Re: 67z vs 93z
 

what kind of rear is in the LT1?

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

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

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

I love looking at the old stuff, but modern horsepower is so significantly better than stock vintage horsepower that it should not even be compared. The only thing that probably actually does compare between the two is curb weight. The '67 is no lightweight, and I'd be willing to guess that they are within 100 lbs. of each other.

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

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

JB

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

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

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

But of course your elevation and weather will have a large impact on the ET.

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

My friend ran his 93 Z with 140,000 miles, 2.73 geared 6 speed with headers, no cats and an SLP TOTL (two on the left) Exhaust that went 13.0 on street tires. Keep in mind this was cool spring air at Gateway International.

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

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

[/ QUOTE ]

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

http://67z28.net/gallery/albums/67%2...Untitled-1.jpghttp://67z28.net/gallery/albums/67%2...Untitled-2.jpghttp://67z28.net/gallery/albums/67%2...Untitled-3.jpghttp://67z28.net/gallery/albums/67%2...Untitled-4.jpghttp://67z28.net/gallery/albums/67%2...Untitled-5.jpg

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

No offense, but if the LT1 car is a 6 speed, and has a good driver it will walk your 67 Z. My uncle has an almost stock 94 Z28, and it will eat my 67 alive. A friend of mine has the bolt-on LT1 record, an 11.70 @ 114. Granted, the car has been lightened up, it has a 12 bolt with 4.33 gears, roller rockers, cold air intake, and headers, but no other modifications have been made. A good driver in a bone stock LT1 should be able to run a 13.4-13.6 with good track conditions. My friends car making a pass. http://lsx.streetfire.net/video/cfa3...6101222244.htm

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

OK OK you guys win https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...s/rolleyes.gif https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

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

[/ QUOTE ]I'd have to see that to believe it, Andy...that's a decent number for the LS1 cars. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ins/tongue.gif

The '67 Zs are the lightest of the bunch, and are gonna have the best shot at knocking off it's newer cousin...for reference, I *believe* Hot Rod did a test back in the day of a '68 Z...they wanted to see how quick they could get the car in stock condition, just by tuning it and playing with the car, on street tires...I've posted it before here, but I believe it was mid-13s @ around 106 or so...

Re: 67z vs 93z
 

If I remember correctly, (in the early 70s) AHRA had the 67 and 68 Z-28s in different (Stock) classes ............... due to weight.