2014 Camaro Z/28 pricing announced at $75,000

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by gto406

Wondering why Chevrolet didn't consider more of a Ford Cobra 'R type approach with the new Z/28?

Throw out the back seats, install 5-point harnesses and utilize the rear space for a roll-cage (on which to affix or anchor said 'harnesses) might have made it more 'realizable' for a track/street car. That being said - there is alot of grey area's for a realizable track/street car (many would argue that is impossible to achieve).

In response to the earlier post about relating this car to the 1-of-1 ZL1 foundation car (the black/gold '69) that is not an apples-to-apples comparison IMHO. I don't think GM ever viewed the ZL1 to be a corner bender, it was to be an all-out street/strip car during the 'muscle-car wars'.

I guess the only parallel is that the Z/28 of today, is out of most folks budgets (including mine).

It was a Double-COPO. Consider it a Z/28-ZL1. Therefore it would be made for tracks not strips due to the suspension design. Personally I think it relates perfectly to the new Z/28.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by pgviper

Part of that price tag is for that z/28 name.

All of us american sports car people buy for the performance, not the name which is why many people think that this car is overpriced.

Welcome to the german way of thinking!

I think the issue is that people were wanting the "name". Those that wanted a 5Gen version of the 2Gen-4Gen Z28 are the most upset. They should consider a 1LE/SS as it fits that perfectly.

[Angrybird 12]

Has anyone posted this video interview with Al O.?


And Jay Leno's Garage

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by gto406

Respectfully disagree with you AB12 - and to clarify I am talking about the 1969 Camaro models - not the 2014!

If I wanted to go around a corner (aluminum block or not) it would be with the 302-DZ motor, not the ZL1.

Check the rear-axle ratio on the ZL1's. I would hazard a guess most of them are north of 4.xx:1. That isn't a road-course setup (3.90's or 3.73's yes) 4.10/4.11 or 4.33 definitely NO.

From Super-Chevy magazine:

"It was the dominance of the Cam Am engine that inspired Fred Gibb Chevrolet to suggest to Chevrolet that they develop a package for the Camaro that would accommodate the 427 ZL1 for drag racing.
...

Working with Chevrolet Engineering's Vince Piggins, Gibbs ordered 50 1969 Camaros through the COPO program in the summer of 1968. They started with the L78 Camaro SS with 14x7 wheels, cast-iron exhaust manifolds and F41 heavy-duty suspension. The option was tagged 9560 with the ZL1 all-aluminum engine and a choice of either the M40 Turbo Hydra Matic, M20 wide ratio four-speed, M21 close ratio or heavy service M22 "Rockcrusher" close ratio four-speed (Gibb later deleted the M22, feeling it wasn't worth the cost). A special 15-pound nodular flywheel was used with stick models. Only one rear-axle ratio was specified, a 4.10:1 differential with heat-treated ring and pinion and Posi-traction limited slip. The steel ZL-2 cold air induction hood was included, along with heavy duty springs with five leaf rears, heavy duty radiator, transistorized ignition, power front disc brakes and F70x14 white lettered tires.

Read more: http://www.superchevy.com/features/c...#ixzz2pjptxGb2"

FYI... The ZL1 was originally designed to provide a 'weight advantage' for Camaro over the Hemi-powered cars from Chrysler in drag (likely Stock/Super-Stock NHRA classes).

Oh ok, I thought you were comparing the current ZL1 with the 69 version. My mistake.

[AZCamaroFan]

I saw that interview last year. what he had to say about the ZL1 made absolutely no sense. it may be aluminum-engined and high horsepower, but the 1969 version is nothing like the current ZL1

and as for the Z28 'losing it's way in the 3rd and 4th generations"
If the the 3rd generations' suspension was any stiffer I'd have all my vertebrae fused at the moment.

[i2disturbedSS]

Originally Posted by 2cnd chance

I think the issue is that people were wanting the "name". Those that wanted a 5Gen version of the 2Gen-4Gen Z28 are the most upset. They should consider a 1LE/SS as it fits that perfectly.

Just maybe they will get that Z28.

