Define exactly what makes something "LOOK" like a Camaro

OK, lets lay a minefield. :)

On the GTO site, there was a pretty ongoing intense (and in some ways extremely stupid) outcry over the new GTO supposedly not looking like a GTO.

For the record, I really think anyone who said that isn't playing with a full deck, since the GTO in appearence was nothing more than a Pontiac mid-size family coupe with (primarily) fake hoodscoops & a blackout grille (excluding the appearence package of the "Judge" and the '74 Ventura based version). The GTO has traditionally been whatever Pontiac's styling theme across the board was at the time, and nothing more, meaning short of a fake hoodscoop, the new GTO is dead on historically.

Now, the minefield. In another thread, a photoshoped picture had more than one person say it "wasn't a Camaro". It's a line I've used a few times myself over the years here.

Camaro has had 4 body designs, and beyond proportions, it can be said each one was different. The 1st gen had 2 styles, the clean 67 & 68, and the creased '69 which had tacky rivet-on "scoops" in front of the rear wheels, in the finest Mustang fashion.

The 2nd gen had at least 4 looks. The standard issue early 70s Camaro nose, the early 70s big "RS" grille, the shovel nose 75-77 edition, & the sculpured plastic look if the post '78s. Camaro also had 3 different rear ends, and 2 different rear glass.

The 3rd gen kept it's angular look for 9 years (though it's CMBL seemed to be in a different position each year). and the 4th gen was as curveous as the 3rd was angular, though it carried nearly the exact same design themes.

So my question/minefield is What look IS Camaro?

The basics has always been a long hood, and short deck. But after that, you start loosing it.

*Does it have a 3 box look (67-69) or a fastback (70 onwards)?
*Does it have a conventional grille (67-81...86 for Berlineta), or is it strictly a bottom breather (82..or 86, onward)?
*Is it a coupe (67-81) or a hatch?
*Does it have 4 round lights (1970-73) wraparounds (74-02) or a split bar (67-69)?
* Bubble back window (75-02) or a somewhat flat one (67-74)?

And the list goes on and on.

We spend so much time talking about ultra high performance V8s, Z28s, SSs, handling, yet no one has taken on the issue as to what the next Camaro should look like.

Lets put the "engine in a box" mentality aside, lock up the "physics defying handling" fantasies, and finally (warning: he who starts this risks getting flamed) bury that endless Z28 vs SS headache, and lets look at the car itself.

The Mitsubishi 3000 & Dodge Stealth had the same proportions as the 4th gen, the new GTO has proportions of the 1st gen, and there are plenty of cars on the road that have a design theme or 2 from the F-bodies.

What makes a Camaro look like a Camaro?

*tip toes through the mines* I do not feel that ANY two of the 4 generations of Camaros look similar.... What I do know is that when I get in my camaro, I know I am in a camaro. It just screams excess. Most of us dont buy camaros for fuel economy or emissions purposes, we buy it because carving a corner/ or launching the car at neck breaking RPMs are our favorite things to do. MY deffiniton of what a camaro should LOOK like is not a matter of what it should look like at all. It is a matter much deeper, its a matter of what it makes me FEEL like. I have read many articles/threads on the new GTO, and they are in most cases not making any sense. A big engine in a small/light weight automobile.... that is what the GTO was all about right? Well that is not my era, but it looks to me like GM has taken a step in the right direction.

*hits a mine*

just my 2 cents.

Charlie

I gotta agree with the survey that was done, the Third Gens are the perfect example of the Camaro look and attitude. A bright red IROC-Z28 with T-Tops is the whole Camaro thing defined and exemplified. (especially the 85-87s)

A Camaro to me is a wide, low car, with recessed headlights, GFX, round but angular lines, sharp quarter panel and hood creases, wrap around taillights, fender flares, a body shaped like this < > on the sides, wide tires, dual outlets, raked windshield, nice (functional or not) hood designs, the emblem on the middle front of the car, the usual 3 piece spoiler on the hatch lid/trunk, appealing rims, and just all-out aggressive and flashy looks. Stripes of any kind have always been a part of the Camaro whether it be racing stripes or lower body stripes. On the interior I'd like to see a big circular speedometer (at left) and tach (on right) with the 3 other gauges placed together separately. Seats with the word Camaro on them with designs such as lines either straight or going across the seats and door panels have also been common. Black trimmed interior and exterior has also been something that you could call "Camaro."

Amazingly enough, eventhough I consider myself a life-long Camaro fanatic ....this is a really tough question!

For me, it's not really so important that it look like any previous Camaro. In fact, I've probably seen as many '69 renditions of a 5th gen, as I think that I can handle. Honestly, I don't especially want a 5th gen looking like any previous Camaro. Been there...done that....got the T-shirt.

