View Poll Results: The ULTIMATE Z28 vs. SS Poll
Z28
105
60.34%
SS
51
29.31%
Other (ZL1, RS, etc.)
18
10.34%
Voters: 174. You may not vote on this poll
The ULTIMATE Z28 vs. SS thread. Where all Z28 vs. SS posts go to die...
04-15-2008, 09:19 PM
#91
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: CNY
Posts: 2,224
My cousin had a '69 Z/28 back in the mid-'80s.
Daytona Yellow with the black stripes and black vinyl top; black & white houndstooth interior.
He had the single quad 302. He said it was a DZ1 motor but I always thought the DZ1 motors were the dual quad 302s.
I never got to drive it but I remember sitting in it working the clutch & rowing the gears. I swear, if you weren't careful releasing your leg off of the clutch pedal, your knee would get slammed into your face. There was a lot of resistance on that clutch.
It was a cool car.
Daytona Yellow with the black stripes and black vinyl top; black & white houndstooth interior.
He had the single quad 302. He said it was a DZ1 motor but I always thought the DZ1 motors were the dual quad 302s.
I never got to drive it but I remember sitting in it working the clutch & rowing the gears. I swear, if you weren't careful releasing your leg off of the clutch pedal, your knee would get slammed into your face. There was a lot of resistance on that clutch.
It was a cool car.
04-15-2008, 09:27 PM
#92
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: FL/MI
Posts: 1,808
I'll back off this thread as it's going to be what it will be...
I want to make certain that all my friends that love Camaro understand what I believe their reaction will be to the next generation car...be their choice V6 or V8...no matter the package badge it may or may not bear...
I think you will be thrilled at what the new Camaro will deliver.
Me at Sebring pre-season practice with a confident grin... I wish you the same:
I want to make certain that all my friends that love Camaro understand what I believe their reaction will be to the next generation car...be their choice V6 or V8...no matter the package badge it may or may not bear...
I think you will be thrilled at what the new Camaro will deliver.
Me at Sebring pre-season practice with a confident grin... I wish you the same:
Last edited by 1fastdog; 04-15-2008 at 10:01 PM.
04-15-2008, 09:27 PM
#93
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 287
The COPO ZL-1's were the fastest, NOT SS or Z28.
All Aluminum 427ci/425hp(probably underrated), very limited production.
Interesting Read:
http://www.68rscamaro.com/camfacts/67z_hist/
With the same or more HP as the 396/375hp BBC, and weighing over 250lbs less, I'd have to say the 302ci H.O. Z28 was faster.
I'd say they should follow a formula like this, not equalling the Vette exactly ofcourse, but:
Z/28 = Z/06
SS(Z/L1?) = Z/R1
All Aluminum 427ci/425hp(probably underrated), very limited production.
Interesting Read:
http://www.68rscamaro.com/camfacts/67z_hist/
With the same or more HP as the 396/375hp BBC, and weighing over 250lbs less, I'd have to say the 302ci H.O. Z28 was faster.
I'd say they should follow a formula like this, not equalling the Vette exactly ofcourse, but:
Z/28 = Z/06
SS(Z/L1?) = Z/R1
Clyde
04-15-2008, 09:49 PM
#94
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 287
The dual quad setup was hard to get right... don't I know... The ZLO1 was essentially an aluminum L88 and the torque went on forever. Put a Kinsler injection on it and go CanAM racing.. monster torque...PERIOD.
The 302 solid lifter motor was good, very good. Bolt on the headers and it only got better. I gotta tell ya though...the LS* motors of today and tomorrow throw the 302 and big blocks it into a shadow for all around performance.
The 302 solid lifter motor was good, very good. Bolt on the headers and it only got better. I gotta tell ya though...the LS* motors of today and tomorrow throw the 302 and big blocks it into a shadow for all around performance.
Clyde
04-15-2008, 09:50 PM
#95
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: FL/MI
Posts: 1,808
04-15-2008, 10:28 PM
#96
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
Originally Posted by HOTCIVIC:
Speculation. I know people who stayed away from the Camaro because the Camaros of the '70s and '80s were pigs.
The only thing a late 80s IROC Z did better than the 1st gen Camaros was blow cooler A/C.
It's too bad because the 4th gen was the best Camaro ever.
Speculation. I know people who stayed away from the Camaro because the Camaros of the '70s and '80s were pigs.
The only thing a late 80s IROC Z did better than the 1st gen Camaros was blow cooler A/C.
