Camaro Z28 / "HP Edition" name choice poll

[14pilot]

A blown, option laden Camaro should not be named Z-28. It should be named "High corporate and dealership margin dollar, overweight bling ride", or HCDMDOBR.

A first gen inspired Z-28 to me means high reving N/A, lightweight, no frills, road race suspension and brakes, dry sump pan, functional cold air hood and with boxed up long tube headers in the trunk to swap on for those track days.

[thok mcbeefstew]

I have a question for the crowd. Is it a big deal for this car to be very suped up and to be great on the track? I would say with this new suspension, and all of the testing on "the track", it is GOING to be a track car. NOW, if this track car also has a MONSTER engine, I fail to see the argument. Not to pick a fight, but I don't think it is in GM's best interests to build so many different variations of a car due to the financial situations. So if this car crushes the Boss and the GT-500, what is the problem? Not to mention the only reason why the GT500 isn't a great track car, is because Ford can't get it right.

[Epitaph]

Originally Posted by thok mcbeefstew

Not to pick a fight, but I don't think it is in GM's best interests to build so many different variations of a car due to the financial situations.

We have a V8(SS)(4 trims 1SS Conv, 2SS Conv, 1SS, 2SS) and a V6(LS/LT)(5 trims: 1LT Conv, 2LT Conv, LS, 1LT, 2LT). I guess you could look at that as 9 Camaros (going on a 10th), but I only see 2 (going on a 3rd).

If you don't give people choices, they will go to someone who offers them.

Take a look at the Mustang, you're given 10 choices (V6, V6 premium, v6 conv, GT, V6 premium conv, GT premium, GT conv, GT premium conv, GT500, GT500 conv). You have the V6, GT, and GT500 (3).

I guess if they offer the next version of the Camaro in convertible, that would be 11.

[Vega]

@Dragoneye I feel like you missed the point of my posts, im not saying the Z should be limited, and im not saying completely strip the interior, im saying do what Ford is doing with the Boss, which is leave out the luxury aspect and go for what a muscle car originally was, a stripped (as in lightweight materials and no fancy luxury, not "no interior at all") car with emphasis on light weight, handling, and high output. I dont see why people seem to think this is such an irrational formula when Ford has already announced their doing it with one of their Mustang models. So im not saying make it a no-interior car with an aftermarket motor and running straight headers and all that, thats rediculous, im saying go as far as you can towards a stripped down road warrior as all the standards and regulations will allow you too.
Also i dont consider the LSA as "tuned" at all, its a whole motor in itself, you dont tune an LSA to become an LSA, you just build an LSA. Sure it has an LS block and a supercharger but its all part of the motor itself none of it is changed from any other standard motor, i dont consider it tuned...now if GM presented an LS3 or LS7 with a different cam and heads than anything they offer stock in any car or as a crate then i would consider that a tuned motor.
As for the Boss i dont over estimate it, i just love the idea behind the car, im not a Ford lover by any means i love all muscle with a slight partialness towards GM, hell i drive a Camaro. Its not the fact that its a Boss or a 302 or any of that, its the idea behind it i love, that "no fancy crap here" idea LOL

@thok mcbeefstew Because with that kind of mind-set whats the point in a V6 model at all? or whats the point in a GT mustang if there's a GT500 out there thats even better, and whats the point of even offering a GT500 at all when there's a GT500 Super Snake. See my point?

@14pilot I completely agree, and some may say "well thats true, for 1st gens, but this isnt 1st gen anymore" but i still agree with you, because these cars SHOULD closely resemble their heritage, thats the whole point, if it wasnt the Mustang wouldnt look like a 60s' Mustang and wouldnt have a 302ci motor, and the Camaro wouldnt look like a 60's Camaro, and the Challenger would DEFINATLY not be the boxy ass "to hell with aerodynamics" Vanishing Point machine we see today. Its all about nastalgia and heritage, so keep the nastalgia and the heritage, if you want a 2-door LSA powered super machine with everything and the kitchen sink...buy a CTS-V Coupe...leave my manual cloth seat, manual gear box, small-fry radio, no-nav Z/28 alone.

[alexcfwu]

I think we need a few more variations:

HP Standard Edition -- whatever the base is... as long as it has more than 500+ HP, new chrome, wheels, leather, logo, paint choices...
HP Luxury Edition -- Every single gadget that you can think of from the SEMA show including the NAV and Audio system... 11 speakers +
HP Super Sport Edition -- Street Legal minus the luxury... Think IROC Z
HP Race Track Ready -- not street legal... no heater, no AC, no radio... just good old fashion built for race track warriors ...