But... Still can't please everybody -

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by gto406

Respectfully disagree with you AB12 - and to clarify I am talking about the 1969 Camaro models - not the 2014!

If I wanted to go around a corner (aluminum block or not) it would be with the 302-DZ motor, not the ZL1.

Check the rear-axle ratio on the ZL1's. I would hazard a guess most of them are north of 4.xx:1. That isn't a road-course setup (3.90's or 3.73's yes) 4.10/4.11 or 4.33 definitely NO.

From Super-Chevy magazine:

"It was the dominance of the Cam Am engine that inspired Fred Gibb Chevrolet to suggest to Chevrolet that they develop a package for the Camaro that would accommodate the 427 ZL1 for drag racing.
...

Working with Chevrolet Engineering's Vince Piggins, Gibbs ordered 50 1969 Camaros through the COPO program in the summer of 1968. They started with the L78 Camaro SS with 14x7 wheels, cast-iron exhaust manifolds and F41 heavy-duty suspension. The option was tagged 9560 with the ZL1 all-aluminum engine and a choice of either the M40 Turbo Hydra Matic, M20 wide ratio four-speed, M21 close ratio or heavy service M22 "Rockcrusher" close ratio four-speed (Gibb later deleted the M22, feeling it wasn't worth the cost). A special 15-pound nodular flywheel was used with stick models. Only one rear-axle ratio was specified, a 4.10:1 differential with heat-treated ring and pinion and Posi-traction limited slip. The steel ZL-2 cold air induction hood was included, along with heavy duty springs with five leaf rears, heavy duty radiator, transistorized ignition, power front disc brakes and F70x14 white lettered tires.

Read more: http://www.superchevy.com/features/c...#ixzz2pjptxGb2"

FYI... The ZL1 was originally designed to provide a 'weight advantage' for Camaro over the Hemi-powered cars from Chrysler in drag (likely Stock/Super-Stock NHRA classes).

I'm reading this post differently from your first post. This post above relates to the ZL1 for drag racing, correct. The Double-COPO would have been a track performer. The 69' ZL1 engine weighed close to the same as a DZ. The ZL1 was made for track cars hence it being a "Can Am" engine. You would have had the choice of rear-end ratios per track configuration. This 2014 Z/28 relates perfectly to the Double-COPO.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by i2disturbedSS

Just maybe they will get that Z28.

But... Still can't please everybody -

Very true.

[backtotintops]

Originally Posted by 2SSRS@Gen5diy

The carbon fiber fenders are heaver then the ones on the car now.

no comprende???

[MBS]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

What you first need to know is that high and low speeds refer to the speed of the piston inside the shock as the sprung mass - car body - moves around due to acceleration, braking, and cornering (this being "low speed"), and as the suspension reacts to hitting bumps (high speed).

You want enough low speed damping for control of sprung and unsprung mass motions without driving the high speed damping so high that the integrity of your fillings is at risk. Apparently DSSV is more capable than other approaches to shock design as far as providing firm chassis control without feeling like they're filled with cement when you hit a stretch of rough road (IOW, harsh).

This tuning is an ability to separate body control from ride quality - consider it a different way of tweaking the shock's damping curve, all done internally and without driver or other external input.

Just like with most other shocks, tuning those four different regions at the shock design level is via internal valving rather than as an end-user adjustment.

External adjustment capability such as what you find on coilovers and Koni Sport shocks allow you to manually shift all or parts of the damping curve. The more separate adjustments you have, the easier it is to get "lost" in your tuning efforts and end up worse off than if you'd left them all alone.


In the attached .jpg, "low speed" is to the left of the vertical red line. It's about where consensus divides low from high, good enough for illustration here anyway. Below the black line is "bump", rebound is above. The greenish line is what the damping could look like if no attempt at all was made at softening bump harshness. Since I rather like my fillings to stay in my teeth, I really wouldn't want to see a 10 inch/sec bump on this line at all (about 0.25 in meters/sec on the plot), even though the low speed bump damping is marginally poorer than the other settings.


