More spy pics from the Big D

[AirGoya]

^Yea, if you say you've got a Z28, car guys/girls should know what you mean. But if you just say GT, they would have no clue what you mean. I would think they have a Ford GT40 and go running out into the parking lot looking for their car.

[WCFB-Russ]

Originally Posted by wildpaws

The Z/28 name only "has some honor" if they put a package in the car worthy of that honor. How would you feel about a new Camaro with 325 HP and a base car suspension being called Z/28? Sorry, that wouldn't cut it, it needs to be a fairly high HP engine with the complete suspension package (and not necessarily the top dog), etc. to be worthy of the Z/28 name.
Clyde

and thats the funny thing -- the original option for the Z/28 was for a not-so-strongly hp'd 302 CID engine. (i can guarantee you it didnt have 325 hp).

there were plenty of other options for better hp/tq.. :-p

but i see where you are coming from on the whole "GT" angle. everyone uses "GT" to mean performance now.

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by black34v6

and thats the funny thing -- the original option for the Z/28 was for a not-so-strongly hp'd 302 CID engine. (i can guarantee you it didnt have 325 hp).

there were plenty of other options for better hp/tq.. :-p

but i see where you are coming from on the whole "GT" angle. everyone uses "GT" to mean performance now.

I'm very aware of what the first gen. Z/28s were all about as I bought a '69 new back then. I'm not sure where you are pulling the mention of 325HP from (oh, looking back I see my mention of 325HP, that was just an example of what could be today), but yes it was a 302cid "factory rated" at 290HP, but given that back then a 327cid with the same parts was rated at 365HP, I think that 325HP for the 302 under the rating systems back then would have been pretty close to right. The thrust of my posts in this thread have been that what made the Z/28 unique was being a total performance package compared to the SS models which were essentially nothing but 1320 screamers (i.e. the greater hp/tq you refer to). All Camaro's back then had 14" wheels except the Z/28 which had 15" wheels, yet with the larger wheels the Z/28 body sat lower and a lower center of gravity. I'll stop now so this does not become a long rambling post, but I want a 5th gen. Z/28 that is a total performance package and not the base V8, just as the 290HP Z/28 was not the 210HP base V8 in the first gen.
Clyde

[SilverTurtle]

Originally Posted by black34v6

and thats the funny thing -- the original option for the Z/28 was for a not-so-strongly hp'd 302 CID engine. (i can guarantee you it didnt have 325 hp).

there were plenty of other options for better hp/tq.. :-p

I've kept my mouth shut with some of your posts, so I'm going to ask two quick questions before I make any assumptions:

1. what are you implying in the quote above?
because it sounds like you think that the DZ 302 was not as powerful as the numbers indicated... and if you think its less than that, we need to educate you on some things... if you think its more than what was advertised, then you are in the right ball park... but your words seem to indicate that you do not know as much as you think you do about the 302 powered first gens.


2. what source are you getting your information from?

[KILLER74Z28]

Originally Posted by black34v6

and thats the funny thing -- the original option for the Z/28 was for a not-so-strongly hp'd 302 CID engine. (i can guarantee you it didnt have 325 hp).

there were plenty of other options for better hp/tq.. :-p

but i see where you are coming from on the whole "GT" angle. everyone uses "GT" to mean performance now.

Be easy on him SilverTurtle...

[acscamarochick06]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Well...with the lack of a books worth of V8 choices nowadays...Z28 does still mean something. And you said it; V8. But where it differs from GT, imho...is that Z28 has some honor. As opposed to every car company using some form of 'GT' to denote performace. Z28 is unmistakable.


It means 'move'.

That is exactly how I feel. For goodness sakes, you can get an ECLIPSE GT... Does that mean it's fast? Hell no! lol It's just not a 4-cylinder!

[radz28]

I remember many speculating the 302 was 400+ horse, but I digress...

