The 1984 Chevrolet Camaro is the third generation of the iconic American pony car, produced from 1982 to 1992. This model year saw significant styling updates and performance improvements. Available as a 2-door coupe and a convertible (later in the generation), key trims included the base Sport Coupe, the Z28, and the IROC-Z (introduced in 1985). It stood out for its sleek, modern design and performance-oriented options, appealing to enthusiasts seeking a sporty and stylish ride.
The Good
The 1984 Camaro offered a compelling blend of sporty performance with its V8 options, a modern and attractive design, and a surprisingly comfortable ride for its class. Its value proposition was strong, providing a fun driving experience that appealed to both the heart and the wallet.
The Bad
Potential buyers should watch out for rust, particularly in the wheel wells and rocker panels. Electrical gremlins can also be an issue, along with the potential for worn suspension components. Engine and transmission condition are critical, especially on higher-mileage examples.
1984 Chevrolet Camaro: Quick Overview
- Engine Options: The 1984 Chevrolet Camaro was offered with several engine choices to suit different performance needs.
- 2.8L V6: Standard on the base model, producing around 112 horsepower.
- 5.0L V8 (LG4): A popular option, typically rated at 165 horsepower.
- 5.0L V8 (L69): A higher-output version of the 5.0L V8, offering approximately 190 horsepower.
- 5.7L V8 (L98): Available on the Z28 model, producing around 215 horsepower.
- 2.8L V6: Standard on the base model, producing around 112 horsepower.
- Horsepower: Ranged from 112 hp to 215 hp depending on the engine and trim.
- Fuel Economy: Varies significantly with engine choice and transmission. V6 models generally offered better MPG, perhaps in the low to mid 20s on the highway, while V8s would be in the high teens to low 20s. Specific EPA estimates from the era are less readily available for precise figures.
- 0-60 Times: With the 5.0L V8, 0-60 mph times were typically in the 8-10 second range. The more powerful 5.7L V8 in the Z28 could achieve closer to 7 seconds.
- Towing Capacity: Not a primary focus for the Camaro; towing capacity was generally minimal and not a significant feature.
- Trim-Level Features:
- Sport Coupe (Base): Standard features included power steering, a 4-speed manual transmission (automatic optional), vinyl seats, and basic instrumentation.
- Z28: Featured a more powerful V8 engine, sport suspension, unique body styling with ground effects, upgraded interior, and alloy wheels.
- Berlinetta: Offered a more luxury-oriented feel with upgraded interior materials, unique trim, and often came with more comfort-focused features.
- Factory Options: Could include air conditioning, power windows, power locks, cruise control, upgraded audio systems, T-tops, and various appearance packages.
- Sport Coupe (Base): Standard features included power steering, a 4-speed manual transmission (automatic optional), vinyl seats, and basic instrumentation.
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Specifications
Vehicle Information
| Year | 1984 |
| Make | Chevrolet |
| Model | Camaro |
| Trim | - |
| Style | - |
| Type | Coupe |
| Category | Compact Car |
Manufacturing Details
| Made In | United States |
| Manufacturing City | OSHAWA |
Dimensions
| Doors | 2-Door |
| Curb Weight | - |
| Gross Vehicle Weight Rating | - |
| Overall Height | - |
| Overall Length | - |
| Overall Width | - |
| Wheelbase Length | - |
| Standard Seating | - |
Engine & Performance
| Engine | 5.0 L V-8 |
| Engine Size | 5L |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 |
| Transmission | - |
| Transmission Type | - |
| Transmission Speeds | - |
| Drivetrain | Rear-Wheel Drive |
Additional Features
| Anti-Brake System | - |
| Steering Type | - |
Pricing
| Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) | - |
| Invoice Price | - |
| Delivery Charges | - |
Vehicle History Report
Vehicle
Specifications
Specifications
Ownership
History
History
All History
Events
Events
NMVTIS Title
History Check
History Check
Salvage/Rebuilt
Check
Check
Accident
Check
Check
Theft
Check
Check
Open Lien
Check
Check
Past Sale
Listings
Listings
Safety
Recalls
Recalls
Odometer
Check
Check
Market Price
Analysis
Analysis
What Problems Does the 1984 Chevrolet Camaro Have?
