Maybe but at that point you could still get one with 245 horses, in '75 155 was the best anyone could get. Although it would help if they didn't change the way they determined power ratings right at '75. I suppose if we could get the power ratings of the '70-'74 Camaros in net power instead of gross then we could have more of a fair comparison? I'd certainly like that. One way or another, I like the look of the '70-73s over the laters ones anyway...and I still hold to them not being factory muscle cars.

 

I would consider it a muscle car because of what they represented

 

well i know there not as popularly known as the '50's and 60's muscle cars but i think the 75-81 camaro's are muscle cars in there own right. they might not be as powerful, hp wise but they meet the basic criteria of a muscle car. Not in that strict definition on that muscle car club site or whatever lol but i think of the 2nd gen as the last muscle cars. Although i know nothing like the earlier cars..i love and wish i could get a 67 camaro or 69 GTO but i like my 81 too..i say if it has as much HP as the 60's muscle cars and meets the other requirements then it should be considered one.

eventhough the later camaro's were weaker with only 150-175 HP factory, if you put a more powerful engine in that makes at least 300HP, it should be a muscle car.

 

Tried to vote....got a server error. Interesting topic. For what it's worth....got to agree with the majority and say "not muscle cars". I have a 77 and am installing a 400+ hp motor so it'll run with the muscle cars but no....it's not a factory muscle car.

 

Again, here's the link that I posted: Muscle Car Definition and Model Listing
By true definition, a muscle car was one that was sold as a hi-performance car, was built more bare-bones as far as options were concerned, and were actually affordable compared to their tame, optioned out counter-parts. Of course, depending on which performance options you chose, you could easily spend more.
You can put in a high h.p. engine that can keep up with (and often beat) what the muscle car came with. But technically, it's not a factory muscle car.
Today's models that are built as performance cars are usually optioned to the eye-brows, and are more UN-affordable than their more tame counterparts.
Back in the sixties, performance cars were sold as play toys, or cars that were made to race and not much else. For instance, just because Chevy built hi-performance models that are now called "muscle cars", that doesn't make the whole Camaro line of the same year a muscle car.
It's not a personal opinion of whether my car or your car is a muscle car or not. It's how it was purpose-built originally at the factory that determines it.

 

I have to agree and dis-agree with you 69. The site you linked is flawed, at least part of it is, it states that only the SS or Z28 Camaro is considered a muscle car. What about the COPO? How about the SS/RS? Just what I noticed about it. It seems though that my origional post about what my definition ofa muscle car is pretty widely accepted. I guess it comes down to a matter of opinion, nice link though, I forgot all about the old riveria, and agree - not muscle, too expensive.

 

I agree that the COPO should be listed, since it was an available option.
But to your other point, an SS/RS is still an SS is it not?
RS was a dress-up option, not a performance option.

 

Yes, youare right it is still an SS, just with the RS trim. I guess the point I was making was about preferance.

 

ok well it might not be a factory muscle car but it can be a custom muscle car then.

 

The term Muscle Car was originally in reference to pony cars that Detroit had stuffed monster engines into. The muscle was the power to weight ratio. It was not intended to include any full or mid-size bodies cars. Although, later there were mid-size entries (Chevelle and GS) in the group.

cplthomas: excellent point, that site didn't list COPOs. Also, what about non-SS Chevelle, there were cars produced with big block and no SS badges. Impala was NEVER considered a muscle car, not even with the 409. BTW Never trust a site that cannot use spellcheck!

Jason: Sorry buddy but my vote is no. My car is a 72 and in strict adherance to the definition it is not a muscle car.