69' BOSS 302 VS Camaro Z28

[Murray B.]

Yep, they made some pretty silly cars back then and these are two of silliest. As I recall the Z28 did not get "on the cam" until 4 grand with shifts at over 7000 for maximum performance. Not really the best sort of thing to take to the grocery store. It is little surprise that they sold only a few thousand copies of either one.

For everyday use the milder small blocks were just better. Some made 300 H.P. but had hydraulic lifters that did not need constant adjustment. They also ran smoother and started easier.

Oh yes, the racing versions of both of them were just about exactly equal in performance since both were winning races on a regular basis. The biggest difference is in the perception of the viewers. Ford men love the Ford and Chevy men love the Chev. In my case I would love to have either one of them just to drive on Sundays.

[wedgemotor]

You never stated drag race or road race. I am assuming you are stating drag race. First off these cars were not designed with drag racing in mind, (although a few have been campaigned successfully.) I think that in terms of sheer street drag racing I would have to give the nod to the z28. Keep in mind though that the Boss motor can and will make more horsepower, but the little 302 chevy z28, just was more successful as a drag racing package. Both cars pull extremely well, and contrary to what others have posted, can run on the street. It is just a matter of gear ratios. Don't believe what others have said. Common knowledge would tell you that a 4.56 gear is not livable on the street. But they are thinking about the average 350, 351. These motors will run all day at high rpms. My 340 has a 3.91 chuck and I drive it on the freeway all of the time. I wish it had a 4.56. I could imagine that the boss 302 or dz motor would appreciate this higher gear ratio. Both cars need to get the RPM's to get into the horsepower band, but that is what makes it so FUN!

[black84z28]

according to a book called camaro exposed talking about the 67-69 developement...the z beat the boss 302 by 2 tenths and almost 3mph :l

[jonnyboy9012]

WOW, you guys realize that you have just revived a 7 month old post.

[wedgemotor]

Old 302 Chevy, that doesn't go away!

[PWMAN]

Originally Posted by black84z28

according to a book called camaro exposed talking about the 67-69 developement...the z beat the boss 302 by 2 tenths and almost 3mph :l

I could probably find some Ford book thats says the exact opposite.

[wedgemotor]

Hey P W Man, My very first car was an 87 Shelby Charger. I now know that Dodge only made 1000 of them, I had some good times in that car. Especially taking the 5.0's off the line up to about 50!

[MrPbody]

Okay, Dodge and Rambler guys, why haven't you jumped in here? What about the 305 T/A Challengers and AAR Cudas? The 304 AMCs? Oh, and the 303 Pontiac?
I was so relieved to see SOMEONE jump in and try to explain the rationale behind these two cars (Z and Boss). Neither was ever intended as a daily driver, nor a drag racer. They were road racing cars, built in sufficient quantity for SCCA to "approve" them for the class. And the engine size? That was a RULE. They had a 5.0 litre limit for Trans Am class. I believe they still use that today.
Went to the Mustang 40th birthday party at Nashville last Spring. Saw some cool cars! There were three there, with factory documentation, as original 427 SOHC cars. They claimed there were about 25 left, but were built as a "Hemi fighter", against the Dart and 'cude Hemi cars for NHRA.
There were scores of Boss 302s, mostly '69s, but several '70s, as well. More than I'd ever seen in one place before... Most of these were claimed to be "documented" (I think they throw that word around too much). You see so many more '69 Z/28s because of all the cloning going on. The majority are not "real" Zs. TRIVIA QUESTION: Where did Z/28 get its name?
In truth, neither car was that quick in stock form, as other "old guys" have already stated. With slicks and gears, Z28 would hose down Boss 302 at will. A Boss 429 car with slicks and gears, will easily run 12s. I've seen a couple in the 11s, with only headers and tires. Apples-to-oranges...
The arguement about the Cleveland heads is also an interesting one. Mercracer obviously has a clue. Regardless of design "features", the small block Chevy head design will EAT UP the Ford, under nearly all race conditions. This isn't my opinion, but a known fact among virtually all professional race engine builders. One only has to look at the Cup cars to understand this. It has taken Yates Racing many years to develope a "Cleveland" (loosley based on the factory head) that can outperform the old style SBC heads. SB2 heads are even better yet.
I find it interesting, though, the most powerful N/A small block Chevys have been in the old Pro Stock Truck class, using the "splayed valve" head. This is a knock-off of the Cleveland on the intake side (though, they reduced the port cross section to a reasonable point) and the exhaust ports look suspiciously like BBC. This is NOT the same as the SB2 head.
I must disagree with the comment about FE versus Lima, though. FE, while a tough and good performing design, lacks the port efficiency and manifolding to come close in relatively stock form. While Lima is slightly heavier (not as much as you might think, as FEs are pretty stout), it has a MUCH better valve train design (that "canted valve" thing again...). Pretty hard to argue with a mildly pumped 468...(Ford, that is)
And on the FE/FT debate, according to Federal Mogul Bearing Catelog (a machine shop's "bible" for specs), there are 3 different "330"s (one FE, one FT, and one "Triton"), and a 332 (FE), but ZERO 331s in any Ford application. In the vernacular, a 331 is a .030" overbored 327 Chevy. There are also zero FE 361s. Only FT. Don't forget the 383, which was the engine found in most of the FE Edsels.
I always liked the '67-'68 and '71-'73 Mustangs the best. The flat backs are NASTY looking, when setup right. And I've read n some of the test mags, the flat back is the most aero of the earlier Mustangs.
That brings me to my last point. Magazine tests. BS. ALL of them. If you want to know how fast a given car is, or how much power a specific engine makes, you MUST do the legwork. That is, drive it, or dyno it. But don't point to 35 year old slanted tests to make a point.
BTW, Trans AM was the BEST TransAm racer... (argh! argh! humor..) Just kidding, but I had to plug the Poncho. Trans Am DID win a TransAm championship in '75, with the BF Goodrich Radial T/A "Tirebird", Jerry Titus driving. That was after Captain Nice died and all the factories pulled out the money. Early on, the Bud Moore Mustangs and Sonoco Camaros (Penske) dominated, but the AMC Javelins (Penske) were tough later on. More TRIVIA: How much money did Pontiac pay SCCA for the right to name their car "Trans Am"? Unfortunately, Dodge nor Pontiac really made a serious factory effort to succeed in TransAm. Does anyone know, did Dodge (or Plymouth, all the same) ever win a title through the '70s?

