What can be said of 4th Gen Camaros?

They’re a pretty inefficient package as far as the ratio of exterior bulk to cabin space goes.  Old school long doors and high liftover height tag team with limited storage space and low seating position to make them pretty impractical grocery getters. 

OTOH, the engines are great, the T56 shifts pretty good and wakes right up with a short stick, the stock rear end is adequate at stock power levels unless you are at the strip, and handling is respectable and wakes right the hell up with mods,  There are abundant opportunities for incremental improvements from bumper to bumper at any depth of wallet.  

if it isn’t your cup of tea, you’re never going to like it. If you drive one and connect with it, you’ll dig the hell out of it.  If the prospect of sweet V8 noises intrigues you, check them out. 

Bought mine for the price of the LS1 and T56 buried inside. Didn't regret taking the car apart to get them out. The donor was great at hauling ass in a straight line, pretty much hopeless at anything else. But man, it liked to haul ass in a straight line. 

Ergonomics are terrible.  The windshield is so raked that when I sit in one the A pillar is really close to my head.

My dad worked in the plastics industry making Butacite which is the stuff that gets sandwhiched between the two pieces of glass in windshields. Back when these cars were new, he told me they had the largest windshield of all cars.  That's all I know. 

In reply to T.J. :

It was a bitch and a half to get the HVAC to work too, since the low slope angle meant that there was no high pressure zone at the base that automakers traditionally used to force air into the cabin.

codrus said:

Ergonomics are terrible.  The windshield is so raked that when I sit in one the A pillar is really close to my head.

 

I liked their looks, but my only personal experience with them was sitting at one in at a car show back when they first came out - there was so much curvature in the door window I nearly lopped my head off while getting in the driver's seat.

My dad worked in the plastics industry making Butacite which is the stuff that gets sandwhiched between the two pieces of glass in windshields. Back when these cars were new, he told me they had the largest windshield of all cars.  That's all I know. 

I vaguely remember reading that one of the magazines testing the then-new 4th gen cars had a windshield come unglued at the top at 155mph due to an excessive pressure difference between inside and outside, so the next car they got they kept the windows cracked during high speed runs. Who knows how much of my remembrance is accurate.

I had a nice 4th gen at a great price once. It was a v6 car but that didn't bother me. I've had a fairly race prepped and running LT1/t56 car offered to me at $1500 and passed (barely). You just have to be ok with all the bad things about the car to enjoy any of the good things. I wasn't enamored of it. I think they're great to strip out and race. You can do serious weight reduction, fit big rubber and good suspension and turn REALLY hard. One posted mentioned missing his 4th gen more than his C5 that was better in every way. I'd personally rather have a cheap c5 than an expensive ls/t56 4th gen. 

I bought one recently as a 'bang for the buck' car. I don't really consider myself a muscle car or camaro guy but it's a fun car.

2002 SS with t56. It had been wrecked and abused but only has 40k miles.

I got it cheap-ish and then had to rebuild the t-56 as it got stuck in 4th. 

Had tick performance rebuild it, got a Pro-5.0 shifter and Tilton Master cylinder and I can effect some pretty quick shifts.

I like the headlights on the earlier ones, like the design in general.  I don't like long overhangs or heavy cars but oh well.

Mine is a hardtop, I don't like T-tops.

It's probably a disposable car but I'm going to do some track days and if it survives a few of those I'll throw a Stranos suspension on it and some larger rubber (currently square at 275-40-17).

It's low, creaky, still has the old round/square gm keys from the last century, but the torque cures these faults.

As of today mine runs, and will be subject to extreme weight reduction and making it turn with junkyard parts, provided it runs well after i get the front of the motor put back together.  

It has 18x10.5 wheels up front and i bet it could take more 

They are a fair recipe for a fun ride, but IMO they are the worst possible platform  in stock configuration.  They have gotten better, but there is no way to ignore the fact that they are a wobbly unibody with front and rear subframes that mount to said floppy unibody with big rubber biscuits.  

That being said, they aren't terrible, they just need some help for any real handling and performance.  The 7.625" ring gear is stuffed into a 7.5" housing which likes to rip the differential bearing bosses out of the casting and eject the differential out the cover by just adding stickier tires.  There are no cheap upgrades either because of the unique torque arm suspension.

I know... it rarely happens, but a stock setup with summer tires is likely fine forever.  I have personally been in a stock LS1 car with a T56 and really sticky DOT race tires when the 1-2 shift popped the whole thing halfway through the diff cover.

It is a strange conglomeration of engineering that should produce a terrible car, but it actually isn't bad.  It's just not one of those cars that you can slap on some coil-overs, some sticky rubber, and Hawk brake pads and expect to win in the cones

I have a 2000 Firebird V6 5 speed as a daily for the last 4 years.

The Camaro dash changed in '97 to a nicer unit, Pontiacs were different and did not change. Door panels and switches are different too. just pick what you like.

Tires, sway bars, and shocks make a huge difference in handling and are the best bang for the buck. no need for fancy control arms etc.

All cars are "t-top" structured. The hardtop is fiberglass and is just a cap over the same structure. Subframe connectors are a must have. Spend the extra on ones that tie in teh center as well as front to back.

the 3.4 cars are unpleasent and not worth buying unless you are planning a radical motor swap.

3.8 cars drive fine, and get a much better exhaust  and intake in 2000 that really cleans them up under the hood.

LT1 cars are the hardest to work on.

LS1 cars are expensive, but the best of the bunch.

Curtis said:

They are a fair recipe for a fun ride, but IMO they are the worst possible platform  in stock configuration.  They have gotten better, but there is no way to ignore the fact that they are a wobbly unibody with front and rear subframes that mount to said floppy unibody with big rubber biscuits. 

...Huh?

There is no "rear subframe", and the front subframe bolts solidly to the tub, no bushings.

I recently bought one for the drivetrain. It was floppy and squeaky and falling apart. But it made great noises and was fast in a straight line!

Should be really rad in a competent chassis. 

I've had an ESP-prepped LS1 4th-gen for about 9 years now. It's not a good car, but it's a damn fun car. Put big enough tires on each corner and they handle just fine.