Monster Muscle: 1967 Camaro 4×4

1967 Camaro 4x4

What do you get when you combine a muscle car with a monster truck? Well, this 1967 Camaro is about what I imagine the resulting offspring would look like. The seller claims that this abomination was constructed 25 years ago to take to car shows and that it hasn’t actually seen much mudding action. That’s a shame though because if you are going to hack up a perfectly good car to build something like this, you might as well use it. The seller believes that the car could still be returned to original spec, but I think you you’d have more fun with it just the way it is. Find it here on eBay out of Eads, Tennessee!

4x4 Camaro

A K5 Blazer donated the chassis needed to build this monstrosity. There’s a 454 out front that currently runs, but the seller mentions that the next owner should probably go through everything before getting too rough with the car because it has been in storage for a while. It would be interesting to find out what becomes of this car. Do you think the next owner will attempt to restore it back to factory condition or will they leave it in its current form? As much as I appreciate original cars, I think it would be fun to cruise around scaring unsuspecting victims in this beast!

WANT ADS

WANTED 1973-1974 Pontiac Grand AM Looking for a solid car. Contact

WANTED 1982 Corvette Chevrolet Corvette Under 40,000 miles. White exterior, Contact

WANTED 1973-1975 Pontiac GRAND AM HI, LOOKING FOR A PONTIAC GRAND AM TWO DOOR IN FAIR, GOOD OR EXCELLENT CONDITION Contact

WANTED 86-93 Ford Mustang Coupe I am looking for a low mile bone stock 1996-1993 STOCKmustang coupe to add to my private collection. Contact

WANTED 1961-1974 Jaguar E Type Contact me if you have an xke or XK Contact

Submit Your Want Ad

Comments

  1. Jim

    Shameful…unfortunate…tacky…so many better things one could do with a debut Camaro! Oh well, whatever floats your “monster car.”

  2. RayT Member

    Some time ago — 15 years or so — there was a similar creation near where I was living. Blazer chassis, 454, giant wheels/tires, but with a Nissan 260Z body laid on top. When I heard about it, my first thought was “tacky!” too, but when I saw it, it was not without a certain, well, “charm.”

    Had a friend who wanted to do likewise with a Cadillac Seville (the fastback sedan), but never did. I probably would have liked that as well.

    Personally, I don’t find these any more offensive than I do the average “restomod.”

  3. randy

    There is a Cobra in my neck of the woods with the same treatment for sale for 25K.

    Take this one to south Dallas, put some 27″ wagon wheels on it with rubber band tires and it would fit right in.
    This one may go parabolic, you are getting two rare cars for one price. I am sure this is worth a lot in two pieces.

  4. jaygryph

    I’d rock it.

    Honestly, it’s nicer done than many of the other ones I’ve seen. Those look like the same 40″ Gumbo Monster Mudders that are under my 79 Fly-N-Hi Toyota magazine show truck which someone spent WAY more money on to make it WAY tackier and over the top (and completely useless offroad). Those tires are not made any more which would date it to the 80’s – 90’s, a time when that car was probably not worth quite what they are today.

    This, I like it.

    • Dani

      Check out the grease monkey show. They bought it and every mechanic just commenrs how someone hadn’t died in it yet.
      There was a gas tank unsecured in any one tossed in the Trunk when the original rusted out.
      Taking it apart it just got worse.
      But they finished it with a cool car

  5. grant

    I remember back in about 1994 in Augusta Georgia someone took about a 66 Chevelle 4 door, cut out the back seat section, shortened it to a 2 seater, and put it on a jeep frame before painting it a really tacky purple. It was almost this bad. There’s a guy currently in St. Helens Oregon doing it to a 96 Mustang. Senseless.

  6. Franke Paige

    This is why Meff is bad…..

    • brakeservo

      Yeah, and meth is even worse . . .

      • randy

        I’ve never seen meth heads in my area accomplish anything other than abused children, much less build a cool 4×4

  7. Stephen

    nice, would use it just the way it is, nice to see a big block in it

  8. Mark

    Someone even put a sunroof in it. They went all the way!!!

