Showing posts with label Chevy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chevy. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Why the '12 Camaro ZL1 is Better Than the '13 Shelby GT500




I've seen quite a bit of brand loyal flag waving on this issue lately. The letters published seem to lean towards the typical 'muscle car' designation the Camaro has done it's best to shake off for the last three decades, so perhaps this is to be expected. Bowtie guys would vote Camaro no matter what, Ford devotees would go Shelby, and this is also to be expected. Most test results were mixed, though. Pretty much everyone noted that the Chevy ruled the track and the Shelby owned the strip, and the toss up was which was a better street car. However, I've seen too much 'moah powah, moah betta' logic from folks who usually have more sense than this. The Camaro ZL1 should be properly noted for dancing with current 911s and GT-Rs, the Ford Mustang kind of being in the role of old flame who still thinks there's a chance at being anything but a fond memory.

Plus, the 'Chapman Is Always The Answer' crowd looks at the spec sheet, sees less weight and more power, and declares the winner sight unseen. I'm not going to claim that the Camaro isn't a few hundred pounds heavier and down nearly 100hp on the Shelby. But if we were talking, say, putting a V8 in an RX7, most of these geeks would be squawking about the front-rear balance, which, by the way, is better on the ZL1. Still, for some, the idea of 'Ford is the better Muscle Car, so it wins' seems without challenge.

Before we go further, let's get the inevitable comparison going.

The GT500 has bigger brakes, more power, more torque, less weight, higher redline, even somehow managed to post better highway mpg than the Chevy. And while I'm building a case for the Chevy as a better corner carver rather than 'pure musclecar,' as many publications wish to pigeonhole it as, the GT500 even manages to post hot laps faster than the ZL1 on tracks like Laguna Seca, which was always my 'real world car' test track on Gran Turismo. Damn if Shelby didn't pull a sucker punch on the ZL1, or so it would seem.


Back when all I had to test my auto ideas was a PS One and Gran Turismo 2, maybe 3, I had a system: I'd drive the car stock one lap around Laguna Seca to warm up and get used to the car's traits, then go for it. Whatever the car did, however I reacted, was how it was, but the track and conditions were consistent, the tires consistent, and the driver consistent. The data revealed how these cars reacted in a stock form to my driving style. It was enough to satisfy curiosity about how an 80's MR2 might differ from a Miata or an RX7, and considering that at the time I was merely wishing I could own a car like that, I was consigned to try and find the one I liked most in a stock form - as, if I acquired one, it would be awhile before I could afford to modify it, and I'd better like it as-is. 

It's all quite idealized - the simulated car wasn't going to have 100k+ on the odometer, for instance, who knows what tires 'normal' corresponds to in the real world, etc. Hardly smoking gun type data.

The basics of one car's attributes vs another's was apparent, though - Civics didn't drive like MR2s which didn't drive like Vettes. It's hardly more than it is, but it's something, and Laguna Seca was picked because the course doesn't really let a car just spend time at 100+mph and 'exotics' don't have an advantage over a hotted-up hatchback in that regard. Which was fine by my standards, since when I started running that 'experiment' it was all I could do to keep a four speed 89 Civic Hatch running well enough to deliver pizza in. No sense in picking a track designed for cars I couldn't afford the keychain for.

As a matter of fact, for a minute in the 'modified' list, while my maxed out C5 Z06 beat a similarly modded R34 Skyline GT-R, both were beat by a heavily modded CRX Si-R - until I dialed the Vette back to 'only' 650ish hp, and the result was I was driving a 'slower' car faster, oddly enough. The 800hp version of the Z06 C5 was slower than the Si-R, but the 650hp version was faster. 

Don't think this didn't occur to me when I owned my Si...I can dream! Sure, it would only involve a 260 horse Honda motor and a laundry list of cost-no-object mods to the chassis, suspension, and brakes, running race tires, and have almost no resale value, but I'd have my 'budget Corvette beater!' However, it's true that Laguna Seca is a pretty decent metric to throw at a car that will be seeing real roads in the real world, minus the fact that I'm sure the pavement is smooth and comparatively perfect - just the ticket if, say, you're running a live axle setup vs. an independent rear suspension that's designed to work on bumpy corners as well as fantasy-smooth ones. 




So to see the GT500 post a .5 second faster lap on Motor Trend's recent comparison around Laguna Seca didn't exactly have me dancing in the aisles. But then, that's why there's all this 'writing' in the article. The Map Is Not The Territory, and the Spec Sheet is not the Car.

The GT500 could post the faster time for exactly one lap. Then it started slipping. First to just a little over the ZL1's time. Within three laps of the 2.2 mile course, the brakes gave up the ghost (despite being bigger) and the Camaro's times remained remarkably consistent, within 2/10ths of a second on each lap. The only time the Camaro would truly be shown up by the Shelby on a road course is if it were Time Attack, where the fastest lap wins. Regular track day at commonly held events? No question the ZL1 is going to be be on the podium, and the Ford - whose engineers still to this day don't seem to truly grasp the importance of braking - will be lucky to not be in the weeds. This scenario has pretty much repeated itself on every comparo I've seen so far.

Many have commented that this hearkens back to the 80's, when the Camaro was living up to it's promise as the Poor Man's Corvette and the Mustang was simply a cheap ass car with an over cammed motor and better power to weight. While the Camaro out handled, out braked, and was nearly as fast in a straight line as the Mustang 5.0, the 5.0 is remembered as the Stoplight King of the time. As some have commented, no one is going to follow you to the local autocross to see you whip the other guy's ass, but they'll watch the drag race happening before their eyes. Of course, the real answer to '80's Factory Stoplight King' is spelled G-N-X, but that's another debate entirely.




The Camaro hasn't been a mere 'Muscle Car' for a long time. Peter Egan wrote about how the Camaro and Mustang of the 80's were among cars the first you could take to a road course, beat on them all day, and drive them home available to the 'common man'. Racing was simply more involved before that and the cars being raced bore little resemblance to the stock example. More than a few 'import' fans have commented on the Camaro's handling abilities. When I first got to drive one, it was on the mountain roads going up to Big Bear Lake - hardly the local drag strip - and it made me want to try and buy a modern car as soon as possible. It was a V6 model and I could only imagine what an LS1/T56 equipped example was like.

The Gen IV F-Bodies took a gamble in going 'hardcore' - more aerodynamic, lower cg, more of a 'driver's car' than the merely hotted up coupe that is the muscle car archetype - and while it suffered in sales compared to the more conventional Mustang, it trounced it's performance handily, later V6 versions nipping at the heels of contemporary 4.6 GTs. The '90s V8 vs. V8 comparo was a foregone conclusion, and the Mustang was still the Fairmont based compromise it always was. Which, ironically, made it a better get-around car. F Body sales slumped, as the car wasn't appealing to non-gearheads and women, who flocked to the easier ingress and egress of the Mustang, and cared less about the crappier driving dynamics and less performance. Chevy screwed up by designing the car around the people who probably weren't going to buy the bulk of them. It's one of the factors in why you'll see dozens of M3s for every 'real exotic' on the road - one of them actually functions as a real car.

When the 2005 Mustang came out, the F body had been mothballed for years and had no competition. So Ford could get away with V8's that had competitive output with contemporary V6's and kind of bland retro styling that was better than the previous SN95 Stangs but hardly a street legal concept car like the Camaro is even in base V6 form. Pretty much every latter day Mustang upgrade, from the 300+ hp V6 to the 5.0l Coyote has been aimed at fighting one car - the Camaro.

