models as well. 

Having sat in/driven a few of these 3rd Gens, I can say that the dashboard on the real thing is just as plastic as the one in the kit!


----------



## John F (May 31, 2001)

I drove a Firebird Formula 350 for 16 years, essentially the same car with a different trim package, It's the only car I've ever missed. I had to sell it for parts in '05. the body had rusted so badly I could no longer get it inspected.

A friend had an 87 GTA that he ordered from the dealer. Was the same color outside but black inside. Was the first car I ever saw with radio controls on the steering wheel.


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

Oh man, a Formula 350?? I've never even seen one of those! That's awesome! I wish there was a good kit of one of those; I'd build that in an instant (well, okay, it would take a few months, but you know what I mean...)!

Sorry to hear it rusted out; seems to be the story for F-bodies, though.


----------



## Barrymartin (May 17, 2013)

This GTA is one of my very favourite cars of all time, its most exciting car, it bodies just looks awesome, i got an idea that if i install such kind of coloring at my rc car which look more attractive, A very good work done. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Jasonjoplin (May 30, 2013)

Faust said:


> Hey all!
> 
> 
> 
> I had a chance to test drive a couple of them in the past few years, and now I know for sure I'll never own one; they are waaaay to punishing a drive to be fun, and my 6.0L G8 is faster! Regardless, I'm glad to have a GTA in my scale garage, even if not in my real one, and I even got to choose my paint and interior just the way I wanted them! By the way, the red interior with flame red paint is legit.


A great Look with massive power


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

Jasonjoplin said:


> A great Look with massive power


I agree, that car is one of the best looking of the 80's, and is a really good one for Poncho to hang their hat on.

Now, as for Massive Power, it was for its day, fairly powerful, but I always thought they were better than they are.

I was reading the 1989 literature I have, and for that year, they were talking about the huge amount of horsepower (210) and "mountainous" torque (about 340+ pounds). I agree, those are good numbers for that time frame, but what makes me laugh is this:

My 1980 Turbo Trans Am, which was derided in its day for being weak (compared to some previous T/As) has THE EXACT SAME NUMBERS: 210hp/345lb.ft! So, in 9 years, all GM could do was get back to what they had, with 50 more Cubes than before! 

I guess it shows that it's all relative. Now, the GTA is faster, because it weighs less, but having driven a 1991 and a 1989 both, I find them to be powerful, but not as snappy as newer cars, like my G8 with the 6.0L V8.


----------



## John F (May 31, 2001)

Faust said:


> I agree, that car is one of the best looking of the 80's, and is a really good one for Poncho to hang their hat on.
> 
> Now, as for Massive Power, it was for its day, fairly powerful, but I always thought they were better than they are.
> 
> ...


 Those numbers are for the 305. The GTA came standard with the 350 /4speed auto rated at 235hp (245 with some exhaust upgrades). If you wanted it with a 5 speed or t-tops you had to order the 305.
A GTA with the 350 would have eaten an '80 TTA for breakfast.


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

John F said:


> Those numbers are for the 305. The GTA came standard with the 350 /4speed auto rated at 235hp (245 with some exhaust upgrades). If you wanted it with a 5 speed or t-tops you had to order the 305.
> A GTA with the 350 would have eaten an '80 TTA for breakfast.


I'd have to check to be sure, but that does make more sense. 

I've always found it odd, that the T-top cars, which are heavier, got the weaker engine and drum brakes at the rear, vs. the hardroofs, which could get the 4-wheel disc and big engine. 

Where's the sense in that?

There's not a lot that doesn't eat the TTA for breakfast, it seems.  Still, The TTA moved fast for its day, all things considered. Even now, with a bit of authority on the pedal, I have no problem outdoing many, much newer cars that are supposedly better. It's all about the torque, and the TTA has that. Apparently, so would the 350 GTAs!

I love those GTAs a lot, but I think it's telling about the evolution of automotive technology that my G8, which is much bigger and heavier than a GTA, rides better and will absolutely immolate it performance-wise, assuming both are right out of the box. 

Still, I wish they'd remade T/As when the remade the Camaro...


----------



## firigidice (Apr 23, 2009)

I like it a lot.


----------



## Larry523 (Feb 16, 2010)

Faust said:


> I've always found it odd, that the T-top cars, which are heavier, got the weaker engine and drum brakes at the rear, vs. the hardroofs, which could get the 4-wheel disc and big engine.
> 
> Where's the sense in that?


The reason was concern on GM's part that the torque of the 350 would be a bit too much for the t-top cars, which were known for excessive body flex. They were afraid of lots of potential warranty work.

In '89, they'd stiffened up the chassis enough (or so they thought) that you _could _get the GTA with t-tops, 4-wheel disc brakes and the 350 (but not with the 5-speed manual transmission, which tended to break even with the 305 engines). I know, since I have one I bought new in 1990 and _still _own and drive. IIRC they took away the 350 option for t-top cars again in the 1990 model year.

The pic below was taken about two years ago. After 23 years and 85,000 miles of ownership, it's still a fun car to drive. I'll probably keep it until the wheels fall off. Then, maybe I'll put 'em back on and drive it a few more years!


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

Interesting. I didn't know that about them actually offering the T's with the 350 that year. 

Your car is beautiful! I would definitely glue the wheels back on and drive her some more! :thumbsup:

I was really surprised that the GTA kit didn't have T-roofs, since they're so quintessentially T/A. 

I guess you could always cut the roof out on a kit to make a replica of your car, eh?


----------

