Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
autoguy
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Camaro ZL1 Forum - ZL1 Specific Topics

Camaro ZL1 Forum - ZL1 Specific Topics Camaro ZL1 specific topics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-26-2010, 11:33 PM   #1
309grovest
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Spaceship Derf
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Venus
Posts: 3
Z/28 might not be much faster than SS

If and when GM builds the Z/28 I do not think it would be much faster than the SS if they use the LS-A but it will probably handle much better - that will be GM's goal with the Z/28 - In my opinion.

If you use the LS-A you will add about 150 lbs to the cars weight b/c the LS-A is that much heavier than the LS3. The added weight is due to the s'charger and related hardware. Also if you upgrade the suspension, go to bigger brakes, wheels and tires you will add even more weight -the car's weight could approach 4200 lbs. This is the weight of the CTS-V and even though GM says the 0 to 60 time of the V is 3.9 I have never seen a test where it achieved this time - usually the time is around 4.4 secs to 60.

Therfore if the Z is approx. the same weight as the CTS-V and they both have the same engine I would think that they would post similar acceleration times- unless GM lowers the gearing in the Z. I believe the SS does 0-60 in about 4.6 / 4.7 - so if the Z accomplishes 0-60 in 4.4 or 4.3 there is very little difference between the 2 vehicles. If you have an SS and spend 5k on engine upgrades you can get the 0-60 time down to 4.0 or the low 4's

For less money you have a faster car, but going back to my original comment the Z will handle better - which was the goal of the Z when it was originally introduced.

Last edited by 309grovest; 06-27-2010 at 12:44 AM.
309grovest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 10:33 AM   #2
ArkySS
Camaroless for now...
 
ArkySS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Blue Topaz Silverado
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 1,415
The Caddy weighs 4,250 lbs. The LSA weight difference to the LS3 is less than 50 lbs. Not that any of the rags matter but C/D got down to a 4.0 with the automatic. Weight would be the enemy there. Motor Trend got a 12.3 in the 1/4. Half a second is huge and the amount of power to get that .5 second is significant. So you are right it's not like your SS versus a dump truck but in the performance car world a .5 second is huge. That being said you can spend 10 grand and get the same performance for less money but you do not have the warranty. I agree with you that part of the appeal of the Z will and should be handling.
__________________
It was fun while it lasted.....
ArkySS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 11:04 AM   #3
Black GT
Banned
 
Drives: 2006 Mustang GT
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 522
My opinoin is a SS with a supercharger will probably outrun the Z/28. the Z's advantage will be upgraded suspension,brakes WARRENTY.
Black GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 11:35 AM   #4
VII O III
 
VII O III's Avatar
 
Drives: 99 z/28 ls1
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Falls Church, Va
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by 309grovest View Post
If and when GM builds the Z/28 I do not think it would be much faster than the SS if they use the LS-A but it will probably handle much better - that will be GM's goal with the Z/28 - In my opinion.

If you use the LS-A you will add about 150 lbs to the cars weight b/c the LS-A is that much heavier than the LS3. The added weight is due to the s'charger and related hardware. Also if you upgrade the suspension, go to bigger brakes, wheels and tires you will add even more weight -the car's weight could approach 4200 lbs. This is the weight of the CTS-V and even though GM says the 0 to 60 time of the V is 3.9 I have never seen a test where it achieved this time - usually the time is around 4.4 secs to 60.

Therfore if the Z is approx. the same weight as the CTS-V and they both have the same engine I would think that they would post similar acceleration times- unless GM lowers the gearing in the Z. I believe the SS does 0-60 in about 4.6 / 4.7 - so if the Z accomplishes 0-60 in 4.4 or 4.3 there is very little difference between the 2 vehicles. If you have an SS and spend 5k on engine upgrades you can get the 0-60 time down to 4.0 or the low 4's

For less money you have a faster car, but going back to my original comment the Z will handle better - which was the goal of the Z when it was originally introduced.
now why do you have to be such a mood kill, but i guess well just have to wait n see
__________________
VII O III is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 11:40 AM   #5
formare
Suspension by Pedders
 
formare's Avatar
 
Drives: Synergy Edition 13.71@102 1.95 60'
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chicagoland (Crown Point, IN)
Posts: 1,901
I am thinking a tt v6 with stunning suspension upgrades ala leno. Remember the first ever z was a 302 and the SS was a 350.
__________________
My first Love. She was called "Miss Carriage" (still cry when I think about her)
383, Muncie 4 speed, custom linkage mated to hurst short throw shifter.
formare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 12:09 PM   #6
usa1camaro1969
Back on the dino-juice
 
usa1camaro1969's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 LS + a few more
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by formare View Post
I am thinking a tt v6 with stunning suspension upgrades ala leno. Remember the first ever z was a 302 and the SS was a 350.
AND 396!
usa1camaro1969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 12:40 PM   #7
formare
Suspension by Pedders
 
