With the exception of the 1967-69s, Camaro models tend to be long-lived; in fact, there have been only five Camaro generations in 45 years. Even after taking into account its 2003-2009 absence from the Chevrolet roster, that’s still not much change. If you want to put it into perspective, consider that there have been five generations of the Honda Accord between 1989 and 2012. Despite the increasing cost of pony-car insurance since the ’70s, despite the import invasion of the 1980s and 1990s, and despite reduced demand for two-door passenger cars in the Oughts, the Camaro is still with us. But for many years, Gen Four was thought to be the end of the line.
There was plenty to be excited about when the fourth-generation Camaro debuted, as a 1993 model. After all, Chevrolet didn’t just trot out an all-new Camaro every day. It was, at least for the early ’90s, a very sleek machine. The outgoing 1992 Camaro had changed little in appearance after debuting in late 1981. Yes, it still looked good, but by now its design seemed a bit dated. The ’93 changed all that.
(Editor’s Update: The Gen Four sat on essentially the same platform as the Gen Three, and its dimensions are almost identical (wheelbase: 101.10″; overall length: 193.20″. It was a tad wider, and (not surprisingly) a couple of hundred pounds heavier.)
Production of the 1993 Camaro (and Pontiac Firebird) moved from Van Nuys, CA, to Sainte-Therese, Quebec. One interesting feature of the new Camaro was its use of SMC (sheet moulding compound) instead of steel for the roof, doors, spoiler and hatch lid (or trunk lid, in the case of the new-for-1994 convertible).
Base Camaros received a 3.4-liter, 160-hp V6. Befitting their status in the lineup, Z28 models got the LT1 V8, with a healthy 275 hp and 325 lb-ft of torque. The standard transmission was a five-speed manual, with a four-speed automatic being optional. Z28s could also be had with a Borg-Warner six-speed manual transmission. It was a big deal in 1993, and the F-body twins were the first GM cars to offer this new transmission.
As mentioned previously, a Camaro convertible joined the lineup for 1994. Like the coupe, it was available in both base and Z28 guise. In 1995, California-bound base Camaros got the 3800 II V6 engine, while “49-staters” continued to make do with the 3.4-liter V6. Starting in 1996 all non-Z28 Camaros, regardless of destination, were equipped with the 3800.
And now we come to the 1997 model year, exemplified by this Bright Purple Metallic coupe I found last Sunday–actually, I first spotted it in late August among several other cars for sale on a corner car lot. The second visit yielded much better pictures, as you can see here. The color really piqued my interest–I’d never before seen it on a Camaro.
It is indeed a factory color, as this 1997 brochure will confirm. It is a polarizing color, to say the least, and I can’t imagine the take rate was very high. I don’t know if I’d drive a purple car, but in this case I think it looks rather good.
1997 was the 30th anniversary for the Camaro, and as you would expect, Chevrolet celebrated. Every 1997 Camaro was technically a “30th Anniversary Edition,” with a special logo embroidered into the headrests, as shown above. All ’97 models also received a revised interior and new tri-color taillights.
If the logo on the headrests wasn’t enough for you, there was the 30th Anniversary Package. As shown above, it recalled Camaros of the past with its special combination of Arctic White paint and wheels, orange stripes, and a white leather interior with houndstooth inserts. The package was restricted to the Z28 and top-of-the-line SS only (the SS having debuted in 1996, along with a revived RS), in your choice of a coupe or convertible. A 30th Anniversary coupe paced the 1997 Brickyard 400 NASCAR race. I know that because at the time, Dad got me a promo model of one from Eriksen Chevrolet. I still have it, along with a ’97 Camaro brochure from the same dealership. I really, really liked these 30th Anniversary Camaros. That white interior was just the icing on the cake.
But back to the V6 Camaro. As with many previous Camaros, the back seat was a little tight. (Ed: understatement of the week) In another nod to the past, the T-top was still available, with locks and sunshades. Believe it or not, A/C was optional on the base Camaro, although standard on the RS and Z/28. Also standard were dual airbags, PASS-Key anti-theft system, cloth bucket seats, full gauges and tachometer, tilt steering wheel, Solar-Ray tinted glass, and an AM/FM radio with cassette player.
On the entry-level V6 Camaro, goodies like a 6-way power driver’s seat, leather upholstery, four-wheel disc brakes (replacing the front disc/rear drum arrangement), CD player and 16″ x 8″ five-spoke alloy wheels (as shown on our featured CC) could be had as options. Frugal Camaro buyers who desired no such frills got bolt-on wheel covers instead of alloys.
The V6 Camaros got the same scooped hood, side moldings and spoiler as the speedier, V8-equipped Z28 models. For buyers on a budget, a V6 Camaro with the optional alloys was the spitting image of the Z28, save the requisite badging on the front fenders and rear deck. Of course, the pace was a bit more sedate…
I think these Camaros were beautiful. I was in my early teens when they debuted, and I thought they looked great. With the Corvette’s LT1 engine and six-speed, their performance came quite close to that of the contemporary ‘Vette. I also recall road testers being quite enamored of the Z28. Lots of bang for the buck could be had with these cars.
Still, they were not without their faults; beautiful as they were, some of their  switchgear and plastics were somewhat lacking. The interior, in particular, was rather slapdash and poorly fitted. That said, I still wouldn’t mind one of these ’90s pony cars. I even wouldn’t mind this purple version–and it’s for sale to boot. I’ll tell you one thing, it would probably get a LOT more attention than my white Volvo wagon!
