Took on a Camaro

[Marc]

I was driving south on I-79 hedaing towards the I-279 exit heading towards Pittsburgh. The weather was absolutely gorgeous, the traffic was ridiculous. A line of us were in the left lane just bogged down to the point that a mini van passed us on the right. When we connected on to I-279, the idiot up ahead finally moved over and people started to pass him.

The last car in front of me moved out of my way, and it was then that I noticed that the Camaro out front. I kicked it up to 75 and started gaining on him. It was just he and I and open road ahead of us. He kept speeding up, not wanting to move over into the right lane. At 85, I heard his engine rev and try to pull away. I just pressed the gas a little harder and he still didn't pull away. He finally moved over, and because I felt that I made my point, I didn't pass him. I moved in behind him, and when we caught some more traffic, we slowed it down. We topped out at around 98, and I could swear I heard my Maruader call me a name. It had a ton left in it and was begging to be let loose. Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor.

I suppose it doesn't count as a "kill," but it was my choice to let him go. The look on his backwards baseball cap wearing face after he wasn't able to pull away was satisfaction enough.

[gpfarrell]

Camaro... are those the cars with the Pizza Delivery signs on them?

I'll bet the real reason you let the Camaro stay out front has something to do with all the Crown Victoria that lurk along that stretch of 279... be careful out there, 98 in a 55 will get you a court appearance!

Greg

[Marc]

I'll bet the real reason you let the Camaro stay out front has something to do with all the Crown Victoria that lurk along that stretch of 279... be careful out there, 98 in a 55 will get you a court appearance!

Greg

The thought crossed my mind before I saw the backwards baseball cap that maybe the Camaro was a state trooper.

[BillyGman]

Hey, I luv Marauders, and I don't mean to burst your bubble, but if it had been a 99 or newer SS or Z28 Camaro, then you would've never kept up w/him let alone beat him unless your Marauder was S/Ced. And that's because the latest Camaros had the LS-1 engine. Very fast, and capable of a 13.2 ET in the bone stock configuration.

[Bradley G]

Fast, but no where as cool!:banana:. Of course if you like comfort & handleing that counts the camaro out! :rock:

[BillyGman]

Forget about comfort, the Marauder looks a lot better because of it's styling than the Camaro does IMO. I don't like any Camaro since the 1968 styling, but that LS-1 engine is a real performer. More displacement than the MM motor, and it has cylinder heads that are very free flowing.

So you're not going to beat a Camaro if it's equipped w/an LS-1 engine, unless your Marauder has nothing less than a power adder(NO2, or S/Cer).

[Bradley G]

Luv the styling of most all hot rods from the late 60's TOO!! I was captivated the first time I feasted my eyes on the marauder:coolman: At 6'7 and having cronic lower back pain(probably a result of basketball)Comfort is large on my list;) , I heard Mustang out sold Camaro Fbird,&T-AM 3 to 1 historicaly

[gpfarrell]

Hey, I luv Marauders, and I don't mean to burst your bubble, but if it had been a 99 or newer SS or Z28 Camaro, then you would've never kept up w/him let alone beat him unless your Marauder was S/Ced. And that's because the latest Camaros had the LS-1 engine. Very fast, and capable of a 13.2 ET in the bone stock configuration.

Yeah, those are silly fast... but 99% of the Camaros on the road don't have those horses under the hood. The original thread never mentioned that this was the latest/greatest SS... but apparently the Camaro driver used to think it was something special.

[TripleTransAm]

I HATE left-lane hogs.

I've never been a big Camaro fan (except for a few years that I found them aesthetically pleasing, from the exterior point of view). I always preferred the Firebird, specifically the Trans Am because of its more luxurious interior. Kind of makes sense I'd be attracted to the Marauder eventually, no? Doesn't matter that most Trans Ams were slower than equivalent Camaros, due to all the extra luxury weight... I still preferred them.

One of the reasons I fell for the LS1-version of the F-body was that for once, it seemed the extra weight didn't seem to hobble the Firebird version. For the longest time after 1998, it looked like the Trans Am was the consistent winner on the 1/4 mile in direct comparisons. Since 1993, there were no longer any reasons for the engine to be restricted in any way when installed in a Firebird versus a Camaro... prior to 1993, the Firebird's lower hoodline always meant a more restrictive intake path. But the LS1 in 1998 really seemed to bring equality between the two.

