American-brand cars prove poipular with millennial

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
. What car would I have wanted in '82 or '83? A Z28 Camaro of course.



Bet you didn't know that back then a
VW Rabbit GTI would BEAT that Camaro 0-60. LOL Not to mention it handled better too.


Nope, I bet I do know better. An '83 Camaro Z28 5-speed had 190-200 hp and lots of tq. It handle very well especially on smooth pavement, about .85g, and cleaned up most of the foreign competitors. And with RWD, lots of torque way more fun. Not to mention way better and cooler styling. 80's Camaros were some of the best looking cars imo. Here's just one review on it http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/...ived-comparison

Quote:
The superior design, quality, reliability and MPGs of most Hondas from the late 70s onwards far outweighed the rust problem or any other niggles compared to the absolute carp boxes that the US domestics were offering. That is why folks lined up to buy an Accord, over a Fairmont, Citation, or Dart.


The fable about late 70's to early 80's Hondas being superior in design and durability has already be pretty well challenged in this thread already.

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
GM engines for years now have very few rubber vaccuum emission hoses and have used longer life hard plastic hoses. About the only rubber hose on most of them is the brake booster. The FPR hose, PCV, breather hoses etc were usually plastic assemblies for some time now. Toyota and also I think Ford used more rubber vacuum lines. GM wiring harness weatherpack connectors have usually been very good IMO.



That's one of the reasons I got another GM car. The engine is not buried under a mound of hoses, making routine maintenance tasks easier, at least to my way of thinking.

Can we start debating the merits of cars made today, not cars that were on their way to rusting out by the time the older Millenials were born?

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: cchase
A quick Google has a 1982 GTI at 8.1 seconds to 60 and 16.36 at 85 mph in the 1/4 mile.

A 1983 Z28 Camaro is listed at 6.6 to 60, and 14.8 through the 1/4 mile at an unlisted speed.

So not sure your source for that. There's a world of difference betwen 8.1 and 6.6, handling aside.


Yep, and not only that the smooth V8 torque would throw you back in the seat when on the gas in just about whatever gear you were in. So it felt even more peppy. As I recall back around '82 Car and Driver I believe it was said the Camaro was the best handling American car available. I think they were including imports in the same price range like the 280zx.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
. What car would I have wanted in '82 or '83? A Z28 Camaro of course.



Bet you didn't know that back then a
VW Rabbit GTI would BEAT that Camaro 0-60. LOL Not to mention it handled better too.

The superior design, quality, reliability and MPGs of most Hondas from the late 70s onwards far outweighed the rust problem or any other niggles compared to the absolute carp boxes that the US domestics were offering. That is why folks lined up to buy an Accord, over a Fairmont, Citation, or Dart.


I don't know about the '83 GTi beating an L69 Camaro Z/28

Car & Driver, November 1982: Volkswagen GTi

0-60 9.7 Seconds

Motor Trend, June 1983: Chevrolet Camaro Z28

0-60 mph 7.41 sec


7.41 is around what a midsize Altima 4 cylinder runs today.

as far as handling? They further reported: The handling benchmark of the three was the Z28. At the limit, on the Laguna Seca track, it is precise and stable, with moderate understeer. In any of the first four gears, the cornering attitude can be controlled with the accelerator, allowing early throttle for full-power corner exits...

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/features/archi...l#ixzz2OnJW0eyp

The GTi was and is a special car. I'm not trying to take anything away from it. I remember commercials in the '70s that proclaimed the Rabbit to be, "fast FAST FAST then showing a garden variety Rabbit holeing and destroying V8 powered American sedans in a drag race. (probably 260 Olds, 262 Chevy, 301 Pontiac...etc....) And that was just a regular carb'd Rabbit. Most cars in 1983 could barely run 0-60 in 10 seconds. VW's little box outsprinted them and circled a roadcourse faster than the even turbocharged European cars like the Renault Fuego. Very cool car. But the Camaro was finding it's way back by then.

 

[mechanicx]

Ha I was just looking at that Motor Trend link where another '83 Z28 wins a comparison again. MT always reported low 0-60 times, but they reported the Camaro pulled .88g on the skidpad. The 0-60 times are somewhat misleading. The tires used in '82-'83 were being pushed to their traction limits and V-8s have immediate power when cruising. I can't imagine how anyone would think a 4-cylinder FWD would be more fun than a RWD with a torquey engine that will do burn outs.