Sadly, demand for sporty coupes started falling off a cliff in the mid-90s. Demand for Camaros (and the related Firebird/Trans Am) kept plunging. A facelift for ’98 did little to help; indeed, the ’93-’97 nose was far more attractive–at least in your author’s opinion. The last fourth-gen Camaro came off the line on August 27, 2002; the factory was shut down immediately after then. Chevy’s pony car was finished, or so it seemed.
Until April 10, 2009, that is. On that date. the fifth-gen Camaro debuted as an early ’10 model. The Camaro had been saved, albeit in a more retro and super-sized form than the sleek Gen Four. But that, as they say, is another story for another time.
Cheers to you, Camaro. You’re not quite the same, but I’m glad you’re still with us!
All Camaro brochure pictures are from lov2xlr8.no. Definitely worth a visit, with a brochure cache of U.S., European and Asian cars from the past to the present day. Check it out here.
One of my oldest friends has a purple ’96 Camaro. The paint on hers is in bad shape on the hood; otherwise, it’s this car’s doppelganger. I’m glad she doesn’t read CC because I’m going to say it: it’s a dreadful car. Sure, it’s fast, but it’s also big, thirsty, and surprisingly ponderous.
The other day I found myself stopped at a light behind a 3rd-gen Firebird. I hadn’t seen one in the wild in forever. I found myself seriously admiring its pert, tight little hind end. I marveled at how trim the car seemed compared to my friend’s ’96. I think I’d rather have one of those.
I find the 3rd generation Firebirds much more aesthetically pleasing than the 4th generation Firebirds, both inside and out.
Wikipedia (which is always right, of course) says the gen 4 Camaros were 193.2 inches long, and 193.5 from 2000-2002. I thought 221 inches sounded a little off — there’s no way these things are bigger than a Lincoln Town Car.
I checked Wikipedia as well as a couple of other sources, and I’m getting the same numbers, as well as a 101″ wheelbase. I really think people would have noticed if a Camaro was larger than a ’77 Buick Electra.
Yup. The Camaro was meaningfully bigger and heavier than the Mustang. The latter was a foot shorter, six inches narrower and a whopping 500 pounds lighter.
I’d argue that the Mustang ultimately sold much better primarily because it was a more appropriate size for a pony car. Yet when Ford finally retired the Fox-based Mustang it made the bad decision to Camaro-size the beast. Thus, the current milk cow.
Actually, the SN95 Mustang was about the size of the 3rd gen Camaro, where the Fox body was a bit smaller and lighter. The current one is a bit of a porker, but I’d still prefer it to the Camaro. The size is pretty close, but the Mustang is still about 250lbs lighter.
I’m a big fan of the Mustang Milk Cow, so much so that I bought a 2011 GT. It’s the fastest cow I’ve ever driven! I also had a 99 Firebird Formula. 5.0 definitely faster!
I was about to add the same thing, 221 is almost 70’s vintage land yacht.
Sorry about that. Tom is usually very good about his fact checking, and I only skimmed the article since it’s a car that doesn’t hold much interest to me. I will fix it right now. Thanks.
I was writing two CCs the same day, and mixed up figures with the other car…beg your pardon!
In addition to back sear being tight, wasn’t the front passenger seat foot space a joke?
I think GM ran the exhaust pipes right under the floor on that side, leaving a big bump in the floor.
Yes, GM put a huge hump on the passenger’s side floorpan about the length & location of a typical passenger’s left femur. The passenger could stretch out without difficulty but the hump is big enough to make one feel claustrophobic. I’m always the driver so I forget it’s there.
The hump also required a special molded floormat. Non factory floormats bunch up & will not stay put.
That hump, also present in many other GM models of the era, is actually there to clear the 2-4th gear servo on the 700-R4/4L60 transmissions, although it is much larger than needs be. I hate riding shotgun because of it,
No that hump is was put there for the early massive pellet style cat to reside and it was retained even after GM finally started using modern cats.
Somewhere around ’95ish, a higher-output LT1 was offered which actually squeezed two converters under that hump.
No, because I can stuff a 700-R4 in the tunnel of my 77 Chevelle, with plenty of room to spare, and it’s not a particularly large tunnel.
Mine has the pellet style cat still on it, and the whole floor itself is raised about an inch over the drivers side. The hump in the later cars was GMs attempt to make more legroom.
The hump was there on F-bodies and S-10s to clear the catalytic converter and provide decent ground clearance.
My 1980 Firebird had a hump like that too.
3G’s for this one seems quite reasonable.
Agreed — I’d pay the asking price. This color and condition of this car make it a rare find.
God help me, I agree – that’s a damn good price, and even with the color I’d consider it. (But what’s lurking underneath..?)
Also…what was with the late nineties and this shade of purple? It seems like it was available (and popular!) on everything from Neons and Cavaliers to Camaros/Firebirds and beyond. Bizarre. And then there was the Plymouth Prowler.
Not only the cars. My 1996 S-10 pickup had the same color purple with silver around the wheel wells, lower rocker panels and bumpers. Always loved that truck, quality was good enough that it got me back to Chevrolet after a 20 year boycott.
Lots of purple cars up to only a few years ago. Taurus, PT Cruiser, HHR, Camaro, Mustang, pickup trucks of all makes and sizes as well as some SUVs.
I liked the look of the 1998-2002 models best as far as the front end went. Reminded me of the 1970½ 2nd gen.
I don’t know the year, but one appeared in my neighborhood last evening. I saw it while walking our dog. It was a convertible. I like! It was black, but I didn’t hold that against it – I hate black cars…
Replacing the fuel pump on one of these is a joyous time.
