1970–1974, 1977–1981 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 (2nd Gen) — The Driver’s Camaro Evolves
Historical Context and Development Background
The second-generation Camaro arrived for the 1970 model year, a clean-sheet F-body with unmistakably European GT proportions sketched under GM Styling chief Bill Mitchell. Longer wheelbase, wider tracks, and a lower cowl gave it a planted stance that the first-gen could only hint at. The Z/28 badge, born from late-’60s SCCA Trans-Am homologation, returned as the sharpest handling Camaro rather than simply the most powerful.
Chevrolet launched the 1970 Z/28 with the LT-1 350: a solid-lifter small-block with big-valve heads, a long-duration cam, and a Holley four-barrel. Its character defined the early 2nd Gen—keen to rev, snappy off-idle, and remarkably tractable for a high-overlap cam engine. By 1971–1974, compression and cam timing softened in response to unleaded fuel, tightening emissions, and insurance headwinds. SAE horsepower reporting also transitioned from gross to net, which exposed a numerical drop that enthusiasts felt more in magazine specs than on a twisty back road.
After a brief hiatus in 1975–1976, the Z28 returned in 1977 repositioned as a handling-and-appearance flagship with the LM1 350. Output figures were modest by muscle-car standards, yet the package—gearing, suspension tuning, and tire—and the platform’s inherent balance kept the Z28 relevant. Competitively, it shadowed the Pontiac Trans Am across showrooms, weathered the Mustang II years, and then met the early Fox-body Mustang head-on by 1979–1981.
Engine and Technical Specs
Across this span the Z/28 evolved from the solid-lifter LT-1 to the hydraulic L82 and then to the LM1, each reflecting its moment in regulation, fuel, and drivability. The constants were small-block architecture, generous mid-range torque, and an appetite for chassis tuning.
| Year(s) | Engine configuration | Displacement | Horsepower (rating) | Induction type | Redline | Fuel system | Compression | Bore/Stroke |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970 | 90° OHV V8 (LT-1, solid lifter) | 350 cu in (5.7 L) | 360 hp @ 6,000 rpm (SAE gross) | Natural aspiration | ~6,500 rpm | Holley 780 cfm 4-bbl | ~11.0:1 | 4.00 in x 3.48 in |
| 1971 | 90° OHV V8 (LT-1, solid lifter) | 350 cu in (5.7 L) | 330 hp (SAE gross) | Natural aspiration | ~6,500 rpm | Holley 4-bbl | Lower than 1970 (reduced compression) | 4.00 in x 3.48 in |
| 1972 | 90° OHV V8 (LT-1, solid lifter) | 350 cu in (5.7 L) | 255 hp (SAE net) | Natural aspiration | ~6,500 rpm | Holley 4-bbl | Around 9.0:1 | 4.00 in x 3.48 in |
| 1973–1974 | 90° OHV V8 (L82, hydraulic lifter) | 350 cu in (5.7 L) | 245 hp (SAE net) | Natural aspiration | ~5,600–6,000 rpm | Rochester Quadrajet 4-bbl | ~8.5:1 | 4.00 in x 3.48 in |
| 1977–1978 | 90° OHV V8 (LM1, hydraulic lifter) | 350 cu in (5.7 L) | 185 hp (SAE net) | Natural aspiration | ~5,200 rpm | Rochester Quadrajet 4-bbl | ~8.5:1 | 4.00 in x 3.48 in |
| 1979 | 90° OHV V8 (LM1) | 350 cu in (5.7 L) | 175 hp (SAE net) | Natural aspiration | ~5,200 rpm | Rochester Quadrajet 4-bbl | ~8.2:1 | 4.00 in x 3.48 in |
| 1981 (49-state) | 90° OHV V8 (LM1 with CCC) | 350 cu in (5.7 L) | 175 hp (SAE net) | Natural aspiration | ~5,000 rpm | Rochester Quadrajet E4ME (feedback) 4-bbl | ~8.3:1 | 4.00 in x 3.48 in |
Driving Experience and Handling Dynamics
The early LT-1 Z/28s are defined by immediacy. With solid lifters and relatively short intake runners, the engine snaps to attention and pulls hard from the midrange to an honest 6,000-plus rpm. Muncie four-speeds deliver a short, mechanical throw and a satisfying gate; ratios suit the LT-1’s revvy nature, and axle options favored brisk acceleration without killing highway manners. Steering feel is heavy by modern standards but precise on center, with useful kickback through the thin-rim wheel. Polyglas bias-plies made the car lively near the limit, but the chassis—stiff front subframe, leaf-sprung rear—always communicated faithfully.
