67-69ish SS Camaro vs same year Chevelle?

**senior gomez** · 12-05-2005, 10:12 AM

So, whats the big difference with the two? They both seem pretty bad ass but like what are the real ups and downs of both? From what I see Chevelles have the angled back...rear i would think of when i think of a muscle car...know what i mean?

well anyways, thanks for the help! oh and it doesnt have to be those specific years, early 70's looked nice i belive

badass67 · 12-10-2005, 08:33 AM

The Chevelle is a longer and much heavier car, thus is does not handle as well and is slightly slower.
But it also is stronger
Of course, it also has it's own look ad feel, with lots of interior and trunk space.

Each has it's own following, and nobody can sya that is bad.

**Mr. CarelessAndImprudent** · 12-12-2005, 06:16 PM

Chevelle is heavier and bigger. It's pretty much up to what you like best

**crawlingt** · 12-21-2005, 06:35 PM

personally i like the camaro's a lot better. but the chevelle's do look nice also espicially with stripes.

**cDUck28Z** · 12-21-2005, 07:44 PM

Well i know my '67 camaro would kick ass against a chevelle. i dunno about yours though...

**SS MPSTR** · 12-26-2005, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by cDUck28Z

Well i know my '67 camaro would kick ass against a chevelle. i dunno about yours though...

Any Chevelle? Pretty pompous statement considering the company you're in.

badass67 · 12-28-2005, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by SS MPSTR

Any Chevelle? Pretty pompous statement considering the company you're in.

My 67 Camaro will kick ass on most chevelles too!!!

And No I am not a Pompous ass! Just an Ass!!

**icemanfour662005** · 01-25-2006, 04:56 PM

well i have both and yes my 69 ss camaro is bad it has a built 350 500 hp alot sportier to drive and has the full pro touring treament but my 70 chevelle ls6 454 is a beast lots and lots of torque it would give plenty of cars a run for their money and look sweet to..and also is worht aobut 35 grand

**chrisl285** · 01-27-2006, 04:19 AM

To actually answere his question: The main difference is that the chevelle has a full frame under the car, while the camaro is a unibody design with a subframe. Because of this design the chevelle is heavier but will not have the amount of body flex that camaros have. To solve this problem many people use subframe connectors and a roll cage to stiffin up the camaros. On a final note, everyone and their brother has a 67 68 69 camaro (dont get me wrong I love these cars) so I would say go with the 69 chevelle. Drop in a 396 with a 4 speed and have some fun. Or go big and drop a 572 crate and blow everyone away.

**needmorepwr** · 01-30-2006, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by chrisl285

To actually answere his question: The main difference is that the chevelle has a full frame under the car, while the camaro is a unibody design with a subframe. Because of this design the chevelle is heavier but will not have the amount of body flex that camaros have. To solve this problem many people use subframe connectors and a roll cage to stiffin up the camaros. On a final note, everyone and their brother has a 67 68 69 camaro (dont get me wrong I love these cars) so I would say go with the 69 chevelle. Drop in a 396 with a 4 speed and have some fun. Or go big and drop a 572 crate and blow everyone away.

+1
The chevelle is a better car to drag race if you don't have a lot of money to spent on chassis work.

**91Z28** · 01-31-2006, 07:06 PM

70-72 Chevelles are the best, so much better than the 60s Chevelles.

**Chevyss4** · 02-23-2006, 03:34 AM

Chevelles have a great stock rear set up for launching @ the drag strip. Easy to tune the front and rear. Launches like a bat out of hell with a strong big block. I've owned camaros, vettes, chevelles and trans am's. Chevelle's are monsters.

badass67 · 02-25-2006, 06:13 AM

Originally Posted by icemanfour662005

....... but my 70 chevelle ls6 454 is a beast lots and lots of torque it would give plenty of cars a run for their money and look sweet to..and also is worht aobut 35 grand

I wish we could run together, it would be a blast.
my 67 is not even close to being stock.
Worth more then 35K as well. That is both good and bad.

www.badass67.com to see pics

rs67ss · 03-02-2006, 09:24 AM

All depends on what you like..both have good ponts, both have not-so-good points. Good thing though, they don't have a blue oval on them....

As far a as that comment about a 572 and putting in a Camaro or Chevelle....WHY????

Why spend all that $$$ for a 572 that is assembled an an assembly line by different people, different shifts in different stages.....Get an engine from Bill Mitchell or Beck Racing Engines in AZ....about the same price, handbuilt by the SAME person, and in the case of Bill Mitchell, u get a warranty....Try getting that from GM....read that dislaimer about Performance engines that they have....

MY 67 rs/ss...560 HP smallblock, built by Bill Mitchell....sure it needs 4 gals of 110 octane in every tank but hey, i could drink that money in an hour....yeah i like BB chevy's too, but small blocks are just what i like the best....2 cents worth