T/A Parts....

I've been in the looks for some parts off an early 3rd gen T/A.. I've gotten the hood, front and rear bumper covers, and air intake setup.... but now I am looking for a set of front fenders with the air extractors,
and tail lights(the tinted ones)... I've been watching Evilbay for a while.. and the ones I've seen were either crap or WAY too expensive... anyone have anything lying around or have seen them reasonable? Dont have to be perfect, just in decent shape... will be ripping apart the 'birds this Summer and hopefully getting a new paintjob soon.
-Geno 1985 Blue Camaro 2.8L w/T-tops (150k and going... getting worried) 1988 Blue Firebird Formula 5.0L w/T-tops 1985 Brown Firebird 5.7L w/5-Speed (No T-tops though) Still looking for an '82-'84 T/A w/T-tops or parts from one
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@uwplatt.REMOVE.edu says...

I found a guy on a forum that sells bowling ball hubcaps and rims. E-mailed him about 15" caps and he said I could have a set for $475 delivered.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
I needed a laugh!
There's a hubcap farm out in Cali that wants $300 for a set and that seems pricey!
--
_________________________________________________________________
Dennis Smith
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
http://www.ardice.com/Regional/Oceania/Australia/Victoria/Localities/B/Ballarat/Recreation_and_Sports/Aero /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What year T/A parts are you looking for?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Last I remember, those fenders were available repop (many are imported though) from just about any body supply shop.
We had a few local ones here in the NYC area that used to deliver to us for free, and we only did body assembly work---gave the paint out to a reputable shop.
If the customer wanted to clean the car up or had to keep it going for a while, this worked out just fine. Joe--ASE Certified Parts Specialist & 10th Ann.Club Tech Director '80 Carousel Red Turbo T/A, 27k orig. '79 "Y89" 400/4 speed 10th Ann. T/A, 57k orig '84 Olds 88 Royale Bgm 2 dr, 307 "Rocket" (lol), 143k and still going....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yeah.. but I've bought aftermarket before.. and it didn't work.. I'd rather have new '82-84 fenders (but can't afford GM prices right now) or used where I KNOW it came off a car so it would fit...
-Geno 1985 Blue Camaro 2.8L w/T-tops (149k and going... getting worried) 1988 Blue Firebird Formula 5.0L w/T-tops 1985 Brown Firebird 5.7L w/5-Speed (No T-tops though) Still looking for an '82-'84 T/A w/T-tops or parts from one
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

OEM and USED body parts may not be an exact fit. Sometimes you have to do minor work to them to align properly, or to get the gaps correct. Yet usually not as much as Aftermarket parts made overseas.
Charles Parts is Parts is not true when you care about your cars,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Good point.
-Geno 1985 Blue Camaro 2.8L w/T-tops (149k and going... getting worried) 1988 Blue Firebird Formula 5.0L w/T-tops 1985 Brown Firebird 5.7L w/5-Speed (No T-tops though) Still looking for an '82-'84 T/A w/T-tops or parts from one
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Geno:
All depends on the quality of what you want. If you want it to be 100% right, with no issues, it's GM new OEM or no way in my book.
Used parts in this case are only a gamble so much as you can see (Or not see) what you are getting. If the unit is straight, generally, as Charles said, minor work has to be done on them.
If you just want to get it together quick and make it look presentable, that's where the aftermarket comes in.
I've bought 'aftermarket' parts only to find out some of them were actually OEM overruns at half the cost of the OEM part :).
Joe--ASE Certified Parts Specialist & 10th Ann.Club Tech Director '80 Carousel Red Turbo T/A, 27k orig. '79 "Y89" 400/4 speed 10th Ann. T/A, 57k orig '84 Olds 88 Royale Bgm 2 dr, 307 "Rocket" (lol), 143k and still going....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I could also go on with more questionable aspects of Clay Blair's background. And I could then use this information, and the inferences, to dismiss The Search for JFK. I could even add that Blair's agent on his Kennedy book was Scott Meredith, who was representing Judith Exner at the time. But I won't go that far. I may be wrong, but in my opinion I don't think the book can be classified as a deliberate distortion or hatchet job. Although the authors are in some respects seeking to surface unflattering material, I didn't feel that they were continually relying on questionable sources or witnesses, or consistently distorting or fabricating the record. As I have mentioned, the book can be criticized and questioned-and dismissed-on other grounds, but, as far as I can see, not on those two.
