GTO vs Z/28

Does anyone remember the '70s? When the LT-1 powered Z/28 died....Trans Am literally pounded Camaro.

When the LM-1 powered Z/28 returned in '77....it was no match for a T/A 6.6 equipped Trans Am. When the WS6 package became available in '78, Trans Ams even outhandled Z/28s!:eek:

If we ever get a new Camaro, does anyone think that Pontiac will build GTOs that run rough shod over Z/28s?

It didn't stay like that for long though. ;) As soon as the Third Gen came along the Z28 was winning the Best Handling Car Built In The U.S. Then the almost no compromise .92G capable suspension of the IROC-Z did it moreover, while TPI Camaros also got a little power advantage due to a better intake design and lighter weight.

But IMO no, the GTO will not perform better than a new Camaro. Gotta recall the "Z28 is the closest thing to a Corvette" saying.

I think this GTO will be faster than the current FBody simply due to the nature of the car. The limited aspect of it, esp now that it steps into the #1 role at Ponitac.

Originally posted by Chuck!
I think this GTO will be faster than the current FBody simply due to the nature of the car. The limited aspect of it, esp now that it steps into the #1 role at Ponitac.


Not the current F-body. I'm sure the GTO will outperform it handily.

I'm talking about the next Camaro. Will Pontiac make sure that say an '07 or '08 GTO...outperforms an '07 or '08 Z/28 and will Chevy let them do it ? (I sure hope not.)

Originally posted by IZ28
It didn't stay like that for long though. ;) As soon as the Third Gen came along the Z28 was winning the Best Handling Car Built In The U.S. Then the almost no compromise .92G capable suspension of the IROC-Z did it moreover, while TPI Camaros also got a little power advantage due to a better intake design and lighter weight.

But IMO no, the GTO will not perform better than a new Camaro. Gotta recall the "Z28 is the closest thing to a Corvette" saying.

Though the 3rd gen Zs tended to handle better than the 1st 3rd gen T/As, the early 3rd gens had a bad rep for it's terrible ride (GMs early days at creating hot handling cars weren't that great... early C4s had the same issues). 3rd gen T/As were also the most aerodynamic cars on the planet at the time.

Just the same, T/As lost alot of enthusiasts, first because of the turbo T/A that not only came in automatic only, but was alot slower than even the Olds 6.6 (let alone the T/A 6.6), then because Pontiac lost their own engine altogether. IMHO, Pontiac never recovered from that.

Originally posted by guionM


Just the same, T/As lost alot of enthusiasts, first because of the turbo T/A that not only came in automatic only, but was alot slower than even the Olds 6.6 (let alone the T/A 6.6), then because Pontiac lost their own engine altogether. IMHO, Pontiac never recovered from that.

Right on Guion.

The last Trans Am that really got me going was the '79 T/A 6.6, 4-speed, WS6.

Of course when new I kind of resented it since the Z/28 of the same year could never hold a candle to it. For that matter an L-82, 4-speed, Corvette could barely compete with a T/A 6.6.

Actaully It think a 70 Trans Am (400) or 71 (455) could take a 2nd gen LT1 Z. Way more torque

I also have a test of a 77 T/A 400 VS a 77 Z and the Z won! -----I know that makes no logical sense.

Some of those mid seventies, pre T/A 6.6 400s were pretty slow.

If I remember correctly, in '76 and '77 they put out 200hp.

Combined with a 3800lbs Trans Am, auto trans and small gear...I can see how a lighter 4-speed Z/28 with 3.73 gears might be faster.

Originally posted by guionM
Though the 3rd gen Zs tended to handle better than the 1st 3rd gen T/As, the early 3rd gens had a bad rep for it's terrible ride (GMs early days at creating hot handling cars weren't that great... early C4s had the same issues). 3rd gen T/As were also the most aerodynamic cars on the planet at the time.

Note the word "no compromise" in my post. :) If you want great handling a nice ride usually isn't an option. ;) 82-84 The Camaro got .36 Cd. while the Firebird got .29 Cd. The Camaro was really close in aerodynamics 85-90, .34 Cd compared to the Firebirds .32 Cd.