formare's Avatar
 
Drives: Synergy Edition 13.71@102 1.95 60'
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chicagoland (Crown Point, IN)
Posts: 1,901
True enough.. Almost forgot about the 396 pretty rare.
__________________
My first Love. She was called "Miss Carriage" (still cry when I think about her)
383, Muncie 4 speed, custom linkage mated to hurst short throw shifter.
formare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 05:20 PM   #8
wildpaws

 
wildpaws's Avatar
 
Drives: 1999 Blazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 1,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by formare View Post
True enough.. Almost forgot about the 396 pretty rare.
Not really that rare. Production numbers for '67-'69 model years: 396/325HP 18,528, 396/350HP 4,587, 396/375HP 11,185, so over 34,000 396 Camaros were produced in those three years (compared to just over 28,000 Z/28s in the same three years).
Clyde
wildpaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 05:27 PM   #9
2010 SSRS



 
2010 SSRS's Avatar
 
Drives: 3 V8 Camaros
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Ocean State
Posts: 123,973
Supercharged Z-28 will definitely be much faster.
__________________
Jannetty Racing JRE Street Package
2010 SSRS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 05:30 PM   #10
BigBrutus12
 
Drives: 68 camaro, 2007 F150
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 7
As much as I would like to see a 2012 Z28. It might be to GM's best interest to build a 550+ HP, (S Borla exhaust, better hood, ext....) and keep the SS name. When the lighter frame comes out 2014 or so then start production on a Z28. Thoughts??
BigBrutus12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 05:35 PM   #11
wildpaws

 
wildpaws's Avatar
 
Drives: 1999 Blazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 1,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBrutus12 View Post
As much as I would like to see a 2012 Z28. It might be to GM's best interest to build a 550+ HP, (S Borla exhaust, better hood, ext....) and keep the SS name. When the lighter frame comes out 2014 or so then start production on a Z28. Thoughts??
I disagree, I think Chevy needs a new Z/28 sooner rather than later. The advantage to a sixth gen. Z/28 would be the possibility of keeping closer to it's heritage (an idea I really like), but I think that time frame is too long to not have a Z/28 in the lineup.
Clyde
wildpaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 07:39 PM   #12
Mankind
Whats a Millwright?
 
Mankind's Avatar
 
Drives: 2LT/RS SIM, 05 Wht Denali
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Holden, LA
Posts: 410
Why worry about the LSA? GM needs to get off their butt and get us a DOHC V8. At that point the performance numbers can be off the chart. Ford is getting comparable power plants with smaller engines because of this. I would gladly exchange a pushrod 6.2L for a smaller 5.7L, or a 5.0 like original Z28, DOHC because you can get more power. Design one, market it in the Z28, and see if ford can keep up. They went back to the drawing board for their 5.0 and only pumped a rated 412, prolly more but they are being sneaky.
Mankind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 07:57 PM   #13
boxmonkeyracing
juggernaut
 
boxmonkeyracing's Avatar
 
Drives: VRSCF, 2011 SS vert
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: kenly, nc
Posts: 3,345
Send a message via AIM to boxmonkeyracing Send a message via Yahoo to boxmonkeyracing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mankind View Post
Why worry about the LSA? GM needs to get off their butt and get us a DOHC V8. At that point the performance numbers can be off the chart. Ford is getting comparable power plants with smaller engines because of this. I would gladly exchange a pushrod 6.2L for a smaller 5.7L, or a 5.0 like original Z28, DOHC because you can get more power. Design one, market it in the Z28, and see if ford can keep up. They went back to the drawing board for their 5.0 and only pumped a rated 412, prolly more but they are being sneaky.

huh. . .a double over head cam engine weights more then a push rod, makes less tq and has to spin up higher to get the same power. . .

also from what I've read about the new 5.0 they have done a lot of tricks to it to get that 412 hp. some tricks that are used by the aftermarket normally. so now you are getting a car that the engine is getting on the edge of being tapped out with basic addons (exhaust and intake)... so tell me why I want to start out with an engine I already have to do more expensive work to to make faster?

give me the old antiquated push rod motor. weights less and makes its power down low. . .right where you need it leaving the starting line. . .and then makes it all the way up to red line. . .
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbodfather View Post
We do not want to use the Z28 moniker on a car that does not deserve this hallowed name.
boxmonkeyracing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 08:02 PM   #14
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mankind View Post
Why worry about the LSA? GM needs to get off their butt and get us a DOHC V8.
No, they absolutely do not...The LS3 is a comparable, if not better engine than even Ford's brand new little 5.0 liter motor. And it's based on early 2000s tech! (hrm, hrm..."imo")

GM is beginning to produce (or fit plants to produce) the new generation of Chevy Small Blocks. Next year, look for the first to arrive....in a VERY big way.

