Well, one, anyway; this one. A (presumably) once-cherished Chevrolet Camaro Sport Coupe, probably lovingly specced out from the brochure; custom-ordered, and waited for with tingly anticipation. Or just bought right off the front lot of a Chevy dealer who affixed a few balloons to it in the spring of 1972, perhaps for some spoiled-rotten high schooler or mistre…, er, I started to misspell secretary, oops.
A lot of miles and a lot of time has passed since that day, however. Presumably, more than just one or two owners as well. If there was need for a picture to define “rode hard and put away wet”, well, pretty much any one from this batch certainly qualifies.
1972 was a hard year for the Camaro, with production only totaling 68,651. The Norwood, Ohio assembly plant went on strike on April 7, 1972, and didn’t go back to work until September—174 days later. Our example is number 50,650 off the line that year, so that would make it from right around Christmas Day 1971.
The Camaro, as with most regular cars back then, could be outfitted in many individual ways, from mild to wild and everything in between. This one started out as a fairly basic Sport Coupe. Well, technically they are all Sport Coupes, but the split bumper was only available on the Rally Sport and Z28 trims, while the regular bumper with the lower turn signals was reserved for the other two, the base and the SS, of which there were few. Pricing for the Sport Coupe started at $2,729 for the 6-cylinder and $2,819 for the V8 version,
There’s always somebody in need of front end sheetmetal from the yard, especially when we are talking about a sporting car. This one still has the lower valance and remnants of one of the lower lights.
The basest of base Camaros sported a 250-CID inline 6-cylinder producing 110 hp and called the Turbo-Thrift, a pretty crappy name for an engine in a sporty car. Only 4,821 were so equipped for 1972, not a shocker. This one has one of the other five engine options, specifically the next lowest position on that totem pole: the 307-CID TurboFire V8 producing a still-not-overly-exciting 130 hp (net). The transmission could have been a 3-speed manual; a Powerglide, or a Turbo Hydramatic. This one’s obviously an automatic, but I don’t know which one.
Is this still that same 307 as installed by a few presumably-angry union workers in Ohio several months before the strike? Or one of the three different 350 variants, or the 396? Or something else entirely? I can’t tell the difference offhand. Someone dressed this one up with some shiny Epson valve covers. Maybe there was a “buy two valve covers, get a free toner cartridge” deal, who knows.
Any real player’s gotta have a Permanent-Cloudy-Sky upper windshield tint band with model name emblazoned on their ride for those who can’t otherwise identify a bright red Camaro from a block away.
Interestingly, and appropriately, the vinyl top option was named the ‘Wet Look’ vinyl roof. Yep, that still checks out on this damp Friday morning in mid-May. It looks like it’s been wet for all of the last 51 years.
You could get a rear spoiler (and a front one) but this one seems more integrated than the optional one, as I recall, so someone’s been trying their hand with some fiberglass and bondo and then red paint after that. The body tag (which seemed to have a dozen layers of paint on it and so was hard to read) indicated the original color code was 14 (Pewter Silver), which you can see in places if you start to look for it.
Given that color and never mind that the above is supposedly a Z28; other than that this is pretty much what this car would or could have looked like when new—or at least before it was slightly butchered and repainted, with different wheels, of course. I now wonder what the roof looks like under the “wet look” vinyl on this one.
Unfortunately, the trunk was latched closed without any readily obvious way for me to open it. But the four tail light holes conveniently allow us to make sure that nobody left their mullet in there. It’s reasonably spacious, at least a 2-bagger.
There’s evidence of further augmentation on the rear fenders as well, with a little botox injection to fatten those lips up. This is pretty much as I remember a lot of these looking like around, oh, 1987 or so. Then they took one of two paths, either shiny and tucked away for those Saturday morning small-town car shows, or getting covered in ever-more primer and endowed with ever-wider slot mag wheels with white-letter off-brand tires. I’m guessing this particular one sort of straddled that fence back then, and perhaps gave in to temptation a few too many times since, sort of an automotive equivalent of how I imagine Mrs. Stiffler turning out in the (very) long run.
But let’s not dwell on that, and instead look inside the car, past the Eugene-spec driver door panel.
There isn’t all too much left of whatever prior glory there once was. But enough to realize that this was a red car with a black roof and black interior, a quite attractive combination overall. It’s remarkable how much room there really is in a Camaro once the seats and stuff are removed, no?
Hey look, the Cadillac-spec glovebox opener! As seen on virtually everything GM built, once upon a time. The molded-in Camaro script is a nice bit of design inspiration, and that upper edge of the glovebox does a very good job of lining up across the dashboard—not too shabby for 1972 Chevy assembly work. The red-top Marlboro box may have been on the options list, as well. Pair that with a few more of the little shooter bottles like the one down there, and what looks like the back of a perhaps illicit Polaroid shot and, well, you’ve got yourself a little after-hours party, circa 1979!