At least on these they didn’t permanently attach the filler neck to the tank like the third generation cars. On the third gens you have to remove the driveshaft, exhaust system (behind the converter) and disconnect the rear end. When I did the FP in my ’89 Camaro (precautionary measure at 170K miles!), I left the brake hose attached but it was pulled pretty taut so in retrospect I should have disconnected that.
The rear axle has to drop down quite far due to that stupid filler neck — the gas tank has to come straight down, ugh. There isn’t any bracing in the area directly over the sending unit so GM could have been nice & added an access panel but nope.
in 4th gens, we cut a trap door over the tank, replace pump, and cover
I had a Car and Driver desk calendar some years ago. On the Camaro’s caption was a claim that the fourth generation was designed with a longer wheelbase in mind, but budget constraints dictated that the design be adapted the the previous generation’s platform – thus, the relatively long overhangs and slightly awkward proportions.
I’ve never seen that claim made anywhere else. Anyone else aware of the true facts?
Oh, and when these were new, the purple version was popular in my hometown of Baton Rouge, as were S-10s, which were also available in this color. Not surprising, as Louisiana State University’s colors are purple and gold. But this was during a short-lived color Renaissance in the early- to mid-1990s; there was a dark turquoise that was also available during the same era.
Had the purple ’96 S-10. No problem ever finding it in a crowded mall parking lot.
According to msn autos, the 3rd and 4th gen were pretty close in dimension, the biggest difference being the extra weight in the 4th gen cars. 3rd gen on the left.
Curb Weight – Automatic (lb.) 3375 3527
Curb Weight – Manual (lb.) 3273 3442
Wheelbase (in.) 101.00 101.10
Length (in.) 192.60 193.20
Width (in.) 72.40 74.10
Height (in.) 50.40 51.30
Track Front (in.) 60.00 60.70
Track Rear (in.) 60.90 60.60
Gimme a SLP Firehawk…I like the firebird/T.A. better in 4th gen.
Tom, THANKS for shooting this car! My favorite colors on these in order are the Quasar Blue Metallic, Purple, & the Mystic Teal Metallic — all rare colors. Back in ’95 or so, I was driving behind Serra Chevrolet in Birmingham & spotted a new purple Camaro in the prep-lot. It was beautiful & was a base model with plastic wheelcovers, 5-speed, and no options other than A/C. I wanted that car so bad.
I finally had enough money & credit a year or two later & decided to go order a new Quasar Blue Z28 but was a little too late. I walked into Serra Chevrolet in Birmingham, saw the front end of the ’98 model, & left absolutely disgusted. I could not believe what GM had done to the front end of that car.
I wasted nearly a year trying to locate a Quasar Blue, Purple, or Mystic Teal 6-speed ’93-’97 Z28 without success & ended up with a Polo Green ’95 6-speed car with 56K and beige leather interior. It was a very nice color although I hated the beige inside. The LT1 was strong but the 6-speed transmission made that car a joy to drive — the shifting was silky smooth — the best I’d ever driven.
A friend was about to lose his ’97 35th Anniversary car & offered me his interior for mine + $200 if I swapped everything out, carpet, headliner, etc. So I had the only Polo Green Z28 with white leather interior — it was a gorgeous car. The only other thing I did was replace the leather shifter knob with a white Hurst ball.
Several years ago the thing quit on me on my way home from work & I had no clue what was wrong with it so I sold it to a friend of mine for $2000 (BIG MISTAKE). Turns out it was the Optispark unit..a common issue with the LT1 engines.
I was 6-speed-less for a couple years & really missed my car so I ended up scoring a ’94 Z28 6-speed convertible off CL for $1800 — it had engine issues but by that time I was brave enough to tear into it (it was the Optispark). I’ve drove it a few years but it began intermittently cutting off so it’s in “time-out” (the barn). I hate black cars (especially on these Camaros) but a good-looking 275 horsepower stick-shift Convertible is not something you find very often.
Those were rare colors, I was selling Pontiacs at the same time, we had the rare purple or mystic teal, Firebird and even Grand Prix on the lot from time to time, though they were slow movers. I think we may have even had a purple Trans Am or Formula once. There was a brief return of earwax gold in the 99-00 too that never caught on,
I recall at the time there were “one year” colors that they would try out and would die the very next year.
This “Rockford Gold” was only a one year wonder in 98 from what I recall.
That is one incredibly vile color. I think Ford offered this
poohue on the Mustang sometime in that time period.This was the era of some adventurous colors. Chrysler offered a similar purple around this time that even showed up on minivans. The interior was a little less adventurous. Other than red, I love the three other interior colors – Dark Gray, Medium Gray and Neutral.
Do I recall that there was something strange about the 6 speed that made you skip 2nd and 3rd gears under light accelleration as a way to keep the EPA numbers high enough?
Yes — that was one annoying feature that I think was purposely designed to be easily disabled. I was one of the dumb ones who bought the $40 “skip-shift eliminator kit” which consisted of a resistor that plugged into the wiring harness, “fooling” the PCM into thinking the shift solenoid was still operational.
In actuality the feature can be disabled by just unplugging a connector underneath the car at the transmission. It sets a trouble code in the PCM but it’s one of those codes that does not even turn the Check Engine light on.
I just can’t leave a good thing alone.
The interiors on these cars did have some issues. The dashboard design of the ’93-’95 model cars is ugly — the two A/C vents on the top corners of the instrument cluster make the LH side of the dash look like a giant frog. The airbag steering wheel is pretty nasty looking & does not age well. The vinyl padded cover hardens over time making the horn nearly impossible to operate.
