I believe most families have minor friendly ongoing spats. Someone may prefer to watch CSI over Law & Order. Others may prefer Tony Bennet over Sinatra, and so on. You know, the kind of dispute that -with luck- never builds up to real animosity, but allows us to engage in lively disagreement from time to time. In the case of my family, it was a sibling thing and obviously car related; my little brother was Team Ford, while I was Team GM.
You may wonder, what kind of family had such quarrels? Team Ford or Team GM? A good number of CC readers had these matters sorted out for them. The family owned a certain brand of car and that defined your allegiances. Easy.
In our case, we had moved to El Salvador in 1976 and our family car was a tiny Toyota 1000 (Publica). Good for Mom, yes, but not the kind of thing kids got excited about. Time to escape reality and think of the American cars we used to see in Puerto Rico!
And isn’t it a sign of how much the world has changed that we as kids dreamt of Fords and Chevrolets?
To be honest, I don’t know if my brother was really Team Ford, or just Team Mustang. I very much doubt he could tell a Torino from a Torino Elite. And somehow I doubt he was much aware of Pintos and Mavericks. But Mustangs, those he defended with all his heart.
I suppose most of his devotion came from the love he professed for his Mustang pedal car. On that he had an advantage, his toy car was clearly identified. Meanwhile, my tricycle was a Murray Mack, which I thought was really cool, but couldn’t point to it belonging to any GM brand. On that end, he had the upper hand on me; he was already pedaling the car of his dreams. Score one point in his favor. On the other, I was the fastest tricycle runner in our street block. Score two points in my favor since I had more fun in the end.
The nice thing about children’s quarrels is how sincere they’re in their biases. Facts and figures? Who cares! Likes, dislikes, and emotions rule all proceedings. I had ‘numbers’ in my favor, or so I thought; GM had more cool cars than Ford, and I could name each by memory. Just Chevrolet had Chevelles, El Caminos, and Impalas, all in lusty SS versions. And well, the Corvette! No matter, nothing would sway my brother in my direction.
Ultimately there was one problem with my ‘numbers’ approach, that pesky Mustang was one nice-looking ride and everyone loved it. The young, the professionals, the street racers, the old ladies; Mustang devotion was everywhere, and it was an unavoidable reality.
While my brother couldn’t tell a Falcon from a Fairlane, he certainly knew the Camaro was Chevrolet’s Mustang contender. How did he know? I probably told him. If so, talk about setting myself up for a fall! In the popularity contest, the Camaro was clearly on the losing side. To defend the Camaro was to support the underdog, a role I wasn’t quite prepared for. I was accustomed to being on the side of almighty GM, and suddenly, to support the runner-up was an odd feeling.
But let’s be honest, did I -as a kid- really like the Camaro? Or did I convince myself that I liked it? Somehow I suspect the latter. I think I saw more grace on a fastback Impala and a Chevelle than on a Camaro. With big tires and some stripes, the Camaro looked like a decent number, but deep down there was something about the design that I just found underwhelming. The flanks were clean and sort of sporty, but both the front and rear were rather simple and unexciting. Better not think too much about it!
Only with the sinister SS face, with the hidden headlights, did I approve of the design. I think… Hard to say when my pride was at stake.
In any case, it’s now rather known that the original Mustang was considered a bit gimmicky and old-fashioned by the automotive press and by GM’s stylists. With Chevy finally joining in the Pony Car fun, the Camaro was the chance for Bill Mitchell’s boys to knock one out of the park. To set all doubts aside; late to the market, but ready to make a statement.
If the mission was for a less fussy design than the Mustang, by all means, it was accomplished. Yet, the Camaro’s plain fascia and rear panel felt a bit unfinished. At best, the car reflected elegant masculinity in its flanks and could build from there. But a certain spark was missing.
