Firebird cluster, but a Z28 could probably have reached that speed, even with a 3.73 rear axle.

 

I am gonna guess at probably not. My reasoning is based on a 67's lack of a front spoiler and bias ply tires. I saw 110/120 many times in my car without horrible effects (built sbc on 4.10 gears just dying to overheat). Pushed a 68 Chevelle over 130 on 3.08's with a well built small block in it. Had a 67 Vette near 160 and it suddenly was like roller skating on an ice rink. Lucky to have survived that one. Our beloved first gens are as aero as a brick so 160 in 67 on a factory build I think not.

 

To do 160 mph with 3.73s and a 26” tire you’d be at 7700 rpm in 4th.

The Z28 302 is not gonna pull 7700 rpm in 4th.

135 mph at 6500 rpm maybe.

 

MotorTrend claims the 1967 BB 396 Camaro was capable of 140mph (possibly rpm limited?). Small blocks were listed as 120mph. Even the top speed of a 1969 Corvette 427 L88 was 151mph according to some sources.

Without overdrive, you'd need 2.73 rear axle ratio to keep the rpm in the right operating range (~5700pm), or maybe a 3.08s if a stock COPO 427 can stretch to 6400rpm. But even then not sure if the a factory 427 COPO has enough hp to push these older F-bodies through the wind at that speed, even if you could buy such a combo.

 

my opinion - no way, not capable. And will add definitely not with me driving.

 

John, I think the only way this would even be theoretically possible is with a L78 pushing through turnpike gears.

 

Y’all a bunch of amateurs. Way back in 4 or so at the International Camaro Club show in the Poconos, we got the chance for $20 to do a “pace lap” on the track. A lot registered and when out time came—no passing—each car would stop at the Start/Finish line for the photo. Since you now have play catch up, it’s W.O.T. to get the catch up catching up. So my big 250/Powerglide/2.73 rear had no problem rolling past 120 till we had to slow down. Now, 160? I doubt it. 130-140 sure, but don’t hit a bump. That extra 20mph takes a significant amount more hp and road. Not 160 till 4th Gen LT1.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/fastest-camaros?slide=1

 

Come on, there's no way a stock 67 can do 160, unless it's falling off a very tall bridge. Wonder what the terminal velocity would be?

 

A friend with a 67 Z28 was clocked at 145 one night going to see his girlfriend in Columbus Ohio, when the car was less than a year old. So, 160, maybe not.

 

If the cluster was for the Firebird, those were available with 400 ci engines, right?

so maybe a 160 speedo was used??

with 3:08 gears and a 26" tire its 6539rpm @ 160mph in a 1:1 final drive trans.

 

The 160 speedo came out in 68 on the Firebird. The 67 had a black 120mph like the 67 Camaro (have a set of 67 Firebird Rally gauges to go in my 67 Camaro) The 68 FB gauges are a blueish color

67 FB rally gauges

 

 

While in the Marines in about 1979 i was challenged by a general with a Jaguar XKE with v12 for a 3 mile race on the H3 highway from Kailua to the Marine base @ Kaneohe Bay. I had a 68 Z28 with a 302. We put in a rear end out of a power glide car.
I got him for 3 lengths to start but at high speed my car started floating in the front i had the cheasy z28 spoiler but when i turned slightly it was some moments before the car moved in that direction. anyway he was at 2 lengths at the first mile and even with my rear at 2 miles, i pushed and really didnt have much control. I won but would have lost at any distance longer. I dont know the top speed but its really hairy in a stock camaro. The MP's were in force at the gate but Marines do love to salute Generals.

 

In stock form (motor) Nope.

 

When I was a kid, all the neighborhood kids decided to see whose family owned the fastest car by checking how high the speedo numbers went. My father drove a 68 Firebird...I won.

 

When I drag raced my 69 I hit 119 to 122 ... high 11's, low 12s. With 4:88 gears I had stopped accelerating before the traps. The car had plenty more to go ... but not with those gears. I'd think 140 would be attainable, I'd think more horsies that stock are required though. I had radials and stock front suspension. I'd think you would want more than stock aerodynamics to go that fast!

 

Okay. All these comments above are making me doubt the story of one of the original members of Buddy Holly & the Crickets. In 1987 Paul McCartney hosted TV special called “The Real Buddy Holley Story.” I wanted to attach a link from YouTube: part 4 of 10.

Unfortunately part 4 of the video will not play for me. So I can’t play it back to listen to the “Cricket” member in the back seat of the old 50’s car telling his story.