  9. Vince Habel

    What a waste of a good Camaro.

  10. MountainMan

    I’ve always got a smile from builds like this. When I lived in Florida there was 69 (iirc) Chevelle with the same treatment that ran around Daytona beach. At one time it was for sale for a few grand. It was bright, bright yellow and in good shape. The Caddy’s and Jags and the like that find themselves on a truck frame are my personal favorites!

  11. Dolphin Member

    It’s not my glass of bourbon, but I can respect the build assuming it performs as claimed, which you would want to verify before considering a bid. Otherwise you’re left with one big bad piece of machinery—‘bad’ not in a good way.

    But I would rather see something like a Pinto body up there, not a first year Camaro. The difference between a real Pinto and a Pinto body on this machine would be a hoot.

    This particular build tells me that the guy didn’t really think it through, or care much about a great first year ponycar.

    • randy

      Things were a lot different 25 years ago, when this was built. He took 2 highly collectable vehicles to make this one, and did not seem to ruin either one. Kudos to the builder. There is a buyer out there with a Camaro frame and a K-5 body, I can sense it in the force.

      • jaygryph

        People tend to forget that being collectable takes time. Some day in the probably not all that distant future I’ll probably have a twinge of regret about the 5 mid 80’s camaros I sawed up, particularly the T top V8 manual trans GTA with the cool hood and vented fenders. I paid $100 it at a tow auction and drove it till the trans blew up. Same with the ‘rare’ 5 speed 4cyl 84 camaro. It drove JUST like my S10 pickup with the same drivetrain. Handled well with no weight up front.

        Parted them out, scrapped the rest. 3rd gen’s aren’t worth much, though that’s slowly going up. Corvettes are the same way. It just takes time. Look at car sales ads in newspapers from the 80’s and you’ll find driver quality 59 cadillac coupe devilles for $800. Some day people will be restoring 90’s SHO fords and will be bitching that so many ended up as trashed 24 hours of Lemons cars.

  12. Bobsmyuncle

    Turning it back would be a breeze. Biggest challenge would be losing the sunroof.

  13. pontiactivist

    I remember this car from years ago. Used to sit at a trailer court along I-90 in Erie pa. A friend of mine owned for a short time and took it south. Always wondered what happened to it.

  14. Jason Houston

    What do you get when you combine a redneck with a hillbilly? An amoeba with the brain of a 25-watt bulb. And his 1967 Camaro.

    • Howard A Member

      Hey Jason, ” you may be a redneck, if you can change your oil on your truck without jacking it up”. ( Jeff Foxworthy)

      • randy

        I’m skinny enough that I have not ever had to jack up any of my cars to change the oil. ’09 Matrix, 65 and 66 Galaxies etc.

        Show us your Prius, Jason!! j/k

  15. Mark S Member

    Not my cup of tea but, at least I’ll say the build quality looks pretty good. I’ve seen a few of these back in tha 80’s and 90’s one was a K5 with a Toyota truck body. The other was a k5 with a 68 chev malibu body. The Toyota was a POS hack job the Malibu was really nicely done. That’s the thing about buying something like this you need to be very careful to look at the build quality. A have no problem with doing these kind of builds especially now a days at least your using and enjoying your ride that is what is important, because at the rate that whole yards are being scraped and the lack of interest beyond the baby boomers why not do it.

  16. Howard A Member

    For a while, somebody was always putting something on a 4×4 chassis. The steam kinda fizzled out on that, but there were some interesting vehicles, as evidenced here. I thought Jesse would get a kick out of this one.
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hNbCRcEshFc/U37ULV3-RQI/AAAAAAAAZ58/wW9OZDGFGt0/s1600/1c.jpg

    • randy

      I like that, it reminds me of a Volvo.

  17. Mark E

    Just to add to the inhumanity, in my home town there was a ’67 Mustang fastback that had this same indignity performed on it back in the early ’80s. >_<

    Now please excuse me while I go off and throw up. The very first car I ever drove was a '67 Camaro and I've always wanted to get one. To see one in this condition is heart rending!

