Go Back   The Supercar Registry > General Discussion > Supercar/Musclecar Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-10-2008, 07:28 AM
MosportGreen66's Avatar
MosportGreen66 MosportGreen66 is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: NY, NY
Posts: 8,713
Thanks: 1,087
Thanked 1,027 Times in 458 Posts
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

what kind of rear is in the LT1?
__________________
Follow me on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mbcgarage/
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-10-2008, 05:54 PM
king_midas king_midas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: California
Posts: 153
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

Don't embarrass yourself, let the legend live, and don't run the '93. Those cars aren't particularly fast, but the 'ol Z's aren't nearly as fast as everyone remembers them being.

To get a 1st gen to run like most think they remember them running back in the day, you gotta have headers / open exhaust, and at MINIMUM a 4.33 gear... You also have to be running better than pump gas so that you can actually advance the distributor so that she can rev. All of these things equal terrible street manners in the old ride, which means that the new Z will walk you with the A/C on while in "D", listenting to his/her favorite Dan Fogleberg song on the CD player.

I love looking at the old stuff, but modern horsepower is so significantly better than stock vintage horsepower that it should not even be compared. The only thing that probably actually does compare between the two is curb weight. The '67 is no lightweight, and I'd be willing to guess that they are within 100 lbs. of each other.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-10-2008, 07:06 PM
jbsides jbsides is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Seal Beach, CA, USA
Posts: 293
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

There is nothing quite like the clackety-clack of perfectly adjusted solid lifters in a well tuned '69 Z with stock exhaust, but there is also nothing like the refined, fast exhiliration of one one today's performance rides. Apples and oranges. I would not take that bet either.
Back in the day, I drove a '69 Z that was only a year old, with less that 20K miles on it, and it would bake those bias ply tires through the gears on demand. No matter what I did to try to duplicate that experience with a restoration I was unable to even get close. There is just something about these cars when they were new.
So I gave up trying. Now I experiment with NOM big blocks that are stock appearing excluding the headers, but with big horsepower for that same "baking" capability.

JB
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-10-2008, 09:20 PM
JK98SS JK98SS is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Illinois
Posts: 440
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

If it is a bone stock 93 it should run mid 13's to low 14's.
93 is the odd ball year because it still had a "chip" in the computer, had speed density air management and 2 versions of the manual transmission. A friend has one and it came with the optional 6 speed that came with 2.73's. Commonly the manual cars came with 3.42's. Auto cars with Z rated tires and performance axle came with 3.23 and the others got 2.73.

I had a 95 Z28 that ran 13.6 with the 2.73's and just a flowmaster muffler and an SLP Cold air kit.

But of course your elevation and weather will have a large impact on the ET.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-10-2008, 09:24 PM
JK98SS JK98SS is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Illinois
Posts: 440
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

My friend ran his 93 Z with 140,000 miles, 2.73 geared 6 speed with headers, no cats and an SLP TOTL (two on the left) Exhaust that went 13.0 on street tires. Keep in mind this was cool spring air at Gateway International.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-10-2008, 11:54 PM
Denis Denis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lake Tahoe (CA) and Vancouver (BC)
Posts: 1,247
Thanks: 1
Thanked 55 Times in 10 Posts
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

[ QUOTE ]
In the October 1996 Car and Driver Jerry M ran his restored Tahoe Turquoise '67 Z/28 against a new '97 Z convert and a '97 Z28 SS LT4. 15.30/97 for the '67; 14.7/95 for the convert, 13.6/105 for the LT4.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a copy of the Jerry M article (clickable thumbnails):


Last edited by Denis; 10-31-2018 at 05:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-12-2008, 07:34 AM
Andy Andy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Posts: 403
Thanks: 153
Thanked 201 Times in 63 Posts
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

No offense, but if the LT1 car is a 6 speed, and has a good driver it will walk your 67 Z. My uncle has an almost stock 94 Z28, and it will eat my 67 alive. A friend of mine has the bolt-on LT1 record, an 11.70 @ 114. Granted, the car has been lightened up, it has a 12 bolt with 4.33 gears, roller rockers, cold air intake, and headers, but no other modifications have been made. A good driver in a bone stock LT1 should be able to run a 13.4-13.6 with good track conditions. My friends car making a pass. http://lsx.streetfire.net/video/cfa3...6101222244.htm
__________________
Andy
1967 Camaro 406 4 speed
1969 C/10 383 5 speed
1969 D300 318 4 speed
1969 Super Bee 383 4 speed
1972 K/5 350 Turbo 350
1972 Duster 340 727
1974 'Cuda 340 4 speed
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-12-2008, 06:12 PM
Kim_Howie Kim_Howie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 4,411
Thanks: 6
Thanked 30 Times in 18 Posts
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

OK OK you guys win
__________________
Jake is my grandson!!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-12-2008, 06:24 PM
Chevy454 Chevy454 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Alton, MO, USA
Posts: 11,923
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

[ QUOTE ]
A good driver in a bone stock LT1 should be able to run a 13.4-13.6 with good track conditions.

[/ QUOTE ]I'd have to see that to believe it, Andy...that's a decent number for the LS1 cars.

The '67 Zs are the lightest of the bunch, and are gonna have the best shot at knocking off it's newer cousin...for reference, I *believe* Hot Rod did a test back in the day of a '68 Z...they wanted to see how quick they could get the car in stock condition, just by tuning it and playing with the car, on street tires...I've posted it before here, but I believe it was mid-13s @ around 106 or so...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-12-2008, 06:39 PM
ORIGLS6 ORIGLS6 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Fishin' in the Dark
Posts: 7,410
Thanks: 1,102
Thanked 509 Times in 145 Posts
Default Re: 67z vs 93z

If I remember correctly, (in the early 70s) AHRA had the 67 and 68 Z-28s in different (Stock) classes ............... due to weight.
__________________
Don't mistake education for intelligence. I worked with educated people. I socialize with intelligent people.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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. The time now is 04:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

O Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.