There is a certain essence that is Camaro that might be hard to put your finger on. But one thing for sure....if I see it...I'll recognise it. And conversely...if it's not there...I'll know it. It's not so important for it to look specifically like a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th gen, or if it's a hatch or coupe, or 3 box or fastback....or any of those things really.

Somehow what Camaro is, just transcends all that stuff.

It's about the right proportions. The right stance. The right attitude. It's about the way the wheels fill the wheel wells. It's about clean lines and yet with menacing agressiveness. It's about feeling that squishy thing in your gut when you see one. That's how you'll know it's a Camaro.

Originally posted by IZ28
I gotta agree with the survey that was done, the Third Gens are the perfect example of the Camaro look and attitude. A red IROC-Z is the whole Camaro thing defined and exemplified.

A Camaro to me is a wide, low car, with recessed headlights, GFX, round but angular lines

*Sigh* The Camaro was "angular" IMO for just 10 years of its 35 year history. I never mean to take an argumentative approach when I disagree with you, but the 1st, 2nd and 4th Gens clearly do not possess the sharp creases of the '82-'92 cars. So the obvious question becomes, why do those cars represent "Camaro" more than anything else?

1st and 2nds don't have sharp creases like Thirds?? Take another look. They were all a mix of roundned and sharp lines before the 4th Gen. The Thirds blended it perfectly to make the tough yet flashy look just right. They have the American musclecar attitude and the exotic car style locked.

I gotta agree with the survey that was done, the Third Gens are the perfect example of the Camaro look and attitude. A red IROC-Z is the whole Camaro thing defined and exemplified.

The 3gen's sold more Z28's (including Z28 - IROC-z's) than any other generation IIRC. They look the meanest IMHO and capture the spirit of a Camaro the best although I think the 4gen is a close second. The 1st gen's were only around a couple years, they're more like an 'embryonic' Camaro than the 'real' Camaro (not a flame to anyone who has one, just my opinion). To me, a 'real' Camaro has:

1. A big hood and an available honkin' V8 under it on the performance variant
2. Fastback roofline with heavily sloped rear glass
3. A lot of tumblehome (IE glasshouse narrower than max car width)
4. 2+2 seating
5. Cockpit-style seating and wraparound, driver-oriented controls
6. Graphics are out of fashion now but I love a few stripes and letters for contrast with the paint
7. Tires with at least 245 tread width, racy aluminum wheels with positive offset (I believe something was lost when automakers started making all their wheels flat in the 1990s, yes, I know that is the minimum mass profile)
8. Some kind of spoiler BUT NOT TOO MUCH of one, just 'enough'... the 4gen SS spoiler is right on the edge of 'too much', the 4gen Z28 spoiler is too subtle, the pre-91 3gen was about right.
9. There are plenty of cars today to lug around the 'jellybean-wannabe' mantle. Camaros get a lot of their menacing posture from sharp angular styling like on the 3gen, and I hope the 5gen follows suit.
10. Chrome 'identity' grille bars are NOT PART of a Camaro!
11. T-tops or some kind of removable roof panel. I'd give up having a convertible variant on the 5gen if it meant preserving the funds for developing a t-top option. Sunroof would be ok too but not as good.
12. Big taillights, mounted high
13. Dual chrome tips but not TOO prominent, and not more than 2 1/2 inch or so diameter
14. Gaping front intake, like the jet intake on an F-16 or F-86 fighter
15. Functional brake ducts and fog lights

This is tough. It's hard to describe a feeling when you see a car with definitions. You can describe the feeling, but not the car.

Anyhow, it's gotta look the Camaro look. If you are a Camaro guy (or girl) you know what that is.

Personally, I don't care if it looks like any of the previous generations. Each generation has it's own look. Even within a generation (especially 2nd) the car changes.

I have to admit, when I first saw the 4th gen in magazines and such, I didn't like it. But when I saw it in person, I started to change my mind. Then, when I was trading my 88 IROC in on my 93 Z, both cars were sitting side-by-side outside the showroom. I was waiting on the salesman to do something and I was just looking at both cars. It was sad and exciting at the same time. That's when I realized the 4th gen really was a Camaro, and I couldn't wait to get in and bang that 6 speed.

I think that's the cool thing about Camaros. Each gen has it's own personality. The owners of each generation do too! It makes us a very diverse and passionate community. Hopefully the 5th gen will just build on our community.

Yup...this is a tough one. Each Gen has, in it's own way, redefined Camaro styling.

The basics are of course long hood, short rear deck coupe seating 4. Looks must be at least moderately aggressive. "Looks fast when sitting still" applies to all Camaro's.