The 1984 Chevrolet Camaro, like many vehicles of its era, has a set of common issues that owners and enthusiasts frequently report. One of the most prevalent concerns, especially for cars that have lived in rust-belt regions, is corrosion. Key areas to inspect are the lower body panels, especially the rocker arms, the areas around the wheel wells, and the rear quarter panels. Floor pans and the trunk area can also be susceptible.
Electrically, these cars can present challenges. Issues with the dashboard instrument cluster, including faulty gauges and warning lights, are not uncommon. Wiring harnesses can degrade over time, leading to intermittent problems with various systems like lighting, power accessories, and even the engine management system. The original radio units can also be prone to failure.
Mechanically, while the V8 engines are generally robust, wear and tear over decades can lead to issues. Premature wear of camshafts in some V8s has been noted, and intake manifold gaskets can develop leaks. Automatic transmissions, particularly the TH700-R4, can develop issues with torque converter clutch engagement or planetary gear failures if not properly maintained. Manual transmissions are generally more durable but clutch wear is a factor.
Brake systems, especially the rear drum brakes, can be a source of problems if not regularly serviced. Suspension components like ball joints, tie rod ends, and bushings will eventually wear out, leading to sloppy handling and potential safety issues. The catalytic converter can also become clogged over time, affecting performance and emissions.
While there aren't specific major recalls that plague the 1984 model year extensively, general maintenance and replacement of aging parts are crucial for long-term reliability. Owners who have maintained their Camaros diligently, addressing rust and performing regular fluid changes and component replacements, tend to report much higher levels of satisfaction and fewer significant mechanical headaches. The third-generation Camaro was a step forward in technology for Chevrolet, but the age of the vehicle means that proactive maintenance and component replacement are key to avoiding common problems.
Electrically, these cars can present challenges. Issues with the dashboard instrument cluster, including faulty gauges and warning lights, are not uncommon. Wiring harnesses can degrade over time, leading to intermittent problems with various systems like lighting, power accessories, and even the engine management system. The original radio units can also be prone to failure.
Mechanically, while the V8 engines are generally robust, wear and tear over decades can lead to issues. Premature wear of camshafts in some V8s has been noted, and intake manifold gaskets can develop leaks. Automatic transmissions, particularly the TH700-R4, can develop issues with torque converter clutch engagement or planetary gear failures if not properly maintained. Manual transmissions are generally more durable but clutch wear is a factor.
Brake systems, especially the rear drum brakes, can be a source of problems if not regularly serviced. Suspension components like ball joints, tie rod ends, and bushings will eventually wear out, leading to sloppy handling and potential safety issues. The catalytic converter can also become clogged over time, affecting performance and emissions.
While there aren't specific major recalls that plague the 1984 model year extensively, general maintenance and replacement of aging parts are crucial for long-term reliability. Owners who have maintained their Camaros diligently, addressing rust and performing regular fluid changes and component replacements, tend to report much higher levels of satisfaction and fewer significant mechanical headaches. The third-generation Camaro was a step forward in technology for Chevrolet, but the age of the vehicle means that proactive maintenance and component replacement are key to avoiding common problems.
How long will the 1984 Chevrolet Camaro last?
Based on owner data and typical maintenance habits, a well-maintained 1984 Chevrolet Camaro can reasonably be expected to last for 150,000 to 200,000 miles, or even more, potentially serving owners for 30-40 years. The long-term durability hinges heavily on how the car was cared for throughout its life. Cars stored in dry climates and regularly serviced with quality parts tend to exhibit excellent longevity, with the robust V8 engines proving particularly resilient. Weaknesses that emerge over time are primarily related to age and environmental exposure, such as rust, aging electrical components, and wear on suspension and interior parts. Cars that have been neglected or subjected to harsh conditions will likely show significant wear and require more extensive repairs to reach higher mileage figures.
