Thats Ok And yes the 540 hp Caddilac is definelty a muscle car in every sense. I refuse to argue though. That not waht this thread is about. Pm me if you want to argue

 

I think too many people want to call camaro muscle cars because muscle cars are the cool and "in" thing right now. It's wishful thinking. There's never been a F-body made that could be considered a muscle car. Sports car, maybe,,, pony car, definitely.

Muscle car, no way....I suggest anybody who thinks otherwsie spend some time looking at the history books

 

If you go by the history books the last muscle car was made in 1974. Coincidentally for a long time the last muscle car was considered the 1974 455 superduty T/A. Again, I like third gens built both for the muscle look and the sport look.

 

it would be difficult to call the gnx anything but a muscle car. They took a mid sized family car and made into a BEAST. That's what a muscle car is


F bodies are pony cars, no matter what engine they have.

 

Its a dumb argument, and not what this thread is about.

 

Lol, this is exactly what this thread is about! Is the 3rd gen a muscle car or sports car? By definition, it's neither.

 

The thread is about if you would build your third gen to have a muscle car look or a sports car look.

 

you can't build a third gen to be a muscle car anymore than you can build a salad to look like a cheeseburger. The camaro/firebird line was designed and built to be a pony car, which is a sports car with 2+2 seating. I don't care how many cubic inches you drop into it, you can't make it into something it's not.

 

I understand your opinion and position, but I do not share it. PM me if you want to further discuss it. right now we are just looking at getting this thread locked.

 

I know I owned a Camaro Sport Coupe

 

I agree with you 100% on the definition of musclecars.

Musclecars are intermediate 2 door rear wheel drive family cars modified by the manufacturer to fit a big engine and have a lot of power as well as some other racy features.

Whatever these racy features were,in addition of the horsepower to back up looks, there was at least no "winning" formula for these. Some offered console shifters, others tried with ram air hoods.

The main thing was, these cars were intended to offer racers a showroom ready competetive package for an affrodable price and increase sales.

All these musclecars however had a particular style about them. There were differences, and these differences caused people to have favorites, but they did have some distinct features that clearly indicate "musclecar" if you see one.

Now, big solid line, because from here on I will move to opinions.
_______________________________________________________________
1) on the topic of musclecars

Some people (journalists, the people who get their opinions printed) misstakingly used the term "musclecar" for a whole bunch of cars that never belonged in this category, and by doing so messed up a clear cut definition and time reference.

One of the cars they did this with was the 1974 Pontiac T/A.
If the T/A had been an intermediate family saloon I would have agreed. With things as they are I do not.

As of lately the release of a new generation of Camaros, Mustangs and Challengers the term Musclecar is abused more then ever before.
_______________________________________________________________

2) on the topic of firebirds and camaros

If these cars were to be given a description, it would either be ponycars, as which they were intended.

Ponycars are compact affordable 2 door rear wheel drive 2+2 seaters with some flashy design features and not nescessarily the engine power to back those up intended to raise sales with a younger audience.

I do not quite see stock firebirds and camaros as GT´s. GT vehicles are luxury vehicles intended for long distance driving. With the small gastank and their low budget, flashy design philosophy I do not think a ponycar will be the best choice for long distance driving, and I would definately cal it luxurious.
_______________________________________________________________

3) about this thread

This thread is, as was explained atthe start of the thread, not intended to define in which category these cars fit. As one member explained in a very plausible way, particularly the third generation is an oddball in american automotive history.

It is about "If you were to describe what you think about the third gen you own, how would you describe it and did you make exterior modifications to display your opinion"

So now please,

 

how about the term "American sports coupe" to describe all generations of camaros and firebirds. this would also encompass the mustangs without us having to use the dredded and hated P*** word

can you think of any cars that came before the mustang that would fall into this category? A 2+2 sporty coupe, with a wide selection of engines and options available?

 

Not sure, when did the Plymouth Barracuda first come in view of the automotive press? It was preseded by the Plymouth Valliant, the Ford Falcon and the Chevy Corvair. All sporty 2+2 compacts, but all missing the typical long hood/short deck design that became identifying for the typical "ponycar" vehicles.

I find American sports coupe nice. It does pretty much describe the body style and limits possible entries to those produced by US manufacturers, regardless of where the vehicle was built.

 

I forgot about the Barracuda because it's so darn ugly... LOL

released two weeks ahead of the mustang, but that woud be a bigger debate in my mind if it was a pony car or a muscle car. I've always thought of it as a muscle car, but it sure didn't start out that way

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand...edirected=true

 

A Porche 911??

 

Kind of fails in having a wide range of engine options.
I´ve never heard of a 911 rolling out of the factory with anything other then a 6 cylinder boxer.