It's too bad because the 4th gen was the best Camaro ever.
I've owned an '85 and '90, and an '86 TA.
They handled pretty damn good for pigs.
I had a good friend who had a late '80's CRX, which he Autocrossed, who was very impressed after driving my IROC-Z.
And I can't even begin to tell you how many lighter cars that have tried to stay with me in turns or on-ramps and failed.
Tho the Tunedport motors were top end limited by long runner intakes, they have butt-loads of low end torque. And my '90 managed very low 14's BONE STOCK...LT1 territory(Auto-for Auto)
With only Free-Mods I picked off quite a few LT1's, on the street and strip, heads up!
And gave Automatic LS1's all they wanted until roughly 70mph...often pulling ahead in the 60ft region.
And even 305ci/5spd IROC's had dual cats and 235hp, like I believe Charlie's is?
The 4th Gen was the best "performing" Camaro ever, true...but in the looks dept, it's arguable that they were the worst looking until the last face-lift...and that to me keeps them from being the "Best" all around Camaro ever.
As someone said, some people thought they quit making them long before '02, since they looked more like foreign cars, big Geo Storm or others.
And I can't tell you how many times I get compliments on my IROC at gas stations, tracks, car shows, even parking lots...or how fun it is to drive!
Last edited by 90rocz; 04-15-2008 at 10:44 PM.
04-15-2008, 10:36 PM
#97
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
Originally Posted by WildPaws:
While everyone generally accepts that the DZ302 engine was underrated at 290 HP, people never seem to offer any thing other than speculation when giving their perceptions of what the HP actually was. I'm sitting here looking at test results dated 8/2/67 from a Chevy document that was published in the book "Camaro Untold Secrets 1967-1969" written by Wayne D. Guinn. This paper and series of tests were part of the developement work on the optional dual 4 barrel carb setup. The baseline test was a single 4 barrel DZ302 engine which produced 441.5 HP @ 7400 RPM. The 2x4 carb setup produced 467 HP @7400 RPM, a fuel injection version was also tested that produced 470.1 HP @ 7400 RPM. I thought it would be interesting to share this knowledge.
Clyde
While everyone generally accepts that the DZ302 engine was underrated at 290 HP, people never seem to offer any thing other than speculation when giving their perceptions of what the HP actually was. I'm sitting here looking at test results dated 8/2/67 from a Chevy document that was published in the book "Camaro Untold Secrets 1967-1969" written by Wayne D. Guinn. This paper and series of tests were part of the developement work on the optional dual 4 barrel carb setup. The baseline test was a single 4 barrel DZ302 engine which produced 441.5 HP @ 7400 RPM. The 2x4 carb setup produced 467 HP @7400 RPM, a fuel injection version was also tested that produced 470.1 HP @ 7400 RPM. I thought it would be interesting to share this knowledge.
Clyde
A local guy I know at the track claims to have a DZ motor car, and claimed it made over 450hp, pretty much stock, I know it was PDQ...
04-15-2008, 10:42 PM
#98
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
Originally Posted by 1fastdog:
By the same token, my friend Ray had a '69 SS396 that he bought, immediateltly took back to his shop and replaced the motor with a L88 427. He could hand me my posterior region in the straight parts...I could lose him in the twisty bits... both good horses for different courses
By the same token, my friend Ray had a '69 SS396 that he bought, immediateltly took back to his shop and replaced the motor with a L88 427. He could hand me my posterior region in the straight parts...I could lose him in the twisty bits... both good horses for different courses
My Dad actually test drove an L88 Vette before ordering his '68 SS396/325hp Camaro. He thought the Vette wasn't very streetable, to him, and chose the 325hp L35 b/c he wanted to save the money and swap to a cam and set up of his choosing. And He did, a Crane "solid" Cam, and rejett and clutch upgrade got the front wheel airborne off the line and just cracked daylight under the tires on the 1-2 shift...with about 3 clutches a year!
(I wish I could get the Super 8 film my mom still has of the Camaro's front tires several inches off the ground in front of a Top Hat burger joint, digitized.)
Last edited by 90rocz; 04-15-2008 at 10:49 PM.
04-15-2008, 11:25 PM
#100
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: At car shows and cruise nights!
Posts: 3,647
In my mind, because the 5th gen Camaro harkens back to 1969, so should the models and nomenclature.
The '80s Camaros era was a somewhat forgettable time for the Camaros to all but the die-hard 3rd gen lovers.