Am I right about the Camaro’s masculinity? Or is it being conditioned by 40 years or so of surviving models being hot-rodded? That’s the downside of the surviving cars of the ’60s and ’70s; visiting a car show one thinks only luxury models or lusty V8s were the norm. The humdrum family car disappears, the wagon gets discarded, and the base ‘sporty’ car becomes extinct. Lost in time is that many average Joes and women took to these cars in large numbers, in lowly 6-cyl. versions.
And while there was no Camaro fever, many gals enjoyed their looks, and probably their reduced size. Full-sizers were only gaining in spread, and those who didn’t agree looked elsewhere, like sporty cars. By the late ’80s, I remember Mitsubishi touting its new Eclipse as being aimed toward women. Even the mainstream media of the period was onto the subject and the effect female buyers were having in the sports car market.
(Today’s completely false, yet feels like true reflection: if mainstream media acknowledges a trend, chances are it is already fading or morphing).
Back to my brother and I. The fact that we spent the ’70s and ’80s in El Salvador meant that I wasn’t much aware of the Gen II Camaro; a missed opportunity actually. It was the only time in the Camaro’s history I could easily have claimed superiority over the Mustang. There it was, that sweet Italian-looking Chevrolet thoroughbred, against the cutesy Kelly Garret Mustang! Perfect cards to play for a child’s argument!
By the time I moved to California in 1990, the Mustang was on an upswing again with the mythic 5.0. I had serious doubts about its plasticky looks, but the ’80s Camaro wasn’t much better in that regard, though it looked far sleeker. Not that it helped much. There was kind of a subversive ‘Mustang fever’ in California; the 5.0 ‘Stang was a ‘cool ride,’ even if it was a domestic. To admit one ‘liked’ the Camaro was uncouth, and I could almost feel my college classmates sneering whenever I dared to say such words.
Notice that up until then, I had NO real experience with any Camaros. It was still childhood playing in my mind. But luckily (?), one evening I was given a ride in a mid-80s model to grab a bite at Jack In the Box. All I can say is that I hope the car was more fun for those behind the wheel than for those in the passenger seat. As a passenger the whole car was absurd; uncomfortably low, with that weird catalytic protrusion on my foot area, really lousy ergonomics, and awfully cheap plastics. No wonder women were making the switch to SUVs and Yuppies had gone to the Germans.
And now, many years later, here I was in San Salvador facing an early Camaro. A ’69 nonetheless. A 6 cyl. or a V8? Looking partly butch, party worn out, and unkempt. Far from a show car beauty, and more like the type of car some deadbeat tries to hot-rod on a non-budget.
Through these many years, I’ve probably preferred the rear view of these early Camaros. The hunched rear quarters are clearer from this angle and show some vigor. Also, in the ’69 there’s a bit of dimension to those plain-jane rearlights.
Like most of my finds in San Salvador, the body seems in fairly good condition. Not quite straight, but with little rust. And lots of minor cosmetic issues; the ‘perfect’ CC find.
About those cosmetic issues, from this view, that trunk lock doesn’t seem original, and the rear window rubber seal is missing completely. I can see the handy work of black silicone sealant in its place. Not concours material, but hopefully keeps the rain away during our torrential rains.
Since it’s unavoidable, here’s that Plymouth Satellite that’s been photobombing our ’69 Camaro throughout this post. The car should be familiar to some of you, as it had its own post a while back.
I would like to say that this was the home of some American iron aficionado, but no. Whoever it was, had a rather eclectic taste and the house was for a while, my place to find ‘curbside classics.’ Old cars rotated rather frequently in this spot, and besides the Camaro and the Satellite, other discoveries were a Fiat 127, a VW Thing, an early VW Type II, and a ’65 Plymouth Belvedere wagon.
I’m sorry to say that this Camaro will be the last of my ‘finds’ from this particular spot. Whoever it was, moved some time ago during the pandemic.
So, where am I on my Camaro love nowadays? Oddly, some recent postings had me looking at early Camaros, and found my interest reawakening. Maybe it’s the overexposure to modern cars with extroverted surface treatments and too many fussy extrusions, but I suddenly found early Camaros clean looking, purposeful, and attractive. Particularly in base form with whitewall tires.