Now come to think of it... I think I want the HP Luxury Edition

[radz28]

Originally Posted by Vega

@Dragoneye I feel like you missed the point of my posts, im not saying the Z should be limited, and im not saying completely strip the interior, im saying do what Ford is doing with the Boss, which is leave out the luxury aspect and go for what a muscle car originally was, a stripped (as in lightweight materials and no fancy luxury, not "no interior at all") car with emphasis on light weight, handling, and high output. I dont see why people seem to think this is such an irrational formula when Ford has already announced their doing it with one of their Mustang models. So im not saying make it a no-interior car with an aftermarket motor and running straight headers and all that, thats rediculous, im saying go as far as you can towards a stripped down road warrior as all the standards and regulations will allow you too.
Also i dont consider the LSA as "tuned" at all, its a whole motor in itself, you dont tune an LSA to become an LSA, you just build an LSA. Sure it has an LS block and a supercharger but its all part of the motor itself none of it is changed from any other standard motor, i dont consider it tuned...now if GM presented an LS3 or LS7 with a different cam and heads than anything they offer stock in any car or as a crate then i would consider that a tuned motor.As for the Boss i dont over estimate it, i just love the idea behind the car, im not a Ford lover by any means i love all muscle with a slight partialness towards GM, hell i drive a Camaro. Its not the fact that its a Boss or a 302 or any of that, its the idea behind it i love, that "no fancy crap here" idea LOL

@thok mcbeefstew Because with that kind of mind-set whats the point in a V6 model at all? or whats the point in a GT mustang if there's a GT500 out there thats even better, and whats the point of even offering a GT500 at all when there's a GT500 Super Snake. See my point?

@14pilot I completely agree, and some may say "well thats true, for 1st gens, but this isnt 1st gen anymore" but i still agree with you, because these cars SHOULD closely resemble their heritage, thats the whole point, if it wasnt the Mustang wouldnt look like a 60s' Mustang and wouldnt have a 302ci motor, and the Camaro wouldnt look like a 60's Camaro, and the Challenger would DEFINATLY not be the boxy ass "to hell with aerodynamics" Vanishing Point machine we see today. Its all about nastalgia and heritage, so keep the nastalgia and the heritage, if you want a 2-door LSA powered super machine with everything and the kitchen sink...buy a CTS-V Coupe...leave my manual cloth seat, manual gear box, small-fry radio, no-nav Z/28 alone.

Hmm... Those are good points. I'd agree LSA isn't tuned, like, say, LS7. I don't really think LS7 was that radical, per se. Maybe in terms of emissions it was, because why would GM take a tiny step back, reduce displacement, and go FI with LS9? I mean, I know why they used the 6.2 block, but GM obviously couldn't hit specific targets with the power they wanted with LS7 (maybe NVH and emissions). I mean gigantic CNC-ported heads, and what would be maybe considered a fairly radical OEM cam, and big displacement, but something just doesn't jive for me. I think, as far as Z28 goes, that GM knew it couldn't feasibly drop enough weight, and even keep a fair amount of ameneties (even like you suggest), without bumping the power significantly, so it reallty had no choice to add more weight and go LSA.

I think Ford simply can go the route they are with the Boss because they've have people to focus on it. To me, it seems the inception of the 5th Gen started in a skunkworks, if you will. I believe CAMARO has progressed to where it is now from fanatics within the Team, not so much because of how much GM is actually investing in the car; I mean the passion behind the Team has pushed it more than the money has. I'm not putting it on the screen like I'm seeing it in my head, lol. Ford had been able to keep the Mustang going this whole time. We had a little break with GM, so while I think CAMARO line will eventually match model-for-model, I don't know that's possible right now. I fully support it right now, but I just don't know if it's a good time quite yet.

[6D8Z28]

Originally Posted by OldScoolCamaro

Okay, good points, however if Chevy will introduce the Z-28 to "rival" the Boss 302 R reincarnation then it has to produce a 5.0L motor along the same cubic inch benchmarks. The Mustang has not stopped production since it's inception and has built off the same platform with modifications and improvements since day one. The Holden Zeta platform is a different aniimal from the F body lineage, and compared to the Ford Mustang chasis it is apples and oranges different. The Camaro5 would need forced induction of one sort or the other to compensate for all it's structural integrity. Sticking a 6.2 L or anything else into it and calling it a Z-28 to rival the 302 R is missing the whole idea of the displacement limitations that were implemented for the trans am series and making a modern retro version. That seems to be the direction Ford is heading with their's. Take some time and read about Ford's 2012 302 R. The 5.0 Ford would be stomped to death by a similary equiped 6.2L, so where's the rivalry in that. We have to think about what the intentions are of the two manufacturers for what the cars are going to be designed for before we can really speculate on a powerplant. AS it is, IMHO the Camaro can't be striped down sufficiently in the current form and go toe to toe with a lighter performer with the same cubic inch displacement unless a boat load more torque and hp can be wrung out from it. Any thoughts?