Originally posted by IZ28
Note the word "no compromise" in my post. :) If you want great handling a nice ride usually isn't an option. ;) 82-84 The Camaro got .36 Cd. while the Firebird got .29 Cd. The Camaro was really close in aerodynamics 85-92, .34 Cd compared to the Firebirds .32 Cd.

I'm sorry, but what is a Cd?

it means the Coefficiant of Drag - A measure of how much air resistance that a particular objects generates. Lower numbers are slipperier ...

Originally posted by Decromin
it means the Coefficiant of Drag - A measure of how much air resistance that a particular objects generates. Lower numbers are slipperier ... Which means they glide better?

Originally posted by Meccadeth
Which means they glide better?

Don't know about gliding, but it helps top speed greatly.

Originally posted by guionM
Don't know about gliding, but it helps top speed greatly.

In fact, it helps top speed alot more than HP. That's why those Winston Cup cars can run 180+ by their self with only about 450-500 HP, superior aerodynamics. :cool:

I'd like to think that a future Z/28 would be an edgier, smaller, more performance oriented car than GTO. A car with razor sharp handling, boatloads of power and torque, huge brakes and serious rubber....a car not necessarily for everyone but perfect for those who can appreciate it.

But with Bob Lutz saying GTO will have 360hp initially with an LS6 on the way, and the fact that this is going to be Pontiacs halo car, and the availability of all the HSV hardware already engineered for it, (like 19" wheels and massive brakes)....it's going to take alot of intestinal fortitude for Chevy to out do GTO.

I wonder if Chevy has what it takes?

Sure, if they want to.

Originally posted by 305fan
Actaully It think a 70 Trans Am (400) or 71 (455) could take a 2nd gen LT1 Z. Way more torque

I also have a test of a 77 T/A 400 VS a 77 Z and the Z won! -----I know that makes no logical sense.

Found the article (Car & Driver April 1977). The Z28 was a preproduction preview, but it sets the stage to show how Trans Am evolved.

In 1977, the Z28 was quicker than Trans Am 0-60 & the quarter mile, but the T/A had the higher top speed (105 vs 110). This was because of Z28's twin resonitator exhaust and it's 3.73 axle (T/A still had the full single & 3.23):
0-60: Z28-8.6 T/A-9.3 L82 Corvette-7.7 Aspen R/T 8.6
1/4 mile: Z28-16.3 T/A-16.9 L82-16.6 Aspen R/T-17.4

In 1978, Trans Am got a healthy power boost (20) and stole from Z28s bag of tricks (twin resonatators, higher axle ratio, revised timing, etc...) as Corvette also did, and became faster than pretty much all but the quickest 3rd gens:
0-60: Z28-7.4 T/A-6.5 L82 Corvette-6.8 Volare Road Runner-7.3
1/4 mile: Z28-15.6 T/A-15.3 Corvette L82-15.5 Road Runner-15.9
Yep, the 78 & 79 Trans Ams were actually QUICKER THAN A CORVETTE! :eek: Did all you "Nothing's ever quicker than Corvette rule" people get that? :p

BUT.... Trans Am was consistantly the better handling of the 2 f-bodies (surprised me too :eek: ) in every comparison of the era, up till the turbocharged T/A of 1980 (weighed more than the T/A with the 455 engine and came with automatics only!). The cold induction Z28 350s were then much quicker till the end of the 2nd gen's production.

also 1971 1/4 mile times:
Camaro Z28: 14.8@96
Javelin AMX: 14.6@92
Trans Am HO: 13.9@104
Boss 302: 13.8@104
Hemi Cuda: 13.7@104

Z28s were much faster in 67-69 trim, typically doing well over 100mph quarters.

how did everyone get on the Z28 vs trans am topic that isn't even what the question was
in GM chevy is top dog i think they will make more of an effort when the new camaro comes out
but i don't think they are going to be direct competitors
they will be in totally different price ranges IMO