1969 CAMARO ZL1 VS 2012 CAMARO SS - Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums

knitetrain05 · 06-18-2012, 09:17 PM

Im not sure on this. What car had more HP, Torqure, Best 1/4 Mile, Top Speed?

PBANDPKSCAMARO · 06-18-2012, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knitetrain05

Im not sure on this. What car had more HP, Torqure, Best 1/4 Mile, Top Speed?

HP and torque I would say the 69.

I was fortunate enough to have Milton Robson as a client and toured his garage one day and he had one.

Parag · 06-18-2012, 09:35 PM

cars were severely underrated back in the day for insurance reasons. so on paper probably the 2010 but weight and actual horespower, it would have a been a good race

L36L72LS3 · 06-18-2012, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knitetrain05

Im not sure on this. What car had more HP, Torqure, Best 1/4 Mile, Top Speed?

but the he 69 is the winner here on HP, torque and e.t. Top speed only mattered in the first 1320 feet. With 4:88 gears, it was done at about 125 mph in stock trim. My L72 pulls through 7200 rpm and doesn't want let up. Running the right valve adjustment and collector length is a key too.

LOWDOWN · 06-19-2012, 05:41 AM

It's important to remember the '69 ZL1 weighed at least 800 lbs. less than the '12 ZL1. It's also important to note the tires of today far exceed the gription of the tires from the late-'60s (be they stock or slicks).

For a definitive history on the '69 ZL1s, try this site: http://www.camaros.org/copo#engine

1969 Chevrolet Camaro ZL-1 - 0-60 mph 5.2 Quarter mile 11.6 (Modified: headers/slicks/Harrell-tuned)
http://www.zeroto60times.com/Chevrol...mph-Times.html

1969 Camaro ZL1 (Stock) - Quarter mile 13.16 @ 110 http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml

*DGthe3* · 06-19-2012, 10:14 PM

The SS is more powerful, probably roughly the same amount of torque. 1/4 mile they'd be just about even. Top speed? SS

While cars 'back in the day' were consistently under rated, that ratings system (SAE gross) is completely different from the one we use today (SAE net). I remember seeing an article where back in, I think it was '71 (it was right after the gross to net change over), where a shop took out a showroom stock ZL-1 engine from a Camaro and ran it on their engine dyno according to the new SAE net protocol. The result? 375 hp -down some 50 hp from the allegedly 'underrated' 430 hp.

If you are wondering about the rumour of the 500 hp ZL-1, that would have been with the equivalent of running an LS3 with no air filter, long tube headers (with no exhaust afterwards), tune, and the removal of any belt driven accessory you can. If you did that on a modern LS3, you'd be looking well past 500 hp.

shrinkdoc · 06-19-2012, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LOWDOWN

It's important to remember the '69 ZL1 weighed at least 800 lbs. less than the '12 ZL1. It's also important to note the tires of today far exceed the gription of the tires from the late-'60s (be they stock or slicks).

For a definitive history on the '69 ZL1s, try this site: http://www.camaros.org/copo#engine

1969 Chevrolet Camaro ZL-1 - 0-60 mph 5.2 Quarter mile 11.6 (Modified: headers/slicks/Harrell-tuned)
http://www.zeroto60times.com/Chevrol...mph-Times.html

1969 Camaro ZL1 (Stock) - Quarter mile 13.16 @ 110 http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml

This is very true. Anyone studying tire Griptology will tell you that tires back then had no where near todays tire gription. Thus 1/4 miles then were also underated do to griptionless tires.

NicKey · 06-19-2012, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DGthe3

The SS is more powerful, probably roughly the same amount of torque. 1/4 mile they'd be just about even. Top speed? SS

While cars 'back in the day' were consistently under rated, that ratings system (SAE gross) is completely different from the one we use today (SAE net). I remember seeing an article where back in, I think it was '71 (it was right after the gross to net change over), where a shop took out a showroom stock ZL-1 engine from a Camaro and ran it on their engine dyno according to the new SAE net protocol. The result? 375 hp -down some 50 hp from the allegedly 'underrated' 430 hp.

If you are wondering about the rumour of the 500 hp ZL-1, that would have been with the equivelant of running an LS3 with no air filter, long tube headers (with no exhaust afterwards), tune, and the removal of any belt driven accessory you can. If you did that on a modern LS3, you'd be looking well past

500 hp.

