don't sell it, u'll regret it as others have

 

hahahahah firebird? lol
yea I want to hold on to it, theres no way I will get the money i've put into it out of it either .

 

when i look at the late 90s firebirds, it looks like a bloated version of the FD. i see similar design cues present. just sharper front end, weird tail, higher stance, and the likes. the rear light design.

i don't have a firebird and i don't plan on getting one at all but im just stating my opinion that the car has alot of design cues that i think are similar to an FD.

 

I think the FD is good looking,hate the FC and absolutely love my 2 85s's!

 

yea man the trans ams do look like the fd's. Like America thinks and acts "bigger is always better" thats a load of B.S. if you ask me. Take a look at all the cars and tell me america didn't take the look from japanese cars and just incredibly make it bigger I don't know. Messed it all up though.

 

I think FCs borrowed heavily from the Porsche 944, and I agree that they lost their identity. The FB is my first love -- really. I saw it in a dealership back in '79, and I had to have one.

The FBs are basic and elemental. They were the original two seat, lightweight, affordable, reliable rotary engined sports car. There will never be another, and it has cemented its place in history.

The only quibbles I have with the car are:

1) Rear Suspension -- geometry doesn't have a great design, which limits ultimate cornering power and is expensive to correct. I road race my car, so this defficiency shows up bigtime.

2) Front Brakes -- they work fine, but replacing them is a PITA because you have to swap the bearings, too.

3) Steering Box -- this thing gives good feel and precision when it's brand new, but requires continual adjustment. A rack would have been nicer.

For 16 years of marriage, I don't have many complaints.

 

I totally agree.. I really wish they had rack and pinion steering that would be DAMN nice

 

Just a correction on some of the misinformation floating around this thread...

The SE didn't pull .91g's in stock form, not by a long shot. Car and Driver has it rated at .82g's.

The SE is around 100 pounds lighter than a FC, but 200 pounds heavier than my SA.

In every objective test the FC outperformed the SA/FB's that came before it, acceleration, braking, slalom, skidpad, steering, etc.

All of this of course doesn't matter one whit to me because the FC is ugly, heavy and big.

I guess I'm biased too.

 

also the sa was the original, not the fb

 

I'm not very fond of the SA rear end.. at all. SE!!!