While the LT1 F-cars were no slouches (anywhere from mid 14s to high high high 13s, depending on year and equipment), the LS1 is truly a gem. This thing just breathes forever... BillyGman is right about the heads, they have bloody HUGE ports! And they were all underrated, my stock LS1 pulling 310 rwhp while still lacking the longish break-in that it seems to prefer (as does the Marauder). And this is from the slowest of the LS1s, they got much stronger over the years until 2002.

And fuel efficiency to boot (33mpg consistently on my trip to Chattanooga and back with a full trunk and rear seat area).

They were good cars and had the potential to become great cars, as did the Marauder. Frustrating to see so many classic performance packages disappearing in favor of the small multi-cammer 4s and 6s.

[MAD-3R]

with a full trunk and rear seat area.

That would be the overnight bag and a toothbrush?

[pharmpod]

I have one of each. :bounce:

2002 Camaro SS Convertible :rock:

2004 Marauder :banana2:

Oh yeah, I also have something else - 2 loans to pay off :down:

Benny

[BillyGman]

I have one of each. :bounce:

2002 Camaro SS Convertible :rock:

2004 Marauder :banana2:

Oh yeah, I also have something else - 2 loans to pay off :down:

Benny

well then if you have both a LS-1 Camaro as well as a Marauder, then you can surely confirm what me and TTA have been claiming all along in this thread......that the LS-1 Camaro will breeze right by our Marauders unless we Supercharge our MM's.

[RCSignals]

Frustrating to see so many classic performance packages disappearing in favor of the small multi-cammer 4s and 6s.
and not to mention FWD

[BillyGman]

BTW, all Z28 and SS Camaros for the last four production years DID have the LS-1 engine in them (from 1999 to 2002). So it isn't true that "99% of them on the road don't have that engine in them" as gpfarrell had stated. Also, the LS-1 engine is more powerful than the old LT-1 engines were. And like TTA had also stated, even the LT-1 engines were "no slouch" either. Furthermore, the 8 cylinder Camaro not only has more HP than the Marauder does, but it's close to 1,000 LBS lighter than the Marauder is.

So my point was, and is, that the Camaro that marc went up against was NOT any 8 cylinder model produced between 99 and 02, and was probably a 6 cylinder model at that. This statement isn't meant to discredit marc, nor meant to knock the Marauder. It's just an attempt on my part to prevent any of our fellow board members here from believing that their MM's will dust any Camaros other than then 6 cylinder ones.

Sure, the Marauder is a nice car, and it moves pretty good, but don't think that your gonna embarrass any SS or Z28 Camaro owners w/a 4200 LB car like the Marauder, which only has a 281 cubic inch engine under the hood UNLESS that engine is S/Ced. If you try that w/a N/A marauder, it's YOU who will end up being embarrassed. And like I've previously stated, I don't even like Camaros because of their body styling. But facts are facts ;)

[TripleTransAm]

F-body:
LT1: 1993-1997
LT4: short run of 1997 SS Camaros (maybe some Firehawks too?)
LS1: 1998-2002
LS6: none (but one GM exec guy did manage to sneak an LS6 in his new F-body on the assembly line, and was promptly fired for it).

[BillyGman]

Steve, I know that the LS-1 engine was put in the Corvette one year before it was available in the Camaro, and I thought that the first year in the Vette was 98. But perhaps I'm off by a year(???).

[TripleTransAm]

No, 1998 in the F-cars (I have one) and 1997 in the Vette.

[BillyGman]

No, 1998 in the F-cars (I have one) and 1997 in the Vette.

okay, thanks for the correction.

[gpfarrell]

BTW, all Z28 and SS Camaros for the last four production years DID have the LS-1 engine in them (from 1999 to 2002). So it isn't true that "99% of them on the road don't have that engine in them" as gpfarrell had stated.


BillyG... I actually think we agree. The latest Camaros... 94 - 02 or whatever, with whatever the "good" engine was (I'm not fluent in General Motors) that year were very fast. The LS moreso than the LT, but even the LT-1s were plenty fast.

No stock MM is going to bully on one of those. ('course with your Trilogy it would be a different story!)

But the guy telling the story never said he was runnin' against anything more special than a "Camaro".

Think of all the Camaros ever made... I think a stock MM would at least run with 99% of them. Yenko 427s? Nope. Baldwin Motion cars? Nope. LS-1s? Nope.