The modern Zl1, stock for stock, ringers excluded, will out perform a vintage ZL1 in just about every contest of speed and performance.

The vintage ZL1 does however feel like it's going a lot faster at the same speed as the modern Z1

_Nick_ · 06-20-2012, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nickey Chicago

The modern Zl1, stock for stock, ringers excluded, will out perform a vintage ZL1 in just about every contest of speed and performance.

The vintage ZL1 does however feel like it's going a lot faster at the same speed as the modern Z1

Well I'd hope so. 43 years is HUGE from a technology stand point.

GM would have failed pretty hard if the modern one wasn't worlds better in terms of performance than the old one.

The old one still looks a helluva lot cooler though.

OUR72GTO · 06-20-2012, 12:33 AM

And you need a 1/4 mile to stop it.

knitetrain05 · 06-22-2012, 11:19 AM

A lot of you guys that posted to this are missing the whole heading of the post. Please read it. "1969 ZL1 VS 2012 SS" Any questions?

GTUPONIT · 06-22-2012, 12:35 PM

As far as numbers on paper, the '69 had more power and torque. As far as 1/4 mile and top end, the SS all the way.

In reality, yes things have changed a lot in 43 years. Without mods, would anyone push the limits of the '69 in autoX compared to the SS? It would be fun for sure. Had a '67 GTO for a while and that was a beast trying to drive it hard in the corners. Rear end kept letting go no matter how I feathered the throttle.

The '69 still looks good doing whatever! Would love to try it out.

HumanWiki · 06-22-2012, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Nick_

Well I'd hope so. 43 years is HUGE from a technology stand point.

GM would have failed pretty hard if the modern one wasn't worlds better in terms of performance than the old one.

The old one still looks a helluva lot cooler though.

Careful... Several around here don't think we've really advanced all that far in that amount of time...

ChrisBlair · 06-22-2012, 03:05 PM

Hi guys

Don't forget when you're talking HP numbers from 2012 to HP numbers from 1969:

Up to the early '70s, the cars were rated at gross horsepower

Then they went to what they termed net horsepower

Today we rate in brake horsepower

Comparing 1969 hp numbers to today's hp numbers must take this into account. Either find out how much brake HP the '69 made, or how much gross HP to 2012 makes, and then you can compare apples to apples

UPDATE:

OK, I dug out my August 1994 issue of Classic Auto Restorer magazine, featuring the 1969 ZL-1 Camaro

430 brake HP. They listed it it as:

0-30 1.9 sec
0-60 5.0 sec
0-100 11.3 sec
Top speed 126 mph (7K rpm)
1/4 mile 13.16 sec @ 110 mph

That's with nylon-cord Wide Track GT Goodyears. But the tires aren't all that horrible. Guys running FAST (Factory appearing, Stock Tire) were running low elevens almost a decade ago

But bear in mind too that ZL-1 drag cars were running 10.05 @ 139 mph, in 1969

Also don't forget that the cars weren't as seriously under rated as the legends would have it. Car makers always had a range of HP depending on each individual engine. Be sure they picked the best number shown 'on the graphs' when they wanted to show off HP numbers

06-18-2012, 09:17 PM	#1
knitetrain05 Account Suspended Drives: 2012 Camaro SS 45th Anniversary Edi Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Rochester, New York Posts: 523 View My Garage	1969 CAMARO ZL1 VS 2012 CAMARO SS Im not sure on this. What car had more HP, Torqure, Best 1/4 Mile, Top Speed?

06-18-2012, 09:35 PM	#3
Parag Drives: 2010 camaro 2SS LS3 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Denver Posts: 1,334	cars were severely underrated back in the day for insurance reasons. so on paper probably the 2010 but weight and actual horespower, it would have a been a good race __________________ stage III cam, 4.10's, custom CAI, suede headliner 461 RWHP, 422 RWTQ

