cam ls1 vs gt500 super snake!?!?!
01-19-2014, 04:59 PM
#101
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I watched an '02 WS6 6spd (JamRWS6 on here) run a 12.99 @ 110mph w/ just a lid and SFCs. Now that was in -700 DA, but it was also with a 2.15 60' (MAYBE 40 degrees). So I am aware that there are 4th gens that run extremely well.
01-19-2014, 05:29 PM
#105
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Everybody knows the '07-'09 cars weren't very impressive. The issue here is the reputed "Super Snake," which is a minimum of 605hp. A sub-400rwhp full-weight F-body isn't going to run away from a 600hp GT500 from a roll like that.
So a slick-top M6 Z28 w/ no options (or a no-option Formula) and a fully-optioned automatic 2.73-geared Trans Am are going to be within 100lbs of each other and run the same times? Good to know. And btw, pointing out that there is more of a weight variance with the new 5.0s just solidifies what I originally said.
So a slick-top M6 Z28 w/ no options (or a no-option Formula) and a fully-optioned automatic 2.73-geared Trans Am are going to be within 100lbs of each other and run the same times? Good to know. And btw, pointing out that there is more of a weight variance with the new 5.0s just solidifies what I originally said.
1st you disagree, then you don't... Make up your mind!
You're kidding... Of COURSE these cars were run on DR's and even on slicks, otherwise stock. The fact nobody posted several videos certainly isn't an indication that it didn't ever happen. Most people simply didn't have video recorders at the track that long ago, or phones capable of good video, etc.
A 1.9 may have been doable on factory tires, but who's to say adding extra traction on an otherwise stock Camaro didn't cause it to bog off the line? I'm convinced there's more to that story anyway... look at the mph... 110+ is surely ALSO quite normal from a "well worn" Camaro...
We can say anything we want, but these cars simply were not running 12.5's back then, stock. That's merely wishful thinking.
Of course not... Nearly every car runs 11's factory stock and 10's by simply adding slicks... Yup, daily occurrence, no doubt.
Even the older GT500's were quite good, all things considered. They could've been better, but the best part was their ability to handle modifications. Far better than a 4th gen, to be sure.
So a 1LE was within 100 lb of the heaviest? Don't think so... Scooter.
Why, because the Mustang weighs more?
Realistically, it isn't "so close between" them at all. The quickest known factory stock 4th gen ran somewhere around 12.8 and the quickest known new 5L has run 12.3... 1/2 second looks like near eternity when you're racing. The average is fairly close, but the Mustang absolutely IS quicker, period.
You're kidding... Of COURSE these cars were run on DR's and even on slicks, otherwise stock. The fact nobody posted several videos certainly isn't an indication that it didn't ever happen. Most people simply didn't have video recorders at the track that long ago, or phones capable of good video, etc.
A 1.9 may have been doable on factory tires, but who's to say adding extra traction on an otherwise stock Camaro didn't cause it to bog off the line? I'm convinced there's more to that story anyway... look at the mph... 110+ is surely ALSO quite normal from a "well worn" Camaro...
We can say anything we want, but these cars simply were not running 12.5's back then, stock. That's merely wishful thinking.
Of course not... Nearly every car runs 11's factory stock and 10's by simply adding slicks... Yup, daily occurrence, no doubt.
Even the older GT500's were quite good, all things considered. They could've been better, but the best part was their ability to handle modifications. Far better than a 4th gen, to be sure.
So a 1LE was within 100 lb of the heaviest? Don't think so... Scooter.
Why, because the Mustang weighs more?
Realistically, it isn't "so close between" them at all. The quickest known factory stock 4th gen ran somewhere around 12.8 and the quickest known new 5L has run 12.3... 1/2 second looks like near eternity when you're racing. The average is fairly close, but the Mustang absolutely IS quicker, period.
Older gt500's were not very good. The 12's were coming around but still not goo for the power.
Beings I seen/had some of these car on scales.......yea 100~. I'm not gonna argue with you over a ounce or even a few lbs. Fact is they did not vary 300lb.