Most anything made before 1994? Ahhh... yes. All those cars with the mighty 305 V8? I think so. 1979 Z-28 with a smogged up Q-jet? You betcha. IROC? yeah. 1969 307 powerglide? Yeah. 1969 396 SS/RS... doubt it!

If you want to street fight, I think its important to know that the LT/LS cars are out there... they're an awesome performance package and should be left alone... but if 99% of the Camaros in the world ran like that I'd have never had any fun driving a Mustang!

Cheers,
Greg

[TripleTransAm]

Greg,
Purchasing my LS1 Ram Air was my chance to wreak revenge on all those 5.0 LXs that used to kick sand in my 305 TPI / Automatic GTA. ;)

Truth be told, I knew I'd lose against any LX 5.0 5-speed in my heavy GTA, and pretty much all the guys who ran against me were good sports about it, with the whole thumbs up deal being exchanged between us and all. Automatic 5.0 LXs were a little easier to deal with, same as the 5-speed 5.0 GTs. However, the automatic 5.0 GTs were fair game... anything could happen as long as they were stock (so is my GTA).

But when I purchased my Ram Air, I unleashed heck on my old neighborhood, that's for sure. ;)

All in good fun, though... there's always someone faster.

[BillyGman]

GPFarrell, I hear ya guy. When you said "99%", I didn't realize that you were including all Camaros since the beginning of it's production in 1967. I was merely looking at the Camaros that are on the street now that we may encounter from day to day. I see very few of those "IROC" w/the 305 garbage motors in them left. But I agree, they weren't anything special at all when it comes to speed, and our Marauders would make light work of them.

That's just another reason why I've always been so impressed w/that LS-1 engine. It's a serious HP machine right out of the factory, and like Steve has previously stated, it IS underrated by Chevrolet.

[RCSignals]

Also the "99%" reference applies to all those that weren't built with a V8.

[BillyGman]

Also the "99%" reference applies to all those that weren't built with a V8.

yep............

[TripleTransAm]

I see very few of those "IROC" w/the 305 garbage motors in them left.


HEY! ;) It isn't THAT bad...
While the 305 TPI won't be breaking any land speed records anytime soon, you have to remember it was pretty torquey for its size, especially for the mid 80s. Depending on the equipment (rear end ratio, weight of car, etc.) you could see 7-second-flat 0-60 times and a top speed just a smidgeon short of 140 mph. My GTA has the 305 TPI/auto combo (don't ask, I'm not sure how that happened either) and has managed to squeak out a 15.6 on the 1/4. Again, gotta put it into the 80s perspective.

However, if you're referring to the US spec 305 4Bbl motors... um... yeah, they were lame. My 1985 Parisienne was equipped with the 305 4Bbl, but thankfully was free of any ECM to mess up the carburetion. Let's face it... carburetors and ECMs were not made to go together. Canadian emissions laws only began to match US laws by 1987, so any Canadian 305 4Bbl prior to that ran well, and in my case really well. I used to beat up on all sorts of 305 4Bbl F-cars with my Parisienne as long as I knew they were 1987 models (ie. equipped with ECMs).

Regarding the 4th gen F-cars (1993-2002) and V8 availability, while I'm not 100% certain of the actual breakdown, I think there was a big bias towards the V8 models. I recall reading that General Motors estimated (probably based on 3rd gen sales breakdowns) that 25% of 4th gen buyers would opt for the LT1 V8 and the rest would settle for the 160hp base 3.4l V6 (the base motor until 1996 when the 200hp 3.8l became standard). They were shocked to see the opposite occur... 75% of buyers wanted the LT1, and the rest settled with the V6. I'm sure this put a large dent in GM's CAFE numbers and led to their reluctance to build too many of the F-cars, which eventually contributed to their demise. (some of my friends waited 6-9 months before cancelling their orders and buying new Mustangs).

So a large proportion of 1993-2003 F-cars out there are V8s... heck, up here it seems they are ALL V8s. Makes sense... if you're going to own a car you probably will want to store during the winter, might as well make it special.