Once the Camaro's production started up again, it came out and basically stole Ford's lunch in that segment, and has been doing it since. The Camaro is the car that saved GM and put it back in the black. As well it should, because while I applaud Ford's later Mustangs, GM set out to crush them from the outset. And essentially succeeded. In the hearts and minds of the uninterested passerby - non-car-person, import snob, what have you - only one of those cars is described as 'pure sex' over and over again. It's another arrow in a large quiver of world class design, go see how many Fords are mentioned vs. Chevy in 'most iconic car designs of all time' lists. No surprise here.

The Camaro has the same platform underneath as the CTS-V, aka the car with the best ride/handling compromise currently on offer according to much of the world's automotive press, according to almost everyone who reviews it. The Mustang is notable for being the last live axle passenger car available in the US, and to be fair, for doing a damn good job with it, chasing even the BMW M3 early on in many a comparison test. The new Mustang platform will be ditching said axle for a Camaro-competitive IRS setup. So it's not surprising that the Camaro has quite the handling and performance potential baked in to it's fundamental design vs the Mustang and has higher potential for performance regardless of engine output. One car has more power - the other can handle more.

So let me get this straight - it's more expensive, AND requires mods/optional equipment to be track ready?


So, while the SS is definitely aimed at a more 'muscle car' buyer, and initially disappointed hardcore track fiends with it's understeer, such a thing is to be expected in that particular place in the lineup - after all, when people who get to drive a car with 400+ lb ft of torque abusing the rear contact patches, you don't want to give it 'evil' chassis tuning. Even the original MR2 and second gen CRX Si had to be tamed from their original specs, as the track-ready agressive rear end was spooking the common driver and did little good on a real roadway. And those were handling-centric designs not sold on horsepower.

The SS was even more so in need of a 'friendly' suspension tune - taming 400lb-ft and over 400hp simply isn't as easy as doing the same to what is basically an economy car motor lucky to have over 100hp to begin with. So understeer is there for the reason it is on most street cars - to keep idiots from killing themselves and the cars safe for Joe Average to drive, in lieu of suspension tuning only a small percentage of owners will be able to take advantage of. The previous owner of my CRX Si was a woman who only used it as a commuter and bought it because it was 'cute' and easy to park. She wasn't needing a rear toe setting that could lead to snap oversteer, I'm thinking.

The ZL1 and 1LE have come to the rescue, as people probably aren't going to go to 5th Gen forums and get word from people modifying the car, they want to see a factory example and what it can do. So bye bye understeer, hello balanced handling out of the box. While offering a safe, sane package that the true speed freak could modify for track readiness was the traditional American way and the way our home market worked for decades, it was time to show what a factory effort could accomplish. No one wants to compare modded vs stock cars anyway as it's a slippery slope, and not all mods are created equal.

The ZL1 and the regular SS may as well not even be the same car. And keep in mind, that while the GT500 gets a weight decrease AND power increase, the heavier/less powerful ZL1 can easily put down comparable lap times that the bench racer might be surprised by. On a relatively short course like Laguna Seca, the half second faster quarter mile time only equates to a slight lead for two laps, then trailing behind the Chevy. Those expecting a gigantic difference will be disappointed any time the order of the day isn't pure drag racing.

The ZL1 is a poor man's Supercar. It's a Budget Z06, if not the gonzo ZR1. Somewhat more mundane, yes, but the Ring Times tell all, my friend.

Yeah, what is the GT500's Ring Time, anyway? Seems like there's still not one posted. I know we were all waiting awhile back for Ford to get one done. Surely, the poor Ring has just been rained out the entire time. Every day. For six months or longer. "We'll get back to you on that" seems to be Ford's standard line on the GT500's Ring Time.

However, let's do some bench racing of our own here. If the GT500 starts losing brakes after 2.2 miles of Laguna Seca, enough to be slower around the 3rd lap of said course than the ZL1, how long could it possibly sustain any advantage on the Ring? Particularly with it's laughably old school shock setup and traction disadvantage on a famously shitty tarmac that Live Axles have a famously hard time dealing with, even when they're not trying to put down 600+hp. Particularly when the high speed corners that come up deadly fast require real brakes.

You're halfway through the 13 mile Green Hell when you come to this
little beauty of a corner, but you're driving the GT500 and people in Poland
can smell that your brake pads are cooked. What do you do, Ford fanboy,
what do you do?

While there's reams posted online about the supposed illegitimacy of Ring Times, the question begs asking: then why doesn't Ford  just play along and do what the Romans do while in Rome...if the times are bullshit, then they can just bullshit a better time, so why not? And where is it? Yet, almost a year later, more than six months after publications were drooling over the time to compare to the ZL1, nothing. If Ford claims a time it's going to come up short and reveal the Mustang as the Muscle Car it is, while the ZL1 is still in pretty damn good company in that regard.

While the Ford guys get easy pickings on the spec sheet, and want to claim 'similar specs' to a ZR1, which is so far from reality I don't have to tear through it like bullets through tinfoil, let's just mention the obvious.

Ford doesn't have a Corvette to maintain.

In other words, the Corvette, much like the 911 in Porscheland, is the top dog. Does anyone honestly think that Chevy engineers somehow didn't see that the LS9's 638hp was up for the asking vs. the lower outputs for the LSA in the CTS-V and ZL1? The ZR1 engine stays in the ZR1, and with a frickin' Mustang and the Viper having higher outputs now, expect the new ZR1 to have even more. Not like it will be a challenge considering they found 20hp in the new engine revisions from the same displacement - the new LT1 will be 450hp to the LS3's 430. That's NA power. All Chevy has to do is turn the wick up with the supercharged variants, because every kid with a Honda D16 and a junkyard T3 knows more boost equals more power.

Much like 90's LS1 Camaros basically 'lost' 50hp to the Corvette through ECU tuning, the LSA's 'restriction' is political based, not engineering based. Quite obviously, if Chevy wished a 638hp ZL1 upon the world, we'd have one. And we just might, who knows, very soon. However, the LS9 and really the LSA are hardly gasping for breath even in the rarified performance realm they occupy. Considering that they're Fuel Injected, Supercharged, Small Block Chevy V8's running stock parts that beat race items for earlier generations of the same motor architecture, perhaps that's not surprising. But 585hp is still more than almost every production car ever made. And it's not like there aren't companies out there willing to sell you a smaller supercharger pulley.

SVT, meet SLP. GT500, meet nightmare. 

Before anyone mentions that the SLP ZL1 is priced in ZR1/Z06 territory, Lingenfelter's 630hp, 650hp, and 700hp upgrades are available, and priced right around what you'd save by not buying the GT500. For the same money, you can have just as much speed and power, if not more.

God Bless...the Aftermarket!

The Camaro ZL1 really is meant to silence the internet trolls and car snobs that think the Camaro is still some leaf sprung, log axled, over engined brute with no finesse. Aka, a 'Muscle Car'. It's 'at home on the track', the handling is 'unflappable', 'composed', 'confidence inspiring'. Everything a driver's car is supposed to be, only instead of some boring, conservative German coupe or a 'Hi-Ya!' styled Japanese coupe, you get a car that's pure concept car awesome and one of the few 'reboots' of old car designs that many think is superior to the car it copied. I can't choose myself - the original is the original, and the new version is what Chip Foose would build from scratch if he wanted a 'new Camaro with the old style' and Chevy wasn't already building it.

And, as someone who modifies cars, I can frankly always find a way to get more horsepower out of a given engine. It's much harder to tune a suspension and/or chassis, and I'd much rather have the factory ironing out the really hard wrinkles rather than worry about horsepower left on the table any schmo with a Jeg's catalog could come up with.

However, let's just put it this way. Like my Laguna Seca 'laboratory', the times tell a story when compared to each other.

So the question is: is the Camaro ZL1 a mere 'Muscle Car'? Forget the GT500 for a minute. Let's compare apples to kiwis for a minute, and see how the ZL1 stacks up against 'real' track cars.