I'm just saying I think it's possible. We have a vid posted of a 12.69. A Z28 went 12.89 in the furd mag on no tire. That car had no slp options and was a t-top. -30~ for the t-top and +15 hp for the SLP options and the possibility is definitely there. Maybe the car that got optioned like that never made it to the track......maybe someone started modding first......or maybe it was someone like me that never put a tire on it till after it went 11.5.
Last edited by HioSSilver; 01-19-2014 at 05:40 PM.
01-19-2014, 06:13 PM
#106
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To much to reply to......suck it!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Older gt500's were not very good. The 12's were coming around but still not goo for the power.
Beings I seen/had some of these car on scales.......yea 100~. I'm not gonna argue with you over a ounce or even a few lbs. Fact is they did not vary 300lb.
Older gt500's were not very good. The 12's were coming around but still not goo for the power.
Beings I seen/had some of these car on scales.......yea 100~. I'm not gonna argue with you over a ounce or even a few lbs. Fact is they did not vary 300lb.
I'm just saying I think it's possible. We have a vid posted of a 12.69. A Z28 went 12.89 in the furd mag on no tire. That car had no slp options and was a t-top. -30~ for the t-top and +15 hp for the SLP options and the possibility is definitely there. Maybe the car that got optioned like that never made it to the track......maybe someone started modding first......or maybe it was someone like me that never put a tire on it till after it went 11.5.
That 1 you're talking about was driven by Evan Smith, widely known to be one of the better drivers of these stock vehicles and he also happened to own a 4th gen or more himself. Besides that, not even Evan ever repeated that time. His best aside from that was like 13.06... GREAT for the time, but by no means 12.5's. Evan did run a 12.7 in a 2003 Mustang Cobra in June of 2002, while in the process of dismantling an also brand new and stock Anniversary SS... which DIDN'T run 12's... He also ran them both on a road course, which the Mustang also won, albeit by only a little. http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...maro_shootout/ <~ No Super Snake, mind you, but that Cobra also had to deal with IRS... LONG before Camaro ever had it. Ford went away from it for years because it not only saved money, but made it easier to drag race, which is all most pony car owners do anyway.
Again, we know some have run well. We also know that NONE have run as well as the new 5L has while in actual stock condition. Further, we know that most 98-02 F-bodies never ran 12 anything while stock and most never ran 13.0 stock either.
You're desperately trying to shelve the 4th gen alongside the current Mustang GT and in reality, as I've already said, they're simply NOT that close. The Mustang is better in EVERY measurable way.
01-19-2014, 06:45 PM
#107
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
You had a few on the scales... Congratulations! I'm also confident the majority of those YOU had on the scales ALSO ran 12.9 or better when 100% stock... After all, it's you and not some normal person who can actually remember the truth.
So there we have it... 1 ran 12.89 and since it was actually stock AND not the lightest one, as if that matters since they're ALL within 100 lb according to you, then OBVIOUSLY it's possible they'd run 12.5's with just a tire! Makes perfect sense even though... IT NEVER ACTUALLY HAPPENED!
That 1 you're talking about was driven by Evan Smith, widely known to be one of the better drivers of these stock vehicles and he also happened to own a 4th gen or more himself. Besides that, not even Evan ever repeated that time. His best aside from that was like 13.06... GREAT for the time, but by no means 12.5's. Evan did run a 12.7 in a 2003 Mustang Cobra in June of 2002, while in the process of dismantling an also brand new and stock Anniversary SS... which DIDN'T run 12's... He also ran them both on a road course, which the Mustang also won, albeit by only a little. http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...maro_shootout/ <~ No Super Snake, mind you, but that Cobra also had to deal with IRS... LONG before Camaro ever had it. Ford went away from it for years because it not only saved money, but made it easier to drag race, which is all most pony car owners do anyway.
Again, we know some have run well. We also know that NONE have run as well as the new 5L has while in actual stock condition. Further, we know that most 98-02 F-bodies never ran 12 anything while stock and most never ran 13.0 stock either.
You're desperately trying to shelve the 4th gen alongside the current Mustang GT and in reality, as I've already said, they're simply NOT that close. The Mustang is better in EVERY measurable way.