So to say that the new Camaro "top dog" should be a Z/28 because the "top dog" Camaro in the '80s was a Z/28, to me, is misplaced. Besides, the "top dog" Camaro in the '80s was the IROC. And we know some of the acronyms for that.
Because the F5 pays homage to the 1st gens, then so shall it's models, trims, and nomenclature.
The '80s Camaros era was a somewhat forgettable time for the Camaros to all but the die-hard 3rd gen lovers.
So to say that the new Camaro "top dog" should be a Z/28 because the "top dog" Camaro in the '80s was a Z/28, to me, is misplaced. Besides, the "top dog" Camaro in the '80s was the IROC. And we know some of the acronyms for that.
Because the F5 pays homage to the 1st gens, then so shall it's models, trims, and nomenclature.
My cousin had a '69 Z/28 back in the mid-'80s.
Daytona Yellow with the black stripes and black vinyl top; black & white houndstooth interior.
He had the single quad 302. He said it was a DZ1 motor but I always thought the DZ1 motors were the dual quad 302s.
I never got to drive it but I remember sitting in it working the clutch & rowing the gears. I swear, if you weren't careful releasing your leg off of the clutch pedal, your knee would get slammed into your face. There was a lot of resistance on that clutch.
It was a cool car.
Daytona Yellow with the black stripes and black vinyl top; black & white houndstooth interior.
He had the single quad 302. He said it was a DZ1 motor but I always thought the DZ1 motors were the dual quad 302s.
I never got to drive it but I remember sitting in it working the clutch & rowing the gears. I swear, if you weren't careful releasing your leg off of the clutch pedal, your knee would get slammed into your face. There was a lot of resistance on that clutch.
It was a cool car.
without even seeing him wind it up too high.
Last edited by IZ28; 04-15-2008 at 11:55 PM.
04-16-2008, 08:16 AM
#101
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 211
I gotta say, all the logic that we have seen so far from GM definitely lends towards the top model being a Z28 (sans the slash) considering no hiphen in the ZR1 vette.
Its still not out of the realm of possibility the super top dog could be a Z28 SS either...
Its still not out of the realm of possibility the super top dog could be a Z28 SS either...
04-16-2008, 10:41 AM
#103
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
Wrong junior. Am I tried of the argument? Yes. Do I care if others opinions differ from mine? No. I was making light of a much earlier suggestion by another member of this forum. i.e. a "joke". If you could actually comprehend what you're reading you might understand that.Besides, sarcasm doesn't play well on the internet.
04-16-2008, 10:45 AM
#104
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
While everyone generally accepts that the DZ302 engine was underrated at 290 HP, people never seem to offer any thing other than speculation when giving their perceptions of what the HP actually was. I'm sitting here looking at test results dated 8/2/67 from a Chevy document that was published in the book "Camaro Untold Secrets 1967-1969" written by Wayne D. Guinn. This paper and series of tests were part of the developement work on the optional dual 4 barrel carb setup. The baseline test was a single 4 barrel DZ302 engine which produced 441.5 HP @ 7400 RPM. The 2x4 carb setup produced 467 HP @7400 RPM, a fuel injection version was also tested that produced 470.1 HP @ 7400 RPM. I thought it would be interesting to share this knowledge.
Clyde
Clyde
04-16-2008, 05:09 PM
#105
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 642
While everyone generally accepts that the DZ302 engine was underrated at 290 HP, people never seem to offer any thing other than speculation when giving their perceptions of what the HP actually was. I'm sitting here looking at test results dated 8/2/67 from a Chevy document that was published in the book "Camaro Untold Secrets 1967-1969" written by Wayne D. Guinn. This paper and series of tests were part of the developement work on the optional dual 4 barrel carb setup. The baseline test was a single 4 barrel DZ302 engine which produced 441.5 HP @ 7400 RPM. The 2x4 carb setup produced 467 HP @7400 RPM, a fuel injection version was also tested that produced 470.1 HP @ 7400 RPM. I thought it would be interesting to share this knowledge.
Clyde
Clyde
I don't know what they were doing to come up w/ the numbers above, but the street car wasn't coming anywhere near 400+ hp near stock even if you convert back to an estimate for gross flywheel HP.
And no matter what number you attribute to it, there is no way the factory 302 was going to outpower the L78 396, you only need to look at the specs on paper for the two.
Last edited by Ray86IROC; 04-16-2008 at 05:12 PM.