LHernandezJr

...

Edwardgp

I love the looks of the 83 Camaro!

82tarecaro

iTrader: (4)

Glacial acceleration LOL

FormerL69

iTrader: (2)

I don't know about that acceleration comment. My '84 L69 with 3.73s was pretty quick off the line. It just couldn't maintain it. It was a great red light racer.

BumpaD82

3rd gen press AND 82-84 !!!

chazman

iTrader: (4)

It's twin to my '83!

8t2 z-chev

i have that magazine-car has a detailed LG4 with L69 aircleaner and "5.0 HO"emblems added.must have been driven gently to be "squeek and rattle free" at over 150,000 MI. It is funny how testers always note how"slow"305 thirds are,but they never mention how "slow" 2bbl 289 '68 mustangs or stock 283 57 chevys ETC are-guess the expectation is higher with a z28 or trans am LOL

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Exactly!

FormerL69

iTrader: (2)

The 60s were a different time.

BumpaD82

Are you sure a 283 '57 is "slow" ... I'm pretty sure my '82's stock 145hp LG4 would have been WORKED! By my dads 220hp 283 '57 'Vert ... But fast is all relative

8t2 z-chev

don't forget those pre-'72 horsepower ratings were"gross"ratings i remember driving a 2bbl 289 4spd '65 fastback mustang-wasn't really all that "fast"-i think any 305 TBI RS would've given that mustang a good runbut yet no automotive writers would say that mustang was slow in a writeup today.

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

Very nice!

Coyote850

iTrader: (1)

Love seeing an article on an '83. As far as the acceleration: I'd love to take the author for a drive in my CFI 305 '83 Z-28, I'd make him **** his pants.

eseibel67

Anybody want to scan and post this article?

subroc

iTrader: (2)

The only problem i had with that article is that they did it on a LG4 auto z28. For someone who doesnt know that there was a l69 5 speed...they might just write off the z28 as slow as the article says. It would be nice to get some fresh coverage on say a L69/5 speed/3.73 or a Lb9/5 speed, or a L98 auto. The car was nice but doesnt exactly give our cars any better reputation with regard to acceleration.

yaj15

iTrader: (3)

Yes scan the article. I'm glad 3rdgens are finally starting to get noticed! There was a Motor Trend or Car and Driver article about a blue metallic 1989 1LE IROC with the LB9/T-5/3.45 drivetrain in it not too long ago.

They should have tested an L69/T-5/3.73 geared car. That car is enough to embarrass many of the 1960's-1970's era legends in the performance department bone stock.

They also should have mentioned some stats for these 3rdgens as well:

LB9/T-5/N10/G92 cars

L98/700r4/N10/G92 cars

The top V8 thirdgen (at least in my opinion) the 1991-1992 SLP Firehawk with the 350 horse TPI motor, 6-speed trans, and Dana 44 rear end, 14inch drilled Brembo brakes, and suspension tuning to match.

And the 1989 Turbo Trans-Am Pace car with the Grand-National Buick Turbo V6 motor. That car was running 0-60mph times in the 4.5-4.8sec range in full stock street legal trim. Over 20 years later that's still a fast 0-60mph time for a fully loaded emissions legal street car. Those turbo Buicks were faster in a straight line than the L98 Corvettes back in the 1980's when they were going so those turbo V6 motors are nothing to laugh at.

Any one of those cars in bone stock form would embarrass many of the hey-day 1960's-1970's era muscle cars. Don't get me wrong I like the old school muscle cars but, perspective has to be taken in to account too. You are never going to get a bone stock 1970 Hemi-Cuda to put all that power to the ground on those stock poly-glass tires and stock suspension. You can have all the power you want - physics still is in play and that old school technology isn't going to put that power to the ground as efficiently as a more modern car can. Ha ha I've got in to many debates with some of my car buddies who swear a bone stock big block old school muscle car is quicker than an a bone stock C6 LS3 Corvette in a straight line.

3rdgens specialty is handling/road holding performance. There are still few cars today that can keep up with a bone stock performance 3rdgen (Z28, IROC, Trans-Am, etc.) in the handling department.

Keep in mind that these cars were pulling low 0.90g skid pad numbers 25-30 years ago without all the high tech computer based aids that modern cars are using to pull the same or better numbers now.

