Shouldn't are cars be called 4th gen insted of 3rd gens? I look at it this way

67- 69 1st gen
70- 7? 2nd gen
7?- 81 3rd gen
82-92 4th gen
93-03 5th gen

wouldn't that make more sence? If i'm missing something can you fill me in? Man the things i think about on the can LOL

 

70-81 same chassis, same body. facia revisions only.

 

so you mean to tell me you could take pannels off of a 70 and put them on a 81 like doors, trunck lid, glass, fenders stuff like that?

 

FYI, there is no 03 F-Body.

 

there were window revisions in the mid 70's and the frontlinesof the bumper and hood changed but still the same body

 

Are cars? What the hell are you talking about?

 

If you take the front/rear clips off the 70-81's, they all look very similar.

 

Yeah really.

 

yeah, and it's possible to mount a late 2ndgen clip (say, 79) on an early chassis, and vice versa.

hear is some of the big differences

67-69: rear-mounted steernig box (near headers), rear leaf springs
70-81: forward mounted steering box, rear leaf springs
82-92: rear coil springs, torque arm

 

a '79 Z28 with a 70-73 nose and split bumpers instead of the full length bumper found on 70-73s with those type front turn signals.

 

1970 RS Z28

 

1970 RS rear shot

 

'70 Z28 with correct full bumper with mentioned turn signals

 

'74 Z28

 

'74 Z28 rear shot

 

1975 coupe rear windows are now the wrap around kind

 

'79 Z28 which looks the same as the 78-81 except for some minor cosmetic change in those years

 

OK i just learned something new about OUR cars i will say i'm sorry to **** anyone off i just thought that they changed the major part of the body too. Thank You 91 Zman you showed me the difference between the 2ND GEN. Now that I know that I want to build 79 split bumper Z28

 

I still think the 79 Z28 looks the best of all 2nd gen maros, with the 70 style closely behind IMO.

 

If you want to go this way on body changes then you have to Put each of the first Gen years in to their own years. Since there was some body changes year to year.
But no there was only Facial changes in the 70s.

 

that red 70 (first pic) is soooooooooooo sexy,

i would kill the entire population of france (and probably get the nobelle prize for it) to get one!

(only kidding france)

great, now i've pissed an entire country off!

 

Also, everyone should note that in the pictures above, the 79 z28 picture with the 70-73 nose, has an incorrect RS nose. There were two styles of turn signals in 70-73 - the round ones to the side of the headlights (RS style), and the long rectangular ones beneath the headlights (normal style). The picture with the split bumpers and the normal-style turn signals is a regular camaro with split bumpers installed. The very sweet 70 RS Z28 beneath it, is a correct RS (correct turn signals for an RS nose).

 

a '79 Z28 with a 70-73 nose and split bumpers instead of the full length bumper found on 70-73s with those type front turn signals. and thanks for explaining it a little further.

 

That "79" z is actaully an 80 or 81. Note the rear fender flares. 2nd gen was so cool esp 80-81, too bad they smogged the hell out of them.

 

Nope.it's a'79 he added the rear flares in which he did it for looks.In '80-81 the vents in the front fenders would be smooth and not louvered.Also there be reverse mounted hoodscoop and there would be 3 stripes going around the lower body and not 2.

 

Nice pics.

 

 

looking at it that way,
93-97 should be 4th gen
98-02 5th gen
because of the different nose.
but that is just being stupid
later
biker

 

Huh? If you are going to consider the minor changes made from 67 to 68 in the body areas, then you need to also consider the minor changes over the years of the 2nd gen. There were more than facial changes in the 70's. The rear window became a wraparound in 75, the rear 1/4's obviously changed with the rear window change, and the front fenders varied slightly from model to model over the years. The tail panel changed over the years as did the front ends. I'd say there are more changes during the 70's than during the 67-68 that you mentioned (if you want to include the minor changes)

 

Thats what I was saying Scott if someone wanted to Split the 2nd Gen up because of the Minor changes in the body ( I know some where more then others) Then they should also put 1st gen cars in their own Gens as well. Thats all I was saying.
But They kept 1st gen the first 3 yrs of the camaro & 2nd Gen the 4th(year) to the14th year.

 

Going by this logic then wouldnt the 5th gens end at 96'. They did change front facias in 97' I believe. Most people wouldnt know a 73' from a 74' anyway. But most would know a 81' from an 82'. Lets not get too carried away with changes that the average Joe Shmoe wouldnt notice.

 

Not trying to be picky, but it was actually 98 that they changed the front end.

I agree with you. Based on the body changes, it's actually hard to believe the 69 wasn't considered it's own generation. Most of the car was redesigned for 69, yet was still part of a 3 year run. If that can happen, then the minor changes from year to year should be considered insignificant.

 

Actually the First Generation Camaros were from 1967 - 1970 and the Second generation was from 70 1/2 to 1981.
OK let me explain, Chevrolet wasn't ready to begin production of the 1970 Camaro (planned to be the start of the 2nd Gen.) so they made 1970 camaro's using the exact same car as the 1969. I think they made about 5,000 I have the exact # at home. But this is true and I have seen a few 1970 Camaro's with a title that matchs. These cars are always identicfied as 1969 but they aren't.
I found that as a rather interesting fact that should be shared.
Later, Garrett
By the way this isn't either.

