Ooooo! A red Camaro… how original! These words weren’t spoken to me by anyone else but my own brain. There’s no shortage of information about Camaros in any of its six generations, and red is probably the color I associate most closely with this model. This particular hardtop had come to mind after a couple of unrelated, recent events had triggered the memory of this sighting from fourteen years ago. At this writing, I had just gone to the 2026 Chicago Auto Show earlier that week on Presidents’ Day Monday, the last day it was open.
I had just finished brunch with my cousin and his wife back in February of 2012 when I had seen this red Camaro rumbling down Broadway, after which we were all headed to the exact same event. The introductory year of any model is often automatically interesting to me, and Chevrolet’s belated Mustang-fighter was a success, finding just under 221,000 buyers for ’67.
This year’s auto show was great, and I’m glad I had realized those plans which had been only tentative just weeks before. The last time I had gone was in 2024 and at that time, the vehicles on display from various makes seemed to have been significantly pared down compared to years past. For example, there was no Stellantis (Chrysler) representation at all. Much of the variety had been restored for 2026. At the Chevrolet section, there was predictably an entire area dedicated to the Corvette – as it should be. The ‘Vette is an American icon and something would feel remiss if Chevrolet’s seventy-three-years-young sports car wasn’t paid rightful homage.
With that said, the rest of the vehicles at the Chevrolet display were non-cars, which was a reminder that there hasn’t been a new Camaro for sale since the 2024 model year. Even the last Camaros were built at the end of 2023. It then became easier for me to think about our featured car as something a bit more special, rare, and interesting. I remember the dull ache and sense of resignation I had felt as a result of the discontinuation of the Camaro after 2002. It had been brought back for model year 2010 with a design that I still find really attractive, but back in the early Aughts, a new Camaro hadn’t even seemed like a possibility.
What had turned out to be the Camaro’s first hiatus had felt like a once rock-solid tradition had just been disrupted. It’s second ending was not dissimilar to a brand name or restaurant franchise of yore that had been brought back and was unable to profitably sustain its momentum in the long run. An uninterrupted span of fifteen model years was a significant stretch of time for the Camaro’s second production run over the fifth and sixth generation cars. It’s just that this model’s disappearance seems even more permanent this time around. I really hope I’m wrong.
One thing that had frustrated me as a kid about the Camaro’s first couple of model years was my inability to easily learn the external cues that would help me nail down exactly what I was looking at. The ’69 was always its own animal with its more aggressively styled body sides and other styling tweaks, but I had always had trouble with the ’67 and ’68 cars. I had come to realize later that there were mnemonic devices that were easy enough to remember, even if all else would fail. For example, any ’67 would have vent windows, and ’68 would have side marker lights. The ’68 also had rectangular turn signals in its grille, versus the round lights of the ’67.
However, it was the appearance-based RS package, with its hidden headlamps, exterior badging, and special taillamps that would give me fits when trying to positively identify whether the car was a ’67 or ’68 model. Any version of the Ford Mustang from either of those two, respective model years would share the same basic front and rear styling, whether in hardtop coupe, fastback, or convertible form. There was the same wide-mouth grille, dummy air scoops on the side, and tri-bar taillamps out back. A Mustang had always presented a uniform appearance across its product portfolio. With the Camaro, it had seemed like Chevrolet had thrown all of its styling studies against the wall like wet spaghetti to see what would stick and ended up offering multiple visual variations of the same car during the same model year.
Given that the RS package was only an appearance package, and that the SS option included the high-performance hardware (a high-performance 350 or 396 cubic inch V8 and a special handling suspension, among other goodies), correctly identifying the alphabet soup of, say, an RS/SS made me feel, honestly, stupid at times. I’ve known what cues to spot for years now, but only after having read about it. Accurate car spotting shouldn’t have been that much work for a car-crazy kid.
I understand if Chevrolet had wanted to try to cover all its bases from an aesthetic and performance standpoint by offering up a myriad of permutations given the rival Mustang’s huge cultural impact, head start in the marketplace, and unmistakable identity. Let’s try these taillamp clusters! No, wait… let’s see if the hidden headlamps of the RS are more popular! Don’t get me wrong. I’m a fan of both GM and the early Camaro, but by not sticking with one strong, basic look, the early Camaro ended up not leaving that big of an impression. In my lead shot, with its headlamps exposed, and from that partially obscured angle, that Bolero Red RS/SS coupe could almost be a Nova.