Is this finally true love forming? Could be. This ’69 is far from the presentation I would like, but fixed properly, would my love for it grow? I’m not entirely sure. But I can tell you this, whatever love I may develop for early Camaros, it will be finally devoid of childish wishful thinking and grandstanding. Or so I think. Just don’t go and tell my brother anything about it.
Further reading:
Curbside Classic: 1969 Chevrolet Camaro – The Last Unmolested ’69 Camaro Six Left In The World?
As I’ve stated before, I came from a fairly hardcore GM family, so other stuff was sort of “off the shopping list” by default. We had, and still have, a 1969 Camaro SS project in the summer house in Montana. It has been in the family since 1976… and it somehow gets sidelined every time something else more important pops up. This was the car I “drove” in many of my early childhood adventures, sealing my fate as a first gen Camaro enthusiast. These drives were facilitated by me grabbing a key to the garage, then slithering under the plastic sheeting coving the Camaro and sliding into that houndstooth bucket seat. It was always parked with the nose facing the garage door, so I didn’t even have to worry about backing it out of the garage and making the tight corner into the alley as a newly minted driver, age 7. How thoughtful!
My reality was spending many of my formative years in Mom’s second gen Firebird, and also driving it when I got my second generation driver’s license (the one that allows the wheels to turn when you’re driving). And finally, I owned a 4th gen Firebird in my late teens to early twenties. It was highly impractical, but few 20 year olds care about such trivialities, and the passenger had to deal with that huge catalytic converter lump in the floor, not me. It was fast and fun and possessed a look that fit my image quite well. I am one of the few who don’t care much at all for Fox body Mustangs, and only tolerated the SN-95, so I wasn’t on the fence from the outside either. The 2005-up Mustangs are another story; I quite do like those.
The thing I most love about the early Camaro and Firebird is how many different ways they could be prepared and served to appeal to such a wide audience. This was of course a play straight out of the Mustang playbook, but my attention was always focused on the F bodies in my formative years. Colors, interiors (and the sheer number of interior colors!), engines ranging from putt-putt sixes to V8’s that only belonged on a racetrack, and selection of transmissions that even included a lobotomized PowerGlide that made you decide when the big 1-2 shift took place. Final drive ratios, disc or drum brakes, power assist or no, hubcaps and wheels and tires, single or dual or louder dual exhaust, spoilers, hidden headlamps, fiber optic lamp monitors. Air conditioning? Do you want AM, AM/FM, AM/FM-Stereo, 8-track, or a blanking plate? Gauges or idiot lights? Tachometer? Clock? Space saver spare? Windshield washer fluid monitor? Console? Don’t want bucket seats? Here’s a bench.
It is hard to find early Camaros (or any pony car, for that matter) that have survived into the modern era without being reborn into a top spec road burner. For many years, there was a blue 1969 Camaro in my hometown that was piloted by an old lady who bought it new. I “interviewed” her when I was about 12, and she told me that she’d special ordered it, and explained her rationale for specifying the options she did. I do remember that it had a console shifted PowerGlide, but can’t remember if it was the optional 250 or a base V8; she wanted a bit more oomph than the 230, but also reasonable mileage and the ability to run on regular grade gasoline. It also had air conditioning, and she wanted the small hubcaps instead of full wheelcovers, which she thought looked gaudy. She was still driving the car into the mid 2000’s, by which time it sported an RS tail light lens on one side to replace a broken one, but the car was in fairly remarkable condition for having seen 35 years of daily use. There was a second one in use into the late 1990’s, and it was a thoroughly hammered winter beater. That one was a metallic greenish beige that was quite humdrum even when it wasn’t dirty and dented. It had 307 badges on the front fenders, but I don’t recall if I ever spoke to the driver. I did see it frequently traversing the unmaintained backroads near a piece of property I rented.
