1992 Chevrolet Camaro Reviews - Page 6 of 6

1992 Chevrolet Camaro RS Convertible 305 cid TBI from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 305 cid TBI Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.4 / 10
Distance when acquired110541 miles
Most recent distance155328 miles
Previous carChevrolet Silverado

Summary:

Cheap, rare, and an excellent car for nice days

Faults:

The engine constantly over heats due to compartment design.

Changed the alternator five times due to engine compartment heat.

Changed to a new radiator at 120,000 miles.

Changed the water pump at 120,000 miles.

Changed thermostat from a 220 degrees F to a 180 degree F thermostat.

OEM style transmission mounts are prone to going out about ever 15,000 miles.

Convertible top wears out quickly.

Transmission is beginning to wear out at 155,000 miles.

General Comments:

This is a medium level muscle car.

It is equipped with a small block Chevy 305cid engine.

Most RS Camaros equipped with a V8 use the older TBI (Throttle Body Injection) system usually found on Chevrolet Trucks. This engine is also almost entirly cast iron.

The RS Camaros also use the 4-speed overdrive TH700R4 transmission. This transmission is a severe heavy duty model. Extreamly reliable.

This convertible model also weighs in at 3500lbs curb weight. This car is a tank.

Over all it is cheap and extremely fun to drive during spring, fall, and summer.

This car turns many heads!

Also Chevrolet only made roughly around 20,000 convertibles from 1987-1992. They are rare.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 23rd April, 2002

1992 Chevrolet Camaro RS 5.0 V8 from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1995
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 5.0 V8 Automatic
Performance marks 4 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.8 / 10
Distance when acquired15000 miles
Most recent distance80000 miles

Summary:

Ho-Hum

Faults:

In the past 3 years I've replaced head gaskets, alternator (twice), along with some other minor repairs.

General Comments:

I've got a white 92' RS with a 305 v8 engine and red heritage edition racing stripes. First off the 305 is a dog of an engine, if you're looking for a 3rd generation camaro stick with the 350. (A stock 3rd-gen 350 isn't exactly great either, but you'll have more upgrade options in the aftermarket). The 305 is a decent daily commuter, but it just doesn't have the steam to keep up with any of the other V8 engines. It's got a quick first gear, but that's as good as it gets.

Inside, the car has lots of cheap plastic paneling, but has good room for both the driver and front passenger. My biggest complaint is all the squeaks and rattles inside the car from the plastic. Above 20 mph the car starts to sound like a mouse infested hayloft in a windstorm.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 27th January, 2002

1992 Chevrolet Camaro RS 3.1L V-6 from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 3.1L V-6 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.3 / 10
Distance when acquired76000 miles
Most recent distance82000 miles
Previous carPontiac Fiero

Summary:

Keep in mind it's a musclecar, get one with V8 and AC... and have lots of fun!

Faults:

Nothing at all, except once it almost didn't start, but did.

General Comments:

I came from a Fiero GT, needing a bigger, easier-to-drive car, but still having pretty high standards for acceleration and handling and comfort.

Well, let me tell you, other than a new Camaro (4th-gen), there was no better car for me and I would not be able to tolerate driving really anything else.

Ergonomics are OK, remember it's still a musclecar not a jet-fighter cockpit like the Fiero. Front seats decently comfortable, lots of elbow room. Throw kids or friends in the back if you want to punish them. Car fits me very well but keep in mind I am 5'-4'.

Brakes stop the car decently with OK feel. Consider how small they are, how big and heavy the car is, and the fact that drums are in the back. Not miracle workers, though.

Steering is just my type, ultra-firm and quick. You will only find better power steering on the new Camaro, maybe c4 and c5 vettes, but nothing else in the world.

Car handled pretty damn well when I got it for having a bone-stock suspension at 76,000mi.

I added poly bushings in the panhard rod (BIG improvement!), front and rear sway bars too. Edelbrock 3pt strut-tower brace. Also fresh 215/65HR-15 Sonar S-665 tires. Turned the power steering box screw all the way in.

Handles pretty good, but the way-too-tall and narrow tires are the main thing holding this car back. If anyone wants actually good handling out of their 3rd-gen F-body you need a minimum of 245-series tires. I would prefer 245/50ZR-16s like came on the highest-performance models.

Another thing holding the car back is weight balance - pretty bad. Since I came from a Fiero with 50/50 balance, I can notice it here significantly - and it's only got a tiny iron V6 in the nose! Forget everything with a V8.

The solid axle bangs around badly on crappy Syracuse city roads. My 4-wheel independent Fiero had no problem...

Just keep in mind that this is a nose-heavy musclecar, NOT a sports car... if you want a sports car get a sports car.

Rides pretty bad and only gets worse, considering I have 82,000 mile shocks and springs and tall-sidewall tires. Worse than a much lighter Fiero with Eibach springs.

Watch out for scraping the nose - happens often - if you lower your Camaro think about getting a bra as the long pointy nose will be scratched up often.

Now the bad part - acceleration. I have the 3.1L V6/ TH-700R4 combo and it can barely move out of its own way. Such a crappy engine can't wait till it throws a rod. Auto doesn't shift well at all, but it is better than new GM autos. I also have driven a 350 model and they don't feel that quick either - they aren't - and the crappy-shifting 700R4 doesn't help. Expect to get beat by diesel Golfs, like I have.

At least it gets 20-24mpg no matter how hard I thrash it, and sounds mean.

It had 76,000 miles on it, I have driven the car very hard and put on over 6,000 miles in just 3 months, and not had one single problem.

Make sure you get one with AC, though - these cars are a BEAR in the summer without it!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 9th August, 2001

1992 Chevrolet Camaro RS 3.1 from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 3.1 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.2 / 10
Distance when acquired135000 miles
Most recent distance149000 miles
Previous carChevrolet Camaro

Summary:

Great looks, but has a hidden price

Faults:

Hood latch cable.

When I first got the car it stalled and wouldn't start. We couldn't find anything wrong with the car. And after a couple days it started to work again and it hasn't happened again.

Some times some of the connects in wiring will come apart.

General Comments:

I like the looks of the car, but it seems to get too much attention from law enforcement. It could just be that I'm a 19 year old driving a sports car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 4th April, 2001

13th May 2001, 11:23

Hey buddy! You got a nice ride, so keep on driving your Camaro. I got a 92' red Camaro RS and the car has been great! Yeah, I had some problems with the car starting, it is kinda weird, but get your battery cables cleaned, that might be it! Man, the car handles great and excellent power! Keep that car, cause its going to be worth something!

11th Jan 2006, 10:27

An 87' Cougar?? Who would even want that car? Honestly man... I do agree with you that a 92' Camaro will never be worth much more than used value, but to comeback with an 87' Cougar? You must be from West Virginia were moldy old Mercuries and F-150s double as tow vehicles to move your house from trailer park to trailer park.

30th Sep 2008, 12:30

I would take a Cougar or a Thunderbird over a V6 Camaro anyday.

16th Oct 2008, 12:16

The last guy needs to fact check before making comments on the 92 RS Camaro. This car came with a V8 also, and just like the Mustang it did come with a V6 model.

Average review marks: 7.5 / 10, based on 23 reviews