Camaros for instance came with I4, V6 and V8 with and without turbo.

EDIT:: @ macneilbibi, I followed your link, and a link to the Alfa GTA (had one of those a few years back. Kept failing on me however so maintenance became too expensive) and found:

...and Gaston Andrey won the inaugural Sports Car Club of America's Trans-Am championship in 1966. Horst Kwech also won the first...

So, if Trans-Am racing was organized by the SCCA, and the ponycars were used in Trans-Am racing, the term Sportscar should apply rather then GT car, right? Particularly for our thirdgens "...designed for... and maneuverability..." does apply, and pontiac was on the right track right from the start, using the camaro chassis but adding parts that mainly improved handling and maneuverability.

 

here's another car that's hard to classify: the thunderbird

it started out as a corvette, but wound up being a monte carlo

 

ummm... Definately different HP options...
While the base 997 Carrera produced 325 PS (239 kW) from its 3.6 L Flat 6, a
more powerful 3.8 L 355 PS (261 kW) Flat 6 powers the Carrera S
3.6 L twin-turbocharged engine as the 996 Turbo, but this time it developed 480 PS (353 kW; 473 bhp)
and 620 N·m (457 lb·ft) of torque
997 GT3 RS with an enlarged 3.8-liter engine producing 450 bhp (336 kW),
The 997 GT2 has a twin turbocharged 3.6 litre 6-cylinder engine,
which generates 523 hp (390 kW)[22] at 6500

 

If there is one thing that I can't stand about porches its that they are still putting the engines in the back and using flat 6s, they are great cars, but they could be so much better if they stopped holding themselves back....

 

They do that for weight distribution. Race against one back in the 80s. The thing just hung corners under acceleration. I fish tailed

 

See my point?

And ´80´s Porsche 911´s with in excess of 240 hp were deathmachines. Most professional race drivers described them as exactly that.

Up to the 964 series they had torsion bar suspension, and up to the 993 series they used a solid rear axle design.

This combined with the amount of weight placed on the rear axle makes for a car that ca really be pushed around corners before it loses grip, but once it loses grip you´re out of a chance to avoid hitting the first tree you see.

The 964´s introduced springs and shocks, and the 993 a multi linkage rear suspension setup.

 

_______________________________________________________________
1) on the topic of musclecars

Some people (journalists, the people who get their opinions printed) misstakingly used the term "musclecar" for a whole bunch of cars that never belonged in this category, and by doing so messed up a clear cut definition and time reference.

One of the cars they did this with was the 1974 Pontiac T/A.
If the T/A had been an intermediate family saloon I would have agreed. With things as they are I do not.




Curious to your opinion on the 74 gto or the 69 copo nova, seeing how close they are to 67-69 camaro/firebirds, and the fact that they aren't a mid size family car

 

as for me, I don't consider the 74 gto a muscle car at all.. MCINO

the 69 nova.. YEAH BABY

I've got no issue with the nova being a muscle car... it was a regular small to mid sized car (even had a 4 door version available) and they put a freaking huge engine in it.... YEAH BABY

 

oh yeah one more silly thing to add about this,,,a 3rd gen even has the word SPORT in the freakin model package "sport coupe" lol. and those are BASE model camaros, so the rs,z28,irocs are "sport coupes" with soooo much more, meaning they are sporty-ER??? iv never heard of a "mucle coupe" 3rdgen

 

Imo just because sport coupe is a trim level doesn't mean much, would you honestly put a base camaro in the same league as a corvette or viper, and a dodge viper isn't a snake or a ford mustang a horse...I think they used that as a trim level just because the car is sporty a coupe and they weren't feeling very creative that day, also if you wanted to think like that you could claim a mustang gt must be a gt car....and it just isn't....

 

camaros are sports cars from factory,(it has computer)
but you yank the computer and emmisions crap and
your opening new doors then you have muscle,muscle means you and the machine and nothing in between.there arent any modern muscle cars there all sports cars,coupes,or supercars(computerized)

 

I made a vowel to myself that I would stop arguing on this thread with people, but your basis of reasoning is very tempting...

 

correct me if im wrong lol

 

actually iv already stated my real and pure reason in page 2. i just added the "sport coupe" thing in because it was actually kind of humerous. but there are lost of sport cars and exotics that arnt animal named....so viper and mustang is an obvious one there. corvette has a name with no relevance to ANYTHING else just like the name camaro. so you realy had nothin to argue with

a little off topic, but i was thinkin to myself the other day and thought it was funny that the mustang has a trim package of cobra...thats two differant animals on one car haha. why didnt they call it a unicorn instead of cobra? lol

 

You trying to say that 'Camaro' is just a made-up word?