What Technology & Safety Features are Included?
The 1984 Chevrolet Camaro represents a blend of 1980s automotive technology, offering a functional yet relatively basic suite of features. Built-in tech was centered around the driving experience rather than advanced digital interfaces. The entertainment system typically consisted of an AM/FM radio, with optional upgrades to include a cassette player or even a graphic equalizer for those seeking a more premium audio experience. These systems were generally straightforward, with physical knobs and buttons for control.
Driver-assistance features were virtually non-existent by modern standards. The focus was on manual control and driver engagement. Power steering was standard, making it easier to maneuver, and cruise control was an available option for highway driving, enhancing comfort on longer journeys.
Safety features in the 1984 Camaro were typical for its time. Standard equipment included seat belts (three-point lap and shoulder belts in the front, lap belts in the rear), a padded dashboard, and side-impact door beams, which were becoming more common in the mid-80s. Anti-lock braking systems (ABS) were not widely available, if at all, on this model year. The Camaro also featured a collapsible steering column designed to absorb impact energy in a frontal collision.
Crash-test ratings for vehicles from the 1980s are not directly comparable to today's rigorous testing protocols and ratings systems like NHTSA's star ratings. However, the third-generation Camaro was designed with safety considerations of its era in mind, incorporating then-standard safety structures and energy-absorbing materials. Optional features that indirectly enhanced safety or convenience included intermittent wipers and rear window defoggers. Overall, the technological sophistication was modest, prioritizing a driver-focused experience with fundamental safety provisions.
Driver-assistance features were virtually non-existent by modern standards. The focus was on manual control and driver engagement. Power steering was standard, making it easier to maneuver, and cruise control was an available option for highway driving, enhancing comfort on longer journeys.
Safety features in the 1984 Camaro were typical for its time. Standard equipment included seat belts (three-point lap and shoulder belts in the front, lap belts in the rear), a padded dashboard, and side-impact door beams, which were becoming more common in the mid-80s. Anti-lock braking systems (ABS) were not widely available, if at all, on this model year. The Camaro also featured a collapsible steering column designed to absorb impact energy in a frontal collision.
Crash-test ratings for vehicles from the 1980s are not directly comparable to today's rigorous testing protocols and ratings systems like NHTSA's star ratings. However, the third-generation Camaro was designed with safety considerations of its era in mind, incorporating then-standard safety structures and energy-absorbing materials. Optional features that indirectly enhanced safety or convenience included intermittent wipers and rear window defoggers. Overall, the technological sophistication was modest, prioritizing a driver-focused experience with fundamental safety provisions.
What Colors Options are Available?
We’re working on this section!
In the meantime, feel free to explore the other sections for more content.
In the meantime, feel free to explore the other sections for more content.
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Prices and Market Value
When new, the 1984 Chevrolet Camaro had a starting MSRP that typically ranged from around $9,000 for the base Sport Coupe to over $12,000 for a well-optioned Z28. Today, the used market prices for a 1984 Camaro vary significantly based on condition, mileage, and trim level. Well-maintained, low-mileage examples of desirable trims like the Z28 can fetch anywhere from $8,000 to $20,000 or more. More common examples in average condition might sell for $3,000 to $7,000. The Camaro experienced substantial depreciation in its early years, as is common for most vehicles. However, it has since entered the classic car market. Factors affecting resale value include originality, rust-free condition, documented maintenance history, and the presence of desirable options or performance engines. Survivor cars and those with significant restoration work can command higher prices.