The giant plastic dash cover in front of the pad itself gets brittle over time & cracks. The console door is bulky & hinged at the rear. The hinge is of course plastic & one half is molded into the console body so one wrong bump with the elbow & the console body is ruined. Various hard plastic pieces fail.
It’s really a shame that “the little things” like this give these cars such a bad rap because overall, I feel that they do their job very well. The drivetrains are reliable (‘cept the Optispark!), performance is great, the T-tops do not leak, driver ergonomics is good (to me), and the optional Bose sound system is amazing.
GM really strengthened the bodies on these. My convertible has over 190K on its original drivetrain and has less cowl shake than the best of my third-gen fleet and the only rattle comes from the driver’s door window mechanism when the window is partially down.
I think they are very attractive cars for this era although the previous Camaros are more attractive to me, especially inside. We also have a Deep Violet (Purple) ’96 Mustang GT 5-speed convertible. What’s interesting is how different these two cars are from each other. I much prefer driving the Camaro.
I would be interested to hear what you prefer about your Camaro over the 95 Mustang GT.
Our GT is ’96 model, the first year for the modular 4.6L engine which only produced 215 hp. Even though our car has the 5-speed, the rear axle ratio is an insanely high 2.73. Acceleration is poor because of it. The car will do 55mph in second gear and that’s not at redline! By contrast, the Z28 has a 3.42 ratio rear end which feels much more appropriate.
I’m 5’11”, not real tall, but all arms & legs & prefer driving in a more reclined position. Our Mustang has the Power seat but even at its lowest rearmost position, I feel bunched up because I cannot stretch my legs. The Camaro also has the power seat but the driving position is much further back & lower.
I don’t like Stereos without knobs & the Ford design is all buttons. I have to take my eyes off the road to fiddle with the radio but with the Camaro, it can be done by “feel”. I’m not big on listening to the radio while driving but it is irritating having to focus on the radio for even a second or two.
The beltline on the Mustang is a little higher than the Camaro & it’s a little more difficult to see out the rear. It makes the rear end look a little too bulbous for my tastes.
The Mustang’s only interior lighting is located in the rear view mirror. No other lighting was available. The Camaro has the same but also has lights right behind each door opening. It may have lights under the instrument panel too but for some reason I just can’t recall…
But in the Mustang’s defense, it has some very nice features the Camaro doesn’t have. It has true dual exhaust & has an incredible smooth roar to it. The Exhaust pipes are polished stainless steel from just behind the rear axle to the tips. They look fantastic & will last the life of the car.
The 4.6L engine is the smoothest running engine we’ve ever owned. This sound campy but you could probably put a glass of water on the intake while it’s running & not see a ripple. Our car has about 140K on it & I assume it’s the original engine. While not as strong as the LT1, it seems to be a much more refined powerplant & we’ve had no issues with it other than a bad coil which took about 3 minutes to replace.
The Mustang interior has fewer flimsy plastic pieces than the Camaro. It’s only weak points are the shifter boot & ashtray areas. I personally like the Dash design a lot — It’s very attractive & is a throwback to the ’69 -’70 design with its two round “humps”. I’m a clock-guy & appreciate the separate clock mounted right on top..instead of the combined radio/clock display in the GMs. I hate having to touch the radio to see what station I’m tuned into.
Our Mustang has white leather interior which is much nicer than the dull cloth stuff in the Camaro. Although the Camaro offered leather, it was either a shade of grey or beige. The Mustang sunvisors also have a plastic core. The Camaros? Cardboard. Freakin’ cardboard sunvisors have no place in a convertible.
I found these hideous. They look like a Corvette that’s stopped going to the gym, and has been gorging on junk food. The 1970s Camaros were sleek -and probably roomier, even if they were a bit smaller overall.
Dare I say the words: D_____ S__ ?
Don’t do it.
+1
They were quite respectable for what they were, even with the usual GM cheapness and haphazard design and interior fittings. The 3800 cars were also quite respectable performers, especially with the 5-speed that, I believe, was only available on ’97s and above.
DO IT after all this is the generation that killed the Camaro due to many factors of this lack luster reskin. After all isn’t a DS a point that put another nail in GM’s coffin and this straight up killed the model that once was the poor man’s Bowtie flagship. It simultaiously looked dated right out of the box and as is mentioned lower looks like an overgrown Storm.
4th gen styling was one of Chuck Jordan’s last gigs, I think…
Thankfully, you do not chose DS candidates.
I’m sorry but there is no denying the fact that this miserable version was what ended the Camaro’s run, even if only for a while. Had it been an all around good car then it would have sold well enough not to have to have been killed.
It was a good car, but tastes were changing, sales were slipping, people that liked it, couldn’t insure it. Yes, it was a bit of a crazy showboat, big on the outside, small on the inside(LIKE THE BELOVED 2ND GEN, I KNOW, I OWN ONE) well, really like ALL F-body cars, a Kingswood Estate replacement?Look somewhere else, in fact, who really cares about room in a ponycar? Not the people that buy them. The F-body had escaped death in one way or another since the first fuel crisis, its number came up in 2002, GM’s funds were tight, the platform needed a full re-design and they made the choice, reluctantly, to kill the F-body.
I would think aesthetics plays a much bigger role when choosing between these types of cars. The hideous front end restyle of the ’98 Camaro & Firebird probably accelerated their demise — the Ram Air TransAm is scooped & spoilered beyond good taste and the Camaro’s fish-like front looks a lot like a Chrysler Concorde.