I don’t think any Camaro ever left the factory with buttoned velour, but I guess the stock vinyl doesn’t hold up forever, so someone’s got to have a cousin somewhere who can fashion something else out of what’s left. It would seem to be pretty claustrophobic back there, with the high-back front buckets in place; the seat cushion wasn’t much higher than the now-visible floor.
An interesting sight here in the junkyard amidst the Aveos, Sebrings, and Ventures—I suppose the rust up top doomed it. And now Chevy’s stopping making new replacements for it as well (again). I suppose time will tell if there’ll be a third rising of the Camaro nameplate; one never knows.
Related reading:
Yes in my high school years (mid 80’s), there were pretty common in the high school parking lot, in various states of dress or distress. And I’m about 95% sure that is Kasey Kasem’s voiceover on the Camaro TV ad, another real flashback!
I’ll donate the final 5% to make the assertion. As soon as the first sound struck on the first instrument, I knew right about the era this ad was from.
I like how they used an appropriate sized human when showing off the back seat of the Camaro. I spent my earliest years in the back seat of a 1979 Firebird, and a good friend did his in the back of a 1979 Camaro; they seemed reasonably spacious to a 5 year old me.
https://www.chevyhardcore.com/news/man-behind-classic-chevy-commercials-casey-kasem-dies-at-age-82/
He also voiced Ford ads!
Wow, from those rear pictures, this looks like something that could still have been on the road fairly recently in my area.
You found a real unicorn here – has anyone ever painted a Camaro red, put chrome valve covers on the V8, and failed to cut a hole in the floor for a shifter to replace the one on the column?
I really appreciate these early ones, not least because they were one of the few GM cars in their era that did not rule in their market segments. Even so, GM stuck it out and eventually had a sales champion after everyone else abandoned the traditional ponycar market.
And tube headers too.
As a kid in Uruguay, the only Camaros to be seen were diplomat-imported, highly optioned deluxe versions. So, I was surprised to learn much later that the column shifter was a thing on them at all. I would suppose that most had checked the option of a floor shifter. Am I right, or both were equally common at the time?
Yep, that was a very nice car at one time. Shame it ended up where it did. Somebody should pull the glovebox door as it appears to be complete. I think some sort of strike in 1972 caused GM to make much less Camaro’s and Firebird’s than the previous or subsequent years. I think I’ve read that somewhere.
Yep, the Norwood strike lasted 174 days, according to a New York Times article I found online. Apparently, they had to scrap a bunch of bodies too because of new (at the time) federal safety standards.
I’m struck by the still quite low MSRP of under $3k for a base V8 version in 1972. I guess this is before Nixon took the US off the gold standard and double-digit inflation began its never-ending ride.
A shame since a carefully optioned 307 Camaro would be a very nice, affordable daily ride, eschewing stuff like the unfortunate vinyl top and those spoilers which the vast majority seemed to eventually get. Seems like, at some point, the vinyl top was no longer offered. At least I don’t recall seeing any on the later, refreshed, 5mph bumper cars.
I’m wondering about the shifter on non-console f-bodies, too. Was it like the Mustang where gear selection was always from a floor-mounted shifter, or did GM go the Mopar route where f-bodies without a console had a column-mounted selector, even if it was a 3-speed.
I think the latter was the case with a Camaro automatic, but I don’t know about a base 3-speed manual. It would have been nice if it went on the floor for one of those strippo V8 cars, anyway.
I can’t answer your question, but do remember the floor shift automatics rotating the same shift collar (sans provision for the column mounted shift lever) on the steering column through a cable, so that all of the automatic transmission cars utilized the same basic column linkage to actually shift the transmission.
I don’t remember seeing a floor shifter for an automatic without a console in this generation, though my memory seems to be taking a siesta from time to time, of late.
You are correct T. A. about the rotating shift collar on the steering column except for one part. The shift collar was rotated by linkage that ran from the transmission to the steering column. This was necessary to operate the back up light switch, neutral safety switch with an automatic transmission and to enable the steering and transmission shifter to be locked. On a column shift car the motion moved from the column to the transmission. With a console shift car the motion moved from the transmission to the column. With a 3 on the tree stick shift set-up one had to shift into reverse to be able to remove the key from the ignition lock. This arrangement was also used on the ’68 to ’77 GM A and G bodies.
I had a ’78 Camaro with the six and manual three speed floor shift. There was no console, pretty sure the car was a base model.. power steering, maybe power brakes but manual everything else. I don’t recall having to put it in reverse to remove the key, I’m thinking there was a release lever on the column.. but that might be my CRS in action, mixing in memories of other cars. Interesting topic, brings back (some, vague) memories!
