Functional Items Included Sintered-metallic Brake Linings
Front suspension involved the usual wishbones and coil springs, but with the springs between the arms instead of atop the upper ones, which benefited handling. Unfortunately, the rear suspension had cheap “Mono-Plate” single-leaf springs that allowed severe axle tramp in hard acceleration with the planned V-8 engines. Because this went undiscovered until the 11th hour, V-8 Camaros had rear traction bars for ’67, then added staggered shocks, though neither was a genuine cure. Easy rear-end bottoming was another flaw.
Sales improved by some 15,000 units for ’68 despite few changes and new competition. The ’69s saw more extensive revisions — a good thing, as they would sell into early 1970 pending a delayed, all-new second-generation Camaro. Options remained substantially the same save for a third 396 (375 bhp) offering. Washington’s mandated side-marker lights provided easy identification, as did a revised grille and one-piece door glass (signaling Chevy’s new flow-through “Astro Ventilation”). A deft lower-body reskin introduced a vee’d eggcrate grille, “speed streaks” above the wheelarches, and a reshaped tail.
The choices began with a basic hardtop coupe or convertible with 230-cid six. From there you went to a 250-cid six ($26), 327 V-8 ($106), or 350 V-8. The last, though, was tied to a $211 Super Sport package comprising stiff suspension, D70 x14 tires, modified hood with extra sound insulation, and “bumblebee” nose stripes. Other tempting ’67 options included Custom interior, Strato-Back front bench seat (rarely ordered), fold-down rear seat, extra gauges, and console shifters for the optional two-speed Powerglide automatic, Heavy-Duty three-speed manual, and four-speed manual. From midseason, a pair of 396 big-blocks (325 and 350 bhp) was offered through dealers to get around a GM ceiling on “excessive” small-car displacement and horsepower.
RS headlamps remained hidden when off, but glass slots allowed some light to shine through should their covers fail to retract. Keep reading to learn about the specifications of the 1967-1969 Chevrolet Camaro. Instruments were revamped, as were some engine choices. Of these, only four (perhaps more) were equipped like the three “real” pacers. Sales eased, but not greatly. The 1967-1969 Chevrolet Camaro was thought to be a fierce competitor to the Ford Mustang, but the styling made it decisively different. Camaro again paced the Indy “500” in ’69, but Chevrolet cashed in this time by selling 3,475 “Pacesetter Value Package” convertibles at about $3,500 apiece.
So, even as the redesigned ’65 models were debuting, GM managers were deciding that the Corvair would be allowed to fade away. A key early decision was to combine unit construction with a front subframe that cradled the engine/transmission package on large rubber mounts to minimize noise, vibration, and harshness. Meantime, Chevy rushed to complete a conventional front-engine replacement as a direct Mustang-fighter. Called Camaro, it predictably followed Ford’s formula down to an identical wheelbase, under-skin components liberally borrowed from a “family” compact (here, the Chevy II), standard front bucket seats, rakish long-hood/short-deck styling, and numerous options that eventually numbered 81 factory items and 41 dealer-installed accessories.
Keep reading to learn about the styling and sales success of the 1967-1969 Chevrolet Camaro. Styling of the 1967-1969 Chevrolet Camaro, on the other hand, was nearly perfect: chiseled yet flowing, and decisively different from Mustang. Naturally, it was created under the watchful eye of GM design chief Bill Mitchell — who ironically didn’t much like the finished product. Again mimicking the Ford Mustang, the Camaro aimed to be all things to all sporty-car buyers.