These cars I think were a little pricier than the Mustang and they were definitely no less reliable but the Mustang consistently outsold them more and more each year ’til GM pulled the plug.
I kind of like the restyled 98 Camaro front nose. Whereas the 93-97 carries on the 3rd generation front end heritage, I believe the 98 front end reminds me of the 2nd gen Camaro Rally Sport, with the central grill…….. The Firebird on the other hand was disappointing, like the Grand Am Side Cladding maniacs had their way, with one front end scoop on top of another.
Overall, I think the 3rd generation styling wears better then the 4th gen. Much cleaner and not as busy.
I once got a gen3 Camaro as a rental for a few days (2.8 V6). It was a truly deadly experience. I have never in my life been in a car that was more shoddily built, and felt like it too. It shook and quivered, the engine moaned and did nothing otherwise, and the interior was dreadful. Never mind the seating position, or the utterly useless rear seat. And the trunk was amazing too! I loathed that POS, and I have never wanted to get near one again. And it’s made me very biased about all of them (gen3 and gen4).
Undoubtedly, others have had different experiences. And undoubtedly, the fast V8s have an appeal for their ability to go. But I consider the gen3 and gen4 to be a low point in my relationship to cars. Well, except maybe the current Camaro.
To each their own.
Thank you for your comment. I, as a guy listed on the serial F-body-hater registry, have chosen to try to remain positive today, and your firsthand experience-based comment will remove any need for me to spew ill-informed (though possibly deserved) venom towards this car. A few deep cleansing breaths, and I should be able to concentrate on 1951 Packards for the rest of the day.
Oh look, Tammy Fae just done gradiated from Joline’s College of Esthetician’in school and she got herself a car.
ever driven one?
Your mulleted-redneck stereotype is outdated. Everyone knows the new king of the trailer park is the 1994-2000 Mustang.
All the comments putting down purple, and in other posts of green, orange, bright red, etc, is reason why most new cars are black, white, and “50 shades of grey”.
People now buy a ‘high resale’ neutral colors to avoid ‘being made fun of by friends’.
Maybe because cars are so expensive these days (at least relative to everything else people are spending money on) and they keep them longer and don’t want to get sick of them, a more neutral color is deemed desirable. As a classic car collector, I look for unusual colors (such as the rich copper, lime green, and deep orangey red metallic cars I own) but for a late-model daily driver, I chose… silver. Sometimes I wish I had gone brighter, but the brighter/unusual shades offered these days are very limited and usually boring. Also, hard to find even when new. I do wish (as is so often stated on these blogs) that interior color would come back. How nice would it be, even on a silver car, if it were offered in a choice of blue or red interiors, along with gray and black!
I think that every 4th gen Camaro I come across is painted Mystic Teal; the defining color of the `90s.
Not the car for me, but a very interesting part of Camaro history, to be sure! If you want one, this purple color is a big +++. Now, is it just me, or is there a lot of (elongated) Geo Storm in these Camaros? They must have been styled by the same team.
God how I hated these cars. The windshield was as long as the hood. That stupid cab forward, make that windshield forward, look. Such a strange sensation looking out at the road from the driver’s seat, like looking down a glass tunnel. The whole interior seemed to be shot from one gigantic plastic mold.
The Gen 3 looks less dated to me. Loved the IROC-Z in yellow with the 5 star wheels. I remember reading back then that the production run was so long on those that the tooling was starting to wear out and that made it difficult to get good panel fits and tight welds.
Grassroots Motorsports did a article (years ago) on the gen3. I think they said the one to get was the later ones (after the tooling started to loosen up) because the seam mastic was generously used to keep everything together making for a tighter car.
The article was written from the perspective of what gen 3 Camaro made a good autocross car.
Climbing the hill on the Sunset this morning, a bright red ’66 Malibu very much like this one came roaring up a clear lane, its V8 in full shout. He mainly stayed under the radar after that, so I was able to catch up and enjoy the sight of it for awhile. (Sorry, no photos while driving.)
I looked across to a new Camaro in the left lane and compared the two. Camaros, while not for me, can be exciting cars, and the new one is what I might have imagined a 2012 Camaro would be. But compared with the simple strength and aggressive stance (and performance) of that Malibu, it looked to me like a pretender.
I had one of these for a few years back in the 90’s. A ’94 z28 convertible in, you guessed it Jordan, teal. I loved that car, but knew it had it faults. The interior was pretty bad, but then so were most GM cars at the time. I was just happy it was quicker than a Mustang of the same period.
Fast forward to 2007. A buddy of mine still has his ’98 z28 that is his garage queen 2nd car. He needed a ride to the dealer to pick up his daily driver from being serviced, and offered up the z28. I was driving an RX8 at the time, and was shocked how loose, noisy and poor handling the z28 was. That said, I’d still take a well kept example like his. It’s a great looking car.
Until I bought my (ex) ’95 Z28, my DD was a rough ’86 Fiero. The first day I had the car, I was driving a moderately curvy 2-lane state highway at what I thought was a leisurely pace & ended up on the wrong side of the road after entering a curve much faster than I should have.
If another car had been coming, I’d have either hit him head-on or rolled the Camaro. I incorrectly assumed its handling was within the capabilities of my worn out Fiero but was wrong by a wide margin.
