What’s faster? 1972 Chevrolet Chevelle SS OR 1967 Chevrolet Camaro

[champi]

Hey all, I want to buy either of these cars and I’m only interested in the speed and power. Which one would you recommend?

thank you. 

links:

Chevelle

 

camaro
 

[alsancle]

2 hours ago, champi said:

Hey all, I want to buy either of these cars and I’m only interested in the speed and power. Which one would you recommend?

thank you. 

links:

Chevelle

 

camaro
 

 

If you want to go fast and not kill yourself buy a new car.

 

[Matt Harwood]

A modern V6 Camaro is faster than either of them by a wide margin and a modern V8 Camaro will eat them alive. If you want speed, don't buy an old car. The nastiest, fastest, most brutal Camaro of the '60s is still no match for a modern Honda Accord.

[alsancle]

As a guy that loves muscle cars I hate to admit you are right.   

[39BuickEight]

On the face, using factory numbers, of the Camaro should be faster and handle better.  More HP and a lighter car with less front end weight.

 

The engines are modified so there is really no way to know for certain.  

[8E45E]

A new F150 is faster and more practical. (But maybe not as much fun.)

 

Craig

[kingrudy]

When considering the purchase of either of these cars. IMO style should be the major concern. There are a ton of after market parts available to them fast, but comparing the Chevelle to the Camaro will be a matter of preference. I like the Chevelle, but that's just me. 

[Terry Bond]

In theory or reality?  Lots more data needed,  dyno testing, etc. Maybe a hot rod forum would be a better place for your discussion. Both cars are modified "tribute" cars. To most of us that means replica, reproduction or fake designed to resemble something it may not really be. 

Terry

[George Smolinski]

55 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

The nastiest, fastest, most brutal Camaro of the '60s is still no match for a modern Honda Accord.

May be true, but I'd rather be driving that ZL1 than the rice burner.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Reminds me of a friend a few years back, a car guy but not so much antiques.  He bought a new Porsche 911 S cabriolet and a new Subaru WRX in a 12 or 18 month span.  The WRX to drive daily, guess which one was actually faster!!! 😯😁

 

Shhh.  Don't tell the Lime Rock Porsche club boys.

 

I would still prefer the Porsche!

Edited April 27, 2021 by Steve_Mack_CT (see edit history)

[padgett]

Tossup. Both will be slow in comparison with a properly built car with a four-speed and posi. Both are restomods, neither is built for speed/performance.

Note: the original 67 Camaro 350 had a weak bottom end.

[bryankazmer]

And both have the handling typical of their era: nose-heavy cars with rear axles (maybe that F150 comparison is not so far off)

[John Bloom]

Others have chimed in on your question of “which is faster”.    Old cars do feel faster than their modern counterparts.  Take a larger upscale SUV out on a smooth interstate. At 80 mph there is no sensation of going fast. There is speed, and then there is the perception of speed. If you want a thrilling feel of going fast, get an MG Midget and take it up to 60 mph.  
 

good luck. I like Chevelles and Camaros.   Lots of fun to be found in either. 
 

[28 Chrysler]

Years back I had a "slightly" modified 63 T Bird.  It could hit 90 MPH in less than  two city blocks and more than that to stop. ( 8-9 MPG )

[padgett]

Nice thing about a VW bus: you cold have a drag race for several blocks and no one would notice.

 

Funny about those "nose-heavy cars with rear axles ", set up right you could pin the nose on a pylon and just walk the tail around. Really embarrasses Porsches in an autocross.

[Pfeil]

1 hour ago, George Smolinski said:

May be true, but I'd rather be driving that ZL1 than the rice burner.

That will make all the Asians who collect antique cars, and the people who collect Japanese cars happy. Did you know that the three major players from Japan who build cars here have more U.S. content than U.S. based car companies, especially in the form of trucks.

43 minutes ago, 28 Chrysler said:

Years back I had a "slightly" modified 63 T Bird.  It could hit 90 MPH in less than  two city blocks and more than that to stop. ( 8-9 MPG )

Is that a Chicago or a NYC city block? there is a big difference.

[Pfeil]

2 hours ago, 8E45E said:

A new F150 is faster and more practical. (But maybe not as much fun.)

 

Craig

The 2021 Ford F-150 comes equipped with a 3.3-liter V-6 that makes 290 hp @ 6500 rpm and 265 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm of torque. The car takes 6.6 seconds to reach 60 MPH from a standstill while it is able to run a quarter-mile in 15.45 seconds.