I’m almost certain (from my memory of the show) he says the band would drive over to Clovis N.M. for recording sessions in the late 50’s. He said the driver would fly at 130 mph. He said with the time change between Lubbock, TX & Clovis, they could arrive about the same hour as they had left Lubbock. Then he stated that going that fast down the highway scares him more now (to just think about it as an adult) than it did when he was young.

I’ve made several Google attempts. I can’t find any regular production car that could go 130 mph in the late great 50’s of old.

 

I’m almost certain (from my memory of the show) he says the band would drive over to Clovis N.M. for recording sessions in the late 50’s. He said the driver would fly at 130 mph. He said with the time change between Lubbock, TX & Clovis, they could arrive about the same hour as they had left Lubbock. Then he stated that going that fast down the highway scares him more now (to just think about it as an adult) than it did when he was young.

I’ve made several Google attempts. I can’t find any regular production car that could go 130 mph in the late great 50’s of old.

Some of the late 50s Chrysler 300 Hemis had a claimed top speed of 130mph.

Edit. Found article: 1957 Chrysler 300C Hemi 392: 1957 Chrysler 300C - conceptcarz.com

 

maybe with the right gear and aero mods theyre about as aero as my cobra and they were aero limited hence the daytona coupe and the cobra has less frontal area than a camaro so

 

 

To answer the original question, No STOCK 1967 Camaro would be capable of that speed.

 

I guess I in a minority, but I think a stock Z28 could hiit 160, maybe not all of them, but some. Now i agree would be a pretty scary ride given the suspension on a stock one. 8000 was obtainable on the 302. They redlined it at 6500, but that was below the peak hjorsepower for insurance purposes. The 67 was the lightest Gen 1 Camaro and the FIA papers give it a weight of 2640 without fuel, but with oil and water. At the time GM said that the AVERAGE Hp on th showroon floor was 375 and NHRA re rated it to 335 HP. GM also said that it was possible to get 500HP from a stock engine with meticulous detail to assy and all that stuff with a 4 BBL Holley' In Hot Rod magazine they published an article by "Smokey Yunick" that said 501 H P from a stock 302 Chevrolet. The article was actually written by GM engineering and published under Smoky"s name. At the time I had a paper from GM enginering dated 6 months before the Mag came out and my copy was word for word except for the author of min was GM engineering, Couple months later they came out with another article on setting up the Camaro Chassie by Dick Gulstrand, again word for word of a GM paper. GM wasn't officially racing, but they sure made it known how to go about it and had a lot of parts across the counter available . Don't forget the Trans Am series was basically for "Stock " automobiles, why the Z 28 was concieved and sold

 

8000 was obtainable on the 302.

I had a bone stock 270 horsepower 1957 Chevy 150 two door sedan (minus the air cleaner) that would easily reach 8000. In fact, I did it often. Paid a whole $300.00 for it in summer of 1965. Needed a transmission, but that was it.

 

Broke 160 in my Audi S4 on the highway with new rubber that’s moving

 

Broke 160 in my Audi S4 on the highway with new rubber that’s moving
View attachment 316780

Thats cool, as is anything Yunick was involved in. But a Stock 67 Camaro isnt capable. Thanks for sharing though Rallegreen, I love Smokey stuff and I think we share a love for the 302 as well. Loved the ones I had and my brothers also, he had twin Predators on a tunnel ram 4.88 gears, sic! We used to drive through the Cadillac dealership, snap the throttle and set off the Cadi's car alarms. Now 35 years later he found the same car and bought it back. SB 400 now.

 

Doubtful

 

Why is that?
Launched properly, this little wagon claws its way to 62 mph in 4.9 seconds, and the speedo will show 100 mph in a sniff less than 12 seconds. Although a chip limits top speed to 155 mph, Audi's engineers say they regularly saw 179 during testing at Nardo.

 

While a specially built and prepped 1st Gen obviously could and in fact would a stock 67 with 3.73 gears could not and did not.

Just sayin

 

406ci SBC
TH350
28" tires
2.73 gears
7500rpm
according to my speedo...
80 in first
120+ in second
??? in drive... and I let out pretty fast once I clicked 3rd....I lost my
Not a stock car...................................................................................

 

Agree with Mike and Melcky. If you ever stood at the finish line of a top fuel pre-season warm up event, in the days when you could stand against the concrete barrier on the edge of the track, it is amazing. The funny cars push far more air at you as they go by compared to the dragster. Even when ready for it at 300+ mph being that close it pushes you backwards a step or two. If standing upright. I know this is twice the spped we are discussing, but also factor in how aerodynamic these cars are compared to the lumber wagon a first gen Camaro was. Going 160 in a stock passenger car the force of the air is certainly going to be a big factor working against you.