In regards to GM’s use of SMC for the door panels of these cars aparently GM didn’t fully test the glue used to hold them onto the steel structure. When they came out a lot of dealers in the coldest climates found the door panels hanging by the handle/lock linkages after the first really really cold night of the year. Not that everyone in that era was immune to the govt tightening the VOC emissions a number of Fords had issues with the trim that was held on with double stick tape falling off on the lots in very cold weather but trim is one thing the entier door skin is another.
Good read, and comments.
Not much regarding these cars performance (incl 3800II) tho… besides bang-for-buck.
Had a 98 3800 stick before my current 95 Z28 T56; both stylings have their +++s. The 3800 stick was a balanced, quick carver, a poor mans Jag or 6XX BMW. And turning the car with throttle in the Z is sublime…
Insure a VENTED Opti goes in your LT1 when needed, and of course never let them get wet from coolant. Kits to switch to LSx ignition are available too!
Purple is rare, and Teal is cool, but the finest F-body color is the pewter.
Roaring home from TN on I-81 last July I got 27mpg at 180k miles on the odo and all original drivetrain in the Z28. Concur re the T56 tranny; none better…
I rode in a ’94 Z28 convertible in an autocross, and it felt like the front end plowed as much as my nose-heavy FWD ’01 Seville. Of course, he could oversteer his way out of it, but I was still surprised that this semi-sports car wasn’t that much better in the handling department as my luxury touring sedan.
Oh my god, F stock? How did you do on average?
The only way to autocross is Cadillac style!
Well, I’m certainly not as fast as the Camaros and Mustangs that are also in F Stock, but considering it’s two tons of nose-heavy FWD fun, not too bad! That the Northstar loves to rev and the GM automatic is responsive to downshift helps a lot. I think people are surprised at what it can do: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7GBKxPJ82A&feature=share&list=PL27AC90B0CDCBCA4F
That was awesome to watch, thanks for sharing! I also run in F Stock, but my car is EXTREMELY outclassed in F. I staid there because I am the only member running in F, all other contenders stick around for a race or two. I am always last, but I am never too far off their times, mostly because I drive the tires off of this thing. (Our last event I was seven seconds behind a Brand-new Camaro SS)
Here’s the results from my autocross last Sunday: http://www.wmclub.org/results/12event4results.shtml. Out of 79 cars entered, I came in 63rd overall; not too damn bad. I was faster than a Gen 5 Camaro, and while he was a novice, I only started doing this a year ago. Video from last Sunday: http://bit.ly/RKuEGq
These were surprisingly appealing to me when I sold Chevys in 1997. I seriously considered a dark green V6 5-speed with T-tops and tan leather. The newer dashboard was a major design improvement over the 93-96s, though the cheap materials were the same as before.
Camaros are the source of two of my favorite sales experiences. I sold a true 30th Anniversary Z28 convertible (white/orange stripes, white houndstooth interior, special order) to a paraplegic Vietnam vet. He traded a dark green ’94 convertible for it; I drove his new Camaro back to the lot after having the hand controls swapped from his trade. He was one of my favorite customers, and it thrilled me to see him burn rubber out of the parking lot in his new ride. He sure as hell earned the privilege.
My all-time best sales story, though, had to do with a red 1997 “RS”-grade V6. The RS models had truly gaudy body mouldings that (IMHO) completely threw off the base car’s proportions, by making the car appear longer and narrower – two strikes against it.
Still, the red RS attracted the attention of a woman and her pre-teen daughter late on a Saturday night, 30 minutes before closing. My up. I noticed as I walked over to them (rather against my will) that they had driven in with a truly gorgeous early-80s Camaro Berlinetta.
“I’m not buying, just looking…” but she was interested enough after the test drive to see some numbers. By this time it’s pushing 9 o’clock, and I want this deal done soon, one way or another.
Not surprisingly, the numbers are too high, even after several back-and-forths with the sales office. No deal on the trade, she wants to keep the Berlinetta (I would have too) and we’re still $40 a month away on payment.
“Switch her to lease,” my sales manager tells me. I tell him he’s out of his mind – Jesus, she’s owned the same car for nearly 15 years! Also, Camaros were horrible leases; residuals were absolutely lousy, as they were considered very much to be disposable sports cars.
Still, it’s my job. Surprisingly, she doesn’t exactly balk at the lease… but she’s concerned with the horror stories about damage and wear penalties at the end of the lease term.
Inspiration strikes. “Come with me, Marie…” I said, as the three of us walked out to the red RS. “I know you’re worried about damages, though judging by how well you’ve obviously taken care of the Berlinetta, I don’t think you have anything to worry about. Fortunately, GM had customers like you in mind when they designed the new Camaro —”
And without any warning, I slam my fist firmly against the (polyglass) side door. “Remember, dent-resistant body panels. You simply won’t have a single door ding on this car, Marie.” (I didn’t point out the rear fenders were metal.) “The doors and fenders can take all the abuse this car may ever see in the parking lot of your business –”
BAM! Again.
“–And will still look as new as the day you bought it, with not nearly as much effort as you’ve had to expend with your current car. Of course, I know you’d take excellent care of this vehicle anyway, but it’s little extra touches like these that set the new Camaro apart.”
One more time. BAM! Then the magic words…
“Rob… stop hitting my car!”
She left the dealership at 10:30. I made about $300 on the deal, not bad for a new car at the time. Last I heard, she bought out the lease and still has the RS.
Great stories. We tend to forget that for every old car we see here on CC, that car once sat in a dealer lot or showroom while a salesman and a customer haggled back and forth over the figures. The deals all got done in some way and someone drove out with one of the best cars ever. There were plenty of bad cars too, of course, but most of those do not live long enough to eventually get featured as a Curbside Classic.