The Ford also offers another engine. It is an 2.7-liter V-6 that spills out 395 hp @ 5750 rpm and 400 lb-ft. @ 4500 rpm of torque. This powertrain is available with the XL 2dr Regular Cab 6.5 ft. SB (2.7L 6cyl 10A) and helps the car to reach from 0-60 MPH in 6.6 seconds. The Ford F-150 covers the quarter-mile run in just 15.45 seconds.

The Ford also offers another engine. It is an 3.5-liter V-6 that spills out 395 hp @ 5750 rpm and 400 lb-ft. @ 4500 rpm of torque. This powertrain is available with the XL 2dr Regular Cab 8 ft. LB (3.5L 6cyl Turbo 10A) and helps the car to reach from 0-60 MPH in 6.6 seconds. The Ford F-150 covers the quarter-mile run in just 15.45 seconds.

 

 

• Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe 4-speed (man. 4) , model year 1972, version for North America U.S.
• manufactured by Chevrolet (USA) in United States
• 2-door coupe body type
• RWD (rear-wheel drive), manual 4-speed gearbox
• gasoline (petrol) engine with displacement: 7443 cm3 / 454.2 cui, advertised power: 201.5 kW / 270 hp / 274 PS ( SAE net ), torque: 529 Nm / 390 lb-ft, more data: 1972 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe 4-speed (man. 4) Horsepower/Torque Curve
• characteristic dimensions: outside length: 5016 mm / 197.5 in, width: 1915 mm / 75.4 in, wheelbase: 2845 mm / 112 in
• reference weights: base curb weight: 1668 kg / 3677 lbs
• how fast is this car ? top speed: 166 km/h (103 mph) (©theoretical);
• accelerations: 0- 60 mph 6.4© s; 0- 100 km/h 6.7© s (simulation ©automobile-catalog.com); 1/4 mile drag time (402 m) 14.9© s (simulation ©automobile-catalog.com) 1972 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe 4-speed (man. 4) Detailed Performance Review

Now if you put some headers on, a good factory high rise and a 800cfm Qjet,  raise the compression to mid 60's levels or what they are today, put a ZL1 cam and lifters in, and get some tire under it you are talking about sub 12 seconds Quarter mile.

[padgett]

Both of the referenced cars have THM-400s.

[bryankazmer]

1 hour ago, padgett said:

Nice thing about a VW bus: you cold have a drag race for several blocks and no one would notice.

 

Funny about those "nose-heavy cars with rear axles ", set up right you could pin the nose on a pylon and just walk the tail around. Really embarrasses Porsches in an autocross.

 Agreed, but not if your driving skill level is "floor it and see how soon it gets to 60."  And Porsches, at least the rear engined ones, are not exactly paragons of good weight distribution either, are they?

[George Smolinski]

1 hour ago, Pfeil said:

That will make all the Asians who collect antique cars, and the people who collect Japanese cars happy. Did you know that the three major players from Japan who build cars here have more U.S. content than U.S. based car companies, especially in the form of trucks.

Don't really know what your point is here. If it's to impress with your alleged knowledge of modern car manufacturers, I see no point. The guy is asking about an old Camaro or Chevelle. I don't think he gives a crap about the U.S. content of modern, look alike no style cars whether from Japan, Germany or any other foreign country. He wants American Muscle as in 60's & early 70's cars.

1 hour ago, Pfeil said:

The 2021 Ford F-150 comes equipped with a 3.3-liter V-6 that makes 290 hp @ 6500 rpm and 265 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm of torque. The car takes 6.6 seconds to reach 60 MPH from a standstill while it is able to run a quarter-mile in 15.45 seconds.

The Ford also offers another engine. It is an 2.7-liter V-6 that spills out 395 hp @ 5750 rpm and 400 lb-ft. @ 4500 rpm of torque. This powertrain is available with the XL 2dr Regular Cab 6.5 ft. SB (2.7L 6cyl 10A) and helps the car to reach from 0-60 MPH in 6.6 seconds. The Ford F-150 covers the quarter-mile run in just 15.45 seconds.

The Ford also offers another engine. It is an 3.5-liter V-6 that spills out 395 hp @ 5750 rpm and 400 lb-ft. @ 4500 rpm of torque. This powertrain is available with the XL 2dr Regular Cab 8 ft. LB (3.5L 6cyl Turbo 10A) and helps the car to reach from 0-60 MPH in 6.6 seconds. The Ford F-150 covers the quarter-mile run in just 15.45 seconds.

I'll STILL & ALWAYS WILL take the ZL1.

