2013 SS or ZL1

[casvg5]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

Along with throwing away your warranty and still not have the ride and control of a ZL1.

I have an unconditional warranty on my LSX motor. If it blows, I get a new one. So...whos got 700hp, for under 50K, and still has an engine warranty? Ride control, I personally dont auto cross or road race...so ill save the 400lbs of suspension componants and other stuff over an SS

[casvg5]

If I was gonna spend 60K plus on a GM, it would be a vette. Plain and simple. Magnetic ride control or not, any vette runs circles around a camaro in handling. I love my camaro though.

[casvg5]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

Along with throwing away your warranty and still not have the ride and control of a ZL1.

And a side note. One of the best things in the world is rolling up to a Z06 vette, a viper, or most all the supercars around here, and reving it up at them. They see some young guy in a new camaro and think "what a chump, he has no idea" as I look like a stock SS. Then he blasts it, and I do to, and I leave him utterly blown away as he heres my supercharger wine into the distance. Sleeper mode.

[DRKS1D3]

Originally Posted by Forty5th

Meh... of course if you compare it to other 'highline' marques. With different perspectives, the ZL1 is a good bang for the buck. BUT it would be a great value if say for example a ZL1 can be had for 50k tops otd especially pretty much loaded. 60k IMHO is overpriced for a Chevy. Just like 65k is overpriced for a Ford, or 55k is overpriced for a Dodge. And just like 90+k is overpriced for a base new 911... damn.

I really like the ZL1 but in my case I'd have to give up both SS and the Boss to step into one... can't say I didn't have thoughts about it...

Yep, that's the world we live in. Imagine going back in time and telling somebody buying a brand new 1969 Camaro for $3,500, "Hey, you know in 2012, these are going to cost $35,000.". They'd fall over dead! Hell, you can go drop $500 on a new cell phone if you're stupid enough to do it. Back in the 40's and 50's, that would buy you a new car.

[Edwin320]

Lots of rationalizations here about how to better spend your money. I'd go with a ZL1 convertible, simply because that is what I like. If all I cared about was going fast, I'd spend 20K and build a 9 second 4th gen. That's not what I want out of my car these days. Just think about what you want and what's important to you (in terms of speed, power, handling, exclusivity etc) and make your choice.

[casvg5]

But I wanna go fast

[SlingShot]

Originally Posted by ShowSStopper

Can you maybe point to where I said I had never driven a ZL1?









Any questions?

Side Note: My pre-Camaro car, an '03 Cobra, cost me $23k used with 40k miles on it. Less than $10k later, it was breaking 9's at the track on drag radials. 'Nuff said.

Which one of those cars cost $60K new ? The Boss isn't even in the same league as the ZL1.

Also what does going 9's in a used car have to do about new cars, that handle, ride and perform off the showroom floor? Nothing ...

To you performance is all about going fast in a straight line, the Z is much more than that. And if you want to brag about going fast after modding, you are only limited by money.

[mlee]

Originally Posted by casvg5

If I was gonna spend 60K plus on a GM, it would be a vette. Plain and simple. Magnetic ride control or not, any vette runs circles around a camaro in handling. I love my camaro though.

If I was buying a vette over the ZL1 it would definitely cost a lot more than 60K unless it was used. I'll be taking my car to the same guy who did yours, I'll be spending WAY less on mods to get to 700 and will still have the beefed up suspension and rear end to handle the track days.

We'll have to give them a run when I'm done and compare notes.

[mlee]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

Which one of those cars cost $60K new ? The Boss isn't even in the same league as the ZL1.

I'll answer that... other than the boss, which is 1LE class, absolutely none of them.

[Renegade]

Originally Posted by mlee

I'll answer that... other than the boss, which is 1LE class, absolutely none of them.

damn skippy.

[ShowSStopper]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

Which one of those cars cost $60K new ? The Boss isn't even in the same league as the ZL1.

Also what does going 9's in a used car have to do about new cars, that handle, ride and perform off the showroom floor? Nothing ...

To you performance is all about going fast in a straight line, the Z is much more than that. And if you want to brag about going fast after modding, you are only limited by money.

Every one of them.

None of those are above $65k new...that Porsche is NOT a 911, it is a Cayman...and it is also a beautiful car.

Apples to Apples? Okay how's this:

From MotorTrend talking about the Boss, a car you CLAIM is not in ZL1 territory:


"We expected the biggest gap in the two cars' lap times to come from the power discrepancy. The Boss is making do with a mere 444 horsepower and 380 lb-ft from its naturally aspirated 5.0-liter V-8. The ZL1 humiliates the 302's spec sheet by cranking out 580 horsepower and a staggering 556 lb-ft of torque from all 6.2 liters of supercharged V-8. The Camaro has to move 7.0 lb/hp while the Mustang is dealing with 8.2. All these things should add up to the Camaro showing the Mustang its taillights with ease and great frequency. In quarter-mile testing, the Camaro ran through in 12.1 seconds at 117 mph, rather impressive, but the Mustang was only three-tenths of a second and 3 mph behind. Sure, the Camaro has 400 pounds on the Mustang, but we still expected more of a gap."

Put the new GT500 next to the ZL1, and things get even nastier according to Inside Line:

"Inside Line took the 2012 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 and 2013 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500, together, on a field trip: to Westminster, California where where they were both tested on the same dyno at MD Automotive, run the by same operator on the same day. In case any memories need refreshing, the specs run thusly: the ZL1 has a 6.2-liter supercharged V8 belting out 580 horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 556 pound-feet of torque at 4,200 rpm, for a 0-60 time of 3.9 seconds and a top speed of 184 miles per hour. The Shelby GT500 rocks up with a supercharged 5.8-liter boasting 662 hp and 631 lb-ft, for a 0-60 time of 3.7 seconds and a top speed in excess of 200 mph. Both get the power down via six-speed manual transmissions.

All things being equal, the dyno returns should have them split by something like 82 hp and 75 lb-ft. But good luck with equality, at least on this day: the Camaro charted 497 hp and 497 lb-ft, the kind of 15 percent drop you might expect due to driveline losses, and just 11 percent of its torque sapped.

The GT500 would have none of it, charting 595 hp and 603 lb-ft. That leaves an on-the-road gap of 98-hp to the ZL1, and even though it loses more torque percentage-wise, it still comes out at an absolutely insane 603 lb-ft."

Denial is an ugly thing. You own a ZL1...so I get that, to you, it's the best thing since sliced bread. And that's okay. But factually speaking, that's not the case.

[ShowSStopper]

Originally Posted by mlee

I'll answer that... other than the boss, which is 1LE class, absolutely none of them.

Wrong

[Stingray]

Originally Posted by ShowSStopper

Wrong

While it's really unfair to compare an all-motor stock Boss 302 vs. the factory aspirated ZL1 (and even the GT500, esp. the pre-13 variants) the Boss should still get due for its ability to stay within a stone's throw with the ZL1, performance wise. I have a Boss and it's like night & day when I compare my SS to it. Personally I'd still take the ZL1 but the Boss is still a great overachiever for what it is/has. Durability on the Boss 302's engine is also topnotch (forged internals, etc.). BTW I got my brand new '12 Boss for just a tad over 40K... that's a fair bang for the buck IMO.

[mlee]

Originally Posted by ShowSStopper

Wrong

Mkay.... I guess that's close enough to 60... and BTW my ZL1 was 57