Homepage Garage Wiki Register Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > Z/28 Discussions


Bigwormgraphix


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-24-2017, 09:42 AM   #29
hotlap


 
hotlap's Avatar
 
Drives: 20 1LE 2SS M6 Rally Green
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Franklin WI
Posts: 6,632
Knowing there are several new V8s in the works. Things that make you think....Hmmmm.

Quote:
General Motors Product Chief, Mark Reuss, has hinted that a possible 302 ci. Z/28 may be in the works. As he put it, they are “looking at the original formulas of the Trans Am homologation of the Z/28.”

Adding, “Why was the 302 engine so special?,” Reuss asked.“So, the formula may change a little, but it still needs to be a wicked fast track car more capable maybe than the comfort- and driver-oriented models.”
Attached Images
 
__________________

"the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”
Ronald Reagan -
hotlap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2017, 10:27 AM   #30
Doug Halsey
Toy Collector
 
Doug Halsey's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 Camaro Z/28
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Brunswick GA
Posts: 133
I own a 2015 Z/28 and I paid 76K for it. I have also owned several Z06’s, a Ford Cobra, etc. However, none of them crashed in value as fast as my 2015 Z/28. You can now find many fifth gen, low mile, Z/28’s that sell in the mid 40’s.

It all boils down to money. Not just for me the end user, but for GM.

Look at what Ford did with the GT350 & the GT350R. Those cars are keeping their value because Ford made just enough GT350R’s to create demand and then sold a lot of GT350’s. Look at what GM did with the Z/28. It put in ceramic breaks, spool dampeners, a 427 and sticky tires and lost money on new car sales.

Thus as a GM customer I’m wondering if I will ever buy another GM product again. It all depends on what GM does next. If they do anything to lower the value of the ZL1 LE (which I’m looking at now) by making a more focused track car, those owners will be pissed.

I know cars should not be looked at as investments when they are new. You can go to any auction and find a rare low mile car that was worth a lot at one time and now sells for less that a Hyundai. But I do know GM doesn’t want to be known as making cars that should only be bought as used cars.

Also why would GM waste time & money in a market (for track cars) when they already have the ZL1 LE? I think GM has wised up with the ZL1 LE and copied what Ford did. The ZL1 (like the GT350) is cheaper and more comfortable than the ZL1 LE (like the GT350R), but it still gets the LE reputation to help sells.
__________________
Doug Halsey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2017, 06:44 PM   #31
396ssrat

 
Drives: 66 Chevelle SS
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,347
They build cars to sell today, not in five years. If I were a car company I'd build what I can sell right now.
__________________
66 Chevelle SS 396
91 octane Driver n/a
6.44@105.78 1/8th mile
396ssrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2017, 06:45 AM   #32
Smokin19

 
Drives: 19' ZL1 A10, w/pdr
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: S.W. ohio
Posts: 1,541
One need only look at today's "modern muscle car" to see a trend in car buying. The HP wars by the major players seems to be alive in the buying public. But, this is only part of the picture as the CAFE standards play an important part in what we will buy in the future.

You will probably never see a car built like mine come from any manufacture. It would likely not pass most state and federal emissions standards, especially Ca. Hence the reason we are seeing more FE cars and smaller engines. A trend I believe that will continue.

The problem will be how to cool down these FE engines as we are seeing in the ZL/1. You can only put so much hardware under the hood to accommodate cooling, increase the HP and you have to increase cooling. Main reason I like a NA engine.

Another aspect of the increasing HP is the drive line and just how much the manufacture can do to beef it up without adding too much to the cost.

Here is an interesting read on the CAFE standards and how it will affect your next car purchase.

http://www.rff.org/blog/2017/do-cons...-gas-standards
__________________
BTR Stg II cam w/ 38% fuel lobe, ARH 2" headers into 3" w/cats, AWE Touring, Kong X port, Weapon X triple ht exchangers, NW 103, Rotofab big gulp, DSX lowside, TCM tune, BMR Lockout, Mustang dyno 720 rwhp, 634 rwtq on 93 pump.
Smokin19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2017, 08:14 AM   #33
Doug Halsey
Toy Collector
 
Doug Halsey's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 Camaro Z/28
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Brunswick GA
Posts: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by 396ssrat View Post
They build cars to sell today, not in five years. If I were a car company I'd build what I can sell right now.
GM did that with the Cadillac in the late 70's and early 80's and almost ruined the brand by slapping the Cadillac emblem on POS cars. I saw that in a "history of GM" video. It is also one reason GM took bail out money and Ford didn't.

From the above article, "we find that consumers are willing to pay about $1,100 for a 1-second reduction in the time needed to accelerate from 0 to 60 miles per hour (a performance improvement of about 12 percent). Because consumers value performance so highly, the requirement for greater fuel economy means consumers must give up performance, leaving them worse off." Which goes to show that performance matters even in the environment that fuel economy is being pushed down our throats.