I'm going to cherry pick a bit, just so it's not a bunch of Vette, Viper, 911 and GT-R times, but I'm going to highlight the Camaro ZL1's Ring Time vs. cars slightly faster and slightly slower than it. You tell me whether a car with this performance is a 'muscle car' and whether the GT500's price premium is warranted because of it being the 'better car'.

Ruf RT 12 - 7:35.0 / +6.27 secs
Lexus LFA - 7:38.85 / +2.42 secs
Mercedes SLR McLaren - 7:40.0 / +1.27 secs 
Mercedes SLS AMG - 7:40.0 / +1.27 secs
Ford GT - 7:40.6 / +0.67 secs
Lamborghini Gallardo LP570-4 Superleggera- 7:40.76 / +0.51 secs
Porsche 911 Turbo S- 7:41.23 / +0.04 secs
Camaro ZL1 - 7:41.27 / 0.0 secs
'05 Corvette C6 Z06 - 7:42.99 / -1.72 secs
Audi R8 V10 - 7:44.0 / -2.73 secs
Pagani Zonda S - 7:44.0 / -2.73 secs
Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera - 7:46.0 / - 4.73 secs
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano - 7:47.0 / -5.73 secs
BMW M3 GTS - 7.48.0 / -6.73 secs
Caterham R500 Superlight - 7.55.0 / -13.73 secs

See the full Ring Time list here.

I think the above speaks for itself. The Germans invented this 'ring nonsense', even if you don't put much stock in it, and it's their game. And Europe's. But look at that company the ZL1 is keeping. Not modified to the hilt, not in some 16 year old's imagination, and not after a bunch of 'dealer installed upgrades.'

"Real" Supercars every one. Even beats a 2009 Auto Bild time for a...09 Corvette ZR1. Drivers make a difference as does track times, and the ZL1's time with a GM hot shoe aboard certainly isn't close to the 7:19.63 2012 ZR1 time, it's pretty damn obvious that by any reasonable yardstick, the $60k ZL1 will show many, many cars often only seen on Gran Tursimo it's tail lights. On not only a 'real track', but the Green Hell.

Beating not just the Ford/Shelby, but many a Porsche, BMW, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Audi, and even Toyota's world record holding TMG EV P001, the world's fastest electric car around the Ring. Many hot shoes couldn't do better in a Nissan GT-R. Aka the car that was designed 'so your Grandmother could do 180mph.'

Pictured: Slower than a 'POS' Camaro, costs nearly 3x as much.

That one there on the bottom? Oh, I know it's quite a bit slower than the ZL1, by a much wider margin than the ZL1 is slower than the top listed Ruf. I just wanted to rub the Chapman Club's nose in it - the Heavy Chevy beats your 1115lb, 263 horse, Ultimate Chapman Mobile, by over 13 seconds. As per the Caterham website for the R500: "The Caterham Superlight R500 represents the ultimate expression of Colin Chapman's fundamentals."

It's also slower than a car that weighs ~3800lbs and wears a friggin' Bowtie. Ouch. Oh, and it only costs 10 Grand more than the Chevy. And assembly is required. That it's not quite in the same 'production' league as the Camaro need not be overemphasized.

Somewhere, Colin Chapman wants just a bit of his life back. For hookers, for some quality time with the kids, some bong rips, something because obviously some of his time spent to obsessively pursuing low mass could have been better spent. Not all of it, just some. I won't tell you what other late model Ring tuned Chevy has a faster time than a Lotus Exige S, because Chapman fans have had enough abuse for one article. But look it up, and cringe. Hint: it's wrong wheel drive.

These are just the production cars! Go here for a list of times of professionally prepped race cars. While I'm impressed by the cars the ZL1 leaves in it's wake, despite being street legal and emissions compliant for 2012 standards, let's just say I'm also mightily impressed by the Formula Ford progam! Most folks who've raced street and prepped race cars will tell you the former can almost never hang with the latter. The heavy, OHV, 'Muscle Car' ZL1 is doing just that. It's far from the top of the heap, granted, but not only older race cars, but even the 2008 Suzuki GSX-R 1000 liter bike was slower.

That's insane fast. No matter how you slice it. Making 3800lbs of steel move like a liter bike is no mean feat, even in a straight line.

Even a 600+ hp modified Toyota Supra posted a slower time by almost 8 seconds. That's the US Import Tuner Holy Grail sporting twice it's original output and tuned for the track.

Damn, it's nice being on this side of the fence. I mean, trust me, when I was 'full on import' in my mentality, I'd browbeat 'Mercan Iron loving folks half to death with my Chapmanisms. It proves that there really is no holding back a good idea, and vindicates GM for their steadfastness in pursuing the LS engine and the to-some 'archaic' layout of the Corvette's chassis. Apparently, the world's largest car company - despite the past, and despite Toyota's and VW's best to date attempts to unseat them from the King of the Hill position - knows a thing or two about making cars. Who woulda figured.

"OHVs and Leaf Springs, WTF?"

'Scuse me, you've literally got that backwards - not WTF, but FTW.

And, to be honest, the CTS/Camaro chassis needs to make zero excuses about it's engineering. It's competitive with Europe's best. Just ask the BMW M5 development team.

Looking down the list, Honda NSX-R NA1/NA2. Lancer Evolution X GSR. Porsche Panamera Turbo. Nissan Skyline GT-Rs in R33 and R34 trim. Mercedes CLK63 AMG Black Series. Vipers. Many a Corvette. All slower, and by huge margins - most wouldn't argue that even over a 13 mile course, losing to someone by 10 to 20 seconds hurts. In the adrenaline amped world inside the cockpit, in full 'athlete in the zone' Matrix consciousness, 10-20 seconds is an eternity. Practically enough for the Hunter S. Thompson 'be waiting for them with a beer in your hand already' move.

When your damnedest effort in the damnedest effort of some of the greatest car companies the world has to offer can't overcome such a defeat, it's got to irk you.

When the car you were chasing, that bested you by an eternity, is wearing a Bowtie, and isn't a Corvette, but a 'lowly' Camaro, it's got to be damn near infuriating. "We lost...to a Camaro?"

All the turbos, AWD, DOHCs, VTEC, four wheel steering, etc, all the carbon fiber and aluminum intensive structures. Beat by a gussied up rental car with a big engine. I'd say Chevy was David vs. Goliath here, but when you're the biggest car company on the planet, maybe Goliath isn't so easy to take down, after all.

I leave you to your cockamamie theories of how American Cars will never cut it in the realm of 'The Big Boys.' We don't need the Viper, Corvette, and GT to prove that anymore. Now we can even do it in the 'redneck chariot', the 'muscle car', that is the Camaro. Maybe we'll even do it in a Mustang one day :D

Miss a shift in 13 miles of Green Hell, and Ford's only true answer to the
ZL1 gets passed. This Ford is better than the Camaro...slightly, maybe not
for long, either... 


Speaking of the GT, Ford guys: not only does the ZL1 handily trounce your Shelby, it damn near beats your best ever effort at Supercar Greatness. 0.67 seconds of breathing room, and considering that GM probably won't take the supposed 'defeat' laying down, I wouldn't be surprised to be able to announce next year that Chevy has a Camaro faster than the fastest production track car Ford ever made.

Hell, Ford, if you can beat the ZL1 at it's own game, why not do so? If, say, it were .68 seconds faster around the Ring than the Chevy, you'd be able to claim you've not only built your most powerful car ever, but your fastest ever, too. Currently, you can only claim one of those. Oh, and the GT, as you may know, is no longer in production. So, without rehashing past glories, you got nada off of the drag strip.