These cars also broke the mold when it comes to aerodynamics too in terms of improving performance and aiding fuel economy. The 1982 Firebird with the KITT bowling ball hub caps had a drag coefficient of 0.29. The Camaros with the exposed headlights had a drag coefficient of 0.34. These are still good drag coefficient numbers today (especially the Firebird's numbers) when you remember that 3rdgens were designed in the late 1970's - over 30 years ago now. I never hear much about that.

scottmoyer

Do not scan the article! That is a violation of copyright laws. I have been in touch with the folks at Hemmings in the past and can probably get the original article to be posted.

scottmoyer

Cornered
An unrestored '83 Camaro Z28 proves that performance can't always be measured in a straight line

Feature Article from Hemmings Muscle Machines
December, 2012 - Words and Photography by Jeff Koch

When the all-new third-generation Camaro came out at the dawn of 1982, the Z28 was the slickest piece of work on the road: nose down, tail up, striped and be-spoilered like a muscle machine built a dozen years previous might've been. The Firebird's aero-slick shape, monochrome-and-black paint scheme and relative lack of adornment lent it a quasi-Euro GT vibe, but the showy new Camaro was the very vision of a low-slung all-American muscle machine for the Eighties, with dished five-spoke wheels and white-letter tires, a scooped hood and colored striping that separated the body color from the ground effects. (If anything, it took over from Pontiac's outgoing WS6 Trans Am in that regard.) According to Camaro lead designer Jerry Palmer in a pre-launch magazine interview, "It really struts!" That strutting style hit America's sweet spot. Lower, slicker and trimmer than anything Detroit had come out with previously, the new Camaro quickly became a sensation--the industry's new style leader.

Alas, the new Camaro was also, to be frank, a bit of a disappointment. For all of the work that went into downsizing the third-gen models, performance versions weighed just 250 pounds less than the outgoing cars. Plus, the available powertrains didn't back up those chiseled good looks. The "hot" engine, the 165-horsepower fuel-injected Cross-Fire 5.0L (305-cu.in.), wasn't available with a stick shift, for emissions reasons; the only V-8 you could get with a manual offered a mere 145hp.

And the transmissions offered at launch? A four-speed stick and a three-speed automatic--at a time when overdrive gearing was available in just about every other sporting car out there. That's the glass-half-empty look at things. The glass-half-full crowd will remember half a dozen years earlier, when Chevy had trouble coaxing 145hp out of a 350, and note that slowly, things were improving.

The improvements did continue, too. They were incremental at first, though fairly quick in coming: A new catalytic converter freed up five horses for 1983, bringing the base Z28 engine to 150 horsepower, and GM's 700-R4 four-speed automatic transmission with overdrive arrived. This new Hydra-Matic managed to get a shorter first gear for better acceleration off the line, plus a 0.70:1 overdrive for decreased revs on the highway and better highway fuel economy; our photo example seen here is so equipped. Then, midway through 1983, GM kicked the performance race wide open with a carbureted, 190hp High Output version of the 5.0-liter engine, and stuck a Borg-Warner T5 five-speed manual behind it--thus spanking the newly resurgent Mustang GT. By 1987, Chevrolet had reinstalled the 350 (5.7L) and topped it with Tuned-Port Injection and twin catalytic converters for 245hp; Pontiac offered the same, and then produced a run of Trans Ams with Buick Turbo V-6 engines that were reportedly underrated at 250hp.

As it stands now, you can find even more Camaro for just as cheap: LT1-powered fourth-gen F-bodies are newer and faster, and while LS1-powered models from 1998-2002 may still command a premium, they do so because their temporary status as the last of the breed seemed to inspire their owners to take better care of 'em.

But the early third-generation cars seem to fall into a sort of performance car limbo. Too new for the collective American baby-boomer heart to make them part of the good old days of horsepower, too old to have been part of the American performance renaissance that started not long after this machine was built--a stock, 150-horse, automatic 1983 Z28 would seem to reside at the bottom of the bell curve in terms of public interest. Today, in the world of 400hp SUVs, the idea of a 150hp Camaro doesn't even compute; an '83 Z28 is the sort of Camaro you'd find up on blocks on the lawn on the other side of town.

