Optional Safety: Another Z28 Idea

[The_Blur]

A lot of enthusiasts focus on power, torque, weight, and sound when considering a new car. It doesn't matter whether the car comes from Asia, Europe, or America. Each company has a certain sound it tries to achieve with extensive tuning per engine per machine. That's easy. At the same time, that sound doesn't matter if the car comes without power. Muscle cars focus on torque and power while trucks need the torque to tow things. All of these factors are up to the engine and exhaust—purely performance-oriented traits of a car.

Weight is a big issue in recent times. One of the reasons muscle cars lost their glory for a short time was that cars that weighed so little and had so much less power could catch up. It was the rise of the ricer. Little Asian compacts took over the streets, and domestic pride turned into GT-R stickers and really big, ugly wings on imported trunks.

The biggest contributor to weight is safety features. 5-star crash ratings today would be 50-star ratings just 20 years ago. The improvements are amazing, and as a result, people have been saved from increasingly life-threatening accidents. Despite this, people still die in their cars, leading one to believe that cars will increasingly have mandated safety features to protect their passengers.

For those of us into muscle cars, we face a trying time where the forces of gravity and environmental legislation inhibit our machines. As a result, we may face another temporary drop in power and another rise of ricers. We do not want this to happen.

I have an alternative to losing our ground. GM should produce an option, only for top trims or special vehicles, that safety be sacrificed just a little bit. GM already has a lower rating on the Corvette, but that is not enough. I'm talking about standard front airbags, but not side airbags. I'm talking about lighter frames. These may increase the possibility of damage upon impact, but the focus for these drivers is on the track.

How can this be implemented? I'm glad you almost asked (if I hadn't posted it first). In the past, more safety has costed more. For enthusiasts who drive carefully, alert, and fast, safety is less important than to soccer moms. We still want to arrive to our destinations safely, but those of you who have classic Z28s know don't feel endangered en route because you don't have a roll cage, harness, 22 airbags, and a frame that weighs 2 tons. The idea is simple. Pay more for less safety.

I know. This is radical. I'm on a budget just like many of you, and our insurance companies will all flip out, but some of us can afford a true stripped Z28 and are willing to save up for it. I, personally, will be delighted with the SS or a heavily modified RS, but many members of this site have expressed interest in a limited production Z28. Just imagine a 3000-pound Z28, race-tuned like a classic, without any of the luxuries of a street machine, putting down the same numbers on the dyno as a Camaro SS, and winning. Imagine the same engine and transmission with better times. The expensive part that our members want is a new engine. Can you imagine keeping the LS3 and just punishing exotics with a lightweight Camaro?

Of course, you'll sacrifice 2 stars and will have to pay the insurance company more. The car will cost $7000 extra due to the special order, and God only knows what the dealer will charge for this limited edition Camaro, but you'd love to see it, wouldn't you?

In summary, weight is a real issue to enthusiasts, and sacrificing some safety features could create the opportunity to make an already great car even more incredible for those who are willing to pay for it. I don't think this is dangerous since so many old cars are on the road, but it is expensive. I just want to know how the community feels about this idea as a limited production Z28.

[joes3rdcamaro82/91/2010]

I get what you are saying, how can all these smaller cars like a Honda Fit for example, meet saftey requirements and still wiegh so little? Why cant the Camaro do this?

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by joes3rdcamaro82/91/2010

I get what you are saying, how can all these smaller cars like a Honda Fit for example, meet saftey requirements and still wiegh so little? Why cant the Camaro do this?

I believe that they are just more efficient in just about every category. Per liter, they are delivering more power with better fuel efficiency. There are a lot of reasons for this. Also, small cars tend to sacrifice cargo room, head room, leg room, shoulder room, and just about any other room you can imagine. GM needs to pump up the efficiency to do this with those legendary small blocks of theirs, but in the meantime, a limited production car with safety sacrifices will beat anything you throw at it.

