The top Corvette should not be SS. It doesn't matter that there was a Sebring racecar built in the 50's that used the name, there was never a production Corvette that had SS badges.

It also does not make sense to say that SS was the be all and end all of performance. It never was that. Sometimes the top of the line cars happened to be SS's, but there also many cars that wore the SS badge that had base or midlevel motors.

 

Says you.


Scared? I would be if I were you...

In production cars it most assuredly was.

And a whole bunch of turds had "Z" and two numbers, or did you forget those?

In case you did:









Ya know, that last picture is ALMOST unfair...

ALMOST.

Somebody give old "Team Chaos" there a sammich and a new shirt... PLEASE.


OHMYGOD, THE CAR'S INTERIOR MATCHES HIS SHIRT!





****

 

Hey, I don't see any Z/28's there.

BTW, I think I've said this before...I thought the original Z24 was very cool. The modern equivalent would have been a Cobalt SS, stuffed with the G6 GTP's 3.9/M6. Who wouldn't like that?

 

I almost bought a '93 Cavalier Z24 5-speed a few years ago when I was in college. As far as Cavaliers go, it was quite a performer.

3.1 V6 on a ~3000-lb compact coupe. Good for 130+ mph.

 

Your wish is my command:






Better?





Note... Looks like a regular old transcamaro from the back... until you look closely and note the holes where the spoiler used to attach.

Here's another one:



Not one, BUT TWO spoilers for TWICE the downforce.



***

 

Dude, when are you going to use that smiley I sent you?

 

Soon, I have to fork some cash over to Obersturmfueher Debler first. I think supporting this site in particular is important.

Thanks, BTW!

 

Where did you come from Dan?




Now be honest….that’s you standing in font of the Z26 with the flame shirt? I mean you did tell us how much you like flame throwers

 

Actually they did count the SS-350s to meet the minimum production requirements. After the 1969 Trans Am season, the rules were changed so the production engines could be destroked to 5.0L. That's why begining in 1970 the Z/28 got the LT-1 350. If that rule existed in 1967, RPO-Z28 would never been neccessary and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

One important fact often missed, several Trans Am Camaros were actually SS-350s or L30/M20s with the motors swapped out. In fact, Z/28 #1 which was raced by Johnny Moore, had its drivetrain swapped out in 1968 and placed in a brand new '68 L30/M20 coupe for the 1968 Trans Am season. The drivetrain from the '68 was placed in Z/28 #1 and it was returned to street duty.

 

I would first like to comment that I couldn't care less which model designation is put on the top Camaro, although I have posted several times in the past that it would make sense due to recent history to have the SS as top Camaro. Now that disclaimer is out of the way...
Says Corvette history. There has never been a production Corvette called SS, so historically it makes no sense to call the new uber-vette SS. And historically the SS racecar may have been "faster" than the competition when it was running, but it did in fact break down and get a nice DNF. Let's name the uber-vette after a racing failure. If you look at the current lineup of appearance packages and attainable performance that the SS line brings, it makes even less sense to call the top Corvette SS.

And this would be included in the 50% of completely useless and retarded responses that you post in this section. Not scared, just well informed regarding the history of the Corvette. Unlike certain Camaro SS drivers that think a Corvette SS would somehow elevate their Camaro.

Except for all of the Corvettes, and every model from mid seventies to mid 90's that did not have the SS designation.

I didn't realize I talked about Z cars in my post. Why don't you find the part where I mention Z cars and quote it for me? I must have forgotten already.

I forgot nothing. In your rush to bash a "Z28 extremist" (who in fact has never owned nor plans to own a Z28) you forgot:
- Just because the Camaro SS in 396 form may have been quick in the 1960s, the Impala SSs with straight sixes were not
- The fact that someone claims SS was not the be all and end all of performance at Chevrolet does not mean that he believes the Z34 was the fastest car ever
- Logic

 

So? Does it need to make sense historically?

In 1963, did it matter that no Corvette had ever been called Stingray? (I think '63 was the first year for the Stingray; please correct me if I'm wrong, but the point stands nonetheless).

 

Which brings this conversation to my long held opinion that "Stingray" is a far better name for a "super" 'vette than SS.

It's possibly even better than ZO6.

 

But at least Stingray came from the concept car of the same name for which the C2 was derived.

 

I say keep it stealthy. I'd like to be able to get the honking V8 and racy suspension WITHOUT a bunch of steenking badges, body cladding, spoilers, etc.

FWIW, in 1963 it was "Sting Ray", not "Stingray" (that was on the '69-'77?). Cool name, but I don't see any need to name a car twice. 'specially "Mustang Cobra", that makes no sense! I mean, is it a horsey or a snakey?

 

Nope, but that is why I don't think it should be called SS; not that I couldn't see GM potentially using SS on Corvette.

It was Sting Ray in 1963, and it had not been used before. But then again Sting Ray wasn't really a trim level, and there weren't any other Chevy's with that name.