  18. Peter

    Not a Chevy guy, unless there’s two, crossed flags on the hood.

    That said, my reading indicates that most often, when “monster” tires are put on any vehicle, the owner usually fails to replace the stock-sized brakes, be they disc/drum or a combination.

    Result: the vehicle is seriously limited in it’s stopping power, due to the increased “lever arm” (for lack of the proper term–English major here). In other words, the K-5 had 11″ front discs (just guessing), that were designed to stop a NORMAL sized tire on a 15″ wheel. The diameter of these tires is what, TWICE that of the OEM, 15″, K-5 tire?

    So (if things are linear…and I’m not sure they are–so it could be even worse, IMO) the vehicle is left with HALF the stopping power.

    Not okay with me, from a public safety standpoint.

    Now consider those tires are going to climb a compact car’s hood, and drop into the passenger compartment and/or possibly crush the roof. I think that might meet the definition of criminal negligence. Except that the state probably allowed it to pass safety inspection, so I’m assuming the driver is insulated from criminal or civil charges, relating to the braking capacity..

    Now, if the builder DID spring for over-sized discs and calipers (which were probably MUCH harder to find, 25 years ago, if possible at all) then fair enough.

    But that is highly unlikely and, as I’ve read, not commonly done.

    So…not a fan of improperly-built monster trucks.

    As for this particular iteration? Since I’m not a Camaro fan, I won’t lose sleep over this one, but from a monetary perspective (given the benefit of 25 years of hindsight, which admittedly the builder didn’t have back then) this seems like a waste of a very saleable collector car.

    Not a fan of rednecks, not a Chevy/Camaro fan, not a huge fan of (normal, and SAFELY-built) monster trucks.

    So, this one just makes me sad.

    The fact that there’s already 37 bids, and it’s up over $8,660. and still hasn’t hit the reserve, just makes me sadder.

    To the old adage “to each his/her own” I must add: “…as long as it is done safely and responsibly.”

    And I’m not a “Safety Nazi,” by ANY means. But if you KNOW the brakes are now, possibly, HALF as effective as designed (which I seriously DOUBT most such builders are) I feel you have a duty to NOT drive such a monstrosity on the public roads. /rant over

    I will say “…it’s a head turner.” That’s about the best I can do.

    (Beer time now…).

    • Bobsmyuncle

      A big piece of the puzzle is missing in your appraisal of the situation.

      That piece is that the braking system is lifted directly from a 1/2 ton pickup and essentially the 3/4 and one ton as well (rear drums may be a bit bigger but as we all know the fronts are doing the lion’s share of the work).

      If it isn’t directly obvious to you those braking systems are designed for a significantly heavier load than the Blazer and certainly a Camaro.

      I’ve had a Suburban and have a Blazer both with 37s and suffered no braking inadequacies whatsoever.

      FWIW an easy upgrade is adding disks to the rear axle with an affordable bracket and using front calipers in the rear.

      • Peter

        Bobsmyuncle,

        Okay, let’s “unpack this,” as Janeane Garofalo says:

        FIRST, when you say this, IF it’s true, you just confirm my feeling that the ’80’s and ’90’s Fords (and all Ford pickups, IMO) are better than Chevies (but since you’re almost certainly wrong, the Chevies are probably okay too–LOL):

        “That piece is that the braking system is lifted directly from a 1/2 ton pickup and essentially the 3/4 and one ton as well….

        Because, Bobsmyuncle, I can tell you, from personally doing brake jobs on my (multiple) F-100’s and F-150’s, over the years, that the half-ton, F150, has a SINGLE-PISTON front brake caliper, while my 1996, F-250 “Heavy Duty” has TWIN PISTON front calipers, as does my friend’s 1988, F-250.