By 1973–1974, hydraulic lifters, lower compression, and a broader torque curve made the Z/28 more friendly in traffic. The basic suspension geometry remained: unequal-length double wishbones up front, multi-leaf rear springs, and hefty anti-roll bars. Damping and bush rates were tuned for compliance, with the Z/28’s heavier bars and stiffer springs still keeping responses crisp. Radial tires improved grip and stability without erasing the Camaro’s fundamental balance.
The 1977–1981 Z28 sharpened turn-in with quicker steering, firmed bushings, and larger anti-roll bars versus base models. Power levels meant you drove the later Z28s on momentum: accurate mid-corner balance, measured throttle to keep the nose light, and the torque-rich small-block pulling from low rpm. The Borg-Warner Super T-10 four-speed (and three-speed automatics) pair well with the LM1’s broad plateau. Brakes remain front discs and rear drums across the era; with good pads and proper adjustment they cope capably for enthusiastic road work.
Full Performance Specs
| Year/Model | 0–60 mph | Top speed | Quarter-mile | Curb weight | Layout | Brakes | Suspension | Gearbox |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970 Z/28 (LT-1, 4-spd) | ~6.4–6.9 s | ~130–135 mph | ~14.4–14.9 s @ ~96–100 mph | ~3,400 lb | Front-engine, RWD | Front discs, rear drums | Double A-arm / multi-leaf | Muncie 4-spd manual |
| 1972 Z/28 (LT-1, 4-spd) | ~7.0–7.5 s | ~125–130 mph | ~15.0–15.4 s @ ~92–95 mph | ~3,450 lb | Front-engine, RWD | Front discs, rear drums | Double A-arm / multi-leaf | Muncie 4-spd manual |
| 1974 Z/28 (L82, auto) | ~7.7–8.0 s | ~122–124 mph | ~15.6–16.0 s @ ~89–91 mph | ~3,550 lb | Front-engine, RWD | Front discs, rear drums | Double A-arm / multi-leaf | 3-spd automatic |
| 1977 Z28 (LM1, 4-spd) | ~7.8–8.4 s | ~120–122 mph | ~15.9–16.5 s @ ~86–88 mph | ~3,600 lb | Front-engine, RWD | Front discs, rear drums | Double A-arm / multi-leaf | Borg-Warner Super T-10 4-spd |
| 1979 Z28 (LM1, auto) | ~8.0–8.7 s | ~118–120 mph | ~16.2–16.8 s @ ~84–87 mph | ~3,650 lb | Front-engine, RWD | Front discs, rear drums | Double A-arm / multi-leaf | TH350 3-spd auto |
| 1981 Z28 (LM1, 4-spd) | ~8.4–9.0 s | ~118 mph | ~16.5–17.0 s | ~3,650 lb | Front-engine, RWD | Front discs, rear drums | Double A-arm / multi-leaf | Borg-Warner Super T-10 4-spd |
Variant Breakdown and Production
The Z/28 identity remained cohesive—performance chassis, 350 small-block, and visual cues—while details shifted year-to-year.
| Year | Approx. production | Major differences and notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1970 | 8,733 | Debut of 2nd Gen Z/28; LT-1 350; Muncie 4-spd or 3-spd auto; available RS appearance package; F60-15 tires; quick-ratio steering. |
| 1971 | 4,862 | Lower compression LT-1; gross ratings drop; cosmetic tweaks; continued RS availability. |
| 1972 | 2,575 | SAE net ratings introduced (LT-1 255 hp); production curtailed by labor disruptions; RS still offered. |
| 1973 | 11,574 | L82 350 (245 hp net); new impact-absorbing front fascia; radial tires more prevalent; graphics updated. |
| 1974 | 13,802 | 5-mph bumpers; L82 350 continues; Type LT luxury trim could be combined with Z/28; last Z/28 until 1977. |
| 1977 | 14,349 | Z28 returns with LM1 350 (185 hp net); heavier anti-roll bars, quicker steering; bold stripes and spoilers. |
| 1978 | 54,907 | Restyled urethane nose; revised stripes; T-tops available; 15-inch styled wheels. |
| 1979 | 84,877 | New dash and interior; LM1 output commonly 175 hp; popular N90-style aluminum wheels available; graphics refined. |
| 1980 | 45,137 | Facelift with deeper front air dam and fender extractors; functional hood scoop door introduced (opens under load); 350 output varied by calibration. |
| 1981 | 43,272 | Final 2nd Gen; Computer Command Control (CCC) Quadrajet; functional scoop retained; refined striping. |
Ownership Notes: What Enthusiasts Should Know
- Engine care: LT-1s use solid lifters—correct valve lash is essential. Use high-zinc oil or additive for flat-tappet cam longevity. Keep the Holley’s float levels and accelerator pump healthy to maintain the trademark snap.
