Trans Am owners... got a question about factory ground effects and wheelbase...
06-20-2010, 06:53 AM
#1
Trans Am owners... got a question about factory ground effects and wheelbase... So I was cleaning the car today and noticed something when cleaning the ground effects under the doors, where it mounts to the body.
The passengers side mounts flush on both ends. The drivers side however, does not. So I got out the tape measure and noticed that the ground effects are the exact same length at 71". So then I measured just above at the very bottom of the door across both fenders as well from front to back where the ground effects mount to the car. Drivers side, where there is a gap, measured 71", passengers side where it lined up perfectly measured 70 7/8". And they are both 100% flush on the front sides. One is not further forward than the other.
Thought that was odd so I measured the wheel base on both sides and got 101.5" on both sides, which actually is .4" larger than what the factory spec is of 101.1"... Now, this was a fairly rough measurement with a tape measure, hard to be 100% accurate that way but they are even on both sides, just a little larger than the factory spec, which easily could have been error in my measurement I suppose...
Anyways, here's a pic of the two ground effects and what I was talking about...
Passengers side, fits flush:
Drivers side, definitely a little short:
The passengers side mounts flush on both ends. The drivers side however, does not. So I got out the tape measure and noticed that the ground effects are the exact same length at 71". So then I measured just above at the very bottom of the door across both fenders as well from front to back where the ground effects mount to the car. Drivers side, where there is a gap, measured 71", passengers side where it lined up perfectly measured 70 7/8". And they are both 100% flush on the front sides. One is not further forward than the other.
Thought that was odd so I measured the wheel base on both sides and got 101.5" on both sides, which actually is .4" larger than what the factory spec is of 101.1"... Now, this was a fairly rough measurement with a tape measure, hard to be 100% accurate that way but they are even on both sides, just a little larger than the factory spec, which easily could have been error in my measurement I suppose...
Anyways, here's a pic of the two ground effects and what I was talking about...
Passengers side, fits flush:
Drivers side, definitely a little short:
06-20-2010, 12:26 PM
#5
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pocatello Idaho
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are the front mounts ok. Mine shifted at the very front where it mounts. I had some road rash up front and it shifted the whole piece. If the fronts have ever been bent it will take some work to get it back. The front metal mounts. Hoppe that makes sense. Now if you don't have that issue than ignore what I said because you probably think I am a dumb ***.
06-20-2010, 10:36 PM
#6
Are the front mounts ok. Mine shifted at the very front where it mounts. I had some road rash up front and it shifted the whole piece. If the fronts have ever been bent it will take some work to get it back. The front metal mounts. Hoppe that makes sense. Now if you don't have that issue than ignore what I said because you probably think I am a dumb ***.
Trending Topics
06-22-2010, 03:22 PM
#10
Frankly, I'd just chalk it up to the fact that our f-bodies are really fairly cheaply made mass production vehicles. They've never been known for their superb fit and finish. We do have an excellent drivetrain, thanks primarily to the resources available for Corvette development, but the rest of the vehicle was really made on the cheap, which honestly has always suited me just fine. A superb drivetrain in an affordable chassis is all I've ever wanted.
06-22-2010, 03:45 PM
#11
Yeah, let me know what you find....
So far I've had a few guys tell me that they have the same problem with it being a little short and a few other guys tell me that on their car it actually is a bit too long... And then there's been a few where they line up perfectly... lol...
So far I've had a few guys tell me that they have the same problem with it being a little short and a few other guys tell me that on their car it actually is a bit too long... And then there's been a few where they line up perfectly... lol...
06-22-2010, 04:15 PM
#12
It's from body twist due to being a uni-body. When the torque twist the body it can sometimes flex the drivers front fender foward, resulting in the small gap at the end of the rear drivers ground effect. Loosen bolts on top of fender and under car for fenders and slide it back, be sure not to compromise the clearance of the door opening.
06-23-2010, 05:45 AM
#13
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sullivan, IN
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you otta look on the bottom of the gfx where they shoot the bolt thru the gfx into the body/rocker panel. there are specific holes the bolts are suppossed to go in. the car i had before one in sig was an 02 WS6, i swear 3 bolts on each side were just shot randomly. no where near the actual hole. the car in sig has one bolt on each side (i think the rears) that aren't in the correct hole. i guess line workers didn't care, especially in 02 when production was going thru last phases. i agree with statement above, i can settle with cheaper body just to get awsome drivetrain! to the OP, i will look at my mint car tonight to see if my gfx look the same as yours. no clue on longer wheelbase except for worn bushings in suspension letting everthing out just a little.
06-23-2010, 01:26 PM
#14
you otta look on the bottom of the gfx where they shoot the bolt thru the gfx into the body/rocker panel. there are specific holes the bolts are suppossed to go in. the car i had before one in sig was an 02 WS6, i swear 3 bolts on each side were just shot randomly. no where near the actual hole. the car in sig has one bolt on each side (i think the rears) that aren't in the correct hole. i guess line workers didn't care, especially in 02 when production was going thru last phases. i agree with statement above, i can settle with cheaper body just to get awsome drivetrain! to the OP, i will look at my mint car tonight to see if my gfx look the same as yours. no clue on longer wheelbase except for worn bushings in suspension letting everthing out just a little.
I doubt it's worn bushings... the car only has 14,900 miles on it. It's pretty much brand new still...
06-23-2010, 10:10 PM
#15
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sullivan, IN
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
finally had time to look at this...my car is just opposite, my driver side is totally flush, passenger side is short. i didnt take any pics, but from 98redbird's pics, mine look exactly the same, just different side. i did not take any measurments, but i chalk it up to the supplier of the gfx. they prolly have a range or "spec" of length before it is considered a defect part. i used to work for toyota when tundra's were built here in indiana, there were many parts that fit poor on the line, but still considered "in spec." i doubt seriously if my car is suffering from a twisted chassis, seeing it only has 7100 miles, 4600 were old man miles, and i have never taken car to track. the car has had sfc's since almolst new.
i also don't think just loosening the front fender bolts to slide the fender and gfx back will get the job done. you will also have to loosen all the gfx mounting bolts, plus there are clips that the gfx clip into in the rocker panel. you might get it to slide back, but all the bolt holes in the gfx aren't going to line up after that, or so that's my thereory.
even on my mint car, i am not going to let this bug me too much. i didn't notice it before, and now i'll always know it's there, but i won't waste any time trying to attempt to fix it.
so in short (at least pertaining to 98redbird's car and my own), im gonna say it's a supplier issue, not a gm production, alignment, or chassis twist issue, although i'm sure with enough power and traction, someone out there has adversly affected their gfx thru twisting.
i also don't think just loosening the front fender bolts to slide the fender and gfx back will get the job done. you will also have to loosen all the gfx mounting bolts, plus there are clips that the gfx clip into in the rocker panel. you might get it to slide back, but all the bolt holes in the gfx aren't going to line up after that, or so that's my thereory.
even on my mint car, i am not going to let this bug me too much. i didn't notice it before, and now i'll always know it's there, but i won't waste any time trying to attempt to fix it.
so in short (at least pertaining to 98redbird's car and my own), im gonna say it's a supplier issue, not a gm production, alignment, or chassis twist issue, although i'm sure with enough power and traction, someone out there has adversly affected their gfx thru twisting.
06-23-2010, 10:13 PM
#16
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sullivan, IN
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
guess i didnt read 98redbird's sig very well, didn't see just 15k. worn suspension may not affect wheelbase on that particular car. don't know really what to think about that. just as long as it's even would be my only concern.
