Talk:Chevrolet Chevelle

Replacement for the Chevy II?
"The Chevelle lineup was originally deemed as a Chevy II replacement" I have some doubts about this. The Chevy II appeared in '62 and was certainly not discontinued when the Chevelle appeared in '64. They were two different sizes and classes of car and I believe were always planned to be so. RivGuySC 05:15, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Chevelle SS424s anyone?
Hey hows about getting a photograph of the 1969 Chevelle SS424?

Chevelle Generations
Isn't the 1964-1967 considered 1st gen, 1968-1972 considered 2nd gen, and 1973-1977 considered 3rd gen? Also, it seems that the weight listed for the 1970 SS454 is grossly understated. --King V (talk) 18:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Photo labelled as first generation Chevelle
This photo is not of a first generation Chevelle, but rather a later (late 60's early 70's) version. One clue to the mistake is that the identified photo includes sidelights, not required until the 1968 model to both the front and rear of U.S. spec. cars. 70.108.62.111 04:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Bryan Ellison

Actually it is a 1970 Chevelle. -Travis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.220.142.207 (talk) 23:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

One thing I have noticed is that all other A body cars have the second generation start at 1968, such as the Olds Cutlass and even this car's counterpart, the Malibu. Why is the first generation listed at 1964-1972, but the body style changed in 1968? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Second generation started in 1968 and ended in 1972. -BlackSabbath1996

Rated as a Start
I felt it was a Start because it has the info boxes and a relatively good amount of sources, let me know, feel free to change it.--Laxplayer630 22:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Page move
I discussed this on the band Chevelle's talk page, but I was wondering why the page for "Chevelle" should have information on a band relatively new to fame, while the car which the band was named after should be on a separate page? Since most of the people editing the page for the band are most likely fans - and most likely are too young to have heard of the Chevelle - I'd have to propose a mutual page move, which would require members editing either article to agree to.  Zchris87v  23:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * If you check out Category:Chevrolet vehicles and Category:Ford vehicles, you'll find that with VERY few exceptions, all cars are listed with their manufacturers name in the article title. I would strongly prefer that we leave this article where it is for consistancies sake (and I'm saying this as someone who has owned two Chevelles over the past 20 years, and without knowing thing 1 about the band).&mdash; Mrand  T-C 14:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

1971-2 Chevelle
I just read the 1971 and 72 section of the second generation Chevelles, and I don't see anything about the styling changs, just the performance changes. The whole back and front ends changed, and there is no mention of it. BlackSabbath1996 (talk) 23:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok I'll get on it.(Vegavairbob (talk) 03:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC))
 * Done. A '71 (front) image was added with additional text on styling changes for 71-72, as well as new '65 SS396 and '67 SS396 images and additional text.(Vegavairbob (talk) 03:28, 7 July 2010 (UTC))
 * Thanks, looks great and reads well. BlackSabbath1996 (talk) 18:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

3rd Generation Section
The 3rd generation section is written a bit fannishly and in the plural first person tense. I don't want to tinker too much as I am a young enthusiast without much knowledge. Could anyone who knows what they're talking about do a bit of cleanup? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.217.153 (talk) 05:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

front bumper
will a 64 malibu front bumper fit a 64 olds cutlass holiday coupe body styles are identical — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.207.168.201 (talk) 10:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

front bumper
will a 64 malibu front bumper fit a 64 olds cutlass holiday coupe body styles are identical — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.207.168.201 (talk) 10:19, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Third Generation "Hardtop" vs. "Soft-top"
Third generation section makes no logical sense when it states that "hardtop" models were removed due to fears of impending federal rollover standards. I assume original writer meant "soft top" or "convertible", especially since he or she later refers to a successful model, the "Colonnade Hardtop".

I am replacing the incorrect terms "hardtop" with the more formal "convertible" and less formal "soft top".

Alpine Joy (talk) 14:35, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * While confusing the section was correct, as in 1973 the pillarless hardtop was replaced by the pillared "Colonnade hardtop". I've tried to clarify the whole passage. —Cloverleaf II (talk) 16:58, 30 July 2016 (UTC)