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

[Norm Peterson]

So once the Z/28 was getting a VIN and wasn't going to be caged and equipped with Kirkeys or similar seating, there was no reason to limit the brakes or engine displacement or anything else to what is race-legal either.

Can't have it both ways, I guess.


I do have to wonder what the airbag situation truly is. Apparently in at least Massachusetts you're not allowed to drive your dented but fully drivable car to a repair facility if the airbags have deployed, though that still doesn't answer the question of what happens if they didn't deploy (regardless of the reason that they didn't).

I'm fairly certain that you would not be able to sell a car with intentionally disabled air bags, at least not for street use.


Norm

[fbodfather]

Originally Posted by ParisTNDude

It's fire engine red and it's also offered in the Cruze with the same name.

exactly - think of a more 'pure' bright red -- (Victory Red has more orange in it)

[fbodfather]

Originally Posted by backtotintops

I removed the driver's side and the passenger's was defeated by a key. Link please regarding the legality of removal of airbags on your own car?



.

I would be very cautious here - because if you have anyone else in the car with you and there's an accident - you may be liable for modifying the car and disabling the airbag. Remember - we live in a very litigious society!

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by fbodfather

I would be very cautious here - because if you have anyone else in the car with you and there's an accident - you may be liable for modifying the car and disabling the airbag. Remember - we live in a very litigious society!

Unfortunately a lot of people don't think of that, and if they do they will just rationalize it saying that "I'm a good driver, I won't get into a wreck."

As I told my son you may have done something 500 times and nothing happens, but all it takes is ONE time for your whole world to be turned inside out.

[backtotintops]

I do agree about the possibility of insurance being dropped.

Originally Posted by Zfatuated

Airbag requirements and cage (il)legality are Federal (therefore cover all states) and administered by DOT/NHTSA.

I believe states supersede federal when it comes to any enforcement of "legality"...I cant find any links saying it is illegal can you?

[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).

[Angrybird 12]

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).

Wrong, the ZL1 was always designed for handling first and straight line performance second. There is no need for Magnetic suspension in a drag car.

[Bhobbs]

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).

GM said they left the back seat in because the Vette is already a 2 seat car.

[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!

[gto406]

Originally Posted by Angrybird 12

Wrong, the ZL1 was always designed for handling first and straight line performance second. There is no need for Magnetic suspension in a drag car.

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).

[Hennesseyrgv]

Just one question. Unless i am wrong and already comes with. Why GM didnt addapt the idea of carbon fiber fenders and panels like the Z06 and Grand sport Corvette? This would of reduce some more weigth. Rigth now the way it is , in my opinion its still a heavy car.

[2SSRS@Gen5diy]

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

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Hennesseyrgv

Just one question. Unless i am wrong and already comes with. Why GM didnt addapt the idea of carbon fiber fenders and panels like the Z06 and Grand sport Corvette? This would of reduce some more weigth. Rigth now the way it is , in my opinion its still a heavy car.

Probably too much cost for too little benefit for something that is specifically expected to see at least a little street time. It was not going to be sold as a loss leader.


Norm

[LOWDOWN]

Keep in mind, with a VIN, the car MUST be crashable as per NHTSA...and, of course, IIHS. Getting into alternative body materials would have complicated the process further.
Time and money...
The relatively "easy" weight reductions were utilized.