So there we have it... 1 ran 12.89 and since it was actually stock AND not the lightest one, as if that matters since they're ALL within 100 lb according to you, then OBVIOUSLY it's possible they'd run 12.5's with just a tire! Makes perfect sense even though... IT NEVER ACTUALLY HAPPENED!
That 1 you're talking about was driven by Evan Smith, widely known to be one of the better drivers of these stock vehicles and he also happened to own a 4th gen or more himself. Besides that, not even Evan ever repeated that time. His best aside from that was like 13.06... GREAT for the time, but by no means 12.5's. Evan did run a 12.7 in a 2003 Mustang Cobra in June of 2002, while in the process of dismantling an also brand new and stock Anniversary SS... which DIDN'T run 12's... He also ran them both on a road course, which the Mustang also won, albeit by only a little. http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...maro_shootout/ <~ No Super Snake, mind you, but that Cobra also had to deal with IRS... LONG before Camaro ever had it. Ford went away from it for years because it not only saved money, but made it easier to drag race, which is all most pony car owners do anyway.
Again, we know some have run well. We also know that NONE have run as well as the new 5L has while in actual stock condition. Further, we know that most 98-02 F-bodies never ran 12 anything while stock and most never ran 13.0 stock either.
You're desperately trying to shelve the 4th gen alongside the current Mustang GT and in reality, as I've already said, they're simply NOT that close. The Mustang is better in EVERY measurable way.
Other than that thanks for posting the article. That was a no SLP option SS that ran that close to the clobra. No doubt would've won on the road course if it woulda had the SLP bilstein suspension. I drove them both with (mine) and w/o that. The fact that the camaro went a 13.4 with a 2.4 60' further proves my theory.......thank you.
01-19-2014, 08:49 PM
#108
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it LAUGHABLE that you start by saying most of the ones you were around didn't stay stock for long... But you didn't have slicks or DR's... On account of you're a winner like that, I'm sure!
Other than that thanks for posting the article. That was a no SLP option SS that ran that close to the clobra. No doubt would've won on the road course if it woulda had the SLP bilstein suspension. I drove them both with (mine) and w/o that. The fact that the camaro went a 13.4 with a 2.4 60' further proves my theory.......thank you.
Btw, the 12.79 came on the pass where Evan missed 4th gear... He'd already run 12.6's a month prior.
Not to take away from what little you know, I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that MOST of us might think Evan had a fairly good idea what he was doing AND talking about, AT THE TIME and just might have a better recollection on THE DAY OF THE EVENT than you may have, 10+yrs later, since he wrote it down and you failed to do that. I don't mind your stories. I've been laughing about them for 10yrs... Still, Evan got it right and YOU DIDN'T! That's why we paid him and not you.
"Having driven each iteration of the fourth-gen Camaro since its 1993 introduction, the SS was quite familiar. Every good point and bad point was accounted for. On the plus side of the ledger was the jet-fighter styling and the SS package (which gives you the higher output, 325-horse LS1 with ram induction, 17-inch wheels, an upgraded suspension and a low restriction, dual outlet exhaust, among other items)." The standard Z/28 got De Carbon monotube shocks. That's the company which invented them and Bilstein paid royalties for the rights to the design till like 1977. It was purchased in phases by DELPHI, completing acquisition in 1997. Somehow, you'll just throw out there, Bilstien is better... WHY? Because you've never heard of De Carbon? I'd bet on that.
Either way, these are the very same type of shock absorber and the article clearly states that SS got the upgrade... whatever that entails.
I don 't know what you're looking for, but it clearly says this car was complete, down to the Hurst shifter(we all know they got).
Now there's TWO things I think you're full of... Other than crap, EXCUSES! Bottom line is the same as it was nearly 12yrs ago... The Mustang Cobra beat out the Camaro SS, period. You really need to learn to get over it.
01-20-2014, 03:04 AM
#109
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (29)
just because the car has gobs of TQ and HP dosent mean the driver knew what the hell he was doing. a 400 rwhp car could have easily took out the GT500 with good driver with the exception of the GT500 driver being bad.
No doubt the GT500 is Superior in HP and TQ. but if you cant drive it. IT ISNT WORTH A **** !!!!!!!!!
No doubt the GT500 is Superior in HP and TQ. but if you cant drive it. IT ISNT WORTH A **** !!!!!!!!!