Actually......"French dictionary showing that the word meant "friend" or "companion"

 

wow, way to pick one tiny little detail that wasnt much of support bearing toppic from what i was getting across. but i didnt know we had to study a name in a differant language that isnt relevant to this culture called northern america,,,i dont think camaros were created in France lol so whatever France thinks camaro is, is probably NOT related to america.

sorry, pick on a topic i actualy was trying to push.

 

Awwww.....So sad. Somebody pointed out a very well known point, in regards to the origin of the Camaro name.

I could care less about your words on the Corvette, Mustang or Cobra. TGO is about 3rd gens, so we don't care about those cars.

 

I don't know about that... if somebody offered me a corvette, I wouldn't turn it down.. LOL

If anybody is listening... I like C3's the best

 

too bad "Project 3.4 Camaro" braught up mustangs and vipers, i just replied to it, big whoop!!quit your cryin.... you realy must not read threads from the freakin start "stephen" because its so annoying to reply to someone about something that doesnt matter or is completely OFF TOPIC.

i mean, realy lol from all the words iv said in replies to other peoples points, or my original replies to the actual TOPIC,,,your gonna sit there and pick at something to start a whole NEW topic going in a whole NEW direction????? why dont you start a thread about the origin of the word camaro? wow

 

alright..to me, the third gen f-body can be either a muscle car OR a sports car..
its in the hands of the owner to the fullest. to me, a muscle car is a car that looks good, sounds good and can throw down good drag times...a sports car is the same BUT should also consist of good autox times as well as drag times..just my opinion, you dont have to agree and the mentality of the owner plays a big part. as an owner that does everything in his thirdgen, i call my car more of a sports car with a muslce car history and powerplant. i confuse myself sometimes

 

I was making the point that just because something has a certain word in the name, doesn't mean it is relevant, like I said, a mustang GT is by no means a "grand tourer", whether its name implies it is or not, just like because camaros have a trim level of "sport coupe" I can almost promise you they called it a "sport coupe" for 1 of 2 reasons if not both, laziness in the creativity department, but mostly as a marketing ploy, nobody runs around excited about buying a "sedan" or a "station wagon" but when someone hears "sport coupe" it kind of gets their attention.
If I started a speaker company making tweeters, and named a model series something with woofer in the name, would that make it a subwoofer?

 

This thread went stupid.

 

I agree, which is a quite a shame. I find it quite interesting to see different interpretations of one and the same car, based on peoples first opinion of the car.

I think the origin of the cars name can be relevant to peoples opinion of, and view on a vehicle.

PS: grammar & attitude. Seeing how Stephen spent well over 10 years on this forum, I assume he has at least once read some of the stickies on behaviour, and is able to see social interaction through the internet for what it is. A nice way to exchange points of view with people you do not nescessarily meet in your local pub.

I wouldn´t turn down a good offer on a C5 either, but I turned down an offer to trade my camaro against a C4. Maybe things are slightly different on this side of the pond, but we have several corvette clubs and on US car meetings I see somewhere between 15 and 35 corvettes every month. Against the handfull of F-bodies (all generations) driving my camaro somehow makes me into one of the exotics around here.

That and I like the camaro bodystyle better then the corvette body style. I would gladly take one as a 2nd car, but I just wouldn´t sell my camaro to be able to own one. I might trade my RS against a 1984 Z28 if someone made me a good offer though, but only if it came with manual transmission .

 

And yes, I do read Topics 100%, start to finish. But I'm also not going to let misinformation go uncorrected, for any future readers. Yours just upset that I corrected you.

Not sure why I was singled out in your post. OK, I KINDA do, but I was here before TGO was, when it was on the tufts.edu site. More like 15 yrs. 1999 was simply when the TGO severs totally crashed & the whole site had to be restarted from ground zero.

You come back in 15 years & tell me you don't get frustrated by stupid posts & reading the same "How do you....." question over & over & over &.....for the billionth time because people can't SEARCH!

All I did was give the origin of the word Camaro, since it does have one & was not just some letters put together by GM for the very first time. And he got upset that I pointed out that there was an origin & he was wrong.

 

i stay'd on topic lol

 

i too am a watcher of topgear, and i am the stig haha, i agree with all of the "arguments for muscle car" as well as the "arguments for sports car" i believe that at the time GM did one of the most genius things they could have by building this car not as a sports car, not as a muscle car, but as both, and neither, also they left the car with enough room for improvement that even today 20 some years after the last incarnation of the third gen it is still one of the most popular, widely available, and customizable cars in the world. you can "make it" a muscle car, or you can "make it" a sports car but i feel that to truly embody the spirit of the "sport muscle car" you need to either tune it with this balance in mind or leave it how it was, as a work of art, after all you wouldn't draw a mustache on the Mona Lisa would you, even if it was a man in drag posing or so they say, by the way that last statement is not a knock to anyone who customizes there car in any way

 

Well, even the mona lisa with mustache is considered art.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Lisa_LHOOQ.jpg

There are some 3rd gens left in such a good original shape that keeping them original suffises to have an extraordinary vehicle.