For you forum dwelling Shelby trolls, keep dreaming about chasing down the ZR1. The GT500 won't match the ZL1's 7:41 time, and  the ZR1 is nearly 22 seconds faster. Not if Santa and the Easter bunny brought you a magic engine tune.

Oh, and enjoy the quasi-victory while it lasts, boys - the 5.8l Coyote is an endangered species, as it's not going to be able to fit in the next gen Mustang. And if the ZR1 gets boosted past 638hp, then it doesn't take a genius to figure out what the Camaro will be doing with the Vette's leftovers. The Camaro obviously doesn't need to match the Shelby hp for hp to beat it, but if it did, or even came close, all it's going to do is widen the gap and show the Ford chassis for the well meaning dinosaur that it really is. The Chevy chassis isn't even at it's limit - it could easily stand more power. The Mustang has obviously already reach it's zenith in this generation, and it's back to the drawing board.

Speaking of drawing board, while Ford will likely dig deep to build a real competitor to the Heavy Chevy, know that Chevy is addressing the one 'drawback' of the car, which is it's size and weight. The CTS chassis will give way to the ultralight, BMW matching ATS platform. In a couple of years all of those LS swapped 3 series cars out there will be largely obsolete, as you'll be able to buy a new one with a factory warranty and zero miles. And frankly, keep pushing the envelope with the Boss - many of us are clamoring for a Z28 powered by an LS7. The ZL1 was a pleasant surprise and more than much of us in the F Body congregation hoped for.

Some things never change...and really, the winners are buyers of either car and the American automotive industry's perception in the world. While we're comparing one car to another there's little to say about the GT500 that's 'wrong'. Many want the more Muscle Car attributes because they're the same guys who used to rip the IRS out of the back of Cobras and swap the 8.8 back in, if not a 9 inch. Of course, well, for those guys, Chevy has the COPO, but hey, we'll keep it to stuff on the factory lot meant for the street, being daily drivable and putting out reasonable fuel economy and clean emissions.

While I've been used to seeing Corvettes battle it out with the best that the world has to offer, even I, as a guy raised in a Chevy household going back 2 generations before me - who's been poking around small block Chevies since he could pop the hood on Dad's Nova when he wasn't around to yell at me for going near the thing - even I was taken aback to see Toyota/Lexus's LFA merely eking out a less than 3 second advantage over such a 'humble' platform, and the other cars that it runs with, much less beats, is astounding. The 3 second advantage is huge but recall that the LFA is Toyota's second best effort ever, and is a car that costs over 6 times the Camaro's entry fee. Also, look over the list again - notice any BMWs that have posted a faster time than the ZL1?

Not.

One.

Here's a list of the manufacturers with posted faster ring times than the ZL1, just to see who's missing.

Porsche, Radical, Gumpert, Lexus, Dodge, Donkervoort, Chevy, Ford (GT), Nissan, Maserati, Pagani, Ferrari, Koenigsegg, Ruf, Lamborghini, Mercedes and McLaren. Notice quite a few 'better' brands of cars that 'make superior performance machines' aren't listed. I can't vouch for the list's completeness - seems there's a few McLarens missing, but that might be due to the qualifications for entry.

The fact that it can hang with that company without much exotica, that it's a real car underneath and not made out of Unobtainium and Unicorn Hide, is all the better. Who wants a Supercar you'll be afraid to use? The Chevy probably costs less than insurance policy on many of the cars mentioned here. Certainly less than a repair on, say, one of the Lambos, Ferraris, etc it leaves in it's wake. I'd say that the attainability, not the exclusivity, is the point here.

The Camaro hides an intriguing proposition - an American car that is quasi-affordable for the common guy that's Ring Ready and able to satisfy an itch that only being able to stare down most any car you meet on the street, under any conditions, straight road or spaghetti, and be able to hold your own, whether that car is a Ford or a Ferrari. While it won't trounce the current Corvettes it will certainly do so to the slightly older variants. Many a Viper as well. And it will do so right off the lot.

You'd have to save your pennies, natch, but it's also half the (significant) cost of cars that even begin to threaten it. The Z06 and ZR1 dust it, sure,  but you could buy the Camaro and a nice CTS 3.6 Wagon for roughly the same money as the Z06, and you could make the CTS a CTS-V for the equivalence of a ZR1.

Hell, you could probably buy the Camaro and a decent house somewhere for that kind of money! Comparing it to cars other than the 'relative bargain' Porsches and GT-Rs, cars like the Pagani Zonda S, Laborgini Gallardo, Ferrari, or R8 V10 that it beats, and you could significantly upgrade your digs - and still pay cash. It won't be as much of an 'arrivers' car as the others, but hey, if that's your thing, you're probably looking up lease rates on the R8 or any other number of price no object cars to strut your financial stuff. While that's fine, you can save me the speech about how all the F1 derived technology on your exotic leaves the Flintstone Mobile Camaro in the dust - because in most cases you'd simply be wrong, and if you aren't, you're in rare company indeed.

We all know the Big Three can do muscle cars. We all know they can build a world class sports car faster than much of Italy's, Great Britain's, Japan's, and Germany's finest, for a price. But now, hell, our hi-po, 'cheap ass' Camaro can run with the best. Tell me why I'd be over at the BMW dealership again? Or, especially, why I'd be giving up the style of an American car for the 'Anime Geek's Wet Dream' look Japan decided to go with, after they figured out most of us weren't into well engineered jelly beans on wheels? American cars, once again, truly offer it all at a price the rest of the world still can't match, even though they've had decades to try and figure out a way to do so.

While some people have said 'but track performance isn't what a Muscle Car is about', they forgot that this is the Poor Man's Vette, and that the very same whiners and complainers spewed mountains of words complaining that said cars were Muscle Cars in the first place. Chevy, you can't win such minds over, but the rest of the world is watching, and some get it - "ZL1's Ring Time in 911 Territory" was one headline I caught while browsing, and is more to the point. Some people get it. Just like some people get why you build both the ATS and XTS, because some people want an 'old style Cadillac' and some want to hunt BMWs with a Wreath and Crest. Let Ford retain the Caveman Joe reputation, the typical attitude that American automakers make cars with more built in power than built in common sense.

It's not 1969, 79, 89, 99, or even '09 anymore. Chevies don't get compared to Dodges and Fords anymore. They get compared to the best in the world. They might not be for everyone, but if you have a bogey in mind you want to hunt with a GM product, they've got the hardware for you.



Oh well. I suppose there's always bitching about the interior or something...

Being a snob and parroting on about how 'American cars just aren't as good as imports' is as current as skin tight jeans and stupid 'louvered' sunglasses...oh wait, just because it's old hat, doesn't mean the clueless won't act like it's brand new, cutting edge, and oh-so-hip. Such is how the Confederacy of Dunces operates.

You can stick to old attitudes, or get with the times, and evolve into something better than you thought you could be. The Chevy Camaro ZL1 has done just that.

The Shelby GT500 is stuck in the past. 


Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Project Buick Roadmaster, Part 7: Impala SS-ify Me!

Sorry for the wait. Not everyone has the option of being punctual whilst hot rodding the car they're sleeping in, and since the last post I've suffered the losses of my camera and laptop, and are only now finding a computer available to read my old memory card, etc. Thanks for waiting, all two of you.

There's a certain fear in hot rodding - the idea that you're going to buy Car X, mod it in various (and often expensive) ways, and for all of your effort, you're going to end up with what ends up being know as "Oh - THAT car."

Somehow, someone didn't see the local Cruise Night Crew guffawing at your 'Pintomino', no matter the rare 13" alloy wheels and other bits from the Mustang II bin. The car below? An examplar of taste compared to the 'Pinto-mino' my cousin ran around in while converting his 2.3l Mustang to the proper 5 liters. Missing? Oh, I don't know, the twin Cherry Bombs (complete with flappers) that were supposed to add a 'big rig' air to the little Pinto. No, it wasn't even a stick. I'll see if he'll send me some 'blackmail' photos later, but this isn't far away!