Cool stories — thanks for sharing. RE: the RS, I used to repo cars & had to pick up a “voluntary” that was left at the Chevy Dealer. The car was in excellent shape which made towing it back to the lot with a sling-type tow-truck a hellish experience.
The “beard” front valance extension was incredibly low to begin with and towing the car backwards through Birmingham back to the lot without damage was sadly one of my greatest accomplishments working there.
There was no way to get an RS Camaro in or out of a parking lot without damaging the spoiler. They showed damage a week after ownership.
Nice close.
I sold one of the 30th Anniversary Trans Am’s at our dealership back in 1999, we got about 10 of them, and ripped every person that bought ones head off, none off them sold anywhere near sticker. We sold one to a customer that insisted we didn’t take any of the plastic off the car, seats or carpet just basic PDI, he took the car away on a flatbed to store it(Ha!) see you at Barrett-Jackson 2035.
For the most part Firebird customers were divided into 2 people, test pilots and buyers. There is a deliciously bad ass element to black on black WS-6 Trans Am.
We had a guy do much the same thing with a ’97 SS – flatbed and everything! It didn’t make much sense at the time and still doesn’t — SS Camaros of that period weren’t very common, but they’re not exactly collectors items either…
The nostrils on the RA hood remind me of the extra level of headlights on The Griswold’s Station Wagon.
Never liked this generation. Drove several (Like Paul, apparently) as rentals. Give me a ’69 or a clean ’70 or ’71 (okay, a ’67 or ’68 would be fine, too). I liked the look of the 80s version, but the powerplants and interiors let them down (rented a bunch of those back in the day, too).
Michael you are right in my wheelhouse. Cross country several times in a 69 with the 230 or 250 six. Ex owned a 68 firebird with a 350 (mileage sucked) . The only other was a 70 model. Lost interest in them all as the models changed and the government strangled them. I don’t think I’m interested in the current one either. Of course I think I have aged right out of their target demographic.
Tom you’re incorrect in your statement that you couldn’t get a Z28 without AC. I raced many a 3rd & 4th gen Camaro and even though it may state in the brochure that AC was mandatory in a Z28 you could still manipulate the order form and delete it. I don’t know if you had to specify the 1LE option to do it but I did order two Z28s, one 94 and another in 97(both had 1LE) without the AC. GM did it in a rather unique way. All they did was use a special idler pulley and bracket that bolted in place of the AC compressor. The HVAC control and wiring were straight from the V-6 model. My only quip with the 4th Gen was that there wasn’t whole lot of options to make one truely unique like you could with the 3rd gens. Maybe I should word it that GM made it to easy to order a freak combo on the 4th gen where as you had to pull some strings to do it with a 3rd gen. My favorites are the B4C cop cars and 93 Indy Pace Car Replica. Pick up a Camaro White Book and you’ll find lots of rare options and combos for all the generations.
Kudos to the guy autocrossing that STS. I successfully defeated many a F-Car/Mustang with my GN back in the late 80’s and 90’s. Also ran a LT1 Impala SS and on ocassion my RMW in F-Stock. Right now I’m building my most radical combanation to date. 90 Riviera with a coil spring suspension on all 4 corners. My mantra has always been “it aint the car but the driver”. Of course 30 years of seat time helps a lot too. Oh and with a little(lots of) practice you can get FWD to oversteer too. Throttle my friend. Dont be afraid to use it. With some trail braking too.
Hey Paul. How about a general DS series? Picking on GM is just too easy for you it seems. Lots of DS from everybody else if you just bother searching for it. Heck maybe I’ll get of my duff and send you some hints.
I never said it was optional on the Z/28:
“Believe it or not, A/C was optional on the base Camaro, although standard on the RS and Z/28.”
That’s wrong, he’s saying. The AC *was* optional on the Z28, even if the brochure said otherwise. He actually got one without AC through order-form manipulation.
Ah. Maybe it depended on the year. I was only looking at the ’97 brochure.
Before you get off of your duff and send in those hints how about a list of major car companies from the modern era that killed themselves. I can only think of one, Chrysler, and even that is up for debate as it was Daimler that put them on life support, despite the claim of merger of equals, and Cerebus who carried them to the grave by being fooled into buying a company that was on it’s last breath.
Sure lots of other automakers have made mistakes some many, but none consistently did so until it lead to their death. Though truth be told many of the reasons for GM’s death were external forces, but those external forces afected most other automakers and they responded to them in a way that allowed them to survive.
> …but those external forces afected most other automakers and they responded to them in a way that allowed them to survive.
No. Those forces affected no other major automakers except Ford, and Ford only survived through a miracle and the F series. GM leadership wasn’t that invested in its legacy to keep it afloat, unlike Ford. Could bankruptcy have been avoided? Yes, but at the cost of making GM a much smaller company than it already had become, and at the cost of global competitiveness. GM could have survived and become a US-only focused company. I’m glad they didn’t take that route.
Anyone remember Polo Green mania from 1992-1994 or so?
Sure do. Looked pretty good on the Cadillacs, too (image from lov2xlr8.no).
Great color, loved it on those Cadillacs.
Boy was it on those Cadillacs, and now, you hardly see a new green car, if they even offer it at all.
It continued at least through 1994 on the ‘Vette – I sold THE first C5 in the state of New Mexico to a gentleman who traded in his polo green C4 coupe. I still like the color… but not on a Corvette.
