Chevy is just about to unveil the production version of the long-awaited Chevy Camaro and more details are starting to surface about the car.
According to sources GM has killed plans for a Camaro Z28. It was rumored that the Z28 version was going to be powered by the same 6.2L V8 in the Cadillac CTS-V, which would have been good over 500 horsepower. This means that for now the range topper will be the Camaro SS, which is expected to have around 400 horsepower.
You can thank the gas prices for this decision.
Full Story: Leftlane News
Related Stories:
2010 Chevy Camaro to Finally be Unveiled on July 22nd?
Comments (29)
.......why can't they make it an option? You go in, put in an order for one and pay up front, then they build it and X number of weeks later, you get your Z28.
Posted by Totenglocke | July 14, 2008 2:05 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 14:05
I'm with Totenglocke on this one.
Posted by 426Hemi | July 14, 2008 2:26 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 14:26
I really hope Lamborghini never makes a truck.
That might seem totally off topic, but really, it’s completely related.
There is a reason Lambos, Ferraris and Aston Martins are so fuel inefficient yet still so expensive and sought after; they unabashedly make great, sexy cars. "If you build it, they will come." I would bet the farm that there are plenty of people out there who would line up to buy a new 500+ HP Camaro. But since Chevy, and GM as a whole, has such a huge product line nowadays, they can't afford to take risks anymore, for fear of cutting into what little profits they have. It is very sad.
Products diversity is one thing, brand diluting is another. (and I really don’ think Lambo will ever make a truck, just making an example.)
Posted by Jimb | July 14, 2008 2:55 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 14:55
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the SS always been a faster version of the Z28? Why did they flip it for the new ones?
@Jimb:
While I see what you're saying, I think GM is in the position where it has to take some risks to turn things around.
I'm not sure I follow how bringing back an iconic car would dilute their image? Chevy is known for Trucks, the Camaro, and the Vette.
Posted by Gary | July 14, 2008 3:13 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 15:13
@Jimb:
You should check out the Lambo LM002.
As for the Camaro, I don't see why there can't be a z28. Dodge went out of their way to bring out an R/T and super bee, Ford went all out for the Shelby GT500 and they were both pretty successful in this area. Just don't call a monaro a GTO
Posted by Awesome Bill | July 14, 2008 3:35 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 15:35
@Jimb:
You should check out the Lambo LM002.
As for the Camaro, I don't see why there can't be a z28. Dodge went out of their way to bring out an R/T and super bee, Ford went all out for the Shelby GT500 and they were both pretty successful in this area. Just don't call a monaro a GTO
Posted by Awesome Bill | July 14, 2008 3:35 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 15:35
"You can thank the gas prices for this decision."
Can we? Is it at all possible that this chassis is too weak to handle a 6.2L V8?
Posted by Jim | July 14, 2008 4:03 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 16:03
Shame on all of you! GM is dying and all you can think of is hp.
Posted by Bill | July 14, 2008 4:23 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 16:23
It is a Zeta based chassis, which has been handling 1000+ hp twin turbo Commodores for a while now.
The Z# series has always been lower then the SS's in the Chevy line up across the range. Exception is the Corvette since the top dog is the ZR1 and there are two other Zs, Z51 and Z06. It might be a typo.
Posted by Avatar | July 14, 2008 4:25 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 16:25
@Gary:
Actually, the Z28 has always been the faster version, until 1996 when the SS was reintroduced as a slightly faster variant. For the 5th generation Camaro, GM had planned to revert to the original hierarchy of the Z28 being king.
Posted by JayZ28 | July 14, 2008 4:35 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 16:35
SS has always had more power. In 1967-68, it had 295 hp compared to the Z28's 290 hp. In 1969-70, the top dog was the rare ZL-1. In 1970, the SS had an optional 375 hp engine compared to the 360 hp Z28. In 1972, the Z28 made more power, 255 hp vs 240 hp. Then in 1973, the SS was replaced with the 'Type-LT' and not to return again until 1996 thanks to SLP, first Camaro to have over a 300 hp rating since 1970-71.
Posted by Avatar | July 14, 2008 5:31 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 17:31
I see you've been doing your homework.
Posted by 426Hemi | July 14, 2008 6:46 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 18:46
I could be wrong but I believe that the original late 60's z28 was created for the SCCA Trans-Am series which limited cars to 5 liters. As such it would have been at a power disadvantage next to its bigger displacement brethen (but would handle better.)
In the 70's the z28 became a badge for the high hp version of the camaro rather than the purpose-built 5 ltr racer.
Posted by bubba551 | July 14, 2008 8:25 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 20:25
In handling, the Z28 in the 1st and 2nd was indeed better. The Camaro, however, was built for the quarter, not to go around a track, especially in the early generations. In the muscle car era, it was all about the quarter mile. The SS for 4th gen became both a better handler and more power, though the power advantage was less in late model years.
Posted by Avatar | July 14, 2008 8:39 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 20:39
The reasons their dropping the bigger engine is because of the cafe standard for fuel economy. Putting the bigger engine would lower their average fuel economy which means their other cars have to be more fuel effiencent as a whole to make up for this car or they will be fined. The early z28 with the 302 or 305 engines were amazing revving to 7-8k ive been lucky enough to get a ride in one and can say for being built in the 70s modern tires made that car run like a modern car.
