Page 188 - Wayne Carini's Guide to Affordable Classics

at least) that harkened back to first generation model. Respecting the proportions of the C4 Corvette that would be launched in
the economies of scale that were required to support a somewhat specialized car program, Ford derived the Mustang from its so- called “Fox” architecture, shared with the Ford Fairmont and Mercury Zephyr. It proved to be a brilliant strategy, as Ford sold nearly 400,000 cars in its launch year, numbers not seen since the first generation Mustang.
GM’s turn at the wheel would come three years later, in 1982. At the time, there was much discussion around various front- wheel-drive sports car concepts within GM, influenced by the VW Scirocco and Saab 900, both demonstrating that a good- looking, fun-to-drive front-wheel-drive car was feasible. At the same time that it was mulling the architectural direction for the third generation Camaro, GM was well into the development of the so-called X-car front-drive program, which would have provided a FWD Camaro an excellent volume base to leverage costs. But there were significant disadvantages as well, with performance being at the top of the list. Purists within Chevrolet voiced significant anxiety about leaving behind the equity built up with the second generation car and “felt strongly that the new car should retain the character that made the old one such a favorite among young and youthful thinking buyers for so many years,” wrote Gary Witzenburg for Automobile Quarterly. “And that meant a front-mounted V8 engine driving the rear wheels.”
With that major stake in the ground, design work kicked off in February 1978 and fairly quickly consensed around a wedge- shaped design, though many permutations were pursued before the mainstream theme settled down in the summer of 1978, with the final design locked down at the end of that year. Channeling
a little more than a year after it, the Camaro’s silhouette was dominated by a strong wedge theme, with a menacing, shark-like front end that was complemented by a large glass hatch (replacing the conventional trunk used previously). Large wheelarches presaged a wheel-oriented side profile that was enhanced by sheer, frameless door glass. Inside, the cockpit was dominated by a “T” design with a strong horizontal theme on the instrument panel that was bisected by a wide center console. As with the forthcoming Corvette, the forthcoming Corvette, the Camaro’s proportions were defined by its steep windshield angle, which, at 62 degrees, violated GM’s in-house standards by three degrees.
Though rear-wheel drive through a live axle was unchanged for the third generation car, just about everything else was different. Starting from the front, the need for a lower hoodline drove the need for a modified MacPherson strut arrangement, replacing the upper and lower A-arms used previously. At the rear, coil springs replaced leaf springs. Dimensionally, length was down by four inches, wheelbase by seven inches and width by over an inch. A smaller footprint, along with computer optimization of the structure, helped shed nearly 500 pounds. The combination paid off with tremendous roadholding, with 0.83g achieved on the Z28 version.
Though an entry-level powertrain was always a necessity for the Camaro, never before had a four-cylinder been offered, with the ignominious “Iron Duke” four pushing out a paltry 90 horsepower and 132 lb ft of torque. Up next was another GM staple, a 2.8-liter OHV V6 with 102 horsepower and 142 lb ft of torque. In a far cry from the fire-breathing Camaros of lore, two 5.0-liter V8s were on offer, one a carbureted version making 145 horsepower and 240 lb ft of torque and a second, throttle body-injected “Crossfire” version with 165 horsepower. Transmission choices were a four-speed manual or a three-speed automatic, though only the automatic was initially offered on the injected 5.0-liter.
Three trim levels were available, starting with the base Sport Coupe. Next up was the Berlinetta, which took the Camaro in a bit more luxurious direction (with no apologies to Ferrari...). At the top of the heap was the Z28, which was really the third generation car’s raison d’être. Though the 165 horsepower from the 5.0-liter V8 (a step down from the technically similar 5.7-liter engine in the Corvette that produced a hardly shocking 205 horsepower) wheezed its way to a 9.4 second 0-60 mph time, it was good enough to win Motor Trend’s “Car of the Year” honors and signal that GM was going to be serious about the third generation car. That year, sales neared 190,000, most of which were fitted with V8s.
The following year saw minor increases in engine performance complemented by extra gears for both the manual and automatic transmissions. In 1984, Car and Driver pitted the Z28 against such diverse competitors as the Dodge Daytona Turbo Z, the Ford Mustang SVO, the Fiero and the Camaro’s own stablemate, the Corvette, to determine which one was the best-handling American car. The Z28 came out the clear winner. “We quickly learned... that a turn in the Z28 was true handling relief: an effortless, confidence-inspiring drive,” concluded the editors.
Third generation Camaro interior somewhat resembled the forthcoming Fiero’s design.
186Wayne CariniAffordable Classics