01-20-2014, 03:20 AM
#111
On The Tree
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wilmywood NC
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just because the car has gobs of TQ and HP dosent mean the driver knew what the hell he was doing. a 400 rwhp car could have easily took out the GT500 with good driver with the exception of the GT500 driver being bad.
No doubt the GT500 is Superior in HP and TQ. but if you cant drive it. IT ISNT WORTH A **** !!!!!!!!!
No doubt the GT500 is Superior in HP and TQ. but if you cant drive it. IT ISNT WORTH A **** !!!!!!!!!
Hell, the GT500 driver might have not even been racing.
01-20-2014, 03:37 AM
#112
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (29)
Ah and you bring a good point 
when I had my TA I raced a GT500 and won twice(from a dig). I know I didn't beat the car but the driver. But a W is a W regardless. I made those guys in the GT500 feel like **** LMAO. They left town
My car only made 326 to the wheels at the time
when I had my TA I raced a GT500 and won twice(from a dig). I know I didn't beat the car but the driver. But a W is a W regardless. I made those guys in the GT500 feel like **** LMAO. They left town
My car only made 326 to the wheels at the time
01-20-2014, 04:40 AM
#113
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Richmond, Mi
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O ya vary true!!! Really? He just waved me next to him just to honk 3 times to say "Hi" an followed me up to 130?? Lol
its funny to my wife bought me a big rear window sticker for my car an not realy into all the stickers or trash talking on the road but might just half to put it on!!
( the only thing that runs good in a ford is the owners mouth). There's some truth to that sticker lol
its funny to my wife bought me a big rear window sticker for my car an not realy into all the stickers or trash talking on the road but might just half to put it on!!
( the only thing that runs good in a ford is the owners mouth). There's some truth to that sticker lol
Last edited by Riddle0288; 01-20-2014 at 05:00 AM.
01-20-2014, 07:26 AM
#114
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Nobody gives a damn what your broke *** had... It still happened.
I find it LAUGHABLE that you start by saying most of the ones you were around didn't stay stock for long... But you didn't have slicks or DR's... On account of you're a winner like that, I'm sure!
A 2.15 short netted a 13.25 in the same exact car... The only point you have here is atop your head! And that was 13.47, not to be mistaken for a .40, plus the MPH was nearly identical, so your theory is shot, period.
Btw, the 12.79 came on the pass where Evan missed 4th gear... He'd already run 12.6's a month prior.
Not to take away from what little you know, I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that MOST of us might think Evan had a fairly good idea what he was doing AND talking about, AT THE TIME and just might have a better recollection on THE DAY OF THE EVENT than you may have, 10+yrs later, since he wrote it down and you failed to do that. I don't mind your stories. I've been laughing about them for 10yrs... Still, Evan got it right and YOU DIDN'T! That's why we paid him and not you.
"Having driven each iteration of the fourth-gen Camaro since its 1993 introduction, the SS was quite familiar. Every good point and bad point was accounted for. On the plus side of the ledger was the jet-fighter styling and the SS package (which gives you the higher output, 325-horse LS1 with ram induction, 17-inch wheels, an upgraded suspension and a low restriction, dual outlet exhaust, among other items)." The standard Z/28 got De Carbon monotube shocks. That's the company which invented them and Bilstein paid royalties for the rights to the design till like 1977. It was purchased in phases by DELPHI, completing acquisition in 1997. Somehow, you'll just throw out there, Bilstien is better... WHY? Because you've never heard of De Carbon? I'd bet on that.
Either way, these are the very same type of shock absorber and the article clearly states that SS got the upgrade... whatever that entails.
I don 't know what you're looking for, but it clearly says this car was complete, down to the Hurst shifter(we all know they got).
Now there's TWO things I think you're full of... Other than crap, EXCUSES! Bottom line is the same as it was nearly 12yrs ago... The Mustang Cobra beat out the Camaro SS, period. You really need to learn to get over it.
I find it LAUGHABLE that you start by saying most of the ones you were around didn't stay stock for long... But you didn't have slicks or DR's... On account of you're a winner like that, I'm sure!