(That’s another good story – the C5 was the only 6-speed available in the state, so we got a ton of looky-loo calls about it, asking for test drives and that sort of thing. It was my turn to take a ‘Vette call, and imagine what I was thinking when the guy told me, “I need to do an interview with CNBC but then I’ll be right down!” Yeah, sure… he wasn’t lying.)
I was a member. Photo taken after I (mistakenly) dumped it.
Had a 1982 Trans Am that used to belong to my sister. This was probably the most enigmatic of all the F-bodies, as in the best looks and one of the worst drivetrains ever put in a T/A. 305 4-barrel with the 200c tranny. Utter crap. Nowhere to go up from there and thankfully they did. Also, the metallic silver paint had a problem with staying on car.
The engine didn’t last 85,000 miles but its replacement was anvil-like even if it was slow. Spark plugs were a nightmare to replace thanks to the strut towers, it had a tendency to chew up tranny mounts right where the torque arm bolted up and I thought the steering was good until I bought my first MR2.
Still, a hot crate motor with a 700R4 would have solved everything.
I have a ’97 z28 orange over arctic white, but it doesn’t have any 30th anniversary badges and has the beige leather interior. Is it a true 30th anniversary edition? Btw, with the six speed, it will scream! I bought it used, and someone did some work on it. It has a lope to it, but it is FAST!
It sounds like your car was originally a regular white Z28, with the orange (stripes?) added at some point after delivery.
That was what I thought, but everything else matched. I found a true 30th anniversary edition with 37 miles on it a couple of years ago in Gadsden, AL, for nearly $30,000 at a dealer! They weren’t interested in letting me test drive it!
Btw, my window control unit will not stay in the door, so I know the pain of the interior build quality issues. Still, it is a fun, fast car. My first car was a monumentally slow ’66 Impala sport coupe with the 283/powerglide combo. My little brother ate a tree at 50 mph with that one! I miss it!
The nerve of them! LOL.
I may be wrong, but I believe all 30th anniversary package cars had the white leather/houndstooth interior.
RE: the window control – those would pop up on new cars sitting on the lot. The clips that hold the switch panel to the armrest are exceedingly cheap. Also watch that you don’t press down too hard on the controls themselves – the switches will pop right out and fall into the door. This was also a problem with the 1995-1998 C/K trucks and S-10 variants.
I know, right! Haha.
But I believe you are right. That is why I got a steal on it in ’03 for $9500 with less than 30,000 on the clock. A dealer bought it for his daughter, then drove it and found it way too fast for a 17-year-old. He was a Gidion with my father and gave me a deal on it, or at least it seemed at the time. Current kbb isn’t so good with 130,000 on it!
Maybe not, but I’ll bet those were some fun miles!!
True, she has lost her garage status to my 2500 silverado and the dash has already gone to pot! I still drive her once or twice a month, just for fun.
She once got nearly 29 mpg on a high speed run from Gadsden, AL to Dallas and back in 2004! I drove her to the beach this summer and barely got 23!
This is very interesting because it sounds like the exact same ’97 Anniversary car that my buddy had. Before his car got repo-ed, he let me swap interiors. I got his white leather & his car got my beige leather. My interior was in excellent shape and had no 30th anniverary emblems on it. At the time his car was the only white/orange Camaro with beige leather & and mine was the only Polo Green/white interior Camaro out there. In the picture I posted above, you can barely make out the white seats — which may have been in YOUR car originally.
His 30th anniversary was like new & he didn’t put many miles on it…AND the car was bought new & lived in the Birmingham/Gardendale area.
Wow! I hope alanheath sees this…
Had he made any improvements to it? Mine runs unlike any other ’97 I have driven…not just saying that bc she is mine!
I bought her in 2003 or 2004 from H. M. Freeman in Gadsden. His son got it at auction for his daughter and had second thoughts! It has flowmaster exhaust, k&n filters, and a performance chip (or so I’ve been told! I can work on engines from the 60’s, these computers screw me up!)
Well, when my friend lost his car, it was only a year or so old & had very few miles on it. He didn’t modify it in the time he had it. I have a feeling it was the same car though 🙂
I’m too stupid and impatient to deal with the computers in these cars. I program enough at work & really don’t want it to bleed into my hobby. My current ’94 is “in-between” OBD1 & OBD2… I can’t use a cheapo OBD2 code reader on it but I also can’t jump the ALDL connector to retrieve the trouble codes.
I will try to get some pics in the daylight to post, but idk if they would confirm or deny anything! The good news is that this discussion caused me to park the sentra for a week and enjoy the z28!
I recently bought an ’04 sentra from freeman for commuting, and he remembered the camaro! haha
Btw, I was told it was a local, Alabama car!
I also had a blue ’89 iroc-z that ate tranny mounts like spree. It had some strange wiring and computer that didn’t match GM diagrams, but it would scream too. It also had a propensity to eat water pumps and starters as well, but man it was fun. I logged over 300,000 miles on that one!
Didn’t the 89 corvette have the six speed first?
Yes it got a 6-speed first but that was Built by ZF. The 6-speed we are talking about is the BorgWarner/Tremec T-56. First installed in the 93 F-Body and later used in the Mustang. Heavy duty versions were used in the Viper and the 5th,6th generation Corvette used a version of it with its rear mounted transmission.
Back in 98 this was the cheapest way into a V8 in the UK market (ÂŁ25K) before it was replaced by the Aussie Manaro at selected Vauxhall dealers. A white with black rallye strip Z28 used to drive through my village every day .
Cheap to day but highly regarded . Good entry car into the American scene