I can almost see some of my friends from back home in Flint starting to rage-text me after having read my last sentence, but I said what I said. Plus, I don’t think the ’68 Nova coupe is a bad-looking car at all. I realize that my argument falls apart slightly when looking at the stunning 1970 1/2 Camaro with its standard face differing significantly from the RS version with its split bumperettes. In my mind, though, both front ends still look like variations on the same theme, and the exact same rear styling and taillamps are still shared by both cars.
I do hope the Camaro comes back in some semi-recognizable form at some point, but I’m not holding my breath. I’d rather have GM take its time to set the stage for the Camaro’s reintroduction than for the nameplate to arrive on something mostly for the sake of trading on the nostalgia and brand equity of the “Camaro” name. I suppose we’ll see, but regardless of how it shows up, I hope it sticks to one basic aesthetic theme if and when it makes its grand re-entrance.
Lakeview, Chicago, Illinois.
Saturday, February 18, 2012.
@Dennis: I guess that’s why the ’69 model is the first one that I really paid attention to, only to be slammed by the gorgeous 1970 remodeling! Whereas a ’69 RS/SS looked great, I could never quite decide whether the split bumper RS, or the regular one looked better. It would have been wonderful to Photoshop the round turn lights with the full width bumper, just to see how it would’ve looked. Unfortunately, the “bunker mentality” style of the last Camaro was a turn off to me; one sat so low in them with the windowsill so high, that cruising with an arm on said windowsill was uncomfortable if not impossible! Maybe if it’s brought back, GM will move up to a car with retro cues from the long running 70’s models. 🙂
I’ve been reading a book by Michael Lamm about the history of the Pontiac Firebird, and much of it (so far) has referenced the development of the Camaro. I’m finally up to the second on the second-generation cars, and yes – the 1970 1/2 Camaro is my jam.
I also liked the round turn signals of the RS, so you pose an interesting question about how the standard “face” would have looked with them. I would also like to see a future Camaro influenced by the 1970 1/2 cars.
Love all the ’67 to ’73 Camaros and actually briefly owned (aka flipped) a lt green metallic ’67 250 6 cyl and a red ’69 305 v8, both base models. Easy money but should have kept the nr mint original ’69, could never afford one now, sadly. Also had a dark olive green metallic ’68 Firebird 400 convert (350 transplanted) with Hurst 4 Spd and liked that one best of all.
Cliche maybe but I do really like these cars in red, it’s just so right. The ’69’s red was not a flaming in-your-face fire engine red (it had a bit of blue in it maybe?) and with black interior was perfect. Wish I still had it.
It’s funny when thinking about cars (and other things) that once we’re plentiful but now command crazy money. We can’t beat ourselves up for what we couldn’t predict back then. I agree that the Bolero Red of the featured car was a great one, and also that black accents complement the look very well.
It’s kind of an unpopular opinion, but the original ’67 is my favorite Camaro. I’d take a stock SS350 with a four-speed, stock wheel covers, and maybe redline tires. You can’t beat those quarter panels.
Yes to the redline tires! I like that your dream Camaro is such a sleeper as you’ve described it here.
The first Camaro was one of those shapes that just looked right at first glance. There was nothing outlandish, nothing to take getting used to, in a sense you could almost say nothing new: but those things had never been put together quite like this before.
Having just started to build a few first-gen Camaro models, I am totally on board with you about the minutiae of RS/SS models: they get so confusing. Sort of like ‘if you get this model with this option, then that badge replaces the other one unless you get the special trim pack which deletes both of them and includes pinstripes, but only if ordered in the Midwest before last Wednesday…’ Or something to that effect.
And an image search isn’t necessarily any help because of the huge number of modified Camaros that turn up; how can you tell the owner of that beauty has the ‘correct’ RS or SS grille badge? To think that some guys are into variations between one assembly plant and another…
Funny how the ‘revived Camaro’ brought back the first-gen’s style rather then the second. I’d have thought the second was more iconic/recognizable for its ultra-long production run.
Peter, from what you say about the slightly confusing details of what’s possible and the different combinations, you totally get what I was trying to say in this piece about the ’67 and ’68 cars. And I concur that a heritage-themed car that references the early second-generation cars would be a welcome stylistic direction. Ford had pulled off an excellent heritage look with the still-beautiful 2005 Mustang, so it seems it would be possible at Chevrolet with the right ideas, stylists, and execution.
A wonderful review of the Camaro’s and interesting read. My first experience with Camaro’ was age 16, in 1967. My best friend, Paula, received and new 1967 Camaro SS, RS, yellow hardtop on her 16th birthday. I had a 1963 T-Bird, and the nights Paula & I spent cruising in our cars.