06-19-2012, 10:14 PM	#6
DGthe3 Moderator.ca Drives: 05 Grand Am GT Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Niagara, Canada Posts: 25,372	The SS is more powerful, probably roughly the same amount of torque. 1/4 mile they'd be just about even. Top speed? SS While cars 'back in the day' were consistently under rated, that ratings system (SAE gross) is completely different from the one we use today (SAE net). I remember seeing an article where back in, I think it was '71 (it was right after the gross to net change over), where a shop took out a showroom stock ZL-1 engine from a Camaro and ran it on their engine dyno according to the new SAE net protocol. The result? 375 hp -down some 50 hp from the allegedly 'underrated' 430 hp. If you are wondering about the rumour of the 500 hp ZL-1, that would have been with the equivalent of running an LS3 with no air filter, long tube headers (with no exhaust afterwards), tune, and the removal of any belt driven accessory you can. If you did that on a modern LS3, you'd be looking well past 500 hp. __________________ Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them __________________ Originally Posted by FbodFather My sister's dentist's brother's cousin's housekeeper's dog-breeder's nephew sells coffee filters to the company that provides coffee to General Motors...... ........and HE WOULD KNOW!!!! __________________ Camaro Fest sub-forum

06-20-2012, 12:33 AM	#10
OUR72GTO 2010 SIM Beige RS 6M Drives: SIM RS 6M 66 Corvair Silverado LTZ Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Kamloops,British Columbia Posts: 4,677	And you need a 1/4 mile to stop it. __________________ CAMARO.. 2010 The Heart Beat is back in CHEVROLET Now let's put it back in America

06-22-2012, 03:05 PM	#14
ChrisBlair Buick 455 Fan Drives: 1970 Buick, 2012 1SS LS3 Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Boston MA Posts: 5,957	Hi guys Don't forget when you're talking HP numbers from 2012 to HP numbers from 1969: Up to the early '70s, the cars were rated at gross horsepower Then they went to what they termed net horsepower Today we rate in brake horsepower Comparing 1969 hp numbers to today's hp numbers must take this into account. Either find out how much brake HP the '69 made, or how much gross HP to 2012 makes, and then you can compare apples to apples UPDATE: OK, I dug out my August 1994 issue of Classic Auto Restorer magazine, featuring the 1969 ZL-1 Camaro 430 brake HP. They listed it it as: 0-30 1.9 sec 0-60 5.0 sec 0-100 11.3 sec Top speed 126 mph (7K rpm) 1/4 mile 13.16 sec @ 110 mph That's with nylon-cord Wide Track GT Goodyears. But the tires aren't all that horrible. Guys running FAST (Factory appearing, Stock Tire) were running low elevens almost a decade ago But bear in mind too that ZL-1 drag cars were running 10.05 @ 139 mph, in 1969 Also don't forget that the cars weren't as seriously under rated as the legends would have it. Car makers always had a range of HP depending on each individual engine. Be sure they picked the best number shown 'on the graphs' when they wanted to show off HP numbers __________________

06-19-2012, 05:41 AM	#5
LOWDOWN Downright Upright Drives: Daily Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Cruisin'... Posts: 4,145	It's important to remember the '69 ZL1 weighed at least 800 lbs. less than the '12 ZL1. It's also important to note the tires of today far exceed the gription of the tires from the late-'60s (be they stock or slicks). For a definitive history on the '69 ZL1s, try this site: http://www.camaros.org/copo#engine 1969 Chevrolet Camaro ZL-1 - 0-60 mph 5.2 Quarter mile 11.6 (Modified: headers/slicks/Harrell-tuned) http://www.zeroto60times.com/Chevrol...mph-Times.html 1969 Camaro ZL1 (Stock) - Quarter mile 13.16 @ 110 http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml

06-22-2012, 11:19 AM	#11
knitetrain05 Account Suspended Drives: 2012 Camaro SS 45th Anniversary Edi Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Rochester, New York Posts: 523 View My Garage	A lot of you guys that posted to this are missing the whole heading of the post. Please read it. "1969 ZL1 VS 2012 SS" Any questions?

06-22-2012, 12:35 PM	#12
GTUPONIT Drives: 2016 Hyper Blue & 2017 SS White Join Date: May 2012 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 245	As far as numbers on paper, the '69 had more power and torque. As far as 1/4 mile and top end, the SS all the way. In reality, yes things have changed a lot in 43 years. Without mods, would anyone push the limits of the '69 in autoX compared to the SS? It would be fun for sure. Had a '67 GTO for a while and that was a beast trying to drive it hard in the corners. Rear end kept letting go no matter how I feathered the throttle. The '69 still looks good doing whatever! Would love to try it out.