So GM does have to think in both worlds where tighter restriction apply, yet people still want their high HP cars. For me a NA is the only way to drive, but I'm still curious about the ZL1 LE (so I'm looking at it).

However, I also am not a fool who is easily parted with my money. I still believe that the fifth gen Z/28 is a marvel when it comes to technology and art - keeping in mind the environment that it was born in. I'm hoping that it will bounce back in value once the "tourist" are done buying them.

As for what GM does next will decide if spending a lot of money (70k+ for me is still a lot of money) is worth the few years of driving pleasure or if I should just buy used at half the cost and still have fun. Let someone else take the hit. This decision does effect future car sales, investment in GM research, and GM's bottom line. For GM to disregard this would mean they will eventually go under.
__________________
Doug Halsey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2017, 08:33 AM   #34
Doug Halsey
Toy Collector
 
Doug Halsey's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 Camaro Z/28
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Brunswick GA
Posts: 133
Smokin15, Did you buy your Z/28 with the stage 5 that way or did you have vengeance racing do it? I was thinking of doing something similar this year, but their prices are a little high compared to what I have had done on other cars of mine - that was similar.
__________________
Doug Halsey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2017, 10:46 AM   #35
Smokin19

 
Drives: 19' ZL1 A10, w/pdr
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: S.W. ohio
Posts: 1,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Halsey View Post
Smokin15, Did you buy your Z/28 with the stage 5 that way or did you have vengeance racing do it? I was thinking of doing something similar this year, but their prices are a little high compared to what I have had done on other cars of mine - that was similar.
I just bought the car this late September with 591 mi on it. Vengeance Racing (VR) was high on my list to modify my 14' 2SS /RS and after seeing this come up for sale, it was a no brain er. The last owner after putting in the stg 5 and putting on Mast heads, with coil relocation, VR vlv covers and shipping the car down to them had to have put almost $20K into the car.

I bought a practically new car for what you see a 15' Z/28 go for with 5-10K miles on it. The stg 5 puts out 680 crank HP, NA and after looking at a new ZL1, I just could not pass this up. It only has just 1051 mi on it now, can't wait for spring.

My friends say, "it's sounds like it came off a NASCAR track". The cam is a custom grind by VR and the power is instant at any speed and it is not even broke in yet. Take a look at the link in my sig for the build.
Attached Images
 
__________________
BTR Stg II cam w/ 38% fuel lobe, ARH 2" headers into 3" w/cats, AWE Touring, Kong X port, Weapon X triple ht exchangers, NW 103, Rotofab big gulp, DSX lowside, TCM tune, BMR Lockout, Mustang dyno 720 rwhp, 634 rwtq on 93 pump.
Smokin19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2017, 12:29 PM   #36
396ssrat

 
Drives: 66 Chevelle SS
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokin15 View Post
One need only look at today's "modern muscle car" to see a trend in car buying. The HP wars by the major players seems to be alive in the buying public. But, this is only part of the picture as the CAFE standards play an important part in what we will buy in the future.

You will probably never see a car built like mine come from any manufacture. It would likely not pass most state and federal emissions standards, especially Ca. Hence the reason we are seeing more FE cars and smaller engines. A trend I believe that will continue.

The problem will be how to cool down these FE engines as we are seeing in the ZL/1. You can only put so much hardware under the hood to accommodate cooling, increase the HP and you have to increase cooling. Main reason I like a NA engine.

Another aspect of the increasing HP is the drive line and just how much the manufacture can do to beef it up without adding too much to the cost.

Here is an interesting read on the CAFE standards and how it will affect your next car purchase.

http://www.rff.org/blog/2017/do-cons...-gas-standards
Love to see this president do away with the cafe standard. This is the USA, not Europe. Americans once had the option of buying what they wanted without government intervention. Let the markets dictate what we want.
__________________
66 Chevelle SS 396
91 octane Driver n/a
6.44@105.78 1/8th mile
396ssrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2017, 12:41 PM   #37
396ssrat

 
Drives: 66 Chevelle SS
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Halsey View Post
GM did that with the Cadillac in the late 70's and early 80's and almost ruined the brand by slapping the Cadillac emblem on POS cars. I saw that in a "history of GM" video. It is also one reason GM took bail out money and Ford didn't.

From the above article, "we find that consumers are willing to pay about $1,100 for a 1-second reduction in the time needed to accelerate from 0 to 60 miles per hour (a performance improvement of about 12 percent). Because consumers value performance so highly, the requirement for greater fuel economy means consumers must give up performance, leaving them worse off." Which goes to show that performance matters even in the environment that fuel economy is being pushed down our throats.

So GM does have to think in both worlds where tighter restriction apply, yet people still want their high HP cars. For me a NA is the only way to drive, but I'm still curious about the ZL1 LE (so I'm looking at it).