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Cost of Ownership
Owning a 1984 Chevrolet Camaro can be moderately economical if you're handy with repairs and choose a well-maintained example. Insurance costs are generally reasonable for older sports cars, especially for liability-only coverage, but comprehensive coverage on higher-value examples will increase premiums. Fuel costs depend heavily on the engine; V8 models will be thirstier, likely averaging 15-20 MPG combined. Maintenance is straightforward, with parts generally available and affordable, though specialized components can be pricier. Repairs can range from minor DIY tasks to significant engine or transmission work. Overall, while not a budget commuter, a 1984 Camaro can be a relatively cost-effective way to own a classic American sports car, particularly if you avoid models requiring extensive restoration.
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Fuel Efficiency
Fuel Type
Gasoline
Fuel Capacity
-
City Mileage
-
Highway Mileage
-
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Recalls & Defects
Parking Brake:conventional
Recall date
1991-04-11
Recall no.
91v055000
Source
NHTSA
Summary
Parking Brake Adjuster Fails TO Operate and DO NOT Work After Brake PAD Wear.
Consequence
Parking Brakes Will NOT Completely Hold A Parked Vehiclewhen Parked ON A Slope, Causing Unintended Vehicle Rollaway Which Could Resultin A Vehicle Accident.
Remedy
Replace Nonfunctioning Parking Brake Adjusters.
Notes
System: Parking Brake.vehicle Description: Passenger Cars; Firebirds and Camaros With Manualtransmissions and Rear Disk Brakes and Fieros With Manual Transmissions.
Seat Belts:front:buckle Assembly
Recall date
1990-05-14
Recall no.
90v105000
Source
NHTSA
Summary
Plastic Components OF Seat Belt Buckle Assemblies DO NOT Contain AN Ultra Violet Stabilizer, and Exposure TO Direct Sunlight and Elevated Interior Temperatures Could Weaken THE Plastic Components.
Consequence
This Could Result IN Breakage OF Plastic Components Whichcould Prevent Buckle From Latching and Protecting Occupant IN A Sudden Stop Oraccident.
Remedy
Replace or Repair Seat Belt Buckle.
Notes
System: Seat Belt Buckle.vehicle Description: Passenger Cars.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/Piping, and Fittings
Recall date
1984-08-17
Recall no.
84v093000
Source
NHTSA
Summary
Rear Brake Hoses Were NOT Properly Manufactured and DO NOT Conform TO THE Requirements OF Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 106, "brake Hoses". Hoses Could Come Loose From THE END Fittings When Subjected TO A Pulling Force.
Consequence
Remedy
A NEW Hose Will BE Installed IF Necessary. IN Addition, Brakes Will BE Serviced.
Notes
Vehicle Description: Passenger Vehicles.system: Service Brakes; Rear Brake Hose.consequences OF Defect: Separation OF THE Hose From ITS Metal END Fitting Wouldresult IN Loss OF Brake Fluid and Loss OF Some Brake Action. AN Accident Couldresult Under Circumstances Requiring Minimum Stopping Distance.
Seat Belts:front:webbing
Recall date
1985-12-20
Recall no.
85v169000
Source
NHTSA
Summary
Dislocation OF A Spring Cover Will NOT Allow THE Shoulder Belt TO Retract After Being Extended. Consequence OF Defect: Although Inertial Feature That Locks THE LAP Belt and Shoulder Belt IN THE Event OF AN Accident ARE NOT Affected, IF Slack IS More Than Recommended IN Owners Manual, Injuries TO Upper Body and Head Would BE Increased IN AN Accident.
Consequence
Remedy
Install Retaining Springs ON Spring Cover OF Front Shoulder Belt Retractor And, When Required, Retractors Will BE Replaced.
Notes
System: Shoulder Seat Belt Retractor. Vehicle Description: Passenger Cars.
Seats:front Assembly:recliner
Recall date
1984-02-06
Recall no.
84v011000
Source
NHTSA
Summary
Some Vehicles Have Bucket Seat Back Locks That DO NOT Conform TO Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 207, Anchorage OF Seats. IN Event OF A Crash, THE Seat Back Lock MAY NOT Function.