[Pfeil]

49 minutes ago, padgett said:

Both of the referenced cars have THM-400s.

A F150 isn't a reference car either.

But;

• Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe Hydra-Matic (aut. 3) , model year 1972, version for North America U.S.
• manufactured by Chevrolet (USA) in United States
• 2-door coupe body type
• RWD (rear-wheel drive), automatic 3-speed gearbox
• gasoline (petrol) engine with displacement: 7443 cm3 / 454.2 cui, advertised power: 201.5 kW / 270 hp / 274 PS ( SAE net ), torque: 529 Nm / 390 lb-ft, more data: 1972 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe Hydra-Matic (aut. 3) Horsepower/Torque Curve
• characteristic dimensions: outside length: 5016 mm / 197.5 in, width: 1915 mm / 75.4 in, wheelbase: 2845 mm / 112 in
• reference weights: base curb weight: 1692 kg / 3730 lbs
• how fast is this car ? top speed: 162 km/h (101 mph) (©theoretical);
• accelerations: 0- 60 mph 6.4© s; 0- 100 km/h 6.7© s (simulation ©automobile-catalog.com); 1/4 mile drag time (402 m) 15© s (simulation ©automobile-catalog.com) 1972 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe Hydra-Matic (aut. 3) Detailed Performance Review
• Still a sub 12 second car with factory installed parts
• fuel consumption and mileage: average estimated by a-c©: 27.8 l/100km / 10.2 mpg (imp.) / 8.4 mpg (U.S.) / 3.6 km/l, more data: 1972 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe Hydra-Matic (aut. 3) Specifications Review

 

[Pfeil]

14 minutes ago, George Smolinski said:

Don't really know what your point is here. If it's to impress with your alleged knowledge of modern car manufacturers, I see no point. The guy is asking about an old Camaro or Chevelle. I don't think he gives a crap about the U.S. content of modern, look alike no style cars whether from Japan, Germany or any other foreign country. He wants American Muscle as in 60's & early 70's cars.

I'll STILL & ALWAYS WILL take the ZL1.

Point is; when you call any Asian car a rice burner around Asian car enthusiast they don't like it very much because most of them I know consider it a derogatory term. I would like to think Asian car enthusiast would feel welcome at AACA. Now do you understand the point? 

 

Edited April 27, 2021 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[8E45E]

2 hours ago, Pfeil said:

The 2021 Ford F-150 comes equipped with a 3.3-liter V-6 that makes 290 hp @ 6500 rpm and 265 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm of torque. The car takes 6.6 seconds to reach 60 MPH from a standstill while it is able to run a quarter-mile in 15.45 seconds.

The Ford also offers another engine. It is an 2.7-liter V-6 that spills out 395 hp @ 5750 rpm and 400 lb-ft. @ 4500 rpm of torque. This powertrain is available with the XL 2dr Regular Cab 6.5 ft. SB (2.7L 6cyl 10A) and helps the car to reach from 0-60 MPH in 6.6 seconds. The Ford F-150 covers the quarter-mile run in just 15.45 seconds.

The Ford also offers another engine. It is an 3.5-liter V-6 that spills out 395 hp @ 5750 rpm and 400 lb-ft. @ 4500 rpm of torque. This powertrain is available with the XL 2dr Regular Cab 8 ft. LB (3.5L 6cyl Turbo 10A) and helps the car to reach from 0-60 MPH in 6.6 seconds. The Ford F-150 covers the quarter-mile run in just 15.45 seconds.

 

 

• Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe 4-speed (man. 4) , model year 1972, version for North America U.S.
• manufactured by Chevrolet (USA) in United States
• 2-door coupe body type
• RWD (rear-wheel drive), manual 4-speed gearbox
• gasoline (petrol) engine with displacement: 7443 cm3 / 454.2 cui, advertised power: 201.5 kW / 270 hp / 274 PS ( SAE net ), torque: 529 Nm / 390 lb-ft, more data: 1972 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe 4-speed (man. 4) Horsepower/Torque Curve
• characteristic dimensions: outside length: 5016 mm / 197.5 in, width: 1915 mm / 75.4 in, wheelbase: 2845 mm / 112 in
• reference weights: base curb weight: 1668 kg / 3677 lbs
• how fast is this car ? top speed: 166 km/h (103 mph) (©theoretical);
• accelerations: 0- 60 mph 6.4© s; 0- 100 km/h 6.7© s (simulation ©automobile-catalog.com); 1/4 mile drag time (402 m) 14.9© s (simulation ©automobile-catalog.com) 1972 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 Sport Coupe 4-speed (man. 4) Detailed Performance Review

Now if you put some headers on, a good factory high rise and a 800cfm Qjet,  raise the compression to mid 60's levels or what they are today, put a ZL1 cam and lifters in, and get some tire under it you are talking about sub 12 seconds Quarter mile.