As far as handling MT reported the Camaro had a good transmission, good brakes and good handling:
"
Manual shift linkages from Detroit have most often been in the "let's not discuss it because we don't want to embarrass them" category. This one restores our faith in U.S. engineers. They can do it. And while they were at it, they managed to select excellent gear spacings. The 5-speed gear spacings have been chosen for performance with a capital P. Hammering through a quarter-mile acceleration run, or straightening out your favorite back road, there always seems to be a gear that's exactly right. In fact, a number of them can be right for the same job if you're poking around in city traffic or going to the drive-in; the engine is flexible enough to allow you to dispense with two or three of the gears and smoooooth right along (it's spelled t-o-r-q-u-e). As part of our testing sequence, we lapped the Camaro/Daytona/Mustang trio at Laguna Seca Raceway and the Camaro was reaching its redline in 4th gear just at the fastest part of the course -- almost seems like it was geared for the track. You don't suppose Chevrolet has raced these cars, do you? The Z28 suspension remains unchanged for '83 and is perfectly up to the task, as are the semi-metallic "brakepads. The combination of stable cornering attitudes and rock-solid braking inspires high confidence levels, and is the basic essence of the Grand Touring ambiance. The car is a joy to drive fast. The Camaro performs all the everyday A-to-B mundane driving chores with no complaint, but always waiting, just beneath the surface, is its almost-face-car alter ego.

All three of our All-American-GTs offer tremendous value for the buyer interested in the GT scene. They are directly competitive with their snootier European counterparts -- at significantly less money. The Z28 epitomizes this GT ambiance with the added advantage of not requiring a second mortgage to get you into the driver's seat. It is completely at ease at speeds that are astounding. With its outstanding brakes, cornering power, and acceleration, it can devour roads (or racetracks) of any description with a kind of swooping grace that instills a calm security in the occupants. You soon find yourself able to control the Camaro on a second order of concentration, with some left over to enjoy whatever's happening around you.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/features/archi...l#ixzz2OnUdOkUc

 

[MCompact]

Looking at the September 1984 Road & Track comparison test of the IROC-Z five speed and the Mustang GT, the Camaro's 0-60 is listed as 8.1 seconds. It thundered through the 1/4 mile in 16.5 seconds at a blistering 90 mph. R&T conducted another comparison test in October 1986, and in that test an IROC-Z L98 slushbox managed a 6.8 second 0-60 and a 15.3 second 1/4 mile at 90.5 mph. Back in those days I was still building SBCs and tuning Q-jets- and I finally had enough money to afford a new Camaro. But for me, the "gotta-have-it" factor was totally lacking...

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: cchase

A quick Google has a 1982 GTI at 8.1 seconds to 60 and 16.36 at 85 mph in the 1/4 mile.

A 1983 Z28 Camaro is listed at 6.6 to 60, and 14.8 through the 1/4 mile at an unlisted speed.

So not sure your source for that. There's a world of difference betwen 8.1 and 6.6, handling aside.


I'm talking about the standard (NON Z28) Camaro that most folks could afford.

Not only that but the Rabbit GTI also out handled it as well.

 

[Spazdog]

The biggest surprise from that article:

Nevertheless, the Dodge was a pleasant surprise on the racetrack, showing up in 2nd place at 1:28.8 sec (76.4 mph). All other things equal, a front-wheel-drive car will be slower than an equivalent rear-wheel-drive car through a given corner. In general terms, this is because the same set of wheels are responsible for both propelling and steering the vehicle, leaving the other two with not much to do. The Daytona Turbo Z is the best-handling front-wheeldrive production car we have tested. It does an excellent job of getting its turbocharged power down to the ground, while simultaneously managing to develop good cornering power.

Having owned an '86 Daytona Turbo Z C/S I agree. Remarkable when you consider it's K-car derived rear beam axle suspension

 

[mechanicx]

And I was talking about I'd want an '83 Z28. They were relatively afford if you could afford a new GTI. It's not a direct comparison pitting one models top performance version against another's entry models. As far as as a GTIs out handling a Z28 I disagree.

MCompact, not in reference to your examples but as I'm sure you know Chevrolet in the 80's offered the Camaros in so many different options in engines, gearing, tires, limited slip etc. If you knew to option the car for best performance, most '83-90 Z-28s and IROC could run 0-60 times of 6.8 to about 5.7 seconds and down to low 14s in 1/4 mile and .85-.90g skidpad.

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
The biggest surprise from that article:

Nevertheless, the Dodge was a pleasant surprise on the racetrack, showing up in 2nd place at 1:28.8 sec (76.4 mph). All other things equal, a front-wheel-drive car will be slower than an equivalent rear-wheel-drive car through a given corner. In general terms, this is because the same set of wheels are responsible for both propelling and steering the vehicle, leaving the other two with not much to do. The Daytona Turbo Z is the best-handling front-wheeldrive production car we have tested. It does an excellent job of getting its turbocharged power down to the ground, while simultaneously managing to develop good cornering power.

Having owned an '86 Daytona Turbo Z C/S I agree. Remarkable when you consider it's K-car derived rear beam axle suspension



But I thought it was the VW or Honda that was the best handling, even better than RWD Z28s

.