Norm

Thanks for the lesson Norm , I had to read it twice to "get it" I had thought they meant speed of the car Always good to learn something everyday

[STI_TO_SS?]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2cnd chance
I think the issue is that people were wanting the "name". Those that wanted a 5Gen version of the 2Gen-4Gen Z28 are the most upset. They should consider a 1LE/SS as it fits that perfectly.
Just maybe they will get that Z28.

But... Still can't please everybody -
__________________
369rwhp/392rwtq

I am not sure the 2014 Z/28 needed to target a very limited audience like the first Z/28. I think GM made a mistake. I also believe there may be more "lesser" Z/28's in the future to meet everyone's expectation, but why take the chance of alienating your biggest market first? I believe it is very clear many expected to have a shot at the "name". And I understand why as I consider myself part of the group. In many descriptions anticipating the car, almost no one seems to have a well-defined expectation of exactly what the Z/28 would be, but they did agree or "know" with certainty one thing: they would have one. By looking back at the history of the Z/28, I can choose to look at the whole rather than just the beginning. By looking at the whole, I saw a common element: the Camaro has always been a working mans car and the Z/28 was within the reach of many. This is the criteria which should have seen the marketing effort putting the name within the reach of many. The car "parts" would not have mattered so much that made up the car. Instead of a "party" for just a few at end of 5gen, we would have a party for most. Why not reward the faithful after all this time and especially after supporting 5gen in such a big way? Then, follow with the exclusives later...I have my Z/28, it just has the wrong name.

[TrackClub]

Originally Posted by STI_TO_SS?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2cnd chance
I think the issue is that people were wanting the "name". Those that wanted a 5Gen version of the 2Gen-4Gen Z28 are the most upset. They should consider a 1LE/SS as it fits that perfectly.
Just maybe they will get that Z28.

But... Still can't please everybody -
__________________
369rwhp/392rwtq

I am not sure the 2014 Z/28 needed to target a very limited audience like the first Z/28. I think GM made a mistake. I also believe there may be more "lesser" Z/28's in the future to meet everyone's expectation, but why take the chance of alienating your biggest market first? I believe it is very clear many expected to have a shot at the "name". And I understand why as I consider myself part of the group. In many descriptions anticipating the car, almost no one seems to have a well-defined expectation of exactly what the Z/28 would be, but they did agree or "know" with certainty one thing: they would have one. By looking back at the history of the Z/28, I can choose to look at the whole rather than just the beginning. By looking at the whole, I saw a common element: the Camaro has always been a working mans car and the Z/28 was within the reach of many. This is the criteria which should have seen the marketing effort putting the name within the reach of many. The car "parts" would not have mattered so much that made up the car. Instead of a "party" for just a few at end of 5gen, we would have a party for most. Why not reward the faithful after all this time and especially after supporting 5gen in such a big way? Then, follow with the exclusives later...I have my Z/28, it just has the wrong name.

I agree and wish, that GM had simply upped the present ZL1 power 10-15 % (a la ZR1, or Hennessey), got much cheaper but very capable lightweight 2 piece rotors (a la C7), put the Pirellis on, pulled more extra weight off, added some aero and called it a Z28. It would surely be faster then the present Z28 and much cheaper. And nobody would complain that the "goods don't justify the price", or "their favourite ice cream costs 9.99" to quote a couple of colourful responses. And so many more could afford it and enjoy it for the purpose it was created: track not collectors garage museums.

[AZCamaroFan]

the first one didn't target a limited audience. by the third year they sold around 20,000 of them.

by the way here's some good history on how the Z/28 began for those who don't know it.
www.67z28.com/history.htm

[Blueclyde]

When many of us ordered our ZL1's, way back in the summer of 2011 (many of us just got in line with a dealer), we all thought we were getting the Z/28. It wasn't until the unveil that we knew it was going to be a Z but not the one we were thinking. I for one couldn't be happier with my car, despite it being a different Z.

I think the strategy for configuration and rollout of this new Z/28 is well matched given the rollout of ZL1 and 1LE. What most people connect with as the "every man's" Z28 (notice no slash) is clearly the 1LE. The 1LE is in fact light years of the Z28's of years gone by.

The Z/28 will be light years ahead of any Camaro ever produced. The price of entry for CC brakes, LS7, Multimatics, etc is about right at $75K.