Jim

[PWMAN]

Originally Posted by wedgemotor

Hey P W Man, My very first car was an 87 Shelby Charger. I now know that Dodge only made 1000 of them, I had some good times in that car. Especially taking the 5.0's off the line up to about 50!

Yup, SC's are very fast from a factory because they were so light, on the average 2400 pounds.
Was yours a factory intercooled car or a T1 car?

[wedgemotor]

T1, only the GLHS was intercooled. I wish I had one of those!

[PWMAN]

Yeah I know, I was just checking if yours was a GLHS. Even the T1 cars are pretty quick.

[soxs]

There were no such thing as 305 T/As or AARs.................They were a Pete Hutchinson-Keith Black 340 that was destroked to 303 ci. They were strong enough for TA racing but did not have the devlopment time to work out the bugs.

[soxs]

As far as your zapper ramblings...the 67 302 RPO Z-28...regular production option. It got its name from the the actual option #.
It seems from your long winded posts and attempts to school everyone that you aleinate yourself. You know your stuff obviously but that is your field, the way you make a living. Thats cool but it gets a little old. Maybe i'm overreacting as i am not a mechanic but wish i knew more. Either either we are both old farts and i think a table full of beer between us and a discussion of chiefs and mopars would be fun. Happy New Years

[wedgemotor]

Originally Posted by Murray B.

Yep, they made some pretty silly cars back then and these are two of silliest. As I recall the Z28 did not get "on the cam" until 4 grand with shifts at over 7000 for maximum performance. Not really the best sort of thing to take to the grocery store. It is little surprise that they sold only a few thousand copies of either one.

For everyday use the milder small blocks were just better. Some made 300 H.P. but had hydraulic lifters that did not need constant adjustment. They also ran smoother and started easier.

Oh yes, the racing versions of both of them were just about exactly equal in performance since both were winning races on a regular basis. The biggest difference is in the perception of the viewers. Ford men love the Ford and Chevy men love the Chev. In my case I would love to have either one of them just to drive on Sundays.

What you call silly I call fun to drive, and it doesn't matter that new cars can outperform these cars. What matters is what puts a smile on your face.

[soxs]

As far as murry bs statement of being silly I agree with wedgee....not so...not even close. If he calls the Zapper and Boss 302 silly than he must mean all muscle cars back then were silly. There were a lot muscle back then that either of these cars would take out in the 1/4. Also these cars would accel on a road course.