Wrong, the z28 is a regular camaro with upgraded parts albeit some very good parts but still the bones are the same as a v6 camaro.
Corrected now
GT350 vs. Z/28
- Thread starter thePill
- Start date
Wrong, the z28 is a regular camaro with upgraded parts albeit some very good parts but still the bones are the same as a v6 camaro.
Corrected now
We wont see anything approaching '13 gt500 power levels for a few years. The gt350 will not be twin turbo.
+1
From some folks on here that are consistently in the "know", the new SVT variant is supposedly very different from the last GT500. TT is almost certainly out, and they seem to aiming squarely for the M3, which is more finesse than sledgehammer.
My little prediction
5.5L N/A ~525hp
3650#
two piece rotors with an option for CC.
$50-60K
I think you are close, but I'm guessing 5.2-5.4 and 3400#
No way they get it down into vette territory weight, but it's fun to wish. If you run down the likely materials of construction, I just don't see how they could possible drop that kind of weight. Combine that with the fact we haven't heard a peep about the base S550 losing much of anything, when they were plastering the F150 weight savings all over the place.
Last edited:
Not so fast...
"
The Camaro Z/28 does not use Magnetic Ride Control like the ZL1. But it doesn’t need it. As we reported previously, the Z/28 is one of the first production cars fitted with race-proven, spool-valve dampers — the first being the Aston Martin One-77
Additional chassis changes include stiffer spring rates and suspension bushings for improved cornering response.
"[1]
So yes. The Z/28 chassis is new - as in - designed for that car. New parts. New geometry. New performance goals. etc. Maybe you just meant the underlying "frame" which probably is borrowed but even that will be moving to new structure.
I'm not a Chevy guy, just backing up my point from before since it was mostly factual.
[1] 2014 Camaro Z28: Five Features To Like | GM Authority
Last edited:
Z28 uses the Zeta platform, which has been around for a long time. Same exact one as the v6'ers are built on. Just with different driveline and suspension components bolted on.
I am sensing some confusion between the terms chassis and platform.
I am sensing some confusion between the terms chassis and platform.
Last edited:
Looks like you are judging each car with a different set of rules. The changes to the mustang over the last generation are far more extensive then any changes made to the z28 over other camaros. We're talking upgraded springs, bushings, shocks and sway bars vs an entirely new platform with suspension components with no resemblance to the outgoing model.
Ford hasnt shown all its cards with the base and GT yet. They are still working on it and keeping it close to the chest until april.
What GTS says, it is the same chasis as the current 13/14 camaro. Just with new suspension geometry, technology, and a lot of weight savings. The brand chasis, will be a smaller car with weight savings which may be where the confusion begins.
Serious? For the last 12 months we were listening to the media state how much smaller and lighter the new mustang is. Some were giving measurements that would make the mustang smaller than a current fiesta!:bash:
Now we find out that the mustang is basically the same size as the old one and you still believe the media, which knows nothing, about the weight rumors?
Huh, do you understand the basic of automobiles, either you have the basics wrong, or you are on purpose are comparing apples to oranges. Are you really saying every car that gets new shocks is a new platform or chassis, if that is the case you can buy a new chassis for a couple of grand from the aftermarket, makes you wonder why the car companies did not think of this so much simpler than designing new cars.
Sure Chevy took a v6 camaro and bolted on some good parts and made a very good car, but it is still the same basic car, just like you b302 is the same basic car as the v6.
Last edited:
Serious? For the last 12 months we were listening to the media state how much smaller and lighter the new mustang is. Some were giving measurements that would make the mustang smaller than a current fiesta!:bash:
Now we find out that the mustang is basically the same size as the old one and you still believe the media, which knows nothing, about the weight rumors?
Yes, the media spread lots of bad info. This has nothing to do with believing the media.
Give me a break. People here (maybe me too) are confusing platform, frame, and chassis terms.
I'm sure there is disagreement on what chassis means but I take it to mean:
chassis=frame+suspension (including mount point locations, type, alignment, what kind of suspension parts, rigidity, spring rates, damp rates, materials, etc.)
And I said the Z/28 uses a new or newer chassis and is a purpose built "performance car" (marketed as a track car). And based on my definition, that is true. Old 'platform'? Sure. Same frame as SS? Sure whatever. But that's not what I'm disputing either.
The chassis is the complete package, working as a whole. And from what is 'out there', the Z/28 chassis exceeds anything Ford has on the ground right now.