Posted by unknown | July 14, 2008 11:24 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 23:24
WRONG. The Z28 was built for road racing= Trans-Am Series and the SS was built for the quarter-mile.
Posted by Gaston | July 15, 2008 6:27 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 06:27
Did we not all just establish that Gaston? So how is anyone wrong?
Posted by Avatar | July 15, 2008 6:43 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 06:43
I don't think GM is going to have any more problems meeting CAFE. It's perhaps one of the only silver linings they'll see as a result of selling so many fewer trucks.
Posted by Jon | July 15, 2008 8:01 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 08:01
I don't think GM is going to have any more problems meeting CAFE. It's perhaps one of the only silver linings they'll see as a result of selling so many fewer trucks.
Posted by Jon | July 15, 2008 8:01 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 08:01
A Camaro with a 4 cylinder? I just got a mental twitch of a Mustang II of the 80s. Heck, that's probably ok, they'll just cover the engine with plastic covers and most folk won't know the difference (sarcasm).
Posted by WVO | July 15, 2008 8:38 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 08:38
The first 3rd gen cars (1982) had a 4 cylinder option. The cars still worked, but they were dog slow.
The current ecotec 4 cylinder would actually be an improvement over many previous V6 powertrains if the car wasn't so much heavier now.
And as a Z owner, not having a Z28 is totally lame, but it makes sense given the general Chevy SS naming methods nowadays.
Posted by Todd | July 15, 2008 8:59 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 08:59
they should have a IROC edition i always loved to call people driving them "Italian Retards On Crack."
Posted by lotus1 | July 15, 2008 9:28 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 09:28
I am a member of a forum (camaroz28.com) that happens to have several people who are very close with the new camaro team. This "news" that is being reported by a variety of sources is in fact false. It is just more "gloom and doom" crap to make things look worse than they are.
Posted by Jacob | July 15, 2008 9:45 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 09:45
Jimb: Lambo made a truck.. late 70s/early 80s. An SUV actually.
Called the LM if memory serves.
Posted by nagromtj | July 15, 2008 10:23 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 10:23
@ Jimb
" Ferraris and Aston Martins are so fuel inefficient..."
Hey Jimb, where the devil did you get that thought from?
Aston Martin makes some extremely heavy sports cars that expectedly get around 12 and 18 in city and highway, and you must be confusing Ferraris fuel economy with Porsches mileage.
Does 13 mpg in the city sound good to you?
Do some research...DUH!!!
Posted by Saheed | July 15, 2008 10:48 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 10:48
Keep the SS the high powered V8 gas guzzler and put a 6 or 4 in the Z28, strip the interior down to the bare minimum to save weight and tweak the suspension for better handling. This type of Z28 would stay true to the purpose of the original Z28 and allow buyers to have the option of a decent handling and relatively fuel efficient Camaro. I'd buy one in a heartbeat (no pun intended).
Posted by Johnny | July 15, 2008 11:41 AM
Posted on July 15, 2008 11:41
John is right. the Z was first intend to fill a road class that limited the CI and they came with 302. Not sure what the weight of this is(take out everthing it might get down to 2400lb?. If its 3k or under, a up tunned turbo sidi2.0 eco can make 300hp not much more than a tune. even stock air intake and cat. It would be about as fast as the older ones(they were not very fast in a 1/4 but had spirit Or better yet the new sidi Cady v6 turbo. that could make the 400hp and get good MPG. close if not 30* highway, Wont be long and you wil see ls7-9 in these from owners, then you will have a real and new SS, Yenko SS from the dealer turned out a few real fast version from the dealer 454ls6 in 1970/s. then and today chevy wont let the camaro borrow from the top of chevy food chain. If you want it you have to do it yourself. I have seen solitces with turboed ls6, man they fit so nice in there. i am sure they will fit as well in this.
Posted by doc | July 15, 2008 2:18 PM
Posted on July 15, 2008 14:18
The new camaro will be around 3600lbs based on estimates. Even at that weight it doesn't rule out a turbo 4 plus it should save about 200lbs. I think even with that combo it would be hard pressed to get 30mpg though. The cobalt SS only gets that and weighs only 2600lbs.
Assuming you're talking about the CTS's 3.6L. Now boosted to 400 hp would be no problem but they average in the around 25mpg in the CTS now. It isn't going to get better with a supercharger or twin turbos. A LS-3 V8 will get about the same and cost less. Not to mention it's a V8 with instant throttle responce.
Posted by RX-7 Guy | July 15, 2008 4:29 PM
Posted on July 15, 2008 16:29
@Saheed
you might have just been born yesterday but do you even understand the meaning of inefficient?
inefficient = not efficient, bad, not good.
your post tells me you have poor proofreading skills and its proboably due to anxiety caused my overmasturbation, you need a hobby...
Posted by lotus1 | July 17, 2008 7:28 AM
Posted on July 17, 2008 07:28