And yes...all sources indicate they will still be cam-in-block.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 08:14 PM   #15
truth411

 
Drives: police interceptor
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Austin, tx
Posts: 1,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mankind View Post
Why worry about the LSA? GM needs to get off their butt and get us a DOHC V8. At that point the performance numbers can be off the chart. Ford is getting comparable power plants with smaller engines because of this. I would gladly exchange a pushrod 6.2L for a smaller 5.7L, or a 5.0 like original Z28, DOHC because you can get more power. Design one, market it in the Z28, and see if ford can keep up. They went back to the drawing board for their 5.0 and only pumped a rated 412, prolly more but they are being sneaky.
truth411 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 08:18 PM   #16
Mankind
Whats a Millwright?
 
Mankind's Avatar
 
Drives: 2LT/RS SIM, 05 Wht Denali
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Holden, LA
Posts: 410
Haven't seen a dyno graph to see what the start torque is but 390 out of 5.0L vs 424 from a 6.2L isn't very shabby. If they did have to do after market type mods from the factory then i will agree with you on the pushrod design. Gm made enourmous strides in pushrod engines but to keep going up in bore and stroke doesn't make sense to me if you can do it with a smaller ci engine. Yes i know they weigh more, but if GM can do such great things with the LLT DOHC then why not on the V8?
Mankind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 08:30 PM   #17
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mankind View Post
Haven't seen a dyno graph to see what the start torque is but 390 out of 5.0L vs 424 from a 6.2L isn't very shabby. If they did have to do after market type mods from the factory then i will agree with you on the pushrod design. Gm made enourmous strides in pushrod engines but to keep going up in bore and stroke doesn't make sense to me if you can do it with a smaller ci engine. Yes i know they weigh more, but if GM can do such great things with the LLT DOHC then why not on the V8?
Because it doesn't need to be done. Allow me, if you will, to give some perspective on the matter:

Ford's new engine has a "CAI" (iirc), and shorty headers, features variable valve timing, DOHC, and heavily revised heads. Yet it makes less torque, but is revved higher than the LS3, giving it roughly equivilant power.

The LLT features direct injection, on top of an equally-high redline, giving it that same 'low' torque/high hp character.

The LS3 has no Variable Valve Timing, single cam-in-block, cast exhaust manifolds, a lower redline, and an aging block design. Yet it still produces more torque and more power across a broad range than pretty much every engine in its class.

The Gen V V8 engines are set to utilize VVT, DI, and they'll ALL be aluminum blocks, among other technologies. One of which they're referring to as an "all-new advanced combustion system design". They'll likely be smaller in displacement, with higher fuel economy, yet will not suffer a significant (if any) drop in power. On top of all that, they've designed it to meet anticipated emissions standards throughout the next decade...not just current ones.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 08:34 PM   #18
truth411

 
Drives: police interceptor
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Austin, tx
Posts: 1,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mankind View Post
Haven't seen a dyno graph to see what the start torque is but 390 out of 5.0L vs 424 from a 6.2L isn't very shabby. If they did have to do after market type mods from the factory then i will agree with you on the pushrod design. Gm made enourmous strides in pushrod engines but to keep going up in bore and stroke doesn't make sense to me if you can do it with a smaller ci engine. Yes i know they weigh more, but if GM can do such great things with the LLT DOHC then why not on the V8?
6.2 is here to stay, but combined with lowend torque and gearing OHV makes great fuel economy. The gen V are right around the corner, and will be even more powerful than the gen IV and more fuel efficient aswell. BTW you are mistaken, you are confusing displacement with the physical size of an engine, Fords 5.0 is bigger and heavier than the 6.2 ls3. A 5.3 OHV V8 is the exact same size as the 7.0 LS7 ohv V8 since it is the same block. Also let me ask you this (theorecticaly speaking)

Which would you rather have:
BMWs 4.0 V8
414hp, 310lbs
Cost $20k (estimate)
14mpg city, 20mpg highway

or
Camaro LS3
Cost $6.5k
430hp, 424lbs
16mpg city, 24Mpg highway

You see my point, horsepower per liter is meaningless and does not transfer to the bottomline to the consumer in any way shape or form in the real world. Where it counts i.e. Weight, cost, compact in size, hp, torque, fuel economy, and responding to mods. OHV>DOHC.
truth411 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 08:52 PM   #19
rawj7
U.S. ARMY Aviation Mech
 
rawj7's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Black 2SS/RS 6 Speed
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 353
I cant wait to read more about the $890 Mil GM just droped on their GEN V engines
Better yet I cant wait to hear about one going into a car
__________________
2SS/RS W/White Hood strip, 6sM. To do before I Die. Dream car-check, ...
rawj7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 09:06 PM   #20
n!ght r!der
That Guy
 
n!ght r!der's Avatar
 
Drives: really good
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 861
OP don't be a downer. Camaro SS is a beast.. but Cts-V is a monster. and the z/28 will be a "beastly monster" so it will be faster than both and the Cts-V and Camrao SS aren't as close as you think..
n!ght r!der is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2010, 09:56 PM   #21
ShnOmac