Yes, the 2015 GT also uses a new chassis. I never said it didn't, but I did say that I believe (and this is just from what is out there), that the design goals for the new Mustang chassis appear to accommodate a variety of car types and conditions and NOT SPECIFICALLY performance (i.e. ride-ability, comfort, etc.) Things not really in-scope to this thread. And there's nothing wrong with that, to be expected.
Now, of course, we expect that the hereto unannounced SVT vehicle will have a new chassis (refer to my definition for the sake of my comments) compared to the GT. Or perhaps a better way to say it is "upgraded chassis".
I also said that - from what I've read - and from what is available - there appears to be nothing particularly NEW in the 2015 Mustang chassis when it comes to sports cars in general. New for Mustang. Yes. Contrast that to the Z/28 using those race dampers, which is nearly a first for a consumer performance car. And please. I am not comparing Z/28 to GT, ok? Just pointing out Ford has some catch up to do. And I think its pretty clear they do. The GTXX0 will need to offer some nice features in its chassis.
So it's not my intention to compare apples and oranges. Rather I'm just trying to convey the fact that Ford is a bit behind (perhaps just in their announcements) in their performance tech. Maybe its a wrong opinion I have, but for now it is what it is. And I truly want Ford to give us some nugget of info that really impresses. IRS is pretty standard and not very impressive by itself....:shrug: But I agree what Mustang has done with the SRA in the past, competing against IRS is impressive. Heck, I track my boss and do the same there.
Last edited:
Who else has stated its going to be lighter? I have to sources who have been spot on over the last 10 years or so. Neither one of them claimed a smaller or lighter 15 mustang.
I lied one source said the 15 was going to be smaller by mm, not by inches! This same source has never stated it would be lighter.
I agree that some people are too wound up by this, and I can see this simple mistake happening. As I see it in the media as well.
The new Z28 chassis is the same Zeta chassis that has been used on all the current camaro's. This chassis was designed in 1999 and is anything but new as it is now 15 years old.
The Z28 is riding on new suspension and new technology which changes chassis geometry but does not change the basic structure of the old chassis.
The new 15 mustang is a new chassis and to my knowledge the first car to be using this chassis.
The 2004 mustang was running a chassis that was designed in the 1970's even though suspension had changed numerous times(00 svt R, and irs for example on the 03/04 svt) from the original concept of the chassis, it was still the same old chassis.
A chassis is a chassis. Shocks, suspension arms, and drivetrain components are not a chassis.
Fox chassis 79-93 mustang
Sn95 94-2004
S197 05-14
S550 15-xx
Those are chassis, generations usually signify the chassis change from one to the next.
The only cars in recent memory that could be considered as having had a chassis change for a special edition model would be the c6 z06 going from a steel frame to an aluminum frame. Period, that's all folks. Maybe if you are very very very very very lenient with the definition, the 03 cobra getting a recessed rear frame to accommodate larger/wider wheels in the rear as well as a whole rear subframe to accept a.... interestingly integrated irs consideration, as well as a new shocks at all corners and suspension upfront, brakes all around, rolling stock at all corners, complete interior change, nearly every body panel changed, as well as unique fuel tank, engine, wiring harness, cylinder heads, an sc, a 6spd, an aluminum shaft, different transmission cradle, etc etc etc etc etc, but honestly, even with the large extent to which an 03 cobra differed from an 03 v6 mustang, I still say it's an sn95 chassis just like the v6 is. Even when BMW offers short and long wheel base versions of it's 7 series, that's still the same chassis.
In general, I understand chassis as frame rails+floorpan+subframes etc.
Individual things that I have not heard described as a new chassis are:
-upgrading the brakes does not change the chassis
-changing the shocks, struts, springs or dampers does not change the chassis
-engine swap is not changing the chassis
-a transmission swap is not changing the chassis
-solely changing the front or rear subframe is not changing the chassis
I honestly think Darren has confused (rear) subframe, ie the rear suspension getting new subframe pick up points, shock placement, and shocks in general, as a new chassis.
A kmember is a (front) subframe upgrade. When you put a maximum motorsports, Griggs, agent 47, etc k-member on a fox, sn95-s197 mustang, it does not mean you suddenly have a new chassis. You do have a much more performance oriented and capable mustang, but it's still the same chassis as the v6/base model that sold for this given years.
The only Chevy I have heard of that has actually changed chassis for performance models is the c6 z06 and zr1 which received an aluminum monocoque vs the stamped steel of the base c6. That is indeed a chassis change imho. Even still, most corvette, Chevy and car fans in general do not say the z06 is a different chassis than the c6 because that's just awkward and confusing. It technically is a different chassis just as a teksid is a different block than an iron 03+ block, but they still call the corvette c6 the c6 chassis, and the teksid is a modular just as the 03+ iron 4.6 is a modular.