        So IF Chevy IS actually putting similar, single-piston calipers on their 3/4 ton trucks (Which I HIGHLY DOUBT) then that’s just one more reason not to like Chevies, or their presence on the road. (I have the $300. Factory Shop Manual, for my 1996 F-250, if you’d like to see a pic, for yourself).

        SECOND, your snark/sarcasm, exhibited in the following statement, while obvious, is neither appreciated, nor reflected, by the ethos and community spirit of this site:

        “If it isn’t directly obvious to you those braking systems are designed for a significantly heavier load than the Blazer and certainly a Camaro.”

        I’ve worked in the Service Depts. of two domestic auto dealerships, as well as the Nat. H.Q. for a luxury car importer, where I was responsible for getting the CORRECT technical info to the people who needed it. What I don’t need is snark, and a lecture about the level of “load” the K-5’s braking system is designed for.

        Why? Because, if you’d subscribed to Car & Driver for 15 years, Autoweek for 10, Automotive News for 4, and (currently) all four of Hemmings EXCELLENT publications, for the last 10 years, you’d have seen more than a few articles about the DANGER PRESENTED BY PUTTING GREATLY OVERSIZED-DIAMETER WHEELS/TIRES on stock, OEM braking systems.

        IOW, it’s a KNOWN problem, with so-called “monster truck” builds that are done by nonprofessionals, as I described.

        I’m real happy you had no problem with running “37’s” with OEM brakes. Do those tires look like 37’s to you, on that Camaro?

        Also, this statement is nearly meaningless, as you alluded to, because, as you said, “…as we all know the fronts are doing the lion’s share of the work” (Hey–at least you were right about SOMETHING, right? LOL)

        “FWIW an easy upgrade is adding disks to the rear axle with an affordable bracket and using front calipers in the rear.”

        In fact, the rears do only 30% of the braking, AT BEST, on the typical automobile/pickup–even less on a pickup, given that the bulk of the weight is located more forward than in a sedan, or a wagon/SUV.

        So…(as you CORRECTLY alluded to) upgrading the rears to discs is meaningless, if the stock, rear brakes (be they drum or disc) can already lock up the rears.

        So…please do me a favor: I PROMISE not only to NOT READ anything else you write (including in this thread), now or in the future, and I respectfully ASK you to return the courtesy.

        So…please know that if I ever DO make a comment on something you read, it was MY MISTAKE, in not checking your screen name, and noticing that it was you.

        Again, I’ll do this for you, and I would dearly appreciate the courtesy of the same, in return.

        Have a Happy Holiday Season.

        Peter

    • Bobsmyuncle

      Wow you are certainly driven by your monster ego aren’t you?

      There was absolutely no ‘snarkiness’ intended, and if you had any sense or experience with the written word you would adjust your impressions based on that rather assuming the worst and jumping into an internet argument.

      Perhaps you should consider how YOUR response contributes to the ethos/community spirit that you so intensely defend.

      On topic. You may notice my comments left some wiggle room so that I didn’t need to research before commenting. I wasn’t writing a technical paper but a response a blog.

      I am quite confident that the front calipers on a half ton (73-88) should be the same as that of the 3/4 ton. The rear drum MAY be larger but I can’t recall whether the pads are bigger. I’m not sure that the rear drum gets bigger with the move to 1 ton though it makes sense.

      As for technical accuracy; the number of pistons have nothing to do with STOPPING ABILITY though there are other reason why multiple pistons are used. One large piston may have a larger surface area than two small pistons.

      At no point was I intending to disagree with the belief that increasing the rolling diameter can negatively affect stopping distance. As an avid off roader I’m quite familiar with the concept and agree full heartedly! Further, I have voiced the same safety concerns often over the years.

      What I DO challenge is that this way lighter Camaro is a death trap because of the larger tires. That simply isn’t the case.

    • Alan (Michigan)

      Peter,
      Unpack a Chill Pill, Bro.
      Take one, relax.
      Your concerns regarding braking effectiveness and safety are legitimate. But don’t just guess regarding the physics involved, a little research will provide accurate answers about torque arms and levers.

      • randy

        Nice play on words there, sir! Let’s lighten up the board again. This should be fun.