However, I also am not a fool who is easily parted with my money. I still believe that the fifth gen Z/28 is a marvel when it comes to technology and art - keeping in mind the environment that it was born in. I'm hoping that it will bounce back in value once the "tourist" are done buying them.

As for what GM does next will decide if spending a lot of money (70k+ for me is still a lot of money) is worth the few years of driving pleasure or if I should just buy used at half the cost and still have fun. Let someone else take the hit. This decision does effect future car sales, investment in GM research, and GM's bottom line. For GM to disregard this would mean they will eventually go under.
You can't blame Cadillac for what the government mandated out of their asses when it came to emissions. I worked at GM beginning in 1965 and saw many flavors of cars during my tenure, Cadillac Coupe and Sedan Deville being two of them, and then there was the J car. GM had issues with engineering small cars with small engines. All manufacturers had issues in the late 70's and 80's due to Federal and California meddling. We have come light years since then in many respects but these vehicles will never last as long as the earlier vehicles. .
__________________
66 Chevelle SS 396
91 octane Driver n/a
6.44@105.78 1/8th mile
396ssrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2017, 10:03 PM   #38
DevilsReject97
Nightmare
 
DevilsReject97's Avatar
 
Drives: Your mom crazy in bed
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Naptown
Posts: 2,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Halsey View Post
It is also one reason GM took bail out money and Ford didn't.
Ummm, Ford took bail out money too, they only took it before the other two took it.

Don't kid yourself, Ford went through the same thing, fortunately for them it just happened a couple years in advance of the rest of the market..
__________________
DevilsReject97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2017, 10:13 PM   #39
LateBrakeU2

 
Drives: 15 RH Z/28, 23 RB2SS1LE, 23LT1VOM
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: So Cal
Posts: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilsReject97 View Post
Ummm, Ford took bail out money too, they only took it before the other two took it.

Don't kid yourself, Ford went through the same thing, fortunately for them it just happened a couple years in advance of the rest of the market..
The way i seem to recall it was Mulally re structured Ford's debt prior to to the recession, GM and Chrysler went BK during it. Whether that was fortunate or foresight they were selling cars when the other two were at the fed with a cup in their hand. Orphan cars at the port, and 2500.00 for junkers towed in to dealerships for downstrokes. Interesting times..
LateBrakeU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2017, 02:33 PM   #40
DevilsReject97
Nightmare
 
DevilsReject97's Avatar
 
Drives: Your mom crazy in bed
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Naptown
Posts: 2,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by LateBrakeU2 View Post
The way i seem to recall it was Mulally re structured Ford's debt prior to to the recession, GM and Chrysler went BK during it. Whether that was fortunate or foresight they were selling cars when the other two were at the fed with a cup in their hand. Orphan cars at the port, and 2500.00 for junkers towed in to dealerships for downstrokes. Interesting times..
http://www.chevyhardcore.com/news/ed...-yes-they-did/

https://www.thebalance.com/auto-indu...rysler-3305670

https://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/fo...n-on-bailouts/

They got money from the government, it just wasn't the same money handed out under the bailout program. Without it, they'd have been in the same boat. Keep in mind, they also sold off Jaguar, shuttered Mercury, etc etc...
__________________
DevilsReject97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2017, 02:51 PM   #41
LateBrakeU2

 
Drives: 15 RH Z/28, 23 RB2SS1LE, 23LT1VOM
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: So Cal
Posts: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilsReject97 View Post
http://www.chevyhardcore.com/news/ed...-yes-they-did/

https://www.thebalance.com/auto-indu...rysler-3305670

https://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/fo...n-on-bailouts/

They got money from the government, it just wasn't the same money handed out under the bailout program. Without it, they'd have been in the same boat. Keep in mind, they also sold off Jaguar, shuttered Mercury, etc etc...
True, but GM was the most egregious in that grease fire- considering it was their sub prime mortgage division that got the whole party started. They alone cost taxpayers over 11B, did a 100-1 reverse split on their common stock and then went BK not to mention the pensions.
LateBrakeU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2017, 02:56 PM   #42
DevilsReject97
Nightmare
 
DevilsReject97's Avatar
 
Drives: Your mom crazy in bed
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Naptown
Posts: 2,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by LateBrakeU2 View Post
True, but GM was the most egregious in that grease fire- considering it was their sub prime mortgage division that got the whole party started. They alone cost taxpayers over 11B, did a 100-1 reverse split on their common stock and then went BK not to mention the pensions.
Oh, I'm not defending GM or Chrysler or anyone else... Just saying Ford took handouts as well...

Additionally, I think the bailout was everything GM needed to clean its house up anyways. It shuttered Oldsmobile not long before the bailout, closed Saturn, Hummer, Pontiac....and shut down some unneeded models in the rest of their lines. Still think they would be better off shutting down GMC and folding it in with Chevy or folding Chevy trucks under GMC.... but I digress...
__________________
DevilsReject97 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.