"Dude, it's all custom...it's gonna get me LAID, for SURE!!!"

Such was my personal nightmare; after being 're-dyed in the wool' as an Import Geek, I just wasn't capable of shutting the Bench Racer in my head up; "The chassis dates to 1958, it's not even a unibody, 4200lbs(!) of steel, no one but drag race guys seem to build them. You're going to end up with a medium fast in a straight line car with wheels that make it look like it should be faster that it is. Lame." Granted, I was more going for 'fastest RV I can afford to live out of', thus sheer capacity was more import than curb weight. But the nagging little small bore fanatic in me essentially voted for keeping it stock.

Yeah, right. Never seems to work out that way...

Basically, I'd been brow beaten to the effect that any car that didn't show 'Miata-ness' in it's stock configuration was simply beyond help, even though such luminous examples of import righteousness as the RX7, Supra, CRX and other Honda Si models, etc, rarely attain any kind of 'dominance' at the track unless modified in the first place. Don't bother sinking money into a pig, is the thought. And, of course, there's the "I got my info from [Blank] Performance Magazine" syndrome, where you'll rarely find worse information for the grassroots builder, even online. The schlubs online at least only have their own shortcomings to deal with - they're not actively trying to sell you automotive snake oil with inflated claims of power gains.

You know the one - "Yeah, this exhaust is worth 20hp on this car - granted, that was on a motor that had custom porting, custom ground cams, and oh yeah, it's turbocharged." Gains without said work? Take a guess, but I was warned by Mike Kojima himself online when I had my SE-R that the stock exhaust was fine up until ~180hp had been achieved - in other words, a more or less fully built NA motor or a Turbo version. Said 500 dollar cat back exhaust's actual worth to folks more interested in going fast than impressing 'net geeks they'll never meet? Almost nothing unless you've already exhausted pretty much every other modification.

So when I set out to modify the Roadie, I was skeptical. "Oh, this thing handles great now" never seemed to be backed up by skidpad tests and usually was uttered by a real Impala SS owner - in other words, guys with money to buy badges that match VIN numbers, not my game personally. Also, it tended to be uttered by folks more interested in quarter mile times than autocross dominance. "Handles great" to me sounded like it was coming from a guy who thought it was 'great' compared to the '65 Impala he used to have, or 'better than when I was driving to work on Big N Littles!'

However, I got my last big check in the mail, and the idea had been obsessing me to the point of idiocy anyway. I cashed the check, got online, and smashed headlong into a brick wall. Oops - no SS wheels for sale. Unlike last week, when I was checkless and three sets where going for ~350 bucks with tires.

To the forum! For some odd reason there was a set waaaaay out in Pomona that didn't show up in my search, but after posting a wanted ad over at http://www.impalassforum.com/, I ended up with a lead. I scored a good set of OE SS wheels, sans center caps, for 250.

Next I had to find tires, and turns out many forum members buy their 17" and up tires from as far away as Hawaii used a few exits down from where I stay. Atlantis Tire takes advantage of a local condition - that of having lots and lots of new BMWs and Porsches in the hands of owners that want to distinguish themselves from the 12 other BMW or Porsche owners currently bellied up to the bar at the Viper Room. Or wherever it is they hang out at. These are good sets of tires, inspected for flaws, for a decent price - 200 bucks for a set of Continental Conti-Sport CS2s in 245-45-17.

Around the corner to a local tire shop and I was in business! (For an extra 50 bucks.)





So, 500 bucks for a set of Impala SS wheels with Porsche tires. Not bad - all 'known quantities', no issues with fitment, bolt them on and go. I wasn't going to have such luck in the aftermarket. Besides which, though it's an 'obvious' mod, the ROH wheels that came stock on the SS are fairly iconic for a reason, are OE tough (nice when you're controlling two tons of steel driven by a lunatic), and are even easy to clean. They might not have the cache of other wheels, but think about it - transport yourself back to 93 and being, like a few folks, a little underwhelmed at the 'Shamu' styling of the Caprice. A little black paint, chopped police springs and these wheels later, you're standing in line, cash in hand.

Nice wheels.

My original plan was to get the rolling stock changed out for minimal cash. This involved selling the OE Buick wheels and tires for ~150 bucks, reducing my investment to 350 bucks. However, a forum member came out of the blue with an offer: "I've got a set of Hotchkis springs here with 8 miles on them. Wanna trade? Huh, huh?"

Let me look at the car with just the wheels on again...

Buick Roadmaster, now apparently with 4 wheel drive...


Dammit, man, you KNOW I wanna trade. Sigh...looks like I'm heading back to Peanut Butter Sandwich-ville faster than I thought...

A trip out to the desert to my secret underground garage facility and many knuck busting, ball joint splitting hours later...

Well, actually, two trips later. I spent the first trip out lowering just the front, which was less than ideal in a few ways - handling, one, and two, approaching driveways and dips, as the higher back end tipped the front even closer to the pavement.

After getting both ends on, we have this result...

Sweeeeeeeeet!!!



Not only is the stance pretty amazing, the handling is now up to par with my other modified vehicles of recent ownership. I'd regularly go after 35mph rated corners, and see how hard it was to double the posted limit. That was pretty hairy with the stock configuration as the 75 series sidewalls were just not cooperating. After the Hotchkis springs and SS wheels/Contisports went on, suddenly it just went through the corner. No drama, and we're talking a 4200lb car when it's got an empty trunk. I was running it with a quite full one. 

The results convinced me that with the SS wheels, good tires, and lowering springs (stock Impala SS items probably would be nearly as good with better ground clearance), the 'Grandpa' Buick is all of a sudden willing to play when the road gets twisty. I can now see why the SS's and other B bodies do so well in motor sports despite their gargantuan size. 

I think a mildly modded motor, SS wheels/tires, springs, shocks, and rear lower control arms are all this car really needs to get down. The potential was already evident even without 'appropriate' shocks (just used the stock items), not even an alignment. This is a good driver's car, and seeing SS's giving 'real' track hardware sweats at auto crosses doesn't seem weird to me at all anymore. 

Pimpest Ride on Skid Rose. Woo not included.


WARNING!!!!

Run these tires on a heavy car like this for a few months without taking care of the camber gain WILL result in having about an inch of steel belt looking at you from the inside edge of the tire. I pulled four different 1/4" shims out of the upper A arm mounts to put it 'eyeball' correct after seeing this, and it did mitigate the wear some, but still, message to the wise - if you LOWER a car, ALIGN it ASAP! Cheaper than a new (used) set of tires. 

****

I never got to finish this piece before my laptop crashed last year, so this isn't the promised wrap-up, just finishing what was to be the last installment on the car while I still owned it. 

Stay tuned for the wrap up and the story on the 240D buildup that came after - aka the 'Easiest Hot Rod In The World'. 

- CID



Small Engine, Big Efficiency? Why Bigger Can Be Better.

Small Engine, Big Efficiency? Why Bigger Can Be Better.

Or,

How to NOT waste your used car budget on something you'll hate.

As mentioned last post I've been crunching date looking to get the most out of my budget for my next car. While there are any number of tasty rides available for under 3k - I was looking about 6 months ago back when a lady was telling me she'd help me buy a 'cleaner' ride than my Benz Diesel, as she was apparently Compression Ignition Phobic - most of the truly cool ones are either too small (got a dog and crap, need space), too expensive to keep up, or too fuel thirsty. Some are all three.

Some, like the Family Truckster here, only come in
Metallic Pea.

BTW, real Craigslist find while on my search..