 

[MCompact]

Well, I'd take it up with Chevrolet; they supplied the cars to go head-to-head with the Mustang 5.0 so I doubt that they picked the slowest configuration. Here is the May 1983 Car and Driver Comparison test. Note that the Z had the 3.73 rear axle ratio(as did the 1984 R&T car). Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that a lower ratio was available. As I said, nothing causes me to regret passing on a Camaro of that vintage- well, I might take a 1LE.

 

[mechanicx]

Well the '83 Z28 ran 0-60 in 6.7 seconds according to Car and Driver so who can complain about that in '83? I don't know what R/T had but The Camaros only got faster later in the 80's is my point. I could think of a lot worse cars in the early 80's and few better ones anywhere near the price range. My favorites around the time was '87-90 IROC with 5.7L or 5L HO 5-speed with ~230 HP. And of course the same '87-'90 years Firebird Formulas that had the same performance parts and options for $15k. It wasnt until the 1990 300ZX did any of the foreign models appeal to me, but it started at $27k and got more expensive later.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx


Yep, and not only that the smooth V8 torque would throw you back in the seat when on the gas in just about whatever gear you were in....


When I had my Daytona, my roommate had a "G" VIN Camaro Sport Coupe. You know, sans tachometer-giant fuel gauge in it's place that reads in liters on one side and gallons on the other with a constantly moving needle, stamped steel wheels with beauty rings, slotted fascia above the grill, cloth insert vinyl seats, no spoiler.... looked like a 4 or 6 cylinder Camaro until you opened the hood and saw the dual snorkel air cleaner on the 305. I don't know what rear end ratio it had, but it surprised a lot of Mustangs. My Daytona could keep up with it at freeway speed, but you had better be in the right gear when you start and you better be spooled up. You get a second while his TH700R4 goes to the right gear. The boost gauge had better be dancing around in the red already when it does.

It was the "cheap" Camaro that the average buyer could afford. We never found out if it was just an an anomaly, some COPO thing from the '80s, or if someone ordered it like that. Never found the original owner

 

[mechanicx]

It's hard to say but interesting. The optioning and ordering system had many combinations. One thing is Camaros had to be about the most tinkered with, hacked up and abused models by owners. If you aren't the 1st owner there's a good chance someone modified, tinkered or destroyed it lol. If it wasn't a Z28 most likely the engine wasn't really an L69. It's possible someone swapped in the dual snorkel air cleaner but it takes a lot more than that to make it into an L69.

 

[ls1mike]

I had three different Dodge Daytona Turbos. Loved them all. My 88 Shelby Z was my favorite. Had two different 88 Pacificas. One was a 5 speed one was an auto, both always did well.

 

[mechanicx]

This is a good video Motorweek 1985 Mustang, Camaro, Firebird shoot out:

 

[mechanicx]

Interesting story on the engineering of the '82 Camaro in case anyone thought GM didn't do some engineering back then

. The sound volume is low

.

 

[Silverado12]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
. What car would I have wanted in '82 or '83? A Z28 Camaro of course.



Bet you didn't know that back then a
VW Rabbit GTI would BEAT that Camaro 0-60. LOL Not to mention it handled better too.

The superior design, quality, reliability and MPGs of most Hondas from the late 70s onwards far outweighed the rust problem or any other niggles compared to the absolute carp boxes that the US domestics were offering. That is why folks lined up to buy an Accord, over a Fairmont, Citation, or Dart.



Sorry, but I smoked a GTI back in my younger days with a 307 2bbl Camaro.

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: Silverado12



Sorry, but I smoked a GTI back in my younger days with a 307 2bbl Camaro.


You probably could at a light. I had a 84 GTI as first car and it was quite a hoot to drive through twisty roads around lakes and in the mountains. I remember mustangs/camaro's trying to tail me and then once I got into twisty's they simply did not keep up and would loose them in the mirror until the next straight away.

Not even sure that the GTI was that much better in real roadhandling #'s but it was a confidence inspiring lightweight car(2100 lbs). It was a wonderful overall package.

Also mine my GTI was Made in the USA! However it was an electrical nightmare. Although I found out latter a friend who worked at electric auto part supplier in the US would send out defective or failed parts to VW since they did not check them. Sad...

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
It's hard to say but interesting. The optioning and ordering system had many combinations. One thing is Camaros had to be about the most tinkered with, hacked up and abused models by owners. If you aren't the 1st owner there's a good chance someone modified, tinkered or destroyed it lol. If it wasn't a Z28 most likely the engine wasn't really an L69. It's possible someone swapped in the dual snorkel air cleaner but it takes a lot more than that to make it into an L69.


8th digit was a "G" in the VIN.

That I do remember. At the time I thought "H" (for H.O.) was the good VIN designator. I looked it up at work and learned that "H" was the LG4. My friend had the higher performance engine. (and subsequently felt better about his ability to leave my Daytona so hard from a standing start)


But you would look at it and it was this creme colored plain Jane Camaro with brown stamped rallye wheels (brown!) The only reason you would not think it was a 4-cyl is that it did not have plastic wheel covers and had the second outlet on the muffler