Going by the title of this thread, I have to agree with what Matt says.

 

The OP does NOT specify which particular engine/transmission combination in each car as several factory engine/transmission/rear end options were offered, and if he prefers stock or modified.  Nor is he stating if he wants the figures for the fastest at top speed each car can achieve with the best engine/rear end ratio suited for it, or the best engine/transmission/rear end for the quickest 0-60 time. 

 

A 1967 Camaro could be had with a 6 cylinder automatic all the way to a 396, and a 1972 Chevelle SS was available with a 307 2bbl to a 454.

 

(The F150 Raptor does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds.)  

 

Craig

[39BuickEight]

3 minutes ago, 8E45E said:

Going by the title of this thread, I have to agree with what Matt says.

 

The OP does NOT specify which particular engine/transmission combination in each car as several factory engine/transmission/rear end options were offered, and if he prefers stock or modified.  Nor is he stating if he wants the figures for the fastest at top speed each car can achieve with the best engine/rear end ratio suited for it, or the best engine/transmission/rear end for the quickest 0-60 time. 

 

A 1967 Camaro could be had with a 6 cylinder automatic all the way to a 396, and a 1972 Chevelle SS was available with a 307 2bbl to a 454.

 

(The F150 Raptor does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds.)  

 

Craig

There are links to the specific cars in his first post.  The Chevelle is a 454 and the Camaro is a 350.  Neither are stock engines, so it’s still a guess really.

[8E45E]

4 minutes ago, 39BuickEight said:

There are links to the specific cars in his first post.  The Chevelle is a 454 and the Camaro is a 350.  Neither are stock engines, so it’s still a guess really.

I guess he can TEST DRIVE them both and get the answer for himself.  

 

Craig

[John_S_in_Penna]

5 hours ago, 8E45E said:

A new F150 is faster and more practical. (But maybe not as much fun.)

 

With any performance car, you're limited

by the roads and the speed limit.

Anyone who really wants a thrill or a rush

can ride any of the newest extreme roller coasters instead.

[8E45E]

Years ago, my elderly neighbor used to ask, what good is a Ferrari when you're stuck in rush hour traffic??!

 

Craig

[Dosmo]

10 hours ago, champi said:

Hey all, I want to buy either of these cars and I’m only interested in the speed and power. Which one would you recommend?

thank you. 

links:

Chevelle

 

camaro
 

It’s possible that you can find a more appropriate forum for this question.  There may be a lot of old fahhhtts on here that couldn’t care less.  I could be one of them.

 

It’s sort of like asking which 4WD diesel truck looks the coolest, sounds the most throaty, and belches the greatest amount of thick sooty smoke.

 

I guess there is nothing wrong with your question.  I enjoy this forum because muscle cars don’t seem to receive a great deal of attention here, and I’d just as soon keep things this way.

 

Edited April 27, 2021 by Dosmo (see edit history)

[Terry Bond]

1 hour ago, Dosmo said:

It’s possible that you can find a more appropriate forum for this question.  There may be a lot of old fahhhtts on here that couldn’t care less.  I could be one of them.

 

It’s sort of like asking which 4WD diesel truck looks the coolest, sounds the most throaty, and belches the greatest amount of thick sooty smoke.

 

I guess there is nothing wrong with your question.  I enjoy this forum because muscle cars don’t seem to receive a great deal of attention here, and I’d just as soon keep things this way.

 

Bingo. Exactly what I suggested way before everyone got off on side-roads.

Terry

[TAKerry]

1 hour ago, Dosmo said:

It’s possible that you can find a more appropriate forum for this question.  There may be a lot of old fahhhtts on here that couldn’t care less.  I could be one of them.

 

It’s sort of like asking which 4WD diesel truck looks the coolest, sounds the most throaty, and belches the greatest amount of thick sooty smoke.

 

I guess there is nothing wrong with your question.  I enjoy this forum because muscle cars don’t seem to receive a great deal of attention here, and I’d just as soon keep things this way.

 

That certainly is forward thinking! 

 

If one doesnt have any interest in a particular subject why bother wasting the energy to read through and answer a thread. Kinda like the dial on the radio.

