1995 Chevrolet Camaro Reviews - Page 6 of 7

1995 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.7 liter LT1 from North America

Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership1997
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 5.7 liter LT1 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 5 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.3 / 10
Distance when acquired20000 miles
Most recent distance73000 miles
Previous carGMC Sonoma

Summary:

Excellent sports car

Faults:

The intake gasket failed causing the check engine to come on giving a bad oxygen sensor fault code. The lock on the T-top fell out of the T-top easy fix for the do it yourself the clip worked its way out of the lock mechanism. The brake pads failed at 52,0000 miles. The only other part that failed was the ABS motor pack failed which was an expensive repair for the part alone.

General Comments:

I really enjoy the vehicle it handles really well, the engine is strong very powerful. The only complaint I have about the vehicle is that it is difficult to work on for the do it yourselfer. The cabin and instrument cluster is well placed easy to see. The back seat is small good for a child, but, not for an adult. The cost of parts are a little higher than other vehicles I have owned, but, I am willing to sacrifice that for the performance of the vehicle.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th July, 2003

1995 Chevrolet Camaro 3.7L V6 from North America

Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership1996
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 3.7L V6 Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.2 / 10
Distance when acquired7000 miles
Most recent distance72000 miles
Previous carChevrolet S-10

Summary:

V6 engine 4 banger power

Faults:

Exhast needed replacement soon after I bought it.

Heat leaks, havent fixed it yet.

Just about idle there is a small vibration, dealer told me I have a crank bearing that has to much wear.

General Comments:

Don't get me wrong I like this car, it handles well, but is to slow for me. My old s10/v6 was faster and got the same gas mileage. And in the winters here in anchorage, Alaska this thing doesn't do well. I wish I had looked harder for the v8 models.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 10th March, 2003

1995 Chevrolet Camaro 3.4L V6 from North America

Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 3.4L V6 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.3 / 10
Distance when acquired62000 miles
Most recent distance71500 miles
Previous carJeep Comanche

Summary:

A fun car for a good price.

Faults:

I had a brake caliper bind up and caused uneven wear on the driver's side rotor and brake pad. This was fixed with a complete front brake job performed in my grandpa's garage for only $150.

The seats do show slight wear marks on the outside bolster of both seats.

The car got jumped on this winter by another Camaro that jumped a curb.

General Comments:

The car is a great bargain and I would not pass another one up.

Though the car is quick for a V-6 and will keep up with, if not beat most other cars on the road, I leave you wanting a Z-28.

You notice that at every bump the car sounds like it is falling apart, mostly because most of the car is plastic.

The handling of the car is great with wide tires that will grip turns at most any speed.

The interior in the front is roomy, yet the backseat passengers don't have much room to move.

The only practical use for the hatch is storage of the T-tops, which are my favorite feature.

Most importantly, the car turns a lot of heads, especially with the T-tops out and the stock Bose CD player pounding out the music.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 8th March, 2003

14th Nov 2004, 23:11

There is no 1995 Z28 V6...only V8's were Z28s.

1995 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.7 LT1 from North America

Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 5.7 LT1 Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.0 / 10
Distance when acquired94800 miles
Most recent distance95600 miles
Previous carOldsmobile Cutlass

Summary:

A great car to any Speed enthusiast

Faults:

There is a squeak in a clutch when you let it out. It is due to the original owner before me who always let off the clutch sliding his foot off. A little grease will take care of that.

General Comments:

I really enjoy this car. Stock this car has 275 horsepower. Right now the car is pumping close to 320 horsepower with a Borla catback exhaust, K&N cold air intake and a RK Sport Coil. It also has cross drilled rotors, Momo shift knob, Neons all the way around and tint. This car is extremely fast, but I can use a little more power.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 25th September, 2002

1st Feb 2004, 01:57

No way you'll have 320 with just those mods... products always overstate their hp potentials...

8th Mar 2004, 18:52

I agree, it is impossible to get that much horsepower from such simple mods.

8th Mar 2004, 20:42

No way a cat back, K+N and ignition gave you 45 hp increase. The Biggest restrictor on the exhaust is the catalytic converter, cat back is more for show then go, maybe 10 hp, the K+N is nice, but without the exhaust being substantially better the intake can only match the intake, maybe 10 hp. New ignition, more efficient spark, more efficient combustion, but not a huge power increase, maybe 5 hp increase. Add it up 25 horse, put it on a Dyno and I bet your at or under 300 horse.

22nd Feb 2005, 10:42

Yea that's a pretty lame list of mods, you're under 300 horses.

20th Jun 2010, 13:48

The converter is not the most restrictive part of the exhaust, the manifolds are. The stock intake and catback on these cars are very restrictive, I would know as I own a 95 Z of my own. Maybe this guy isn't putting out 320 like he says, but it's not unreasonable to think that he could be in the 300 hp area.

Average review marks: 7.0 / 10, based on 24 reviews