It's basically unheard of to have the frame, or rather chassis of a car changed just for a performance model. The z28 is $75,000 because Chevy can get buyers to pay that. The c6 z06 is $80-115,000 because it's basic structure is changed, and every panel is changed. I don't feel the z28 warrants it's price, however the vette definitely does.
If you want to get very technical, the camaro v6-z28, which sit on 110" wheelbases because the zeta chassis is a 15 year old sedan chassis, is less ideal than the new 2015 mustangs 107" wheelbase ground up new design for 2015.
I honestly see the 2015 gt performance/brembo package mustang being within spitting distance of a z28 on the same track, same day, assuming both have the same driver for lap times, and both are shod in the same tire compound.
No one ever states it, but the z28 rides on 305/xx/20 60 treadweae Pirelli trofeo's... It ran 7:37 with a hint of rain at the last fee bends, and back straight of the ring. (30 seconds ).
The 2013 gt500 ran 7:39 with a stick axel, albeit 662hp, with measly 265/285/xx/20 220 treadwear goodyears.
The 15 gt gets larger brakes than the 14 gt500 had, irs, double ball joint front suspension, a much stiffer chassis, 2" wider track (an inch in track is 2 in the tire), 3-4% better weight front/rear weight distribution, lower center of gravity, lower drag coefficient, etc. People will be very impressed by the 15 gt performance packs numbers. I'm done.
Fox chassis 79-93 mustang
Sn95 94-2004
S197 05-14
S550 15-xx
Those are chassis, generations usually signify the chassis change from one to the next.
The only cars in recent memory that could be considered as having had a chassis change for a special edition model would be the c6 z06 going from a steel frame to an aluminum frame. Period, that's all folks. Maybe if you are very very very very very lenient with the definition, the 03 cobra getting a recessed rear frame to accommodate larger/wider wheels in the rear as well as a whole rear subframe to accept a.... interestingly integrated irs consideration, as well as a new shocks at all corners and suspension upfront, brakes all around, rolling stock at all corners, complete interior change, nearly every body panel changed, as well as unique fuel tank, engine, wiring harness, cylinder heads, an sc, a 6spd, an aluminum shaft, different transmission cradle, etc etc etc etc etc, but honestly, even with the large extent to which an 03 cobra differed from an 03 v6 mustang, I still say it's an sn95 chassis just like the v6 is. Even when BMW offers short and long wheel base versions of it's 7 series, that's still the same chassis.
In general, I understand chassis as frame rails+floorpan+subframes etc.
Individual things that I have not heard described as a new chassis are:
-upgrading the brakes does not change the chassis
-changing the shocks, struts, springs or dampers does not change the chassis
-engine swap is not changing the chassis
-a transmission swap is not changing the chassis
-solely changing the front or rear subframe is not changing the chassis
I honestly think Darren has confused (rear) subframe, ie the rear suspension getting new subframe pick up points, shock placement, and shocks in general, as a new chassis.
A kmember is a (front) subframe upgrade. When you put a maximum motorsports, Griggs, agent 47, etc k-member on a fox, sn95-s197 mustang, it does not mean you suddenly have a new chassis. You do have a much more performance oriented and capable mustang, but it's still the same chassis as the v6/base model that sold for this given years.
The only Chevy I have heard of that has actually changed chassis for performance models is the c6 z06 and zr1 which received an aluminum monocoque vs the stamped steel of the base c6. That is indeed a chassis change imho. Even still, most corvette, Chevy and car fans in general do not say the z06 is a different chassis than the c6 because that's just awkward and confusing. It technically is a different chassis just as a teksid is a different block than an iron 03+ block, but they still call the corvette c6 the c6 chassis, and the teksid is a modular just as the 03+ iron 4.6 is a modular.
It's basically unheard of to have the frame, or rather chassis of a car changed just for a performance model. The z28 is $75,000 because Chevy can get buyers to pay that. The c6 z06 is $80-115,000 because it's basic structure is changed, and every panel is changed. I don't feel the z28 warrants it's price, however the vette definitely does.
If you want to get very technical, the camaro v6-z28, which sit on 110" wheelbases because the zeta chassis is a 15 year old sedan chassis, is less ideal than the new 2015 mustangs 107" wheelbase ground up new design for 2015.
