I graduated high school in 81, college in 85 and ordered my first new car - an IROC in February of 1987.

With Apatite for Destruction playing on the Kenwood pullout I was living large. :D

I had a new 84 trans am with the H.O. engine. What a joke. The 86 GN was a good car with bad paint. I got mine used with a few miles on it and it had already been repainted. I later traded it off and the guy that bought it blew it up

Not an 80 -- but I bought a new 79' Z28 and it was nothing but problems. It was high optioned with everything except cruise control and the alum wheels. The t-top seals were replaced twice, the carpet was replaced (turned a green color), the carb was replaced, the hood was repainted (you could see primer under the paint), etc. etc. etc. The local Chevy dealership had a key to the car -- I just dropped it off when crap went bad. Sold it with 21K on it ... :no:

answer is yes,,,,yes,,,yes,,,

Yes!!!!

I believe the low water mark was 1976. Yes, most bread and butter cars into the 80's were crap. Computer controlled carbs? What a joke. Like trying to put wheels on a horse. One technology did not go well with the other. Pontiac gave it a go for as long as they could. At least they kept the Trans Am name afloat, trying to get some performance out of the smogger motor. Chevy made some progress starting with the 77 Z/28, but both of them were really fighting an uphill battle. Apparently Ford and Mopar had given up on muscle by 76-77.

Road & Track ran an article on the fastest cars (as in observed top speed) in America, 1976. They hinted that it might be a pick up (454 Chevy, as the truck was the only vehicle available with a big block in 1976). I will dig up the article to make sure I get the numbers correct, but I believe it went something like this:

Corvette 126 mph
Chevy Truck with 454 121 mph
Mopar with a 360 dual exhaust (can't remember if it was a Duster, or what, but midsize car) 112 mph.
And the "mighty" Ford Mustang II with the "high performance" 302 topped out at 105 mph. (crap, I had a 70 Opel Rallye with a 1.9 4 banger that would top 105!!!)
Seems there was a 5th car in there, but can't remember what it was.
What a bunch of slugs. I probably should not have listed mph numbers, as my fuzzy memory surely got some of them (maybe all of them) incorrect. If anyone is intersted, I can dig out the old rag and look it up.

Mind you, this bunch of turds is what fueled the first muscle car craze, and is reason that as early as 1977 guys were craving a bit of nostalgia in the form of a car with real power. That is when a lot of our cars started being cared for.... many for the first time.

A CCC Q-jet worked very well and required minimal maintenance. The "dancing needle" concept they incorporated was pretty ingenious, given the technology of the time (in development in the late 1970s, released in 1980-1981).

It's easy to bash the 1980s cars looking through a 2017 window, but many of the 60s muscle cars weren't all that great either.

Don't forget that the 325hp 396 was a slug with the little 198 deg @ 0.050 cam and .398 lift, stock, as-delivered 302 Camaros weren't exactly fast, etc. The 1984 HO 305 in the ad above could give either one of these cars a good run. A '79 Z28 responds to typical heads / cam / exhaust bolt-ons just like the 2 examples above.

In 1983,I bought a brand new 1984 Z-28 H.O.305 with the stereo equalizer,thought it was fast as hell with a good sound.
Then soon traded it in for an 1986 Iroc Tuned Port 305.Thought it was much,much faster and sounded a lot better.
Then traded it in for a 1989 Iroc 5.7 Tuned Port w/4 wheel disc and what an incredible world of difference that car was.
Made the other two feel like pedal cars,and it's BOSE stereo w/Amp had a crisp clear sound that could reach the moon.

I understand completely.