 
ShnOmac's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Silverado SS, 2009 G8 GT
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PNW
Posts: 13,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
N look for the first to arrive....in a VERY big way.
Hmmmm..... What are you thinking may happen?
ShnOmac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2010, 12:36 AM   #22
nfamous209
 
Drives: 2002 Camaro z28
Join Date: May 2008
Location: patterson, ca
Posts: 413
Send a message via AIM to nfamous209 Send a message via Yahoo to nfamous209
Quote:
Originally Posted by truth411 View Post
6.2 is here to stay, but combined with lowend torque and gearing OHV makes great fuel economy. The gen V are right around the corner, and will be even more powerful than the gen IV and more fuel efficient aswell. BTW you are mistaken, you are confusing displacement with the physical size of an engine, Fords 5.0 is bigger and heavier than the 6.2 ls3. A 5.3 OHV V8 is the exact same size as the 7.0 LS7 ohv V8 since it is the same block. Also let me ask you this (theorecticaly speaking)

Which would you rather have:
BMWs 4.0 V8
414hp, 310lbs
Cost $20k (estimate)
14mpg city, 20mpg highway

or
Camaro LS3
Cost $6.5k
430hp, 424lbs
16mpg city, 24Mpg highway

You see my point, horsepower per liter is meaningless and does not transfer to the bottomline to the consumer in any way shape or form in the real world. Where it counts i.e. Weight, cost, compact in size, hp, torque, fuel economy, and responding to mods. OHV>DOHC.
the m3's e90 4.0L V8 weighs more than the LS3, it weighs like 450.
nfamous209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2010, 01:39 AM   #23
LostInMoscow
Exiled Speed Junkie
 
LostInMoscow's Avatar
 
Drives: None
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 806
Z28 with 556 HP = 1 big freak'n smile after another! How fast do you want to drive? Come on! When I turned 16, they introduced the 1982 Z28 with 170 HP. Never did I dream that the camaro lineup would include a 312 HP V6 (OMG), a 426 HP V8 SS model and a 556 HP Z28. But yet, here we are! These are the good old days! Enjoy them while they last!
__________________
LostInMoscow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2010, 02:28 AM   #24
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 22,195
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
Quote:
Originally Posted by nfamous209 View Post
the m3's e90 4.0L V8 weighs more than the LS3, it weighs like 450.
I was thinking the same thing at first, but I believe he meant lb-ft of torque not lbs of engine weight.
__________________
Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them
__________________
don't believe a thing you read about the next gen Camaro -- as history has proven time and time again:

WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT FUTURE PRODUCT PLANS PERIOD FbodFather
__________________

Camaro5 Fest sub-forum
DGthe3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2010, 02:29 AM   #25
SIXJAK


 
SIXJAK's Avatar
 
Drives: MO's only SC'd LLT.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Branson MO
Posts: 2,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostInMoscow View Post
Z28 with 556 HP = 1 big freak'n smile after another! How fast do you want to drive? Come on! When I turned 16, they introduced the 1982 Z28 with 170 HP. Never did I dream that the camaro lineup would include a 312 HP V6 (OMG), a 426 HP V8 SS model and a 556 HP Z28. But yet, here we are! These are the good old days! Enjoy them while they last!
Good point. I love my V6 and for most applications, it's plenty. But as the video above illustrates, that 556 HP motor is reeediculous and I'm a fan.
__________________
IPF supercharger kit, IPF tune, SW LT's, R. Tech HFC's, ARK DT-S catback, SS Brembo brake upgrade, BC Racing adjustable coilovers, Hurst STS, Pfadt rear arm package, Pfadt adjustable sways & end links, Pfadt diff bushings, BMR rear cradle full kit blk bezels,SS diffuser, Innovate gauges.
SIXJAK is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
4-Sale 2001 Z/28 Show Car A4, t-tops 01pewterz28 Autos For Sale / Wanted 10 08-12-2010 09:26 AM
SS A6 or M6 faster?????? MY2010SS 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 275 05-20-2010 05:15 PM
Anyone with an HHR SS or Implala SS caverman 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 1 02-06-2010 06:45 AM
Top Trim? SS or Z/28 moto-camaro 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 22 04-13-2009 07:05 PM
What (in your opinon) is the top dog model? poll. 454lsxss 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 21 06-28-2008 03:06 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.