A 2.15 short netted a 13.25 in the same exact car... The only point you have here is atop your head! And that was 13.47, not to be mistaken for a .40, plus the MPH was nearly identical, so your theory is shot, period.
Btw, the 12.79 came on the pass where Evan missed 4th gear... He'd already run 12.6's a month prior.
Not to take away from what little you know, I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that MOST of us might think Evan had a fairly good idea what he was doing AND talking about, AT THE TIME and just might have a better recollection on THE DAY OF THE EVENT than you may have, 10+yrs later, since he wrote it down and you failed to do that. I don't mind your stories. I've been laughing about them for 10yrs... Still, Evan got it right and YOU DIDN'T! That's why we paid him and not you.
"Having driven each iteration of the fourth-gen Camaro since its 1993 introduction, the SS was quite familiar. Every good point and bad point was accounted for. On the plus side of the ledger was the jet-fighter styling and the SS package (which gives you the higher output, 325-horse LS1 with ram induction, 17-inch wheels, an upgraded suspension and a low restriction, dual outlet exhaust, among other items)." The standard Z/28 got De Carbon monotube shocks. That's the company which invented them and Bilstein paid royalties for the rights to the design till like 1977. It was purchased in phases by DELPHI, completing acquisition in 1997. Somehow, you'll just throw out there, Bilstien is better... WHY? Because you've never heard of De Carbon? I'd bet on that.
Either way, these are the very same type of shock absorber and the article clearly states that SS got the upgrade... whatever that entails.
I don 't know what you're looking for, but it clearly says this car was complete, down to the Hurst shifter(we all know they got).
Now there's TWO things I think you're full of... Other than crap, EXCUSES! Bottom line is the same as it was nearly 12yrs ago... The Mustang Cobra beat out the Camaro SS, period. You really need to learn to get over it.
Just so you know all that **** you put in bold is WRONG. If you were not so damn stupid you could look at the pics of the car and see that.
SS's came with a upgraded sus. but NOT the availible SLP sus. More **** you don't know. Slp suspended cars sat lower had Eibach springs and REAL Bilsteins.....not those pos de carbons which were the standard shocks on SS/T/a.
Now you want to compare the Cobra's best time on a completely different day to the Camaro's time that day. Classic you.
No need for me to write a book when I can put you away so quickly.
Last edited by HioSSilver; 01-20-2014 at 07:33 AM.
01-20-2014, 08:25 AM
#115
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O ya vary true!!! Really? He just waved me next to him just to honk 3 times to say "Hi" an followed me up to 130?? Lol
its funny to my wife bought me a big rear window sticker for my car an not realy into all the stickers or trash talking on the road but might just half to put it on!!
( the only thing that runs good in a ford is the owners mouth). There's some truth to that sticker lol
its funny to my wife bought me a big rear window sticker for my car an not realy into all the stickers or trash talking on the road but might just half to put it on!!
( the only thing that runs good in a ford is the owners mouth). There's some truth to that sticker lol
It's not about whether or not you won, but whether or not it was really the car you say it was, as those are so much more powerful that if you took off and left one to 100, but 130, it's likely to have just blasted by you with the obviously lopsided power advantage.
01-20-2014, 10:10 AM
#117
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Richmond, Mi
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for the spelling lol POS phone! but yes I understand where ur coming from cuz I was surprised that it happened the way it did. an I have a good friend that's a ford nut an he still don't believe me just cuz of the hp an torque difference in the 2 cars! Don't no if it was more a driver to driver race but!!! It's a win in my book.. 
01-20-2014, 11:50 AM
#118
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just so you know all that **** you put in bold is WRONG. If you were not so damn stupid you could look at the pics of the car and see that.
SS's came with a upgraded sus. but NOT the availible SLP sus. More **** you don't know. Slp suspended cars sat lower had Eibach springs and REAL Bilsteins.....not those pos de carbons which were the standard shocks on SS/T/a.
Now you want to compare the Cobra's best time on a completely different day to the Camaro's time that day. Classic you.
It isn't like the Cobra didn't CONSISTENTLY run quicker, because it did indeed.
No need for me to write a book when I can put you away so quickly.