Styling should be FORWARD THINKING!! When a Camaro model is new it captures styling essence for years to come. It is original and clean in design, making minimal use of "tack ons" functional or not to make a statement. It's sheetmetal WILL NOT rely on past styling. It should not have the bulbous curves of the 90's, or the creased faceted look of the 80's, 3 box design of the 60's...etc. Use of prior styling cues are acceptable, but must be minimized and smoothly incorporated.

What would I like?? Taught, clean, muscular, aggresive front end, with presence.

Yes, I'm speaking in generalities....but I guess that has to come first...specifics are so much more difficult.

I think one thing the Camaro has always had, and what a new one needs, is that large, gaping, open fishmouth grille.
That is a Camaro trademark.

It needs to look pissed off!!!!!!!


I think the "Muscle tone" concept is what the 5th Gen should be, it is a 21st Century evolution of the 1st gen Camaro

Well, first of all, I gotta' say that I'm disappointed that guionM had to start this off with a rather spiteful attack on those of us who stood our ground and obviously GM heard us (the 2nd gen GTO's will arrive with the proper styling que's) when we said that "If you're gonna' call it a GTO then at least give it what GTO's ALWAYS had...hood scoops"...but that horse has been dead for a while, so let's just leave it alone...:rolleyes:

A Camaro's "look" has as much to do with proportion than any specific body line.

And as much as the 1969 is the overwhelmingly most popular body style of the 60's muscle cars, I don't think the 1st gens really define what a Camaro "looks like" for the ages.

The SS concept photoshopped version most recently posted has some of the look of a 67-68..but, again I don't think the 1st gens should "set the tone".

Long hood, short deck, 2+2 seating, sloping rear glass (more so from the 2nd gen on)...

Camaro's, after 1969 have always had the headlights above the beltline and a center mounted grille....or simulated grille, below the beltline.

They've also always had a nearly vertical B pillar, with no rear side glass, i.e. door glass only.

Add to that, most performance model Camaros had duck-tail style rear spoilers...with a few exceptions.

Personally I like the side body lines of the 1969 with their sweeping body line over the wheel openings...it really gave the car a forward movement even while sitting still....(No matter if guionM thinks the side chrome simulated vent openings are "tacky" or not...BTW, they weren't "riveted on", but use tinnerman nuts like most of the rest of the emblems and such for that era. Might want to do a little better research).

I've always felt like the sides of the 2nd gen & up Camaros lacked any real style what so ever...small wheel lips and added on ground effects didn't give the muscular style of the coke bottle shaped 67-68's or the defining sweeps of the 69....really kinda' boring side styling after the 1st gens. Oh, some 2nd gens had some added on vents on the front fenders, but looked like an afterthought.

Rear tailights have usually, but not always had a tear drop shape, sometimes wrapping the corners.

Camaros, again, 2nd gen on, had a low slung, wide track, aggressive looking stance.

I love my t-tops, but rumor is that the engineers are fighting side air-bag placement and we "might" not get a traditional t-top....gggrrrrrrrrr......:mad:

I'd venture a guess that most of us can tell a 2nd gen++ Camaro coming a mile away and the over-all proportion and iother defining elements will definately say "Camaro" when we see it.:bow:

Originally posted by Doug Harden
Well, first of all, I gotta' say that I'm disappointed that guionM had to start this off with a rather spiteful attack on those of us who stood our ground and obviously GM heard us (the 2nd gen GTO's will arrive with the proper styling ques) when we said that "If you're gonna' call it a GTO then at least give it what GTO's ALWAYS had...hood scoops"...but that horse has been dead for a while, so let's just leave it alone...:rolleyes:


Doug, go to the GTO site & read some of the things they wrote. You most certainly were not in that catagory! You stated your opinion on styling, and did it in a reasonable way.

As I pointed out (perhaps not as clearly as I should have) I was refering to the other site. Statements such as "Bob Lutz should be Fired", "I'll never buy a GM car again", "The new one discraces GTO's heritage", "GM should have left the car dead", and a whole host of things said over there led me to that opinion. They even had Bob Lutz himself visit the site to talk to them. Imagine if Bob Lutz addressed us here regarding a new Camaro that was faster than ever, and we gang up on him just because it doesn't look
like a 1969 only, or a 73 only. That's what I meant buy not playing with a full deck.

Seems that group wouldn't be happy unless the new GTO was a carbon copy of a 64..... then the ones that had a '69 wouldn't be happy because it didn't look like a '69, and so forth, and for the most part, those guys seemed to dumb to realize this. They seemed oblivious that GTO had no special look with regards to the rest of the Tempest & LeMans line.