That ended one night, when in her Camaro, a drunk driver pulled in front of her car and we t-Boned at 55 mph. Paula died, JoAnn in the front seat went into the windshield, I was trapped in the backseat. It took some time to cut us out of the car. A passenger in the other car also died. The drunk driver in the other car had a suspended drivers license and already convicted for previous violations and served prison time. That drunk driver was not convicted on a technically and I can say this now, Paula’s parents took care of that drunk driver, he disappeared.
Come 1970, my Dad crashed my T-Bird, I had to have a new car fast and Dad sent me to his Chevy dealership with a blank check, don’t go crazy an buy a Camaro. I bought a new 1970 Nova SS 396 just to piss off Dad.
Many decades later I saw the 2008 Camaro concept and fell in love. I special ordered my 2011 Camaro in 2010 before the dealer even had 2011 prices. The first week I had my new 2011 Camaro I debagged the car, tinted the windows and later changed the exhaust and wheels.
I love my 5th gen. Camaro.
Wow. Alfred, I was not prepared to read what happened to your dear friend. It must be of some comfort to think about those happy times of you and Paula cruising around in those two cars that would be destined to become classics.
There’s a 2010 or so Camaro that has parked one block from home recently, and I paused to take stock of just what a beautiful car and shape it actually is, sixteen+ years later. The original reborn Camaro is my pick of the car’s entire second production run, at least aesthetically.
The early models had a very clean look. The ad shows off a base car, and when a car looks this good in the lowest price edition. you know that you have a real winner. My only beef with the design is that the lower body curls under too much. With standard wheels/tires it is not so bad, but with wider wheels and tires I think that they stick out too far.
The ’70 Camaro is one of GM’s masterworks, right up there with the ’66 Riviera. Even through its extensive facelifts, it still looked pretty good at the end.
I thought that the first versions of the re-born Camaro looked the best. However I just couldn’t warm up to the ugly (in my eyes) dash and instrument panel. They also had kind of a bunker feel to the interior. But when I see one in traffic with big 19/20 inch.wheels I think that they look really sharp.
Jose, we agree on a lot. I was reading about the first Camaro and how the designers had a big gripe about how the base wheels and tires simply didn’t fill out the wheel wells enough, but I don’t think they look awful. And yes, I also think the 1970 1/2 cars were a stylistic slam-dunk. TBH, I don’t dislike any of the 2nd generation cars, all the way through ’81.
I remember sitting in the cave-like interior of the reborn 2010, but I liked the rest of the car so much, I think I could get used to it.
As a 15 year old in 1967, I was crazy over both Camaros and Mustangs. Since my dad was a Ford guy, my first car was a 1969 Mustang sportsroof. But car number two was a 1973 Z28. Then real life takes over and fun cars turn into more practical ones. But when I retired in 2015, I bought a 1969 Camaro Super Sport and undertook a 5 year total nuts and bolts restoration that produced a car I really enjoy showing and driving.
I liked, but didn’t love, the first generation F-Bodies. To be honest, I liked the Camaro much more than the Firebird, which I kind of thought of as a half-assed styling job. My sister had a couple of friends with ’67’s and a family friend had a misty blue with white top converible R/S. She owned that car for over 20 years, fixed up just enough to drive, but never restored.
I really liked the 2nd generation. Both the Camaro and the Firebird, but both needed the rear spoiler or they looked “wrong” to me. Eventually, I would own a ’79 Trans Am and a ’78 Camaro (For about 3 days). I sold my Trans Am and instantly regretted it, the ’86 Iroc-Z that replaced it looked nice, but it just wasn’t a real replacement. The 305 TPI engine just wasn’t strong enough. But the 3rd gen styling was fine.
Then came the 2010. To say I was disappointed is putting it mildly. I HATED it. And I continued to hate it all the way until GM pulled the plug. The front end was fine, but from the windshield back it was a disaster, inside and out. Great driving car, but I just couldn’t get past the interior and the looks of it. I was hoping the ’16 update would maybe fix the looks, but somehow GM made it even uglier. When the C8 was first shown, I was convinced beyond all doubt that GM’s styling had really lost it’s way. So far, they have shown no signs of finding it again. Ford lost their way for many many years, so it can be fixed, but right now, nothing GM really makes appeals to me at all.
Make a Camaro that looks like a 2nd Gen, with a useful trunk and some decent room inside, a good V8, and take my money. In 2010, the Challenger was the easy choice, and again in ’18, since I don’t do Ford.