And so we were more than a little surprised to find Rod Loveless's 1983 Z28, a vehicle that he's owned since 1985. We're not surprised that it runs--Chevy seemed to make about two billion F-bodies in the third-gen's 11-year span, and plenty can still be found on the streets if you know where to look--but that it's as unmolested as it is. The low-grunt engine hadn't been pulled for something stouter (a cheap and easy maneuver, these days). The wheels and tires weren't updated to a set of larger-diameter aluminum hoops and lower-profile rubber. No, we're impressed that this so-called disposable Camaro is in as good a shape as it's in; the paint seems fresh, the factory clearcoat hasn't been burned through by the desert sun, the decals register brightly with color and haven't cracked with time or heat, and the various brittle plastics used to assemble the interior remain utterly unfaded and uncracked despite the glass T-tops. This is what most 1983 Z28s looked like in 1985, and this machine's longevity is jaw-dropping.

"One of my favorite drives is Arizona Highway 89A between Sedona and Flagstaff," Phoenician Rod tells us. "My then-girlfriend, now-wife, Karel, took this drive with me in her '79 Trans Am. During the drive, we saw a new '83 Z28 that ended up driving, shall we say, competitively with us. As time went on, I knew I was in love. Yes, with Karel too, but also with third-gen F-bodies." Some months later, an '84 WS6 Trans Am with the 5.0 HO package joined the '79 on the driveway.

Then, kismet: "In the spring of '85, the wife of Karel's co-worker had an '83 Z28 they bought new. She wanted to sell the Camaro and get her hands on a minivan." A moment of silence here for this terminal lapse in judgment. "It had just 8,000 miles on it, and it was perfect." It was also well-equipped: power windows and locks, power hatch release, tilt wheel, cruise and more. "We bought it and became a two-Trans Am, one-Camaro family. A month after we bought it, the seller realized what she'd done and offered to buy back the Camaro, at a profit to us." No deal. Over time, the two Trans Ams found new homes, but the Camaro stayed put as a gently treated daily driver--one that's now got well north of 150,000 miles on the clock.

And so, often mocked as the disposable generation of F-body, three decades on, this 1983 Z28 stands proudly, and entirely intact. We've since learned that the seats have received a Classic Industries re-upholstery kit, the AM/FM stereo tape deck had been taken from Rod's '84 Trans Am (but was still period enough that we didn't notice), and the engine has a spittle of chrome dress-up, with rocker covers, alternator and upper bracket, and the A/C compressor bracket and cover getting the shiny treatment. But the rest? Never apart and never repainted--even the weatherstripping is all original. "It's never leaked," Rod reports. (Though, to be fair, it doesn't rain much in the desert.)

Time to drive. Have a seat--removing the glass T-tops makes it far easier for tall folks to slide in and out; with them in, the opening is big enough for most body types, but your knees suffer slightly getting down that low. Once inside, you're low enough between the door, sill and the high driveline hump and console that you're safely cocooned deep in the car, but the position you're put in is plenty comfortable. The door looks every bit as gigantic as a second-gen F's door, but pulling it shut takes about half the effort.

The windshield is plenty wide, and the side glass is near enough to your head that your vision is largely unencumbered. The B-pillar is massive, but the wraparound rear glass helps visibility and lets ample light into the cabin. Similarly, your look at the gauges is clear, although the double-length speedo needle, one side marking off miles per hour (up to 85, natch) and one side marking off kilometers per hour, is a curious solution for the English/metric issue. It's a choice (as one magazine suggested some three decades back) that may help make the driving experience a little more exciting, as the engine may not be up to the task. The indented faux-NACA duct hood scoops are a strange reversal of the usual muscle car trope; is this fiberglass engine-lid cover the anti-cowl hood?

Turn the key. The engine settles quickly into an 800-900 RPM idle, rolling gently between the two as various electronic systems fire off marching orders; the 305 sounds and feels a tad "cammy," which in turn gives the unit-body chassis something to communicate even when standing still. The exhaust is a little gurglier than we remembered on third-gens; the owner fessed up to putting a free-flow cat, three-inch exhaust and Flowmaster muffler on. Invisible, but even at idle, certainly noticeable. There's also a dual-snorkel air cleaner, for moderately better breathing, and an Edelbrock intake manifold beneath the 650-CFM Q-Jet; a JET computer chip was also added for a bit more power. Combined, maybe they're good for 15 or 20 horsepower.