[BBfan24]

nice idea. i wouldn't get one of those, but it would be nice to know it existed thus making the camaro, "any camaro" on the road, that much more respected

[wildpaws]

I agree with some of your points about weight increases due to safety causing the "demise" of the American muscle car, but I think that the downhill slide began long before that in the early '70s when HP was drastically cut for emissions and mileage concerns that were pushed on the industry. I really don't see much of a market for the type of Camaro you are talking about and don't think that GM could justify building them just to have them, regardless of how the enthusiast sector felt about them. In this day and age GM must make decisions based on potential sales and profitability.
Clyde

[greenrail]

Originally Posted by wildpaws

I agree with some of your points about weight increases due to safety causing the "demise" of the American muscle car, but I think that the downhill slide began long before that in the early '70s when HP was drastically cut for emissions and mileage concerns that were pushed on the industry. I really don't see much of a market for the type of Camaro you are talking about and don't think that GM could justify building them just to have them, regardless of how the enthusiast sector felt about them. In this day and age GM must make decisions based on potential sales and profitability.
Clyde

I agree. One also needs to consider the laibility issues GM would face by putting a vehicles out on the market intentionally not as safe as regular production vehicles. This would never fly as far as a street vehicle.

However, take a look at what Ford is doing with their track vehicles Mustangs sold only for off Highway use. They are race cars.

Which are sold a significantly higher prices than their street versions.

Could it be done? Heck yes (In my opinion). But at what cost?????

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by greenrail

I agree. One also needs to consider the laibility issues GM would face by putting a vehicles out on the market intentionally not as safe as regular production vehicles. This would never fly as far as a street vehicle.

However, take a look at what For dis doing with their track vehicles Mustangs sold only for off Highway use. They are race cars.

Which are sold a significantly higher prices than their street versions.

Could it be done? Heck yes (In my opinion). But at what cost?????

The Corvette doesn't get a 5-star crash rating. As a performance car, no one seems to care.

[TAG UR IT]

I think it'll have to be a short lived version and I don't think it should be called a Z28. No disrespect to you, of course. But, I'd rather it be called.....a ZL1.

Z28's are track stars which everyone wants to own. If GM limits their sales to a few select people only at a much higher cost, there will be a lot of disappointed people.

Sacrificing safety for weight is an option I think the customer should have the right to choose. But, GM can't put too many options on the options list or that will be upping their cost even more.

Take the B4C for example. It's a stripper version of a luxury race car. Take out the luxury and you end up w/ a race car....manual windows and locks, etc. But, it'll have a stiffer suspension, beefier brakes, stronger driveline components, etc. It is....a closer example to what you request. Now, if you want that same version w/out the airbags, rear seat, etc., I think that again, it could be a possibility, but GM would need the market to do it.

Right now, I don't think GM has the market to do what you mentioned. The buyer can get the car, remove all the weight, beef up the engine, and spend the same amount as what they would spend on the race version you mention.

Would that be profitable for GM? I don' think so. Why? Because people want to mod their race cars to their specifications.

Let's not forget that you wouldn't be getting a warranty with this new purposefully built "race car."

[carfansince73]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

The Corvette doesn't get a 5-star crash rating. As a performance car, no one seems to care.

What does it get? I've never seen a crash test on the new ones. Many low volume cars don't get tested at all, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The customer should know what they are getting, and people shopping for Corvettes probably wouldn't care if it showed a rating of less than five stars.

The current system has 5 stars, which I THINK means a car could get just one star and still pass the test, and I would hate to be in a car that only gets one star.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by TAG UR IT

I think it'll have to be a short lived version and I don't think it should be called a Z28. No disrespect to you, of course. But, I'd rather it be called.....a ZL1.

Z28's are track stars which everyone wants to own. If GM limits their sales to a few select people only at a much higher cost, there will be a lot of disappointed people.

Sacrificing safety for weight is an option I think the customer should have the right to choose. But, GM can't put too many options on the options list or that will be upping their cost even more.