Some people prefer to race them, whether it´s on the 1/4 mile or on the track.

And then there are those that consider the cars to be nice dailies that can go a long way with some light or more serious modification.

The fact that these cars are still so widely used and still considered competetive indicates GM must have gotten some details right, regardless of how much they messed up in the quality compartment

My guess is that within a few short years the early 3rdgens and some anniversary and special edition models will become classics.

 

IMO, I would say thirdgens are sports cars right off the back but have the potential to become muscle cars as well (depending on owner). I personally want to build my GTA to have a little bit of both worlds; something like a "muscle sports car" if you will .

 

very well me: 0 you: 1 haha

 

Interesting thread

Over here in sunny London (is this nuclear winter ever going to end?!) you mention Camaro's and Trans Ams and it's almost always described as a muscle car. Muscle cars being unsophisticated but powerful, rearwheel drive and big (relatively). A sports car is typically defined as a small two seater (think lotus elan, elise / Austin sprite etc.) - also think delicate precision machinery (more lotus then). These days this also means fairly sophisticated (as most manufacturers try to squeeze as much power from smaller engines). That's pretty much the cliche here anyway...

The 3rd gen was marketed as being a sophisticated, frugal, efficient "sporty car". Probably because it didn't have the ***** to brag about it's power numbers. Few years down the GTA Firebird again was a marketing exercise to present the 3rd gen as an upper market american car to rival sporty exotics - that's how GM wanted us to see it.

But underneath the marketing spin it was a pretty old design. I mean a steering box, live rear axle, ohv, 2 valves per cylinder iron engines. Sure, greatly improved from the 2nd gen - but perhaps not class defining.

I think to put it a bid coldly it's neither from the factory. I'd say it's easier to make it into a muscle car then a sports car.

Me: I'm working on the suspension to make it handle better and then will try and massage a few more ponies from the L98 whilst keeping it stock looking - sleek and low - I think an old magazine article description of the GTA provides my sorta direction - a muscle car in a tuxedo>>

 

very well put

 

OHV being inferior to OHC is nothing but a myth, they both have pros and cons over the other, most if not all of GMs big powerful v8s are still using pushrods, including the ls9 which is the most powerful engine they have ever made, and the LSA which powers one of, if not the fastest production sedan ever made.
And imo, it may be live real axle, but .92gs on a skidpad is as much as the modern day muscle puts down, mustang and challenger both pull .92, the new camaro which DOES have IRS, only pulls .93gs, .01 more. And I may be wrong, but I believe IRS is heavier than live rear axles.

 

thanks for standing up for the third-gen against the naysayers who all thin it was an under powered, under developed, simple, bad car. because if it was any of these things, it wouldn't be able to hold a candle to modern cars, but as you have just said it very well does, and in more ways than one now i will admit to street racing and i have beaten more modern nissans mitsubishis and toyotas in my 21 year old 2.8l OHV engine powered pontiac firebird and it is relatively untouched so far as performance goes the performance suspension which is a factory option has been the same since back in 89 and no weight has been removed form the car , i for one love its handling which i feel rivals that of any car on the road today, i'll admit to it lacking in power (on paper anyway) while it doesnt have a 180mph top speed like a lambo or a ferrari, it does achieve its top speed somewhere near 124 mph if my speedo is correct (which it is) a damn sight faster than many modern cars. so there i stand by the "FACT" that it is a muscle sport combo

 

Sorry for posting to a semi-old thread, but I was just reading this thread after trying to decide which way to go with my '91 restoration. It has been very helpful!

To me the 3rd gens look a lot more like similar year Corvette's than they do the old school muscle cars. You can definitely have a muscle car mindset when adding mods, but the exterior styling is more like the category in which you would put the Corvette. Also the fact that many people are putting Corvette components into them is a factor.

That being said, there is a huge difference between a real sports car (Corvette, Porsche, etc.) and a sporty car (Miata, etc.) Those aren't even close to the same thing.

To me, the question was, "do I want my car to look more like a late 60's Firebird/GTO or a modern Corvette?". I've decided to go with more of a Corvette look. Meaning lower profile-tires, Corvette wheels, fender vents, slicker sounding exhaust etc., rather than the taller white-letter tires with classic muscle rims, lopey idle, etc.

Either way, these don't really fit strictly in either category. They definitely borrow some characteristics from muscle and sports cars. Which way you decide to take it from there is up to you. They're kind of like the best of both worlds.