Consequence
Remedy
Inspection OF Seat Back Locks Will BE Performed. Locks That Have Bent, Broken or Missing Hooks Will BE Replaced.
Notes
Vehicle Description: Two Door Passenger Vehicles and Light Trucks Equipped Withar9 or AV5 Bucket Seats.system: Interior Systems, Seat Back Locks.consequences OF Defect: THE Seat MAY Fold Forward IN A Crash, and Wouldincrease THE Likelihood OF Injury TO THE Seat Occupant.
Fuel System, Gasoline
Recall date
2006-05-19
Recall no.
06e043000
Source
NHTSA
Summary
Certain Replacement Fuel Filters, Fram Brand Name P/N G3727, With Date Codes X52911 Through X60801 Sequentially or X600141 and A Mexico Country or Origin Marking ON THE Fuel Filter Housing Manufactured From October 18, 2005, Through March 21, 2006, Sold FOR USE ON THE Vehicles Listed Above and ON Certain School Buses. (TO SEE THE School Bus Engine Sizes, Click ON "document Search" and Then "bus Applications"). THE Connector ON THE Fuel Filter WAS NOT Manufactured TO Honeywell's Specification. AS A Result, THE O-Ring MAY NOT Seat Correctly ON THE Fuel Line.
Consequence
This Condition MAY Cause AN Inadequate Seal AT THE Connection, Potentially Leading TO A Fuel Leak. IN THE Presence OF AN Ignition Source, A Fire Could Occur.
Remedy
Honeywell Will Notify Owners and Replace THE Fuel Filters Free OF Charge. THE Recall Began ON October 18, 2006. Owners MAY Contact Fram Customer Service AT 1-800-890-2075 (Option 1).
Notes
This Recall Only Pertains TO Aftermarket Fram Fuel Filters and HAS NO Relation TO ANY Original Equipment Installed ON THE Vehicles Listed.customers MAY Contact THE National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Vehicle Safety Hotline AT 1-888-327-4236 (Tty: 1-800-424-9153); or GO TO Http://Www.safercar.gov.
Equipment
Recall date
2007-10-24
Recall no.
07e088000
Source
NHTSA
Summary
Certain Honeywell Fram Racing Brand HP4 and HP8 OIL Filters That Were Manufactured From MAY 25, 2006, Through September 14, 2007, and Sold FOR USE AS Replacement Equipment FOR Vehicles List Above. THE Affected Filters ARE Marked With A Date Code A61451 Through A72571 Sequentially. THE Date Code and Part Number Appear ON THE Filter Housing. Fram Racing HP4 and HP8 OIL Filters NOT Bearing A Date Code IN This Range ARE NOT Affected BY This Recall. THE Gasket OF THE OIL Filter Becomes More Pliable Under High Temperatures and Pressures.
Consequence
This Condition MAY Cause Inadequate Sealing and Loss OF Engine Oil, Possibly Resulting IN A Fire.
Remedy
Honeywell Will Replace THE Affected OIL Filters Free OF Charge. THE Recall Began During November 2007. Owners CAN Contact Fram Customer Service Toll-Free AT 1-800-890-2075.
Notes
Customers MAY Contact THE National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Vehicle Safety Hotline AT 1-888-327-4236 (Tty: 1-800-424-9153); or GO TO Http://Www.safercar.gov.
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Insurance
Insurance for a 1984 Chevrolet Camaro is moderately priced, reflecting its status as a Coupe with strong safety ratings and
reasonable repair costs.
reasonable repair costs.
How Does the 1984 Chevrolet Camaro Compare to Other Coupe?
The 1984 Chevrolet Camaro competed in the pony car segment against formidable rivals like the Ford Mustang and Pontiac Firebird. In terms of performance, the Camaro Z28 with its optional V8 engines offered competitive acceleration and handling, often rivaling or surpassing the Mustang GT of the same era. The Camaro's styling was generally considered more modern and aerodynamic than the Mustang's for this generation.
