Camaro: 1st gen vs. 5th gen, what's changed?

jg95z28 · 08-12-2005, 07:50 PM

I was re-reading Camaro Exposed: 1967-1969 by Paul Zazarine last night when I stumbled upon the following:

'When work began on the F-car in August 1964, a set of specific baselines were established by Chevrolet for the final design:

Distinctively modern aerodynamic styling for a clean functional appearance
Small, highly maneuverable size with packaging for four passengers
A very broad range of available performance capability
Quick, sharply defined roadability with a firm, yet comfortable ride
"Cockpit-type" interiors for close driver identification
An evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, basic design approach to maintain maximum value to the customer
Wide Selection of mechanical and appearance equipment to allow customer tailoring to his needs and desires'

Based upon all the discussions around here for the past two years on what we want in a 5th gen Camaro, I can't honestly see that anything has changed... even after 40-plus years.

guionM · 08-12-2005, 08:19 PM

The recipie for the pony car.

turbo96z28 · 08-12-2005, 08:29 PM

if anything has changed, it's the technology. hopefully all the winky's are true and GM is sticking to this formula,

Z284ever · 08-12-2005, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jg95z28

I was re-reading Camaro Exposed: 1967-1969 by Paul Zazarine last night when I stumbled upon the following:

'When work began on the F-car in August 1964, a set of specific baselines were established by Chevrolet for the final design:

Distinctively modern aerodynamic styling for a clean functional appearance
Small, highly maneuverable size with packaging for four passengers
A very broad range of available performance capability
Quick, sharply defined roadability with a firm, yet comfortable ride
"Cockpit-type" interiors for close driver identification
An evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, basic design approach to maintain maximum value to the customer
Wide Selection of mechanical and appearance equipment to allow customer tailoring to his needs and desires'

Interesting, huh?

SGT Posaune · 08-13-2005, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z284ever

Interesting, huh?

Depends on what you consider small? Solstice is small. So is the Aveo (well maybe that one is tiny). Cobalt is small.

It is good to see the Fourth gen got a few of those.

jg95z28 · 08-13-2005, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z284ever

Interesting, huh?

I knew you'd get a kick out of that.

When you consider at the time that was originally written, Chevrolet already had a small sporty car to compete with the Mustang... the Corvair. (Or so they thought.) Before the Mustang's introduction, the Corvair, and in particular the Monza, was the best selling small sporty car in American, and even outsold all the imports. Mustang changed all that, along with help from Ralph Nadar. America just wasn't ready for a rear engine air-cooled IRS sports car.

Camaro was small when compared with the big cars of the day, which were Impala, Biscayne, Chevelle, etc.

Another interesting part in that book is the development of the car and how they had to work around the high cowl that it had inherited from the Chevy II. There are also some very interesting clay proposals for a low cowl version for 1969, which also included a more aero roofline. I say interesting because a few of them look nearly identical to many of these prototypes that we've been dreaming up around here for the past two-years.

DaxsZ28 · 08-13-2005, 11:08 AM

Great post. I hope GM follows the same guidelines for the 5th gen.

vinz96z · 08-13-2005, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SGT Posaune

Depends on what you consider small? Solstice is small. So is the Aveo (well maybe that one is tiny). Cobalt is small.

It is good to see the Fourth gen got a few of those.

Definately a good post. I agree with the Sargent though, I wouldn't exactly call the fourth gen small...

MasterEvilAce · 08-13-2005, 02:07 PM

Quote:

A very broad range of available performance capability

I don't consider that still in existance.. late 4th gen you basically get v6 or ls1.

Broad? Meh. Then it's standard handling or upgraded (Z28/ss)
It's one or the other.. NOT broad.

It was a lot broader back in the day.

Joe 97RA · 08-13-2005, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jg95z28

I was re-reading Camaro Exposed: 1967-1969 by Paul Zazarine last night
Based upon all the discussions around here for the past two years on what we want in a 5th gen Camaro, I can't honestly see that anything has changed... even after 40-plus years.

Zazarine is an idiot. I doubt he has an original thought and if he did, it would probably be the wrong one. I distictly remember breakfast with him about 10 years ago and all he could do was bash the new LS technology that was due to be introduced in the 97 Vette. He said that motor would be chevy's undoing. He was an idiot then, and still is now. Incidently, that doesn't have anything to do with the 5th generation. Just stop reading crap written by Paul and you'll be further along.

91_z28_4me · 08-13-2005, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterEvilAce

I don't consider that still in existance.. late 4th gen you basically get v6 or ls1.

Broad? Meh. Then it's standard handling or upgraded (Z28/ss)
It's one or the other.. NOT broad.

It was a lot broader back in the day.

Well in the 4th gens you could get the Y87 option for the V6 which gave it better suspension and you could get the SS option on the V8 which also improved the suspension. 3 suspensions, 2 engines, 4 combiniations of suspensions and engines. Now we will have a mid level V8 so that will probably have a suspension package available for it so you have 6 combinations of that, who knows there could even be a super Camaro so we could have 7 combinations. It won't be like the first gen as far as options but you should still see some diversity.

SFireGT98 · 08-14-2005, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 91_z28_4me

Well in the 4th gens you could get the Y87 option for the V6 which gave it better suspension and you could get the SS option on the V8 which also improved the suspension. 3 suspensions, 2 engines, 4 combiniations of suspensions and engines.

Actually......

The Y87 package didnt give you a suspension.

It added to the stock v6 car:

-limited slip diffy
-little bit bigger 16 inch tire
-dual exhausts (which still sucked anyway, they were tiny)
-same steering ratio as the v8 cars
-four wheel discs on pre-98 built cars

Not to be picky, just wanted to point it out

HAZ-Matt · 08-15-2005, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFireGT98

Actually......

The Y87 package didnt give you a suspension.

It added to the stock v6 car:

-limited slip diffy
-little bit bigger 16 inch tire
-dual exhausts (which still sucked anyway, they were tiny)
-same steering ratio as the v8 cars
-four wheel discs on pre-98 built cars

Not to be picky, just wanted to point it out

And 3.42 gears on the automatics.

Diognes56 · 08-30-2005, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jg95z28

Distinctively modern aerodynamic styling for a clean functional appearance
Small, highly maneuverable size with packaging for four passengers
A very broad range of available performance capability
Quick, sharply defined roadability with a firm, yet comfortable ride
"Cockpit-type" interiors for close driver identification
An evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, basic design approach to maintain maximum value to the customer
Wide Selection of mechanical and appearance equipment to allow customer tailoring to his needs and desires'

Amen!!!

David