Take the B4C for example. It's a stripper version of a luxury race car. Take out the luxury and you end up w/ a race car....manual windows and locks, etc. But, it'll have a stiffer suspension, beefier brakes, stronger driveline components, etc. It is....a closer example to what you request. Now, if you want that same version w/out the airbags, rear seat, etc., I think that again, it could be a possibility, but GM would need the market to do it.

Right now, I don't think GM has the market to do what you mentioned. The buyer can get the car, remove all the weight, beef up the engine, and spend the same amount as what they would spend on the race version you mention.

Would that be profitable for GM? I don' think so. Why? Because people want to mod their race cars to their specifications.

Let's not forget that you wouldn't be getting a warranty with this new purposefully built "race car."

The only reason I felt that Z28 was a better moniker was that it would use all of the same parts as the SS. The body would be the same so GM wouldn't have to make it look different. The LS3 would be the only engine option.

If I were to call it a ZL1, I would encourage GM to replace the motor with something even more menacing, like the LS7. This would place it in a similar category with the Z06, but it would be a 4-seater instead of a 2-seater.

I also recommended limited production so GM could test the market. If supply exceeded demand on a car like this, sale prices would plummet. I'd advertise it like the Challenger SRT8.

Originally Posted by carfansince73

What does it get? I've never seen a crash test on the new ones. Many low volume cars don't get tested at all, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The customer should know what they are getting, and people shopping for Corvettes probably wouldn't care if it showed a rating of less than five stars.

The current system has 5 stars, which I THINK means a car could get just one star and still pass the test, and I would hate to be in a car that only gets one star.

Currently, the Corvette has 4 stars, according to Motor Trend.

Remember that standards for these tests go up over time. This is an important consideration for people driving older cars. At today's standards, many cars wouldn't pass.

[carfansince73]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

Currently, the Corvette has 4 stars, according to Motor Trend.

Remember that standards for these tests go up over time. This is an important consideration for people driving older cars. At today's standards, many cars wouldn't pass.

Actually, the four stars is Motor Trend's overall rating for the car, not it's safety rating. I figured this by checking a Honda Pilot (we have a 2006), and it only shows three stars from MT. The NHTSA gave it 5 stars in all their tests.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by carfansince73

Actually, the four stars is Motor Trend's overall rating for the car, not it's safety rating. I figured this by checking a Honda Pilot (we have a 2006), and it only shows three stars from MT. The NHTSA gave it 5 stars in all their tests.

I must be thinking of a previous generation.

[greenrail]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

The Corvette doesn't get a 5-star crash rating. As a performance car, no one seems to care.

That may be true for the present. But I would hazard a pretty fair guess that the next Generation Corvette will. As you look at each successive vehicle engineered by GM, there are more and more safety features added to up their respective safety rating. Whether through Federal Mandates or General Performance Engineering, it will happen.

[radz28]

I think the idea of removing weight to improve performance is a good idea, although, not to sound argumentative, I think GM has already thought of that. I have to ask myself, "Why would GM not be as efficient with weight from the get-go? It would help fuel efficiency, handling, safety (to a degree I suppose,) and performance." Wouldn't it be cheaper considering the cost of steel is going up, to use less of it? My point is I think GM has addressed the weight of the known models and optimized them as best they can, given their understanding of the respective markets these cars are designed for and according to crash protection regulations. With GM as politically correct as they are, I'm sure they wouldn't make this car as you've suggested (as much as I honeslty agree with you) because there is probably too much liability and they don't have the money to develop a car that only maybe a few thousand people would be interested in. I mean, how can you make money on a car that has less content and features without dropping the price a whole lot? I'm not an economist by any means, that's for sure, however, it just seems to me that a Camaro, fashioned this way, would just not make sense in the way of making money for GM. I think it would be a lot easier to bump up the power with a powerplant already developed and just change the face of the car. That would seem, to me, to limit the amount of R&D time and cost, and deliver a car that perhaps would appeal to a larger audience. I do have to say that my idea of a Z28 does not exactly follow what many people think though. I know what the car used to be, but times change. We won't likely know what comes of this for a couple more years :(