Dubious Davis
Such is not the case with John Davis' foray into Kennedy biography. The Kennedys: Dynasty and Disaster 1848-1983, was published in 1984, before Davis became the chief spokesman for the anti-Garrison/Mob-did-it wing of the ramified assassination research community. In its very title, his book is deceptive in a couple of interesting ways. First, from the dates included, it imp
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
American higher-education still revered on a pedestal. In Ravelstein Wolfowitz appeared as Bloom's protg Philip Gorman, leaking national security secrets to his mentor during the Bush Sr. war against Iraq. Strauss hovered around the novel as Bloom's mentor and guru Professor Davarr. Strauss/Davarr is really the minence grise of Ravelstein. With friends like Bellow, Bloom did not need enemies. On the basis of Ravelstein alone, Wolfowitz warrants investigation by the F.B.I.
Just recently the University of Chicago officially celebrated its Bush Jr. Straussian Neo-Con cabal, highlighting Wolfowitz Ph.D. '72, Ahmad Chalabi, Ph.D. '69 (the CIA's Iraqi puppet), Abram Shulsky, A.M. '68, Ph.D. '72 (head of the Pentagon's special "intelligence" unit), Zalmay Khalilzad, Ph.D. '79 (Bush Jr's roving pro-consul for Afghanistan and then Iraq), as well as faculty members Bellow, X '39, and Bloom, A.B. '49, A.M. '53, Ph.D. '55, together with Strauss. According to the University of Chicago Magazine, Bloom's rant "helped popularize Straussian ideals of democracy."16 It is correct to assert that Bloom's book helped to popularize Straussian "ideas," but they were blatantly anti-democratic, Machiavellian, Nietzschean, and elitist to begin with. Only the University of Chicago would have the unmitigated Orwellian gall to publicly assert that Strauss and Bloom cared one whit about democracy, let alone comprehended the "ideals of democracy." Does anyone seriously believe that a pro-Israeli Chicago/Strauss/Bloom product such as Wolfowitz could care less about democracy in Iraq? Or for that matter anyone in the Bush Jr. admi
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
him out to be. In the National Enquirer, Truitt stated that Mary had revealed her affair with Kennedy while she was alive to he and his wife. He then went further. In one of their romps in the White House, Mary had offered Kennedy a couple of marijuana joints, but coke-sniffer Kennedy said, "This isn't like cocaine. I'll get you some of that."
The chemical addition to the story was later picked up by drug guru Tim Leary in his book Flashbacks. Exner-like, the angle grew appendages. Leary went beyond grass and cocaine. According to Leary, Mary Meyer was consulting with him about how to conduct acid sessions and how to get psychedelic drugs in 1962. Leary met her on several occasions and she said that she and a small circle of friends had turned on several times. She also had one other friend who was "a very important man" who she also wanted to turn on. After Kennedy's assassination, Mary called Leary and met with him. She was cryptic but she did say, "They couldn't control him any more. He was changing too fast. He was learning too much."
The implication being that a "turned on" JFK was behind the moves toward peace in 1963. Leary learned about Meyer's murder in 1965, but did not pull it all together until the 1976 Jim Truitt disclosure. With Leary, the end (for now) of the Meyer story colors in JFK as the total sixties swinger: pot, coke, acid, women, and unbeknownst to Kennedy, Leary has fulfilled his own fantasy by being Kennedy's guide on his magical myst
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
the story that made Hersh's career was his series of articles on the massacre of civilians at the village of My Lai in Vietnam. Hersh then wrote two books on this atrocity: My Lai 4 and Cover Up. There have always been questions about both the orders given on that mission and the unsatisfactory investigation after the fact. These questions began to boil in the aftermath of the exposure of the Bill Colby/Ted Shackley directed Phoenix Program: the deliberate assassination of any Vietnamese suspected of being Viet Cong. The death count for that operation has ranged between twenty and forty thousand. These questions were even more intriguing in light of the fact that the man chosen to run the military review of the massacre, General Peers, had a long term relationship with the CIA. In fact, former Special Forces Captain John McCarthy told me that-in terms of closeness to the Agency-Peers was another Ed Lansdale.
By the time Hersh's second book on the subject appeared, the suspicions about the massacre, and that Peers had directed a cover up, were now multiplying. Hersh went out of his way to address these questions in Cover Up. On pages 97-98 the following passage appears: There was no conspiracy to destroy the vil
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
endorses her story.