I almost always admired Chevrolet styling, so I really didn’t know that their products weren’t as good as their designs until the Vega showed up. After that, I realized that lemons can be good looking. This generation of Camaro predates the Vega, so I have always admired it.
Even the 1970 redesign is admirable. That was when my mom started driving them, and once again, I discovered that a good looking car could be a good looking lemon. I couldn’t count the number of times one of my mom’s Camaros would be coming home from getting repaired again, and someone would see me with it and tell me what a good looking car it was. I would agree, and move on because, it was a good looking car – it was just a piece of junk too.
So – I want to believe that the first generation of Camaro was as good as it looks – knowing fully well that it was still a Chevrolet. My family and I have had many Chevrolets and I wouldn’t recommend any of them due to terrible quality. Good looking cars – but built with an axe, I swear.
I never got the whole “hugger” ad thing, seems kind of dumb in retrospect given the market and the rather cutesy vibe of it. Also never understood why the stylists picked the boring rectangle tailights, the classic Chevy 3 round lights would have looked so much better.
We had a 6 cyl ’67 and 307 ’69 and liked them both. The 250 7 bearing 6 was a good engine and moved that car just fine, as well as the 307 nearly! They look better all the time, I just sold those cars too soon.
As a “Chevy guy” at the time, I did like the Camaro when it appeared, looking fresher, cleaner and newer than the Mustang, which was already stuck in its design language from 1964. But it didn’t exactly bowl me over, like the ’63 Riviera and Sting Ray had. It just wasn’t truly great; it seemed less than genuinely inspired and a bit rushed or half baked, especially the very simplistic flat front and rear ends. It looked a bit like a 13 year old; somewhat attractive but whose qualities had not yet fully blossomed.
The ’69 fixed some of those issues, looking more complex and grown up. What’s curious is that its deeply sculpted front end was almost identical to one of the final clays for the ’67. Why did they leave that off the original.
Yes, it’s a bit hard to look at these without having the mental image of all those perfectly overdone Z-28 clones, but I can take myself back and this example makes it easier. It reminds me of how so many looked in about 1978 or so.
My Dad ordered a 1967 Camaro very much like the gold one shown, but even more a strippo, with black wall tires and dog dish hubcaps. It was the base V8 version, 327cid/210 gross hp. The only options on it were bumper guards, a front bench seat/column shifter Powerglide, and an AM radio. It was better looking than it was a CAR. It’s handling was mediocre and its ride harsh and tossing. Seats were thin-feeling, hard and flat-cushioned (the buckets may have been better). Noisy on the road, too; and its Powerglide burned out its high-gear clutch at 40k miles. It got overhauled, then did it again at 75k. My 1968 Plymouth Valiant, boxy and unsexy, with a Slant Six, was a better CAR all around. As a result, in a GM family, I became an outlier Chrysler guy.
Wait, there’s a Camaro in these pictures? (says the Mopar guy 🙂 )
I remember the debut of quite a few new cars during this era – but try as I might, I just do not remember the introduction of the Camaro. My family was all about Oldsmobiles then, and I certainly knew what a 67 Olds Cutlass or 88 looked like as soon as they were out. And my sentiments followed my father’s preference for Fords, so I absolutely remember seeing my first 67 Mustang, and having very mixed feelings about it when compared with the 65-66 original. Ditto the big 67 Ford, which I compared unfavorably to Dad’s 66. But the Camaro? Nada.
Now, I see it as an exceptionally cleanly styled car. I can see the argument that it needed just a little more visual punch, but I can also appreciate that simplicity and cleanliness are virtues in automotive styling, as in life.
The ’69 was a single year design, and I feel that it is the best of the early Camaros. It does appear more mature and complex and fully developed. The ’70 -’81 design was a stunner, especially the early ’70’s models. My older Brother was an F car fan, had a new ’72 Camaro and later a year old ’76 T/A, and then a few years old ’76 Camaro, bought because he wanted to try a four speed manual. (Terrible shifting). The first was new, the others were only a year or a few years old, and my brother drove the wheels off of them. He accumulated huge mileages in a short time period with few if any problems.