I honestly see the 2015 gt performance/brembo package mustang being within spitting distance of a z28 on the same track, same day, assuming both have the same driver for lap times, and both are shod in the same tire compound.
No one ever states it, but the z28 rides on 305/xx/20 60 treadweae Pirelli trofeo's... It ran 7:37 with a hint of rain at the last fee bends, and back straight of the ring. (30 seconds ).
The 2013 gt500 ran 7:39 with a stick axel, albeit 662hp, with measly 265/285/xx/20 220 treadwear goodyears.
The 15 gt gets larger brakes than the 14 gt500 had, irs, double ball joint front suspension, a much stiffer chassis, 2" wider track (an inch in track is 2 in the tire), 3-4% better weight front/rear weight distribution, lower center of gravity, lower drag coefficient, etc. People will be very impressed by the 15 gt performance packs numbers. I'm done.
Last edited:
No, but some believe those components, in part, comprise the chassis. A frame is not a chassis. A floorpan is not a chassis. It's all-those-things as an integral unit of the underbody substrate.
I agree with many of your points though. I'm no expert so I'll just refer to this blurp that, perhaps, perpetuates confusing the term.
From Chevy's media site:
So according to them (perhaps they are confused), they consider those "changes" integral to the chassis and thus different - ergo a "chassis change".
Interestingly, they don't refer to them as suspension changes
I guess it becomes nuance at one point. I didn't mean to stir up a semantics debate though, I was just using the term based on my chosen meaning. But I think when I used "new" chassis, that was probably misleading and I get that now.
FWIW, I don't consider SN95, S197, S550 as chassis' . To me, they are PLATFORMS. And a platform HAS a chassis. The GT, Boss and GT500 share the same platform, but all have different (if even slightly) chassis'
That's just how I look at it.
Last edited:
7.39? where is this information?
They are all separate platforms. Each model within a platform could by some degree be called separate chassis as well but it's IMO a misappropriation. The terminology is not well defined.
According to google results, a chassis is "the frame that supports a vehicle" and "the base frame of a motor vehicle or other wheeled convenience"
We are all arguing semantics, but in general, 99% would say the z28 is not on a new chassis. I point this out because imho, the more you maintain or consider it as such, be there honestly "compelling" publication that could lead one to believe so, it is in general a mis appropriation and confuses more than communicates.
Anyways, just my $.02, I think we are all someone subjectively using the terms as they are generally muddled together.
My own car only really shares the floor and body panels and rear subframe with a stock 03 cobra but I still say it's an sn95 chassis. Who knows really, the terminology is often easy overlapped.
In my opinion, those article extracts you posted are explains modifications to the chassis, which is based on the zeta platform.
According to google results, a chassis is "the frame that supports a vehicle" and "the base frame of a motor vehicle or other wheeled convenience"
We are all arguing semantics, but in general, 99% would say the z28 is not on a new chassis. I point this out because imho, the more you maintain or consider it as such, be there honestly "compelling" publication that could lead one to believe so, it is in general a mis appropriation and confuses more than communicates.
Anyways, just my $.02, I think we are all someone subjectively using the terms as they are generally muddled together.
My own car only really shares the floor and body panels and rear subframe with a stock 03 cobra but I still say it's an sn95 chassis. Who knows really, the terminology is often easy overlapped.
In my opinion, those article extracts you posted are explains modifications to the chassis, which is based on the zeta platform.
Last edited:
Was on here for weeks, is on YouTube with a timer from bridge to gantry, (JUST LIKE EVERY GM/PORSCHE/MCLAREN/MANUFACTURER NURBURGRING VIDEO FOR ALL THE IDIOTS THAT CLAIM ITS NOT A COMPLETE LAP!!!)
The bold is not directed at you, it's directed at all the idiots that commented on the video that's on YouTube.
That 7:39 is as valid as gm's and best of all, it's 1.x seconds faster than gm's zl1 time. It is 1.x slower than the z28's, but the z28 is on 60 tread tires while the gt500 was on 220, and it's assumed the zl1 was on 220's as well.
Throwing 60's on a gt500 or zl1 would drop them deep into the 7:31-33 range easy. Probably 7:29 on an absolute hero lap. A 60 tire is very serious boarder line race tire.
The z06 z07 pack and viper acr run 60's, and they pull leguna in 1:33.6/7. That's incredibly fast. They also run the ring in 7:19-12.
A stock 07 z06 ran a 7:42(? Iirc) at the ring on 200 tread tires with 505hp and early gen shocks (read: scary at limit)
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