It started out years ago when I started looking for a 'fuel efficient midsize SUV'. I looked at various 4 cylinder models - Isuzu Troopers and the like - and came to a conclusion - mostly all a four offered at that level was less power than a six. While there were some fuel efficiency gains, we're still talking dismal mileage.

So how does one avoid having four cylinder passing power with eight cylinder mileage?



I've been using www.fueleconomy.gov extensively lately, and I can't recommend it enough for those of you buying a new or used car. Like a lot of people I hear 'four cylinder' and immediately think two things: 'low power' and '30mpg' or something along those lines. Sadly, though, there are a LOT of four cylinder cars and trucks out there that, depending on your driving style and whether you're mostly a city or highway driver, might not only be slower than your current ride, or the 'ride you want', but less efficient and economical as well. Not to mention, less capable...

For instance, last year I was getting a little bit of an 'enthusiast sales pitch' from a guy who likes the Toyota Previa minivans. They're pretty cool for what they are, bland styling for sure (I remember thinking of them as 'eggs on wheels' in junior high), but I was looking at something that would absolutely blend into modern traffic but be old enough to be cheap. Huge amount of room for music gear and/or living space. I saw a 2.2l Toyota four specified and thought it was a good match - it HAD to get better mileage than my 2 ton plus 5.7l V8 Buick, right?

Well, kinda. 

As you can see here, (http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=11063&id=11404&id=27947&id=11432) the Previa gets 17 city mpg, 21 highway,  for a combined 18 mpg. 

The Roadie got 15mpg city, 23 highway, and 18 combined.

So if you had a 50/50 mix of highway and city driving the result is a wash. Go with what moves you - for me, that was 5.7 liters of roaring tailpipe music in a car that literally got me mistaken for a pimp - by a real pimp. 

If you're mostly driving in town, the Previa has a 2mpg edge, and if you're driving mostly highway, the same 2mpg edge goes to the Buick.

If I could easily swallow the monetary difference, the Previa looks outmatched by quite a bit. Would keep me from going bonkers thinking about engine swaps, though, because the Previa is pretty much foolproof in that regard - the factory that built it decided it was just easier to supercharge the stock motor. Makes a shadetree guy like me think of greener pastures...

You'd think a 5.7l, 260+hp American OHV V8 and a 2.2l DOHC Japanese I-4 would get wildly different results in the mileage department. I think it's best expressed as 'Overall Efficiency - Work Demanded = Actual Efficiency'. If the four didn't have to work so hard to move those 3500lbs of van, it would get better mileage. The V8 can lope around at lower rpm and do the same work in a relaxed manner. I don't doubt the LT1 would probably match or better the stock 2.2l powerplant if a swap were possible - after all, while the aerodynamics might suffer a bit, the Previa is 700lbs lighter too.

Reminds me of the old C5 Z06 vs BMW M3 reviews. I recall that the NA I-6 of the BMW put out less torque at peak than the LS6 did - at idle. Remember, torque = work, and out of horsepower or torque, the latter is the only one directly measured, rather than extrapolated by a formula (torque x RPM/5252 = HP). The less you have available, the higher the motor has to spin, and the more fuel consumed. 

Pictured: Efficiency. No, seriously...stop laughing!


It's a path to fast, and a path to efficient, apparently. Comparing more apples to apples motors, in a way, I recently got into a bit of a spat on YouTube with a Lexus fan dissing GM cars. Looking up the LFA specs, I noted that not only does the 3300lb, 550hp V10 'supercar' barely beat the ZL1 Camaro around the Nordschlieffe by 3 seconds over 13 miles, the 6.2l, Supercharged, 638hp LS9 in the ZR1 get's better mileage than the 550hp 4.8l Lexus V10. Not by a few, either - a base 6.2l Vette will turn in city mpg similar to the LFA's hwy mpg. 

Overall, the 'huge' engines, 6.2l, 7.0l, and 6.2SC, all turned in better mileage by about 5mpg average. 

(Vette Lineup VS Lexus LFA MPGs here - http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=31326&id=31328&id=31327&id=31089. Left to Right - 'Base' Vette, Z06, ZR1, LFA)

Not bad considering the ZR1 is a third of the price of the 'base' LFA. Not a bad comparision, either, as both cars are obviously designed with high performance in mind and have similar curb weights. Drag coefficients are as follows: 'Base' Vette, 0.28, Z06 0.34, ZR1 0.36, and LFA 0.31. Even the 'porky' Camaro ZL1's average MPG is 16 - which is the LFA's highway rating. That's with a .35 cD and an extra 700 lbs or so to push around. (http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32161&id=31089)

Looks like a lot of engineering misapplied in a vain attempt to give a 'halo' effect to a bland product line. Or an example of how low end torque can be used for work, play, AND efficiency - but that's no news to diesel heads. 

Pictured: $375k worth of slower than a Vette and less
MPG than a Supercharged 6.2l Camaro.

Also pictured - why 'Hot Rod Black' should only applied to,
you know, hot rods.


But it also illustrates that, down here in the real world, not everything is cut and dried as it seems. 'Smaller motor = more efficiency' doesn't always compute. Not that one should just as blindly buy any old V8 engine and assume it'll be efficient for your particular use, either. 

So, for instance, if I were to truly put down roots here in Venice and want to stay, a Previa makes slightly better sense - who gets to cruise in overdrive in LA during anything but the wee morning hours? Almost entirely used in the city, over 10k miles, the Buick would consume 666 gallons (hee!) and the Previa only 588, a difference of 78 gallons and 351 dollars in a typical owner's year. That's about 30 bucks a month. Of course the same 2mpg difference in an all highway scenario would be the same, and for someone who could care less about the 30 bucks a month, well, I've got plenty of blog space devoted to the big B body. 

But, as I'm planning on going to New Orleans soon and have 2000 miles or so of highway driving, a Roadie would actually save me gas money, as well as being the cooler ride. When I lived in the Desert and you'd be in overdrive by the time you passed your neighbor's house, there would be no question - more power AND more MPG, please, all in a ride fit for a prince - or, at least, a pimp from Pomona...

Ok, so mine wasn't Magenta. Otherwise, I was a little embarrassed...

Oh, and I don't do decals, so NYAAH.

(From 'Bloom County' comic strip, published June 15th 1982)


Comparisons like this illustrate the finer details of choosing a ride, especially on a pretty limited budget. I, personally, wouldn't want to pay more or the same amount to get less of what I want out of my purchase. 

So at the time I also compared the Chevy Astro 2wd passenger van, a solid workhorse that's become practically legion as you literally see them all the time in LA. And I considered another Mercedes 300D Turbo in a pursuit of efficiency. Both were being weighed against the Previa and Roadmaster.

The Astro, despite a similar curb weight, almost identical transmission, and a 4.3l V6, gets worse mileage than the Buick. Without going into all the other reasons, this shit-canned the Astro pretty quickly in my eyes, though I'd consider one as a secondary vehicle. To be fair, the parts availability of the Astro is great (it's all S10/G Body parts and other standard GM RWD stuff), the Previa will never take to engine swaps, and Toyota's solution to having adequate power in a Previa, the S/C supercharged model, turns in similar MPG to an Astro. The Astro, however, would take to any number of engine swaps in search of more power or economy.

FWIW, the differences between the 4.3l V6 Astro, especially in MPFI trim (190hp, 260lb-ft), and the Previa LE S/C (160hp, 200lb-ft), considering the 1mpg difference city/hwy, are pretty much obvious. A low production high tech engine that was only made for one generation (plus the funky configuration, accessory drive, etc) vs. a 6 cylinder version of the venerated SBC in production for two decades -  are semi negligible - until one gets to the tow rating. The Astro? 5500lbs, same as the Roadie. The Previa? 3600lbs. If you want to tow, you know where to look. If goofy, one-time only arrangements and 'mid engine' minivans are your thing, well, best of luck with that. 