- Fuel and ignition: Mid-’70s cars transitioned to HEI ignition; periodic cap/rotor/coil checks cure many drivability gremlins. 1981 CCC systems rely on intact vacuum routing and good grounds—label lines during restoration.
- Cooling and timing: Small-blocks like accurate initial timing and a functional heat riser. A clean, properly shrouded radiator with the correct fan clutch prevents hot-soak complaints.
- Chassis and bushings: Subframe bushings, rear spring eye bushings, and steering linkages wear and erode precision; quality replacements transform feel. Check front subframe alignment and the cowl-to-subframe mounts.
- Rust watchpoints: Lower fenders, rear quarter arches, trunk drop-offs, tail panel, windshield/rear glass channels, and floor pans. Inspect cowl plenums for water ingress.
- Brakes and wheels: Proper rear drum adjustment and good linings matter; stainless brake hoses and quality pads help repeatability on spirited drives. Keep correct 15-inch tire sizing to preserve gearing and stance.
- Service intervals: Oil every 3,000–4,000 miles (or annually), valve lash checks on LT-1s at tune-up intervals, ignition and carb tuning seasonally, gear oil and diff service roughly every 30,000 miles.
- Parts and restoration: Mechanical parts are widely available and affordable; model-year-specific trim (early RS, certain striping, interior plastics) can be harder to source. Bodywork complexity is moderate; panel alignment depends on careful subframe-to-body setup.
Cultural Relevance and Market Perspective
The early LT-1 cars are the connoisseur’s choice—true links to the Trans-Am ethos—praised in-period for steering and balance as much as for straight-line pace. The late-’70s Z28 became a pop icon, with period graphics and spoilers that defined the street scene and magazine covers alike. The second-gen Z28 has appeared in films and television reflective of the era’s car culture; its silhouette remains shorthand for American performance of the time.
Collector desirability skews to 1970–1972 LT-1 cars (original drivetrains and documentation amplify value), with 1973–1974 examples appreciated for their blend of drivability and style. The 1977–1981 Z28s, produced in larger numbers, reward buyers seeking characterful V8 torque, accessible parts, and strong club support. At major auctions, well-documented, highly original early Z/28s have achieved six-figure results, while exceptional low-mile late-’70s Z28s can surprise on the block. As always, originality, provenance, and condition govern price.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I verify a real second-gen Z/28?
Documentation is key: the build sheet and original window sticker list the Z/28 package. The cowl tag and RPO codes help, and from 1972 onward the VIN includes an engine identifier. Factory sway bars, quick-ratio steering, correct wheels, and drivetrain components should corroborate paperwork.
What rear axle ratios were typical?
Early LT-1 cars commonly used performance-biased ratios (for example, 3.73:1 and similar performance gearing), while late-’70s Z28s often carried 3.08:1 automatics and shorter 3.42:1 with four-speeds, depending on equipment and emissions calibration.
Known problem areas?
Flat-tappet cam wear (especially with incorrect oil), vacuum leaks causing off-idle stumble, tired subframe and leaf-spring bushings, window channel rust, and degraded wiring grounds (notably on CCC-equipped 1981 cars). Carb throttle shafts and secondary air-valve settings also affect drivability; proper carb rebuilds solve most issues.
Which years are quickest?
In stock trim, 1970 LT-1 cars lead the pack, with mid-14-second quarter-mile capability and genuine 130-mph speed when properly geared. Later cars emphasize balance and tractability over outright pace.
Manual or automatic?
The four-speed delivers the most engagement and performance, especially with the LT-1 and later LM1 torque curves. Automatics are durable and pleasant in traffic; a well-tuned TH350 shifts crisply and suits the late Z28’s GT character.
Parts availability?
Excellent for mechanicals across all years. Trim pieces and year-specific fascias, RS front-end parts (early), and certain interior plastics can be the challenge—budget time and effort accordingly.
Value trends?
Early, documented LT-1 cars command the strongest money. Clean, correct 1973–1974 and well-kept 1977–1981 Z28s remain accessible, with low-mile, unrestored examples increasingly sought by collectors.