  19. randy

    The “Camaro” is in great condition. It’ll be fine, I promise.

    On the brakes, I had a friend/coworker that made a monster type truck out of a 80 or so Toyota truck. He was not paying attention or got distracted and had to do an emergency stop. The light truck with the huge tires just skipped and bounced into the car in front of him. A bad deal for sure.

  20. piper62j

    To each his own, I guess.. This Camaro my be bought by someone with the desire to restore it to it’s former glory and sell the Monster parts to help recoup the cost..
    Sad..

  21. alfred

    coming from boston before moving to florida I am about as un redneck as you get. I would leave it just the way it is and drive the wheels of that thing

  22. leiniedude leiniedude Member

    Not to put the brakes on about the stopping power subject, but my buddy is the second owner of red 67 Camaro. He put a four speed in it and left the column shifter in it like this one also. What are the odds?

    • Brian

      This thing is an automatic and the colum shifter is used. The shifter on the floor is for the 4×4

      • leiniedude leiniedude Member

        Thanks Brian, now that you explain it, it was so obvious I should kick myself. I feel your pain on the Goat photo also. Being pictured on the street, maybe some states do not have bumper restrictions. Have a great New Year! Mike.

  23. Mark S Member

    3/4 ton vs 1/2 ton there is a difference and that is rotor thicknes, that is done to absorb heat created during braking. Yes brake fluid will boil if you work the brakes hard enough and that will cause the peddle to fade. So you’ve come down a long hill and your brakes are screaming hot and now you have to do an emergency stop, you hit the brakes again and the peddle goes to the floor and you kill a guy in a smart car. That’s what’s wrong with these wheels.

    • Bobsmyuncle

      I was pretty sure you were wrong, about the thickness but wanted to wait until I confirmed it as it has been some time since I did the swap. Since this thread keeps popping up and since we’re all here to learn I figured I’d clarify.

      1/2 and 3/4 rotors are the same thickness. Calipers are also the same. Only difference is the number of lugs.

      • randy

        Thanks, ya big LUG!

  24. Mark S Member

    One thing I missed is the large diameter wheel won’t necessarily affect the stopping power right away, but the brakes do have to work harder and heat up much quicker that is what will lead to brake fade.

  25. Howard A Member

    OK, all great points on the brakes and all, but let’s call a spade a spade. 1st), in Wisconsin, you wouldn’t get 50 ft. with this thing without a cop issuing a ton of violations and 2nd) you’d have to be nuts to drive this thing that fast on surface streets to even experience brake fade. Besides, most monster type trucks I’ve seen have just 1 disc brake on the rear driveshaft. They aren’t mean’t for highway use, as is this. I did, however, learn a lot about braking.

    • randy

      Thanks Howard for the ability to back away a few feet and inject some common sense into the fray.

      I drove a mildly monstered up jeep on the road, and it was a chore, to say the least.

    • Mark S Member

      Hi Howard I wasn’t trying to ruffle any feather. Just pointing out a few things about brakes. There is one thing that you said that make perfect sense and that is this is an off road vehicle. I’m In AB Canada and up here there are bylaws that don’t allow bumper heights to be that high. This would have to be trailed to the trails, and it would still need to be insured and registered. Also it would have to pass a safety inspection. It would be tough to get a pass on something like this. Cheers

  26. Vince Habel

    I have driven a few and it was not a pleasure. A chore is putting it mildly.

  27. Brian

    This one made me sick to see, this my favorite car 1969 GTO butchered up so bad. BUT I think I would still like to take it for a spin.

    • randy

      It’s just a thing. All the parts for this car are available. Maybe when he is done with his toy, you can buy it cheap.

  28. Dani

    It got even better with the next owners…

    • Aaron

      You did a mighty fine job mr rawlings sorry to hear of aarons departure

Leave A Comment

RULES: No profanity, politics, or personal attacks.

Become a member to add images to your comments.

*

Keep me in the conversation via email. Or subscribe without commenting.