When it comes to features, the Camaro offered a range of options, from basic amenities to more performance-oriented upgrades, comparable to what the Mustang provided. However, the Mustang often had a slightly broader range of powertrain options and a more established aftermarket support system, even in 1984. The Pontiac Firebird, sharing the F-body platform with the Camaro, offered similar mechanicals but typically came with distinct styling and sometimes more aggressive suspension tuning, particularly in Trans Am trims.
Reliability can be a mixed bag for all these vehicles of the era. The Camaro, like its GM siblings, could be prone to electrical gremlins and rust. The Mustang, with its robust 5.0L V8, was generally seen as mechanically sound but could also suffer from similar age-related issues. The Firebird shared many components with the Camaro, so reliability concerns were often similar.
Price-wise, the Camaro was generally positioned competitively. The base Camaro was often more affordable than a comparable Mustang, while the Z28 trim was priced to compete with the Mustang GT and Firebird Trans Am.
Alternatives to Consider:
When it comes to features, the Camaro offered a range of options, from basic amenities to more performance-oriented upgrades, comparable to what the Mustang provided. However, the Mustang often had a slightly broader range of powertrain options and a more established aftermarket support system, even in 1984. The Pontiac Firebird, sharing the F-body platform with the Camaro, offered similar mechanicals but typically came with distinct styling and sometimes more aggressive suspension tuning, particularly in Trans Am trims.
Reliability can be a mixed bag for all these vehicles of the era. The Camaro, like its GM siblings, could be prone to electrical gremlins and rust. The Mustang, with its robust 5.0L V8, was generally seen as mechanically sound but could also suffer from similar age-related issues. The Firebird shared many components with the Camaro, so reliability concerns were often similar.
Price-wise, the Camaro was generally positioned competitively. The base Camaro was often more affordable than a comparable Mustang, while the Z28 trim was priced to compete with the Mustang GT and Firebird Trans Am.
Alternatives to Consider:
- Ford Mustang (1984): A very strong contender, especially the GT model with the 5.0L V8. It offers comparable performance and a vast aftermarket.
- Pontiac Firebird (1984): Mechanically identical to the Camaro but with different styling. Some prefer the Firebird's aggressive look.
- Dodge Daytona (1984): While a front-wheel-drive coupe, it offered sporty styling and turbocharged engines, providing a different but still engaging performance experience.
Final Verdict: Is the 1984 Chevrolet Camaro a Good Coupe?
The 1984 Chevrolet Camaro is ideal for classic car enthusiasts, younger drivers looking for an affordable and stylish entry into the muscle car scene, or anyone who appreciates 1980s automotive design and performance. It's worth buying, especially as a used vehicle, for its iconic status and fun driving experience. Condition is paramount; prioritize a rust-free example with a solid mechanical foundation. The Z28 trim with the larger V8 engines offers the most compelling performance, while the base models can be a more budget-friendly entry point. Thorough pre-purchase inspection is crucial, focusing on rust, electrical systems, and engine/transmission health. Buying a well-maintained, original car will likely offer a more rewarding ownership experience than one requiring extensive restoration.
Drew B
Drew is a seasoned automotive expert and contributor to VinCheck.info. With nearly 15 years of experience as a former Porsche technician, he brings a wealth of hands-on knowledge to his writing. Born in North Carolina, a region renowned for its deep-rooted NASCAR culture, Drew developed a passion for cars early in life, often building and working on vehicles from a young age. At VINCheck, Drew leverages his extensive technical background to provide in-depth analyses of various vehicles. His articles often focus on engine performance, reliability, and maintenance insights, offering readers practical information grounded in real-world experience. Some of his notable contributions include reviews on the Mazda CX-5's longevity and detailed examinations of engine options for models like the 2011 Toyota Camry and Tacoma