You guys have both made some very good points. When chevy brought back the camaro they were the ones that compaired it to the '69. I guess they just meant "the look". I'm sorry but I was hoping for alot more. I was waiting for the options, in styling and performance. Back then you had the small block, SS, RS, SS/RS and the Z/28. You also had the optional L78, 375hp 396 big block, which is a rare car these days. In my option the Z/28 just needs to out perform the Boss 302 and what ever Challenger (Hemi 392) we go up against. My biggest fear is the one of the car mags compairs the Boss or Challenger to LSA powered Caddy (ouch) ...instead of their true Z/28 rival. While I do enjoy my new camaro, I will order the Z if it makes sense. I've only owned Z's in the past, I just hope Chevy gives me a reason to own another one. Keep the conversation going guys. It just started to get interesting.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

High Performance....and I seriously doubt it's a production name consideration...fwiw.

yeah you caught me lol. Typo on my part but still lame on their part.

[KarFan]

Should be a curb weight limit on usage of Z28. I'd say any production Camaro over 4,000 lbs curb weight shouldn't qualify as a Z28.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by thok mcbeefstew

I have a question for the crowd. Is it a big deal for this car to be very suped up and to be great on the track? I would say with this new suspension, and all of the testing on "the track", it is GOING to be a track car. NOW, if this track car also has a MONSTER engine, I fail to see the argument. Not to pick a fight, but I don't think it is in GM's best interests to build so many different variations of a car due to the financial situations. So if this car crushes the Boss and the GT-500, what is the problem?

I'm right there with ya'!!!

Originally Posted by Vega

@Dragoneye I feel like you missed the point of my posts, im not saying the Z should be limited, and im not saying completely strip the interior, im saying do what Ford is doing with the Boss, which is leave out the luxury aspect and go for what a muscle car originally was, a stripped (as in lightweight materials and no fancy luxury, not "no interior at all") car with emphasis on light weight, handling, and high output. I dont see why people seem to think this is such an irrational formula when Ford has already announced their doing it with one of their Mustang models.

As for the Boss i dont over estimate it, i just love the idea behind the car, im not a Ford lover by any means i love all muscle with a slight partialness towards GM, hell i drive a Camaro. Its not the fact that its a Boss or a 302 or any of that, its the idea behind it i love, that "no fancy crap here" idea LOL

Okay, I understand where you're coming from now. I guess at this point all I have to say is that "just because Ford did it, doesn't mean it's smart". I, too, like what Ford did with the Boss. I think GM could have done it better...but that's neither here nor there. I don't believe Ford will sell very many of those Boss Mustangs at all. Meanwhile, the GT500 will still wear the PR crown as the "King Mustang"....which is the image Chevy is going for with this rendition of Camaro.

Originally Posted by Vega

Also i dont consider the LSA as "tuned" at all, its a whole motor in itself, you dont tune an LSA to become an LSA, you just build an LSA. Sure it has an LS block and a supercharger but its all part of the motor itself none of it is changed from any other standard motor, i dont consider it tuned...now if GM presented an LS3 or LS7 with a different cam and heads than anything they offer stock in any car or as a crate then i would consider that a tuned motor.

Hmm...I disagree completely. The LSA has been wholly modified from the standard LS block. But this is not your main concern here, so I'll digress.

Originally Posted by radz28

To me, it seems the inception of the 5th Gen started in a skunkworks, if you will. I believe CAMARO has progressed to where it is now from fanatics within the Team, not so much because of how much GM is actually investing in the car.

Oh, the company is very supportive of the Camaro this time around. The passion of the enthusiasts, and the team (who are enthusiasts, themselves) for this car has made it that way. Any limitations will be more because of the other brands they have to attend to and the resources split, rather than the support-factor.

Originally Posted by a_Username

yeah you caught me lol. Typo on my part but still lame on their part.

They could have called it he BA Edition....

Originally Posted by KarFan

Should be a curb weight limit on usage of Z28. I'd say any production Camaro over 4,000 lbs curb weight shouldn't qualify as a Z28.

Ehh.....I think there needs to be more logic then that...

[heavyt100]

It WILL be called the Z28.

[nick at night]

Originally Posted by heavyt100

It WILL be called the Z28.

Source? Or is this your opinion? I can't see it being called something else after all the hype but you never truly know. Unless you know.... Then... I guess you know....

[heavyt100]

Originally Posted by nick at night

Source? Or is this your opinion? I can't see it being called something else after all the hype but you never truly know. Unless you know.... Then... I guess you know....

Someone high, high up on the Chevrolet food chain.

Besides, it would be stupid to do otherwise.

They already have the brand. Don't need to reinvent it.

[nick at night]

Originally Posted by heavyt100

They already have the brand. Don't need to reinvent it.