[Pfeil]

2 hours ago, 8E45E said:

Going by the title of this thread, I have to agree with what Matt says.

 

The OP does NOT specify which particular engine/transmission combination in each car as several factory engine/transmission/rear end options were offered, and if he prefers stock or modified.  Nor is he stating if he wants the figures for the fastest at top speed each car can achieve with the best engine/rear end ratio suited for it, or the best engine/transmission/rear end for the quickest 0-60 time. 

 

A 1967 Camaro could be had with a 6 cylinder automatic all the way to a 396, and a 1972 Chevelle SS was available with a 307 2bbl to a 454.

 

(The F150 Raptor does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds.)  

 

Craig

The original post has the links to the Chevelle and Camaro that gives the spec. of the cars,

[8E45E]

2 hours ago, Dosmo said:

It’s sort of like asking which 4WD diesel truck looks the coolest, sounds the most throaty, and belches the greatest amount of thick sooty smoke.

Here's my answer:  https://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/forum/your-studebaker-forum/general-studebaker-specific-discussion/71424-from-the-archives-116-1963-8e15-155-crew-cab-diesel?69723-From-the-archives-116-(1963-8E15-155-Crew-cab-Diesel)=    Except this one is only a 2WD.

 

Craig

[Peter Gariepy]

 

 

 

 

 

[padgett]

Interesting but in stock form, neither is very fast. Both in the first post are restomods and still not built for speed.

[intimeold]

I don't think this guy cares about what the original Chevelle and Camaro; were capable of.  Both of these cars are not original cars anyway.

 

My recommendation:  Try to get to these 2 cars in person and drive each. Seat of the pants feel; may be different than actual speed anyway.

 

But my first thought was: is this guy for real? 

[padgett]

Has one (1) post. Joined 17 hours ago.

[victorialynn2]

58 minutes ago, intimeold said:

 

But my first thought was: is this guy for real? 

Based on the way he wrote the post and the fact that this is his first post, I imagined a teen trying to settle a bet with his buddy. 😆

[Graham Man]

They are both are winners in my book.  If I were asking, I would want the one with less rust and better sorted/driving car...I think I might add A/C to my list, speed would be the last question.

 

My 1972 Mustang is a ball to drive, sure it's slow, but it looks and sounds great. 

The only bad thing is it takes forever to get out of the gas station, people always want to talk about the car.

[Buffalowed Bill]

At the risk of getting feedback from the gallery saying, since nobody asked, so who cares, I'll give my personal anecdote. I've owned my 1967 RS, small block since 1969. How I got it and why is interesting, but again who cares. I owned the car through my last several years of college, and continued to drive it well into the 80's. I have a habit of hanging on to, and restoring a car that has been good to me, and the Camaro had been, so I restored back to original driver condition. The car is special to me because of my personal connection to it, but would I go out and find another today-absolutely not. This shouldn't be taken as any kind of indictment of the car, but the car was always a bit too small for my taste. I always prefered a small block car to a big block version-again so who cares? I always felt the the A-body GM's suited my own personal tastes better then the Pony cars. Then again would I trade my Camaro for a similar Chevelle-absolutely not. some people reading this will get it and some will think me crazy, but do I care-absolutely not.

[chistech]

While I’m an original, pre war car guy, my brother is a muscle, drag racing car guy. I looking here I’m seeing comments from old car guys it seems with assumptions that the old cars just don’t go. My brothers 71’ nova easily ran in the high 12’s and was set up right so that he actually lost his police car tails a few times as street racing here in New England was a big thing years back. The car he currently has now is a 67’ Olds cutlass with a mildly built, actually very stock 455, 431 hp, 517 ft pounds torque on the dyno. It is running 12.4s through the 1/4 with an Olds th400, and my Honda Accord sport will not come close to that. Another thing that is proven among drag racing or fast cars is the auto over the manual trans. All fast drag cars run autos. The th400 will outperform the best Muncie or Tremec with the best driver out there. Many rail dragsters run two speed power glides. My brothers friend runs a 72’ nova with a power glide and he’s in the low 10’s. By the way, it’s a street car, not a drag only car. To say only the modern cars are fast is totally incorrect. There are many newly manufactured parts to update the old cars like disc brakes, tubular A frames, chassis stiffeners, turbos, super chargers, nitrous oxide , etc., and all can be installed on street capable cars. Are new cars fast and great handling, absolutely, but you’re talking two different animals, and don’t assume the old animal is totally incapable. As far as the Camaro and chevelle thing, the 60’s Olds were actually faster than most out of the showroom floor but many never knew that.