Finally: If you read the article, you'll be able to see where it says the SS package on THAT car was $3,625.00(WU8 code) and $2,500.00(Z4C code) got the optional 35th Ann package. Then, if you know all you claim to know, you'll quickly be able to check with the GM "RPO" codes for those cars and then you'll be able to learn that THIS PACKAGE is listed as " "non-Chevy Mod. by SLP Engineering" and 11,191 were made(3,369 in 2002 and 1,971 like the one in the article). I got that from the site "Chevy-Camaro . com"
Looking around even more, I have seen only that, if the SS has the "High Performance Suspension," it is either Koni or Bilstein and nothing I've seen differentiates between the two.
I'm not a big SS fan personally, and never claimed to know all about them, UNLIKE YOU... Also unlike you, I took the time to check my facts against your dreams and it turns out my facts are indeed more accurate.
01-20-2014, 11:56 AM
#119
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: South MS
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody cares... People who HAD the cars at the time... did.
It's DIRECTLY from the article! I'm sure your goofy *** knows more about the car that Evan Smith was driving and writing about in 2002... today, having NEVER actually seen the car in person yourself, let alone examined it. You have an incredible knack for being a total dimwit.
Again, I quoted the article. I didn't just write something in bold. As for Bilstien, YOU said it didn't, but should've had Bilstien. The "package description" claims higher performance.
I added AN ENTIRE ARTICLE and the times are in it... The Camaro had its *** handed to it, PERIOD. Cobra ran .46 better, best vs. best, even with a missed gear...
It isn't like the Cobra didn't CONSISTENTLY run quicker, because it did indeed.
You're such a wannabe... TRYING desperately to live in the past, based on what you WANTED to have happen won't change anything. As we've all known for over a decade, the Cobra beat the Camaro silly.
Finally: If you read the article, you'll be able to see where it says the SS package on THAT car was $3,625.00(WU8 code) and $2,500.00(Z4C code) got the optional 35th Ann package. Then, if you know all you claim to know, you'll quickly be able to check with the GM "RPO" codes for those cars and then you'll be able to learn that THIS PACKAGE is listed as " "non-Chevy Mod. by SLP Engineering" and 11,191 were made(3,369 in 2002 and 1,971 like the one in the article). I got that from the site "Chevy-Camaro . com"
Looking around even more, I have seen only that, if the SS has the "High Performance Suspension," it is either Koni or Bilstein and nothing I've seen differentiates between the two.
I'm not a big SS fan personally, and never claimed to know all about them, UNLIKE YOU... Also unlike you, I took the time to check my facts against your dreams and it turns out my facts are indeed more accurate.
It's DIRECTLY from the article! I'm sure your goofy *** knows more about the car that Evan Smith was driving and writing about in 2002... today, having NEVER actually seen the car in person yourself, let alone examined it. You have an incredible knack for being a total dimwit.
Again, I quoted the article. I didn't just write something in bold. As for Bilstien, YOU said it didn't, but should've had Bilstien. The "package description" claims higher performance.
I added AN ENTIRE ARTICLE and the times are in it... The Camaro had its *** handed to it, PERIOD. Cobra ran .46 better, best vs. best, even with a missed gear...
It isn't like the Cobra didn't CONSISTENTLY run quicker, because it did indeed.
You're such a wannabe... TRYING desperately to live in the past, based on what you WANTED to have happen won't change anything. As we've all known for over a decade, the Cobra beat the Camaro silly.
Finally: If you read the article, you'll be able to see where it says the SS package on THAT car was $3,625.00(WU8 code) and $2,500.00(Z4C code) got the optional 35th Ann package. Then, if you know all you claim to know, you'll quickly be able to check with the GM "RPO" codes for those cars and then you'll be able to learn that THIS PACKAGE is listed as " "non-Chevy Mod. by SLP Engineering" and 11,191 were made(3,369 in 2002 and 1,971 like the one in the article). I got that from the site "Chevy-Camaro . com"
Looking around even more, I have seen only that, if the SS has the "High Performance Suspension," it is either Koni or Bilstein and nothing I've seen differentiates between the two.
I'm not a big SS fan personally, and never claimed to know all about them, UNLIKE YOU... Also unlike you, I took the time to check my facts against your dreams and it turns out my facts are indeed more accurate.