The Mercedes W123 body 300D was an interesting story as it's a 21mpg city, 23hwy, 22 combined car. So I'd gain quite a bit in town - more than most cars in the price segment that aren't 4 cylinder compacts with sub 2.0l engines - but no more highway mpg than my Buick. The city mpg was where I wasn't happy, and in that regard the 300D had better 'city manners', such as parking (GREAT turn radius/steering angle) and creamed the Big Bad Buford by 6mpg in the city. But... 

Then the gear head came into play.

"You know, the LT1 in the Buick's already been breathed on a bit, should be 285hp or more, probably stockish 330lb ft. The OM617a in the 300D has a mere 123hp and 170lb-ft, and while it can make more, it's a 2500 dollar Myna pump and a serious turbo upgrade away from any impressive numbers..."

Plus, yeah, I'm trading THIS for a Previa? Riiiight.....


That sealed it. I kept the Buick for another year after this initial run down. I still kind of regret selling it, to be honest - the car was a bonafide G-ride, and even a local character - an Inuit orphan who we all know as 'Pirate Darren' due to his ever-present leather Tri-Corner Hat, aka one of the least 'gangster' people I know - called my ride 'Gangster As Fuck'. Hard to show up a few days later in a car that looks like I knocked up a broad after hearing that a few dozen times...

So I kept the Buick for another year. I don't regret it, in a car guy way, in a 'practical guy' way I kinda do though. Really, the better option than both was the 300D and it's probably going to be my next ride, as these Benz built-to-a-standard-not-a-price-point tanks are still, in my opinion, the automotive deal of the century, and the 300D's average mpg is Accord/Altima like (http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=27947&id=11108&id=11827), but I don't have to drive a frumpy mid 90's midsize FWD sedan. Granted, they're faster, and rated at better mpgs highway. But the 300D also has been reported reliably to get upper 20s highway if you're not driving 80 the whole way, too. 

Something to be said about getting into a Benz for the same price as an Accord and getting similar affordability and efficiency. Not to mention, this:


Choose wisely.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Project: Buick Roadmaster, Part Six - Stage One, "All The Mods 50 Bucks Will Buy", Part II

While turning the previously sedate Roadmaster into a brooding muscle sedan was a matter of taste (some would rather have the quiet than the power or sound I was going for), the LT1's intake system as delivered on the B-Bodies are chock full of ways to unlock power without letting the neighbors in on the fun. Most of the built-in restrictions to the factor system were aimed at drive-by noise standards and a competitive luxury market where the LT1's bad boy intake growl was a detriment rather than an attribute. So diving into the intake system offers up many places to make improvements without breaking the bank.

Porting The Stock Air Filter Housing


Cost: Free


The ported air box after 6k miles of desert travel - the Spectre
filter keeps the intake air very clean. Other cheap filters of the
type, even K&Ns, tend to let fine particulates through. On the
bottom and far left you can see where I've opened it up.




The stock air filter housing offers up opportunities to up flow rates without spending a lot of cash nor even any obvious visual cues. The front and driver's side walls of the lower portion of the box can be opened up for more flow, but avoid 'swiss cheesing' the box as you don't want to pull air directly off of the top of the PCU's heat sink, which, as you might have guessed, is there to slough off heat.

Also something to look at while the Dremel is out is porting the frame of the driver's side headlight. Anything to ensure air can move unimpeded to the factory airbox location.


Obviously, you don't want to compromise the integrity of the mount itself, but there was room for improvement here. Honestly, I'm sure most folks will skip this step; I don't for sure know if any actual effect is being produced here, but again, while the Dremel was out...though, take a look at the photo below and you can see the path to the stock airbox location behind the headlight.


The following 'porting' (whatever you might want to call it) might fall in the same category, might not. I cut two vents into the factory aero work under the driver's headlight, behind the lower part of the bumper cover. The idea is to 'scoop' air at speed and direct it to the same cavity that the above 'ports' feed.

Looking down from behind the DS headlight.
Of the two, I think this one is likely to be more effective. The good thing is that these, and the cold air source in the fender left by the factory, offer many paths for cold air to reach the the factory airbox location and thus make it less necessary for it to suck in hot engine compartment air.

The factory skirt and airflow at speed should direct more cool air
to the cavity that the factory airbox feeds from. 


"Home Plate" and "First Base" Removal


Cost: 10 bucks, if you haven't got a hockey puck lying around. 


This is a REAL redneck's car - who else but white people
would have a hockey puck just hanging around? ;-)
'Home Plate' and 'First Base' are the forum names for the factory intake silencers, the former being the big piece of plastic cockblocking your eye from all of that 'Vette Engine' visual goodness, the second the square-ish piece that goes from the MAF to the above pictured elbow in the factory setup.


Home plate is easy. I've used two items in the past - a peanut butter jar lid (glass jar, metal lid) and the classic hockey puck. I happened to have a hockey puck laying around when I got the car so that's what I went with. Ideally you'll position it inside the opening in the elbow with it off of the car, and try to make it as flush inside as possible (reducing interior turbulence/resistance) and then clamp it in place with the factory clamp.

First base, counterintuitively enough, is harder to fix. I went to Home Despot, bought two 3" 45˚ bends like the forum said, and it came to 8 bucks and tax. Just for the two bends, not the cement or the straight pipe needed to connect them, and there were no scrap pieces around at the time. If I'd have bought these, the "8 dollar intake" would have been closer to 20. I figured that the better investment of the two might be to just drop the Spectre in and call it a day, after all those panels are usually good for 5hp or so and it was only 20 bucks from Amazon.

Initially I taped the two bends together as seen in the first photo, left the MAF in the stock location, and drove it like that to New Orleans and back. It wasn't bad but it was a little shorter than ideal, I got it to fit by not fixing the air box to the stock mounts and just left it loose. It worked and since it was covered at the time by a sealed 'box' of windshield blocker (foil covered heat insulator) no one was the wiser.

Then I realized I could use the factory grommets and clamps to clamp the 'big' ends of the 45˚ bends to the MAF in the middle, which the factory wiring accommodates. The big ends will squeeze into the grommets, you put them over the MAF flange and clamp it all down. The bitch is that there's no flex in the ABS elbows so there's no clamping force on these. A good stomp of the gas and the engine rolls over, pulling them off. Not good.

So I have it covered up in this:

Duct Tape Of The GODS.
Gaff Tape's adhesive is very versatile, strong, yet doesn't leave the same residue duct tape does and is much, much stronger. It's used for, um, Gaffing - i.e. the hanging of lighting and/or sound rigs for live performances and filming. This tape suspends lighting assemblies weighing hundreds of pounds over the heads of paying customers and valuable talent the world over. To say it's 'trusted' is an understatement.

The adhesive is heat/friction activated, so when the engine compartment gets hot, the tape's adhesive wants to work stronger. Because we're dealing with a naturally aspirated engine, small leaks are pulled shut by the intake vacuum. If put together right, it's just as safe as clamps and hoses. Keep a roll in the trunk in case you get an SES light and have to repair on the roadside, but I haven't had this happen to me even though I've reconfigured the intake a few times and thus increased my chances of screwing something up.

In order to make this work, I also had to tape small end of the intake side elbow into the airbox. It'll squeeze into the factory hole with a little filing on the outside and a half round file can open up the ID of the air box a little. From the inside it'd look like this:


As you can see, while it's going to provide a sturdy connection to the air box, it could flow a bit better. This is one of the reasons I went to the "MAF in the Middle" configuration, as these sudden step downs in ID cause turbulence in the intake path. With the 'big ends' of the elbows in the grommets around the MAF flanges, those are more or less taken care of. The exit step opens out into a larger pipe, so no flow loss there really. I had the half round file out, so I took a few minutes and ended up with an intake pipe that a smooth transition:


While the ABS elbows aren't exactly 'car show' material there are advantages to it's use - workability of the material being one. Most forum members claim this mod is good for 5 hp, and while it might not prove to produce more power, I believe I have improved the standard design slightly here.