[BillyGman]

good point Steve. I admit that i was just trying to be agreeable since I didn't think it was even worth debating. But I too have seen more V8 Camaros than 6 cylinder ones on the street. But like i said, it isn't even worth debating. obviously the Camaro in question that was mentioned in the first post of this lengthy thread is a 6 cylinder one.As far as my previous comments about the 305 engine equipped cars of the past, i wasn't neccessarily picking on just one car of the 80's, because as far as I'm concerned, ALL cars that were produced in the 80's that listed for under 50K back then were dogs. They were just plain slow. A 0-60 MPH time and an ET of 15 seconds is just plain pathetic in my book, which is why i couldn't accept my marauder in it's stock configuration. So I had to modify it. But atleast the stock Marauder has an excuse, since the car weighs a whopping 4200+ LBS. But the 305 engine equipped cars of the 80's that we're talking about weighed about 800- 1,000 LBS less than the Marauder does, so to turn a 15 sec ET while the car weighs 3200-3400 LBS isn't what I would call a hi-performance car at all.

And I too have formed that opinion from experience. I purchased a 1984 Z28 Camaro new from the dealer at that time, and w/one of those sad 305 engines under the hood, it merely produced 215 HP at the flywheel. As far as I'm concerned, if that's all your car is putting out power wise, then it might as well be a Luxury car instead of a wanna-be sports car/hi-perf car, which is what my 84 Z28 was....a wanna-be. I sold it after merely ownig it for 10 months, and took a $3500 beating.

[RCSignals]

I recall reading that General Motors estimated (probably based on 3rd gen sales breakdowns) that 25% of 4th gen buyers would opt for the LT1 V8 and the rest would settle for the 160hp base 3.4l V6 (the base motor until 1996 when the 200hp 3.8l became standard). They were shocked to see the opposite occur... 75% of buyers wanted the LT1, and the rest settled with the V6.

Another example of an out of touch with it's customer base auto manufacturer.
I mean, it's almost "why bother" when you start talking about a car like the Camaro/Firebird/Mustang with a 6

[TripleTransAm]

I think they were still thinking they'd appeal to the 'secretary' market... a valid assumption, considering the way the Pony cars had been marketed since the Mustang's introduction for 1964. It seems the 90s changed this in some way that I'll have to figure out after much beer consumption and introspection. Heck, by 1998 I was seeing a handful of ads for the 1998 Ram Air bragging "the Musclecar Lives" with ominous-looking photography. It was perhaps General Motors (or Pontiac alone?) acknowledging that the base V6 market just wasn't there for them anymore, and they might as well bite the bullet and go after the V8 sales. But I fear some internal politics probably short-circuited that attempt, as I no longer saw any fresh advertisement after the 1998 model year.

Perhaps it was a matter of economics... the stability (or perhaps volatility) of the economy in the 90s meant that extravagances like a V8 sports coupe could be justified. Just a mere half-dozen years prior, the 80s were literally peppered with hordes of 4 cylinder Mustangs and 4/6 cylinder F-cars! Such a wild change in this market segment in so short a time frame!

RC, having rented at least a dozen 90s Mustangs with the V6, I have to agree with you about the uselessness of that option (except for any insurance benefit). The fuel costs were staggering, even with regular driving, and many times I looked forward to returning home to my frugal LS1.

Billy, I don't believe the engine you had in your '84 was rated at 215hp, unless it was a 1985. If it was a 1984, you had the options of two carb'ed 305s : base 4Bbl at 150-160 hp, a real dog with the ECM on it, and the HO version at 185-190 hp with a bigger carb, cam and exhaust which was prone to vapor lock). The 1985 305 TPI was rated at 215 hp, but was a bastard child in that it used a one-year-only ECM that was reportedly so slow it couldn't handle operating the engine and feeding ALDL diagnostic data streams at the same time... you had to settle for a truncated slow stream during test drives!

But hey, such was the 80s and the state of technology back then. My little 305 TPI delivered 2.0-2.1 60' times with a heavy car like my GTA, and still manages 25-27 mpg on the highway... it's the top end that suffers due to the low-end-torque-tuned intake runners. In a head-to-head comparison, it would definitely run away from my 400 cubic inch 1978 Trans Am (180 gasping hp!!!!) :up:

[BillyGman]

I dunno Steve, all I remember was the Z28 I bought brand new late in 84, and it was just about already a leftover at that time of the year, and the advertised HP being 215. But, I'll have to assume that you're correct, cuz whatever it was, it was just the quickest case of "buyer's remorse" that I've ever experienced. I was very young, and it was my first brand new car that I'd ever bought.

But here's something that might really shock you.........this Marauder that I bought last year, is only my second brand new car that I've ever bought. It had been a trend for me for decades to buy older muscle cars, and fix them up to make them fast. That's why it was difficult for me to sell my 73 Vette, which I did two weeks ago.