It feels good to hear people from GM say we are not going to be disappointed, however, I can't help but think that they aren't necessarily directing that to fanatics. I could be happy with 400 horse, but if I can afford a model that has more, that's where I'm going. With the S/Cd' engines GM is putting out, I don't think I'll be disappointed, but I can't help but worry.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by radz282003

It feels good to hear people from GM say we are not going to be disappointed, however, I can't help but think that they aren't necessarily directing that to fanatics.

The only folks they've addressed being disappointed to, was us. Because we worry that the car won't be for the enthusiast. (An idea that underlies most if not ALL of our concerns).... Are we not fanatics?

The one statement that completely put ALL my fears to rest was this, from the Fbodfather (after driving a 'special' car):

Originally Posted by fbodfather

The future has gone past "looking bright" -- it's a fireball!

Ever since then, I haven't wasted a moment worrying about what they're putting together for us enthusiasts, AND the common buyer.

[radz28]

You bring up good points. It's always easier to remember the negative things than the postive. I'll keep your points in mind.

I feel better already.

[WCFB-Russ]

Originally Posted by SilverTurtle

1. what are you implying in the quote above?
because it sounds like you think that the DZ 302 was not as powerful as the numbers indicated... and if you think its less than that, we need to educate you on some things... if you think its more than what was advertised, then you are in the right ball park... but your words seem to indicate that you do not know as much as you think you do about the 302 powered first gens.

i realize factory ratings dont lead to actual hp - anyone who is worth the car they drive (v6 or v8) would know that. i know that GM underrated hp/tq back in the day, however i havent "seen" data showing that it had 325hp or more than that (i figured maaaybe 280-300).

as for "what i was implying" - i was making discussion. this is a discussion board. it seems that everytime someone talks about the "z28" (currently) they want some big hp (400+) monster and i was trying to suggest that maybe GM wont make the z/28 some huge hp machine but rather put it back where it was back in the day (as a performance model, but not THE performance model) - ala the z/28 - SS - ZL1, just another option but not the top dog like some people are suggesting it might be.

as for this:

Originally Posted by SilverTurtle

2. what source are you getting your information from?

I have several books, and the internet is my life - im a web developer. as such I am quite gifted at finding RELIABLE (as in actual reference information) regarding the things I am talking about.

I don't like to be wrong about things because I like to talk with people and like to try to be in the know - but if i say something that you consider wrong feel free to point it out. just dont be a sh!thead about it and i'll be happy to admit defeat.

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by black34v6

i realize factory ratings dont lead to actual hp - anyone who is worth the car they drive (v6 or v8) would know that. i know that GM underrated hp/tq back in the day, however i havent "seen" data showing that it had 325hp or more than that (i figured maaaybe 280-300).

as for "what i was implying" - i was making discussion. this is a discussion board. it seems that everytime someone talks about the "z28" (currently) they want some big hp (400+) monster and i was trying to suggest that maybe GM wont make the z/28 some huge hp machine but rather put it back where it was back in the day (as a performance model, but not THE performance model) - ala the z/28 - SS - ZL1, just another option but not the top dog like some people are suggesting it might be.

as for this:


I have several books, and the internet is my life - im a web developer. as such I am quite gifted at finding RELIABLE (as in actual reference information) regarding the things I am talking about.

I don't like to be wrong about things because I like to talk with people and like to try to be in the know - but if i say something that you consider wrong feel free to point it out. just dont be a sh!thead about it and i'll be happy to admit defeat.

You really don't want to start the debate again on what the actual HP of the original DZ302 was, it is enough to say that it was factory rated at 290horsepower and that almost everyone in the last 40 years agreed that it was
under-rated, the only real difference of opinion is by how much. If the new top dog Camaro is way up in HP (as we have heard the possibility of 500+HP), then I would certainly hope that the Z/28 would be 400HP minimum and not be the 300+HP base engine. The first gen. Z/28s were certainly above base engine HP levels. The SS 350/295HP and the Z/28 302/290HP were very close in HP, the only other regular production SS engines offered starting as mid year offerings in '67 were 396/325HP, 396/350HP, and 396/375HP, the 427 engines were only offered in COPO and dealer installed, I don't consider them to be regular production nor were the 69 ZL1 427 Camaros built in '69 regular production.
Clyde