I can attest to a 68 manual with column shift, that I knew when it as already old. I live in Uruguay, and the ones that made it here were expensive imports with many options.
This generation Camaro/Firebird was the unofficial “default” first car at my high school circa 1982-86. I’ve ridden in and driven more of these than I could probably count on all my digits. These were more numerous than Fox Mustangs, and only really vied for the title with Collonades (but we’d have to include all 4 makes and every model of those to make it a close race). I have a forever-fondness for them, despite the mullet sporting, Marlboro smoking rep they carried in their later years. Generally, I always view them as “Popular Girl” cars more-so than “Burnout Mobiles”. I think 2 out of 3 teenage girls in those years drove 2nd gen F-Bodies or the Monza/Sunbird H-bodies. It was just a few years later that the mullet men took over. Pop sociology from my point of view.
It’s interesting, second generation Camaros of any year were never precious enough to not find in a a self service junkyard in my experience. A first generation, never, nor do I recall finding any firebirds but I’ve seen a share of 70-73 Camaros within the last 10 years. Despite being arguably the best looking Camaro they really kind of remained a good value in spite of every other car from the time soaring, that’s something I thought was changing given some of the now insane prices I’ve seen people bid on late second generations, but here this is. Doesn’t even look seriously rusty, even under the vinyl top remnants, a good sandblasting and this is a better starting point for a project car than 2/3rds of the classic cars out here in the rust belt
Those front slot wheels would be coming home with me
Sad to see the Camaro like this but it happens.
The windshield sticker was definitely a thing back in the 70s and 80s. It was a common “upgrade” to pony cars, pickups, etc. Also common were the stickers with the name or logo for the door handles and matching mud flaps too!
It appears these stickers are still being made but I recall stickers in this style pretty often:
Probably unpopular opinion here but meh, good riddance. These are still so common here that at any given summer car show you can pick your color. I never found these early 2nd gens all that good-looking, either.
Regarding the engine: Given the tube headers and chrome valve covers, I initially assumed it might well have been a substantially warmed-up 350. But the surprise was seeing the column-mounted shifter for the automatic. As Jim noted, this really should have had an after-market floor shifter to complement the tube headers and the almost-certainly Edelbrock intake and four barrel carb. But no…
BTW, while Chevy small blocks all do look pretty much the same, the big blocks (396, 427, 454) are easy to identify with their much wider valve covers, among other things.
Oh yeah the 396 is much bigger. Imagine my surprise three weeks ago when I went in to see if my FE heads were done. One man owner and two others working in the shop. He said yes and the two guys come walking out with these massive heads with round ports and I go ……………………..! Then he realized mine weren’t done but were the next week and they look great with everything new.
Easiest quickest tell besides the size is the headers, big blocks had evenly spaced ports and small blocks had the central ports close together, with some factory exhaust manifolds saimesed.
The valve cover proportions are quicker for me to spot now, but there was a time pretty much every OHV V8 looked basically the same to me, exhaust and intake port layout and distributer placement were my first beacons to say “that’s a small block Chevy”, or “that’s a 302 Ford” etc
I rode in a number of these in high school when they are 5-8 years old, and they all rattled, had cracked vinyl seats, miserable back seats, and rode like lumber wagons, but they sure looked nice and were better in every way than the same year Mustang. Except for the inability to order a big V-8 and subjective preferences about styling (I like them both), the 2nd generation Corvair was really a much better package than the 2nd generation Camaro. The Corvair had much tighter body structure, much more sophisticated suspension and better ride/handling, more useful backseat and trunk, and probably 50% better fuel economy (with the 110 or 140 HP versions). Really a step backwards in just about every way.
I can’t see one of these without hearing in my mind’s ear that multi-clunk the open window made when the door was closed. Yet I’ve never actually ridden in one, just sat in a showroom.
Did they ever offer a front-half vinyl roof on these, or just paint as on the carrier Camaro?
In my opinion these second gen Camaros are the best looking of the F bodies, even better than the Trans Am. The headlamps, grille, and the thin bumper give them an early Ferrari vibe. This look actually was shared by the ’55 Chevy!
A year after graduating h.s. my older brother bought a new ’72 Type LT, Luxury Touring, with a 350 V8, and auto, no a/c. It had a column shift and no console. It was black with a black vinyl top and blue cloth seats. Very sharp. He added Ansen slot mags, RWL tires, glass pack dual exhaust, and of course, an 8 track tape player. Man, that thing was Boss! He let me borrow it a few times. really nice to drive. He put 80 thousand miles on it in the next three years.