In the article, Smith seems conscious of her questionable qualifications to address the serious subjects of Kennedy and Cuba and the Church Committee. Throughout, she sprinkles in little aphorisms to neutralize any attacks. She quotes Oscar Wilde (not famous for his history books) when she says that history is merely yesterday's gossip. Later on she notes that "today's gossip is tomorrow's headline," a bit self-serving considering her profession. Rising to an Exner-like crescendo near the end, she quotes the ancient Greek historian Herodotus, who felt that history "is what people have said to me and what I've heard, that I must write down." She leaves out the fact that Herodotus did not have access to the National Archives, 3.5 million pages of newly declassified documents, and the on the record testimony of the principals involved via Sen. Frank Church.
Like the Washington Post and New York Times, Smith has her hatchet out for the Church Committee. About the most extensive investigation of the CIA and FBI ever, she says that it was a "little nothing of a half-assed investigation," that the report was written by "aides and underlings" and that they asked Exner "rather pointless questions." She finishes them off by characterizing it as "the pathetic 1975 Church hearings," the implication being that Smith - between interviews of Barbara Streisand and Julia Roberts - has been digging through the newly declassified record and will now set us straight.
But her only source is Exner. And, like Kelley, Smith seems to avoid asking the tough questions, probably because these two have been pals since 1977. At one point she calls her a "real star."
None of the inconsistencies or absurdities I have noted get into the article. In fact, Smith adds more of her own. As with Demaris, one of her aims is to make Exner a victim of the press so that she can imply that the "liberal media" is "protecting" the Kennedys. As demonstrated above, this is preposterous. E
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
said he didn't remember doing that either (Ibid p. 174). On the day that RFK met with CIA officials to make it clear there would be no more unauthorized plots against Castro, Kennedy's calendar reads as follows: "1:00-Richard Helms." Helms could not recall the meeting (Ibid p. 131). With this much to explain away, Helms must have poured coffee for Davis the day they met.
But Davis is not done. He also writes the following: Kennedy also met on April 20 with the Cuban national involved in the unsuccessful underworld Castro assassination plot, a meeting that was not discovered until the Senate Committee on Intelligence found out about it in 1975. That Kennedy could have met with this individual, whose name has never been revealed, without knowing what his mission had been, seems inconceivable. (Davis p. 297.)
Imagine the images conjured up by this passage to a reader who has not read the report. I had read the report and I thought I had missed something. How did I forget about Kennedy's private meeting with Tony Varona in the Oval office? JFK asks Varona why he couldn't get at Castro and then pats him on the head and says try it again. When I turned to page 124 in the report, I saw why I didn't remember it. The meeting, as described by Davis, did not occur. At the real meeting are Kennedy, Robert McNamara, G
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
OK, Now I'm pissed.. trying to be us in our own NG?!?!?!? GRRRR!!! God I hate people!
-Geno 1985 Blue Camaro 2.8L w/T-tops (150k and going... getting worried) 1988 Blue Firebird Formula 5.0L w/T-tops 1985 Brown Firebird 5.7L w/5-Speed (No T-tops though) Still looking for an '82-'84 T/A w/T-tops or parts from one
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
matter never addressed in any version? The logical choice as contacts would be the Angletons. This is apparently off limits for Ron. If he drew attention to his lack of curiosity on this matter, it would hint that something is being papered over in order to conceal a point.
If that were so, then a previous occurrence in Jim Truitt's career would bear mentioning, since it quite closely resembles what he did later in 1976. In August of 1961, Truitt had called Bradlee and said he had evidence that Kennedy had been previously married before his wedding to Jackie, and that this fact had been covered up. Both Bradlee and Truitt pursued the story. But before they printed it they asked Kennedy about it. He referred them to Pierre Salinger, his press secretary. Salinger had already heard the charge from rightwing commentator Fulton Lewis. He had all his points lined up and proved the story false. Bradlee's account in Conversations With Kennedy (pp. 43-49) seems to suggest that Truitt and Bradlee still worked on the story after they were shown it was wrong.
Also intriguing is a flourish added in Rosenbaum's version, which appears heavily reliant on the Truitts and Angletons as sources. Rosenbaum writes that Mary's diary, although usually laid upon her bedroom bookcase, was found in a locked steel box in her studio. Rosenbaum doesn't probe as to why it was not found in its usary&resting place. The locked steel box is not a part of any other version of the story I know, including Tony Bradlee's, and, in all versions, she supposedly found the diary. Of course, a locked box suggests intrigue, but it strains reality. Are we to believe that every time Mary wanted to make an diary entry she would
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.