A 10- or 15-percent bump over stock sounds good, but do the math: Whether it's 150hp or 165, 3,400 pounds (closer to 3,900 with the owner and your tester in the car) isn't going to light anyone's hair on fire. Such was the case here: Acceleration was more leisurely than sporting, although sports car nuts who remember the days of cycle-fendered MGs and Austin-Healey Sprites would tell you that those buggies were hardly JATO rockets themselves. Alas, TCs and Sprites were small enough, minimalist enough, to put you close enough to the ground that even at 40 MPH, you felt faster. Not so with the Z: Its glacial acceleration is roughly in line with cars of its era, but the Z's sporting driving position, sheer size and radically sporting look only make you feel slower than you're actually going.

And so we turn to the Z28's raison d'etre, besides looking good--its steering and handling. Since the Z28 had come back from its brief hiatus in mid-1977, it had become Chevy's in-house corner-carver; dreams of high-revving, high-compression small-blocks were but a distant memory. Yet somehow, the Z28 never quite had the panache, the moves or the word-of-mouth that its sister, the WS6 Trans Am, did. In the dying years of the second-generation F-body, Pontiac was out terrorizing Corvettes for half the cash; the Camaro was left a distant third in the handling game.

But with the dawn of the third-generation F-body, things flipped, and while Firebirds touted their aero-slickness, Camaros got about the business of eating up the turns. A peek at the specs, comparing the Z with a WS6 Trans Am of a similar vintage, shows a thing or two. The two have the same front spring rates, but the Z28's rear springs, at 183-lbs./in., are way stiffer than a WS6's 134-lbs./in.; while the two Fs share a rear anti-roll bar diameter of 0.83 inch, the Z28's 1.22-inch front bar is smaller, by 0.04-inch, than the WS6's. There's also some additional chassis bracing up front--six pieces in all--that the Trans Am lacks. It doesn't sound like much.

And yet the effect is massive. Here, we can find no fault with Chevy's good work: Just turn that chunky wheel, and the rest of the machine responds in kind. There's no lean worth mentioning, no tire squeal, no fuss, no drama, just quick and quiet action: crisp and immediate. The on-center slop that was part and parcel of most Detroit machines of the day simply doesn't exist here; sneeze with your hand on the wheel, and the front wheels will twitch in response, sending the chassis with it. It manages to feel lighter on its feet than a second-gen WS6 Trans Am (our muscle car cornering gold standard) does, despite the third-gen weighing just 300 pounds less. Actual feel is a little out-of-bounds, although there's no denying the steering's heft--it won't let you twirl the wheel with a single outstretched digit. And the chassis, even with the tops out, doesn't squeak, creak or shimmy, like many F-bodies did when they were new. It's enough to make us think that anyone who's dispatched one of these to a grassy knoll to be swallowed up by the creeping kudzu is missing the point a little: Yeah, it's down on power, but man, does it make up for that in the turns!

The same year Rod's long-lasting Z was built, Car and Driver chose the Z28 as the best-handling car built in America, and spending time behind the wheel of an as-new example like this one explains why. It made us wish we were near some twistier roads, rather than the grid-like plan of the greater Phoenix area, just so we had an excuse to spend some more time behind the wheel and soak in the Z28's cornering genius. With the slightly wider tires and 20-years-newer tire compound, we could probably beat those period .81 to .83g numbers on the local desert pavement today, were we to try.

Tempting though it is, we won't. This '83 Z28 has spent too much of its life being pampered for us to go and cane it in its dotage. It's survived this long--a beacon of permanency in a world of disposability. It's not going to rest on anyone's lawn anytime soon.

Owner's View
When people find out that this car has been a daily driver for three decades now, and has more than 150,000 miles on the odometer, they're stunned. I think the reason that I keep the Camaro looking so stock has to do with my upbringing. My father, Dean Loveless, would buy a new car every year, and we would watch the final assembly of his new car. He was a sales engineer for the Demmer Corporation, the company that assembled the famous Hurst/Olds. He reported directly to Mr. John Demmer, one of the nicest guys you'd ever want to meet, and the Demmers would come to our house in Frankenmuth, Michigan, twice a year for dinner. In 1972, he pulled up with a new Hurst/Olds convertible, and it was perfect. I learned then: When you have something that's that great, you don't change it.
-- Rod Loveless

This article originally appeared in the December, 2012 issue of Hemmings Muscle Machines.

scottmoyer

This article originally appeared in the December, 2012 issue of Hemmings Muscle Machines.