That poor red car, except for the hood it’s mostly complete. It’s not even wrecked! The shell looks salvageable, too bad that it’s been picked pretty clean. Except for the rusty roof, I couldn’t see any perforations, though I’d bet floors, and the windshield and rear light channels are pretty crusty. Too big a job for a driveway DIYer. My ’66 Riv had rusty window channels which I never fixed. It looks like the car might have been restorable awhile back, every part you need is available from the aftermarket. You can laugh, but this could have been rebuilt by a dedicated person, and you’d know what condition the car was in after you finished. Decent examples of these Camaros are selling in the mid 15’s and restored pre smog versions like this are well over 35K. I was talking to the owner of a ’69 Mustang Mach One who told me that he bought the car in really sorry condition. He replaced the floors and some other body parts, rebuilt the mechanicals, body work, paint, and interior and had his dream car at less than market cost. Since he did a lot himself, and had the work done, he knew that it was a solid car.
I keep thinking/seeing that this car used to be some color other than red. Best I can guess is white or that copper color that was popular at the time.
Great find and excellent write-up.
I would have pulled that glove compartment door. That’s bound to be worth something someday.
Poor old thing .
I liked the front end visuals of these cars but never really wanted to buy one .
I owned a RS Camaro briefly. maybe a ’67 ? .
The A.I.R. system had warped al the valves so it barely ran, I had zero interest in doing a valve job on a $350 car no one wanted in the late 1980’s .
-Nate
Pretty sure the brand of valve covers is ERSON, like the aftermarket cams that were (are?) available.
I read something on someone’s website 25 years ago stating the 70-81 Camaro was the most primered car on the road.
Yes those are Erson covers, for many years Super Shops’ house brand cams and chromed tin. So yeah good chance that engine had/has an Erson cam to go with those valve covers. From only 39.99 and of course being a SBC that was the one available at that price. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qs5KqchC-4
Even though Super Shops went bankrupt and the brand has had a number of owners it is still alive today. http://www.pbm-erson.com/Content/AboutUs_Erson
Interestingly just yesterday I drove by the former location in Seattle (Lynnwood) location.
We referred to them as “belly buttons” because everyone had one .
Also ‘mullet mobiles’ .
-Nate
Nice find and write-up Jim. I don’t think I ever seen an early 70’s Camaro in the junkyard. This car was definitely not originally red; you can see all the red overspray on the rad support from the repaint. They also painted over the licence plate fuel filler door. It looks like from the inside of the doors and the interior that it was originally brown. I suspect that the rear spoiler was likely added when the fender flares were added. Being that it is 307 column shifted car, I bet it looked more like the pic I attached below when new. Just a grocery getter Camaro, nothing special.
As for the split bumper, it was part of the Rally Sport package, option code R22. The split bumper was not standard with the Z/28 package. The Rally sport package was an appearance package and was available on any Camaro including the SS or Z/28 cars. Even a plain 6-cyinder base model Camaro could have had the RS option.
The option package was as follows:
Includes special black painted grille with special rubber tipped vertical center bar and resilient body color grille frame; Independent LH and RH front bumpers replacing full width bumper; license plate bracket mounted below RH bumper; parking lights with bright accents mounted on grille panel; Hide-a-Way windshield wipers with black-chrome finished arms and articulated left hand blade; bright window, hood panel, and body sill moldings; body colored insert on door handles; RS emblem on the steering wheel; Rally Sport front fender nameplates; bright accented tail lights and back-up lights. (RS emblems deleted with SS or Z28 option)
On the engine, as others have pointed out it is the ubiquitous SBC. For those not as familiar with engine ID, the exhaust ports are a give away, but in this case the siamesed intake ports are also another clue. In addition, SBCs, prior to 1987, have rectangular valve covers with only 4 perimeter bolts holding them. Factory Mark IV Big Block Chevy valve coves are more rounded, flatter and wider and have 7 perimeter bolts.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this car still has the 307, in particular since no one upgraded the transmission. The ID code for the engines are stamped on the block near the right side of the water pump, which would tell us what it is with certainty. I knew a few cars with hopped up 307s. A friend had a ’72 Chevelle with a 307, and it had a 4-bbl swap, with a performance cam, headers, and dual exhaust. It was an ok performer.
Thanks, Vince! The original color was Pewter Silver (code 14 on the body tag).
I got some of my info from the 1972 brochure and made a couple of assumptions based on the spreads they included of what seemed like the model lineup, thanks for the better info re RS package. Check out the Z28 page, you’d assume split bumper from that…but it doesn’t call it out so…yeah.
https://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/chevy/72cam/72cam.html
I’m kind of liking the plain grocery getter Camaro nowadays. Heck, I even kind of like the base model current Camaro with zero options…for the money it seems quite the value, but of course going away.