 

Garrett, The 1969 Camaro production year ran from September 26, 1968 through February 26, 1970. All of these cars were 1969 models, regardless of what year it was when they were built. Chevrolet did consider selling the '69 style cars as 1970 models, but they never actually did it. There are some photos out there that show a '69 Camaro wearing "1970" promo plates on the front bumper, but as I said, it never came to fruition. The 1970 models were introduced late in the model year and, to my knowledge, they were never officially called '70 1/2 models. I could be wrong on that, but I have never seen anything that said Chevrolet introduced them as anything but the 1970 model.

 

OK Matt, now my interest is beginning to peak. I will have to go home and look at my books and see what they say, and get the facts right. But I was almost positive that was how it happened. I have a question, was the 1964 1/2 Mustang listed as a 64 1/2 or not??? Because I have always heard the 70 1/2 Camaro referred to as a 701/2 Camaro.
Oh well I get back and post the results of my search wether I am right or wrong.
Later, Garrett

 

Yes, I do believe the Mustang was in fact a "64 1/2" model. I too have always heard the 1970 Camaro referred to as a 1/2 year model, but then I have never seen any documentation attesting to that fact. Like I said before, I could be wrong.

 

Ok Matt here I go I had a little extra time and I looked it up on the net and here's what I found

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Garage/3967/f70.html

So it looks like we where both kind of right but the info. isn't complete either way. So like I said I'll go home and do some more research tonight.
Later, Garrett

 

Hey Garrett, I have seen many web pages like that one, and it's information is sometimes based only on what it's creator believes to be true. I usually rely on Mike Antonick's Camaro White Book for the most accurate information, and it doesn't really say anything at all about the 1/2 year issue. It does refer to the model year as only 1970, so I assume he researched this and wrote the book as such. Again, no one book or website is absolutely correct, so unless the answer came from someone like Scott Settlemire, you just never know.

 

Here's an excerpt from a hardcover book called Camaro by Anthony Young.

Engineering and testing staff spent many months at GM's Milford,Michigan,proving grounds evaluating and improving the new Camaro.Simultaneously,the car was developed togo racing,or at least engineered so as to be effectively worked on by professional racers for SCCA,drag racing,even a hoped-for NASCAR class.However,all the development testing took time-more time than general manager John Delorean wanted.He wanted and had planned for the new Camaro to be introduced in the fall of 1969 as a 1970 model.All the reports coming back from engineering and manufacturing were saying the same thing:the deadline to establish the new production line in the summer of 1969 could not be met.
DeLorean met with all the leads on the Camaro program to nail down when the car could go into production.With engineering programs completed and long,lead tooling procured,it would be February 1970 before the car would roll into Chevrolet dealers.It was decided it would be best to introduce the new Camaro as a 1970 1/2 model,rather than a very early 1971 model.It was felt that this later idea proved unworkable in terms of new vehicle registration and would have caused confusion in the market.The 1969 Camaro would continue in production the additional number of months necessary before the production line switched over for the all-new Camaro.:lala:

 

, I should have just looked at the hood. My bad.

 

All this talk about "generations" of f-bodys and no mention of the Firebirds ?

The facia changes, etc of the Firebird and T/A models didn't always correspond to the Camaro changes, so that would throw another flaw in the theory of using body changes to divide them up.

That's why the "f-body" "generations" are divided by the basic chassis configurations.

 

Garrett, It turns out we are both correct. I E-mailed Scott Settlemire (F-bodfather) and asked him the burning question.

Here's his reply;

Hmmmm.......based on my memory......

The 2nd Gen Camaro and Corvette were introduced to the public, I believe,
in Late March or early April.....and at the time, they were referred to as
1970 1/2s......this was a real departure from introductions back then which
were ALWAYS in September. With that said, the VINS are 1970........... so,
from a legal standpoint, they are 1970s.........

If you happen to see this Scott, thanks for the quick reply.

 

Good enough for me! , So I guess that settles it, Our cars must then be the 16th through 26th generation Camaro's .
Later, and nice talking to you Matt, Garrett

 

Facts are that GM had major changes to the Fbody over its lifespan and all these little changes are "revisions", with each major overhaul the cars were basically grouped in what people call generations 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.

These major changes were chassis related mostly to bring the fbody into a new era so to speak, most everyone here realizes this.

In the past the revisions were more frequent and made the car look very different yet it was essentially the same car that debuted the chassis or generation. Later generations recieved more cost consious revisions that made it look a little different than the original car of its generation but they still resembled the originals closely.

There were only 4 distinct generations of the Fbody period.

Mustang generations can be grouped in a similar fashion, the 64 1/2 to 73 years, 74 to 78, 79 to 93, and 94 to 03. but the 64 to 73 years are more questionable, IMO stangs have been through 4 generations as well.

 

<img src=https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/attachment.php?s=&postid=858189>
>HA! my Bro has that car! It fking rocks! 600HP! but its just a broken toy for now.