CLUB SCENE

Vintage Chevrolet Club of America
P.O. Box 609
Lemont, Illinois 60439
626-963-2438
www.vcca.org
Dues: $35/year • Membership: 8,000

American Camaro Association
5786 Buckeye Road
Macungie, Pennsylvania 18062
610-966-2492
www.americancamaro.org
Dues: $20/year • Membership: 200

Worldwide Camaro Association
800-456-1957
www.worldwidecamaro.com
Dues: $39/year • Membership: 214

PROS
+ Unrestored condition
+ Corner-carving abilities
+ Still tight and squeak-free

CONS
- Glacial acceleration
- Jouncy ride
- Good luck finding one this clean

1983 CHEVROLET CAMARO Z28
SPECIFICATIONS

PRICE
Base price -- $10,336
Price as profiled -- $12,920 (est.)
Options on car profiled -- CC1 removable glass roof panels, $825; C60 air conditioning, $725; A01 tinted glass, $105; AU3 power door locks, $120; J65 four-wheel power disc brakes, $179; N33 Comfortilt steering, $105; MXO four-speed automatic transmission with overdrive, $525

ENGINE
Type -- Chevrolet "small-block" OHV V-8, cast-iron block and cylinder heads
Displacement -- 305 cubic inches (5.0 liter)
Bore x Stroke -- 3.74 x 3.48 inches
Compression ratio -- 8.6:1
Horsepower @ RPM -- 150 @ 4,000
Torque @ RPM -- 240-lbs.ft. @ 2,400
Valvetrain -- Hydraulic valve lifters
Main bearings -- 5
Fuel system -- Single 625-CFM Rochester Quadrajet four-barrel electronic feedback carburetor, mechanical pump
Lubrication system -- Pressure, gear-type pump
Electrical system -- 12-volt
Exhaust system -- Single head pipe, crossflow muffler, dual tailpipes

TRANSMISSION
Type -- GM TH700-R4 four-speed automatic with overdrive
Ratios:
1st -- 3.06:1
2nd -- 1.63:1
3rd -- 1.00:1
4th -- 0.70:1
Reverse -- 2.29:1

DIFFERENTIAL
Type -- Corporate 10-bolt housing, 7.5-inch ring-and-pinion
Ratio -- 3.23:1

STEERING
Type -- Recirculating ball, power assist
Turns, lock-to-lock -- 2.5
Turning circle -- 36.7 feet

BRAKES
Type -- Hydraulic, four-wheel disc, vacuum power assist
Front -- 10.5-inch disc
Rear -- 10.5-inch disc

CHASSIS & BODY
Construction -- Unit-body construction
Body style -- Two-door coupe
Layout -- Front engine, rear-wheel drive

SUSPENSION
Front -- Independent, modified MacPherson strut, coil springs; anti-roll bar
Rear -- Rigid axle; torque arm; coil springs; two trailing links; Panhard rod; anti-roll bar

WHEELS & TIRES
Wheels -- Cast-aluminum five-spoke
Front -- 15 x 7 inches
Rear -- 15 x 7 inches
Tires -- Goodyear Eagle GT, raised white outline letter
Front -- 215/65R15 (currently Eagle GT II 235/60R15)
Rear -- 215/65R15 (currently Eagle GT II 235/60R15)

WEIGHTS & MEASURES
Wheelbase -- 101 inches
Overall length -- 187.8 inches
Overall width -- 72.8 inches
Overall height -- 50 inches
Front track -- 60.7 inches
Rear track -- 61.6 inches
Shipping weight -- 3,061 pounds
Curb weight -- 3,399 pounds

CAPACITIES
Crankcase -- 5 quarts
Cooling system -- 15 quarts
Fuel tank -- 16.2 gallons
Transmission -- 4.7 quarts

CALCULATED DATA
Bhp per cu.in. -- 0.49
Weight per bhp -- 22.66 pounds
Weight per cu.in. -- 11.14 pounds

PRODUCTION
Chevrolet produced 154,381 Camaros in 1983, of which 62,100 were Z28s.

