08-27-2018, 12:35 PM | #169 |
Drives: 1999 Camaro SS M6 - SBE LS1 Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,167
|
I would be very interested in an LT5 Camaro Z/28 or not...it would change my shopping for a ZL1 1LE immediately.
__________________
1999 Camaro SS 6M - SBE LS1
1963 Corvette GrandSport - ZZ502 4M 2017 Denali 1500 6.2 2017 Yukon Denali 6.2 |
08-27-2018, 12:41 PM | #170 | |
Drives: 2015 SS 1LE Red Hot, 1970 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 6,989
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
08-27-2018, 02:01 PM | #171 | |
Drives: 2017 1SS camaro ,2SS a 68 + 08 C6 Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: West palm beach
Posts: 495
|
Quote:
Youre kinda right about that . However Chevy doesn't care so how many few if any people will be pissed off if they go FI with a normally NA car . Chevy cares how much profit and how many cars they can sell . And IF I Were a real purist , I remember the original DZ 302 ( aka Z/28 )was limited to 5.0 cubic liters or smaller , chevy broke that rule already plenty of times Those were th eroad racing days which are long gone . People care about 1 thing more than anything my friend and that is HP . Reviving the z/28 nomenclature would add a bit of historical nostalgia and keep the iconic model and the top of the food chain. We’ll all see what GM has in store . |
|
08-27-2018, 02:17 PM | #172 | |
Drives: 2015 Z/28, 2007 HHR Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,148
|
Quote:
|
|
08-27-2018, 02:23 PM | #173 | |
Drives: 2015 SS 1LE Red Hot, 1970 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 6,989
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
08-27-2018, 03:31 PM | #174 | |
Drives: 2017 1SS camaro ,2SS a 68 + 08 C6 Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: West palm beach
Posts: 495
|
Quote:
And actually the only thing z/28 signifies was an RPO code back in the day to satisfy such scca/trans am rules about the 5.0 Ci engine size maximum . You are kinda wrong about another thing there were additional chevy models with the z/28 nomenclature 3rd gen also had Z/28s and so did Fourth Gen’s ( IM restoring one now that is my late brothers car ) Chevy also had a z-28 in the late 70’s also. Piggins would be proud to have a lt5 powerplant im sure in a 6th gen ( the original designer of the z/28 ) It has a long history of performance . Heck they can even call the 6th gen LT5 powered the cheetah .I believe thats what chevy was originally going to call the RPO Z/28 . But the z/28 stuck . IMO the 1LE has kinda replaced what the Z/28 original package was , performance handling brakes , etc. Either way IMO whatever LT5 is called if they make it , it will be a welcome addition . |
|
08-27-2018, 03:43 PM | #175 |
Drives: 2015 SS 1LE Red Hot, 1970 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 6,989
|
Except they didn’t break the rule. The rule went from 5.0 to 5.7 liters. Then Trans Am went away and so did the rule.
Besides, no Z/28 exceeded 5.7 liters, until the 5th gen.
__________________
|
08-27-2018, 04:20 PM | #176 |
Drives: 1999 Camaro SS M6 - SBE LS1 Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,167
|
The ZL1 RPO was far more butchered and less "purist" than anything GM has ever done with the Z28 RPO - even if they put an LT5 in it.
GM has butchered all their hallowed name plates - especially the GrandSport Corvette - what is the holy grail of C2s, is now a base powertrain with Z06 body and suspension...WTF.
__________________
1999 Camaro SS 6M - SBE LS1
1963 Corvette GrandSport - ZZ502 4M 2017 Denali 1500 6.2 2017 Yukon Denali 6.2 |
08-27-2018, 05:12 PM | #177 | |
Drives: 2015 SS 1LE Red Hot, 1970 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 6,989
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
08-27-2018, 08:16 PM | #178 |
Drives: 2004 Pontiac Grand Prix Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lomita,CA
Posts: 806
|
There are formulas then there is just trying to make something with all of the same numbers that it had in the past.
The former I agree with however the latter I disagree with.... Al stated that the Z/28 has a formula and that formula includes natural aspiration, now will he hold to that and risk not having a Z/28 or break that rule to have one?. I honestly don't see why GM doesn't produce an engine for the Camaro only as it out sells the Corvette. |
08-28-2018, 12:10 PM | #179 | ||
Drives: 21 Bronco Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Carol Stream
Posts: 6,024
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
08-28-2018, 08:56 PM | #180 |
Drives: 2001 Onyx Black/Ebony SS. 427/M6 Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Sussex, Wi
Posts: 509
|
Just for arguments sake, the '67 Z/28 had an MO 302. The DZ came in '69, MAYBE some late '68's. I would love to see a Z/28 specific engine, even if its a "parts bin" destroked version of the 6.2. I could see the LT5 making its way into a new model, which Im not someone to have any say in anyways, itll be priced way out of my league.
|
08-29-2018, 04:31 AM | #181 |
Drives: 2017 2ss, m6 Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Iowa
Posts: 231
|
The issue that I see always comes back around to expectations. In the late 60's GM didnt have to do a lot outside of design an engine and then produce it. That is not the case in 2018. For GM to design, certify, validate, and then produce an engine it takes a lot of time and money. Everyone loves our track warranty right? Well as a business you are only gonna do that on a large scale after so much testing and evaluation concludes you can with an appropriate risk of repair. If you really like the rare engine model say goodbye to the very broad stroke track day warranty. This is why you won't see small run rate engines in these cars. The juice simply isn't worth the squeeze and as an enthusiast I dont want to see the track warranty go away. I'll gladly take an LT5 any day as long as GM allows me to flog it mercilessly out on a race track in stock form and cover it. I also know that for them to do that means I will not have as many options and will not have as many "updates and enhancements" to current options...a price I will gladly pay for the warranty coverage.
|
08-29-2018, 06:18 AM | #182 | |
Drives: Silverado Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Above ground?
Posts: 214
|
Quote:
My point is, there’s little to no market for an $80,000 Track-rat Camaro. |
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|