After getting everything just right, I sealed it all up with Gaff Tape and made sure there was enough tension created to keep the elbows on the MAF sensor. The SES light will come on if the seal between the MAF and Throttle Body is compromised, and if it's compromised downstream you'll have dirty air - but both connections are easy to seal up.

Spectre Drop In Panel Filter


Cost: 20 bucks

I topped off all of this with a Spectre drop in panel filter. These are usually regarded as 'cheap K&N knock offs', but K&N's specs haven't changed much since the 80s when they debuted. Spectre's filter has so far outperformed both the 'other cheap brands' and K&N in one regard; zero fine particulate in the intake so far. I used a new K&N cone filter on my SE-R's SR20DE and later found fine particulate in it, and that was on the comparatively less dusty east coast. So far, so good, and if nothing else, the Spectre and K&N are at least equivalent - which means I saved about 50% even if the Spectre is 'only as good' as the K&N setup.

The results are thus:


Adding It Up: The Sum Of It's Parts

So let's go down the list; throttle body bypass; home plate delete; first base delete; ported airbox and surrounds; better flowing air filter than stock. Let's just say, that when combined with each other, each is good for 5hp. I'd say my exhaust is good for better than that, but just for the sake of speculation:

   Stock engine:              260hp
+ TB bypass                    
+ Muff Delete                  
+ HP Delete
+ FB Delete
+ Air Filter                      25hp
------------------------------------------
=                                   285hp

That's the factory rating for the F Body LT1s. While many try to swap in a Camaro cam or this or that - much more work and expense even using used parts - in the pursuit of 'higher spec' horsepower could work, the F Body cam was designed to work with the F Body and Vette. The B-Body's cam was designed to work well with the extra half ton of weight that a Roadmaster Estate would be saddled with vs. the lighter sports cars. Even if the cam magically gave you the 25hp without changing anything else, you might not actually make the car 25hp faster. The torque curve is very important in any vehicle, but the more that vehicle needs that torque - i.e., the heavier it is or the more the application requires - the more important it becomes. Trading the luxury car type torque delivery for high end pull and power is a good idea in a 3500lb Vette or Camaro; in a 4200lb Roadmaster it's not a good idea.

For instance...

My former boss, Carl, had worked on a Hummer for Arnold Schwarzenegger at one point. He'd been driving a client's Lamborghini LM002 and happened to see Arnie's then über-rare Hummer in the parking lot and parked next to him. Arnie came out, he and Carl got to talking and then his experience at Callaway Turbo came up. Having wrenched on the famed Sledgehammer, Arnie thought he'd be ideal for modifying a Hummer for 400hp. Arnie loved the 6.2l (6.5l?) Detroit Diesel's off road performance, but on the highway the Hummer was a slug.

Carl built up the then-new LT1, 'the Vette motor' at the time, and over 50 grand later (keep in mind, the LT4 hadn't bowed yet and when you're pioneering mods on the 'new Vette motor', you pay out the nose for the privilege), he had the envy of the Hummer meet...up until he actually got out of the parking lot and went to the first part of the trail you had to crawl up.

Because getting an extra 100hp out of the LT1 caused the torque peak to move up, and even stock doubtless it was fairly stratospheric compared to the NA diesel V8, the Hummer was stuck on the first rock of the trail, and one hopes Arnie passed enough people on the way home to feel better about the experience.

The above mods should be good for the F-Body LT1's 285hp without changing the cam characteristics. Thus, not only is it the 'poor man's solution', it's also the smart man's. 50 bucks and a lazy weekend later the Roadmaster is something of a genuine, if mild, hot rod.

Chassis Horsepower! FREE!


Sure, straight line power is fine and all, but much like when I trained to fight, when you're already powerful, adding more power without some agility to be able to put it to good use is futile. The Roadmaster already has great acceleration from the factory for what it is, but the handling isn't quite as laudable.

Part of the reason for this is the tires; there's little to be done with those big balonies. However, fixing that's going to take some cash, and this is Cheapville we're living in for the time being.

The 9C1 Caprices have long been rumored to have a 'special frame' compared to the rest of the B-Body line; even the Impala SS didn't feel as buttoned down as the 9C1s did according to many owners of both models.

Googling around, I found out that that's because the factory, in their infinite wisdom - er, cheapness - decided that no B-Body cars besides the 9C1 would be delivered with all 14 body to frame mounts installed. The first 3 mounts on each side - from the radiator support to under the A pillar - are simply bolts that don't allow the flex to exceed 1". Jack the car up at the wrong spot and you can see the gap form between the frame and body.

So, you go and buy mounts and install them, right? Well, the pioneer of this mod/observation recommends replacing all of the mounts with better spec ones, driving the cost to about 75 bucks to do the whole car.

Mostly I'm concerned with the first mounts, which connect the frame to the radiator support and thus the rest of the front of the car. These are the front corners of the box; if they're not connected, the whole front is going to be sloppy. However, when I was getting a wild hair (hare? Neither one sounds pleasant) up my ass to do something about this, I was rather, um, broke. Seriously, unless I was going to be able to buy new mounts with food stamps, this just wasn't happening. Then something dawned upon me.

What's better than nothing to provide a mount to the body?

Anything. Anything at all.

So I remembered that friend had been using a hole saw on his drill to attempt to lighten a board my street performer friend uses for his show. I remembered the cast off 'discs' created by that. Hmm...

2" around, 3/4" thick. How thick were those recommended mounts again? 7/8"? Close enough. Given that the wood won't give as much as even hard durometer rubber, the 1/8" margin for error seems fine by me. I installed the pucks (after enlarging the center hole to fit over the bolts) and viola - instantly noticeable improvement in the front end's feel.

Yeah, yeah, Captain Hack, but how long is this shade-tree mod going to last in the real world?

The photo below was taken today, and those pucks have been down there for going on six months, and I've had some spirited runs on my chosen driving roads to put them to the test. A) They work, and B), they haven't failed yet. The real beauty of it? Even if they did, the car's configuring defaults to 'stock' by definition. Even a broken mount is probably better than air.

So there you go - new gauze air filter, low restriction intake system, hot rod exhaust, even a legit chassis mod - all for under 50 bucks. Car Craft, Grassroots Motorsport, and 24 Hours of Lemons, take note.

Total Cost Involved

Speaking of Car Craft, I like something they do - they pride themselves on actually publishing the cost of the mods they do. It keeps you objective, especially if you have other things going on in your life than impressing other insecure car guys with your ride's awesomeness. Besides, it's the name of the game here. So in that spirit...

Used LT1 Roadmaster                     $1000
2 Mobil One oil changes                        70
Spectre Air Filter                                    20
Rear diff fluid, gasket, LSD additive      25
2 3" ABS elbows, 45˚                             8
Exhaust clamps and adapters                 10
2 window rollers from HELP                14
__________________________________
Total                                                 $1147
Minus 1450 paid for accident            -1450
Total invested:                                   -$303

That, my friend, is modern hot rodding done right. While we can't all have a nearly 1500 dollar windfall land in our lap, it's a good reason to buy a car that's actually worth something, if only on the books. I am seriously curious as to how the $2012 Challenge rules would view this list. Even at 1147 bucks, I'd have over 800 dollars worth of mods to be done. I'd have to spend $303 to break even on the car at this point...how am I going to do that? Come back for Part 7, Where do we go from here? Or, Impala SS-ify Me!