Mustangs and Camaros originally might have appealed to a wide demographic, but especially as used cars it seemed as though the Camaro was more attractive to the hot rodder, and six cylinder models were openly disdained. The Mustang was loved by all types and ages, whether new or used, six or eight. That picture of the older lady standing proudly next to her ’66 Emberglow Mustang coupe, with 289! was typical. That’s why many early Mustangs used to be found in good original condition.
Myself, I’m on team Mustang.
Ford guy here, I think where the Mustang wins for me is every version from a “secretary car” with a six to a hippo 289 or 390 GT they all about the same sprightly look to them. Camaros have a look where everything below a RSSS or is decontented from that, which is probably the reason every survivor ends up dressed as one or a Z/28 – people put in what the factory left out. By contrast people are largely content to restore 65-68 Mustangs as they were without cloning them into a Shelby GT, even if there is some mechanical massaging. Plus Mustangs IMO had much nicer interiors and dash design, at least until 1971.
GM with few exceptions have never really wowed me the way Ford and Chrysler designs do, I don’t think there were many designs under Bill Mitchell’s run that were unattractive, but the ones that aren’t the Stingray, Riviera, etc very often look to be going through the motions. Chrysler gets derided for copying GMs styling a cycle behind, but their designs enhanced the work Bill Mitchell & co said “good enough” with. I’ll take stunning and derivative over hohum and contemporary, or something that truly has identity like the Mustang over a tidied up Italianate facsimile like the first generation Camaro.
That Ford guy=Mustang guy thing is legit, GM has a lot of variety, and today you see all different categories represented in the classic car community, from Corvair to Impala, but Ford fans really are mostly about the Mustang, and if you have a non-Mustang Ford there’s almost an outcast stigma from within the Ford(Mustang) camp itself.
Team Mustang here too, obviously, but back then, we were a GM family with our ’68 Impala.
Not that my Dad and I ever argued about it like you or your brother, but I grew up in a GM household too, and my go to was all things full sized Chevy. Then my Dad bought his first Ford, a ’73 LTD. This became my car eventually, and a Ford Guy was born from this GM Family.
FFWD to late 2013, and Dad finally wanted to scratch that Sports Car itch (even though Pony Cars are not truly sports cars, but I digress as usual). He went shopping for one, convinced he wanted a retro Camaro (maybe to rival his son’s retro ‘stang?), but after one test drive he was convinced it wasn’t for him. Its claustrophobic feeling inside and lack of visibility killed it for him.
He ended up with his second, and only other Ford ever, the 2014 Mustang pictured below instead. We’re now kinda both Honda guys. 😂
Rich, you stated something in your piece I agree with.
When the Camaro entered the market I was in grade 7 and a big fan of the Mustang. The Camaro did seem somewhat plain and boring. The Firebird not much so. Decades later I have changed my opinion and now appreciate the looks of the car. Parked alongside a Mustang of the same year, the Camaro looks more stylish in looks. In my opinion. And as I write that comment, I’m reminded of the many great looking models GM had at that point in the mid-Sixties.
Lover of 67/68 Camaros here, I would like a base model with V8 and Powerglide, hold the wheelcovers, I would update to some nice aftermarket wheels, any of the original colors except black. a nice turquoise or light blue metallic would be nice.
I liked the Camaro so much I bought a new one in 2015. My reason? The Ford dealer had little to no motivation to sell me a car. “Oh you want a manual..? Too bad, we can’t get them.”
Meanwhile there was a shiny white, stick shift V6 Camaro with 320 Hp waiting for me across the street. I put 17,000 miles on it before I moved to a snowy state and needed a 4×4 for work.
I would look back and stare every time I drove it. I loved the 2015 tail lights because it reminded me of the 1969 models, instead of those goofy half moon things they put on the modern Malibu.
Funny thing is when I went of my first date with my now wife, I flashed the lights in the parking lot and she gasped “That’s YOUR car…?” She fell in love with us both haha