PERFORMANCE
Acceleration:
0-60 MPH -- 7.9 seconds
0-100 MPH -- 23.8 seconds
1/4-mile ET -- 16 seconds @ 85 MPH
Top speed -- 116 MPH
Source: Car and Driver, January 1982 (165hp Cross Fire Injected Z28 with three-speed automatic transmission)

85 T/A WS6

I know Jeff Koch from many emails and Hotwheels trading (we are both collectors) and he has tested / written about a wide range of perfromance vehicles. I was so close to getting my car in the magazine, his trip to WA was cancelled. Anyway he is a well respected author and always gives a balanced, unbiased review of the subject matter. He has one of the coolest jobs ever!

scottmoyer

I wasn't going to say anything until it was published, but my car will be in the magazine sometime in the future. They did a photo shoot of my car earlier in 2012. I'm waiting and looking forward to it being in the magazine.

subroc

iTrader: (2)

Oh thats SWEET Scott. Cant wait to see the article. I have a subscription to muscle machines and muscle car review. Muscle car review needs to really start getting with the times though and expand its definition of muscle car past 1973.

eseibel67

Great article on a great car. Love the early ones, as a ninth grader I remember coveting them when they were new.

Scottmoyer: Don't be coy, make sure you post the article on your car when it's released.

drjewalton

I can second this!

BADNBLK

iTrader: (11)

I have seen this car in person and think that I have pics of our cars parked next to each others somewhere.

Very nice car, and the owner is a great guy. Him and his wife drove up to CO for some national Camaro club event that happened to be held in Aspen or Vail something?, and they decided to enter in the Denver Super Chevy show while passing through, and we parked next to each other. I was happy when I opened my issue to see a third gen, but even happier to put two and two together to find that it is one I have actually seen and met the owner.

Scott congrats man on your mag coverage.

burnout88

I have seen this car several times in person and talked to Rod about it. He is a moderator in the AZ All Gens Camaro club and a great guy. It's a very clean 83.

Jason E

I subscribed to Hemmings from issue #4 until late last year. When they used to do articles about all sorts of different American muscle and "muscle" cars (like '78 turbo LeSabres, for instance...), they were cool as hell.

Now that they are the same as every other "muscle car rag," mostly ignoring the '73+ vehicles, the magazine I once considered essential reading is pretty lame IMO. Yes, they do still have the occassional article like the one above...but they used to have unique things in EVERY issue (can you say comparing an '03 Marauder to a '96 Impala SS? Highlighting an AMC Spirit AMX?)

83ZZZ28

Can't believe I missed this entire thread until now. ...Thank you everyone for the kind words !

Having my '83 in Hemmings Muscle Machines is the highlight of my life. I have had friends from around the country, some I didn't think they were still alive, call or email me to give congrats on the ariticle. That's so cool. 3 years ago, Jeff Koch of HMM noticed my Z-28 at the last Super Chevy Show held in Arizona. Had a photo shoot 2 weeks later at 5:00 in the morning for the lighting. Since it was in November, the freezing morning temp was around 43* ... freakn' Burrrrrr.

BADNBLK .... I remember you too. Had a Great time talking with you, and drooling over your HOT Z ! ! Sure glad we wern't competing in the same Camaro class. Hoping to make it back up there sometime.

SCOTTMOYER ..... That is so awesome about your photo shoot with HMM. I was told that it would take 6 months to a year before my article would come out. It took Hemmings 3 Years before mine came out.

The November 2010 HMM #86 mag. featured " High Mileage Muscle " .... They featured an Original Owner, 5.0 HO 1984 TRANS AM with 291,000 miles on it. Jeff Koch also did the photo & story.

I had a '84 T/A with the L69. That was a kick @ss ride. Only had one problem with the T/A , the same problem that many of us may have expirenced... the dang back tires always ended up bald.
Thanks,
Rod
83ZZZ28

scottmoyer

January 2012 - they did the photo shoot. October 2013 - still haven't heard from them.

LHernandezJr

...

Stuart S

They shot my '87 in November of 2011... Nothing here yet either...