On the other hand, pretty much everyone here voiced a general opinion that the new GTO was a very good car that was bland looking & plain, and needed some fine tuning design-wise. I remember that you were one of them. Styling is just a matter of taste & opinion, and I respect opinion, because I know my tastes tend to be low-keyed stylewise. But those guys over there were just plain........ out there.

So I want to make it clear that I wasn't refering to you Doug, or to anyone else that simply felt the GTO needed more "zing" stylewise.

That's completely different from those people who even went so far as condeming the new GTO's quality without knowing anything about Holden, never seeing one in their life, before the car even moved out of prototype stage, or indicating they would rather see a FWD Grand Prix as a GTO rather than the 160mph, RWD rocketsled that we'll be getting.

Apologies, Doug. :)

I agree that 3rd gens are the best example for the Camaro, but not the F-body as a whole. As long as the 5th gen is intimidating I will be happy. The best example of this a black Ram Air WS6 LS1 Trans Am. Those things just look super pissed and ready to rock :eek:

The 5th gen needs refined yet sharp lines. Thats the biggest thing. Sharp angular lines are intimidating.

With all that said, my favorite Camaro is the '70-'73 with the split bumper.
That car is sweet. I wouldn't mind owning one of those.

I think the 2nd gen F-bodies' look was changed a bit for the worse when they put the wrap-around rear glass in for '74.
Ironically, that style glass was intended for use right out of the gate in 1970. But I guess they had problems with sealing such a large piece of glass, so they went to the style that we see in the '70-'73 cars.

Originally posted by HuJass
With all that said, my favorite Camaro is the '70-'73 with the split bumper.
That car is sweet. I wouldn't mind owning one of those.

I think the 2nd gen F-bodies' look was changed a bit for the worse when they put the wrap-around rear glass in for '74.
Ironically, that style glass was intended for use right out of the gate in 1970. But I guess they had problems with sealing such a large piece of glass, so they went to the style that we see in the '70-'73 cars.

wrap around rear glass started in 75;)
also, i think door glass sorta makes or breaks the deal
only the 1st gens had glass behind the door glass

I stand corrected.

This is hard because each gen brought something new to the table. I look at the first and 4th gen and see no obvious connection. The variations and differences between each gen is too great. The closest they come is 3rd and 4th gen. For that reason, the 5th gen needs to be an evolved version of the 4th gen, which in return was somewhat of an evolved version of the 3rd gen.

While it isn’t as detailed, I’d simply say look at the 4th gen for clues and build from there. I say this because the 4th gen is what Camaro styling has meant for the last decade. Don’t start from a clean slate, but rather build from there.

Too new to Camaros to really give any good input, but I love the look of the ls1s. I never paid much attention until this version came out.

- Long hood
- Short back
- Wide

Those are the 3 simple things. But then comes in the part I kind of have trouble explaining. I guess the best way to put it in words is "subdued muscular appearance".

The Camaro doesn't have the super fancy, sharp edges like the exotics. It doesn't have all the flare of a Trans-Am. Its, like a keep it simple, but tough looking. It has some bulk to it, giving it a wide stance appearance that screams for lots of rubber. It's big enough that when you pull up next to a Miata you dwarf it, but when you generally look at the car it doesn't appear to be huge.

Dual exiting exhaust pipes. Though I guess the 4th Gen V6 didn't have this. I think that it's still something a Camaro should have, even in the base model.

That's what I can think of off the top of my head.

Long nose;
short rear deck with bobbed tail (Camaros of any generation without the small tail spoliers look really stupid IMHO);
wheels and tires that sit right at the edge of the widest part of the bodywork--"square shouldered";
sits low, without too much space between the top of the tire and the wheel well;
prominent dual exhausts; and
sloped windshield--not too vertical and sedan-like.

Beyond these basics, I am not too concerned. Let the pros work out the details.

I would like the new car to have functional aerodynamics and available options to make it road course-worthy out of the box, like a Z06, but that's more function than form.

I love my t-tops, but rumor is that the engineers are fighting side air-bag placement and we "might" not get a traditional t-top....

If I had to choose between having T-tops but no tumblehome or no T-tops but a good amount of tumblehome to preserve the racy shape, I'd take the latter (especially if a sunroof was available instead)

What everyone hasn't realized is that the 4th gens weren't selling very good. Why would you want to make a new car based on an older version that wasn't selling. It seems like that would be a waste and going with a completely new design would be the best bet. But like everyone else said the long nose and low slung design would have to be there.

I don't know what the big deal is about t-tops and side air bags.
The C6 will have a targa top and I don't hear anybody complaining about side bags.
Just mount them in the side of the seat. Problem solved.

F-bodies NEED T-Tops.

Originally posted by HuJass
F-bodies NEED T-Tops.

YES, I LOVE MY T-TOPS

I wouldn't trade them for a sunroof anyday!:cool: