It seems you can't offer a pony car these days without also making available a full race-spec drag racing version. Ford was first with its Cobrajet, then came Dodge with the Mopar Challenger Drag Pak, and soon we'll have an offering from Chevy.

That car will be based on the COPO Camaro Concept, which debuted last month at the SEMA Show in Las Vegas and whose name, COPO, harkens back to a time when sly dealers could order a Corvette-powered Camaro from the factory without the big wigs knowing. But unlike most concept cars, the COPO Camaro Concept is a rolling prototype for the production version that's to follow.

As such, engineers from General Motors have been working on the car's development for over three years, and today they released a video featurette showing the concept's first run out in the real world. According to the video, engineers ran the car all day long with a number of engine set ups and it "met or exceeded" all expectations.

Watch the video for yourself after the jump. Now all we need is some three-lane drag strips to see these straight line ponies face off at the same time.

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 3 Years Ago
      To all you haters on here, who cares what it looks like. That thing sounds awesome and goes like H=ll. By the way, I drive a 2011 gt500 and I still have nice things to say about other manufacturers.
        • 3 Years Ago
        Nice comment being older myself and plymouth is not around anymore I tend to like all muscle cars also keeps every one on there toes.
      • 3 Years Ago
      No matter whether you're a Chevy fan or not, you should be supportive of this program. Anytime an OEM puts this kind of effort (money) behind this kind of product, it should be celebrated.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Wouldn't take much to design a Chevelle SS. Base it on the 1970 model, one of the most popular models of the muscle car era. Build a two door model (redesign a Monte Carlo), rear wheel drive (see the Camaro) and add the small block "LS6" engine. Throw on a cowl style hood, black rear cove to simulate SS pad and sandwiching two rectangular tail lamps, all wrapped with subtle fender and quarter panel muscle bulges. Put them altogether as a contemporary car and you would have a hot SS LS6 Chevelle. People would flood Chevrolet with orders for such a car. Why not re-capture the heritage of the muscle car era with a new SS Chevelle (not a Malibu) based on the original 1970 design. It worked for the new Camaro.
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        I would take a Chevelle SS over a Camaro any day of the week. Given that this car is uses the platform of a mid-sized sedan, it actually would make more sense to do a Chevelle on such than a "pony car". I feel Chrysler should have done the same thing with the Charger. People would go nuts over a Charger based on the 1968-1970 model. Oh, how I wish we had as many muscle cars available to us as we do all of those stupid CUVs. People just don't know what cool cars are anymore.
          • 3 Years Ago
          @LUSTSTANG S-197
          I couldn't agree more.The problem with going the Chevelle route is what they've done with the base car the Malibu. Doable as an entirely new concept maybe. Personally I can't stand the new Camaro design. It looks like those pimped out die-cast model versions. IMO Chrysler and Ford did better reproductions of the Challenger and Mustang. Never thought I'd see a 4 door Charger in my lifetime so I'm with you on that too.
      • 3 Years Ago
      COPO - Central Office Production Order program around since at least the early 60s. Biggest use was conversion of vehicles for over seas markets. It does apply to specially built high perf cars, but not just to 1969 Camaros. How about the 1965 300 series 2-door post Chevelle with 396-425, M22 gear box and 4:10 rear. Or 1968 Z/28 Camaro convertible. 1969 427 Chevelle. These cars still exist. There are many other Chevy COPO cars but most were not built for performance market. By the way, most of all cars off the dealer lot were RPO - Regular Production Option vehicles.
      • 3 Years Ago
      I have a Camaro modified by SLP with all the goodies. This car is quicker than quick! I can only imagine what a copo will do
      • 3 Years Ago
      So piles of the car is from the land down under and the thing is built in canada.....cant understand why an american ICON isnt american.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Nice to see GM actually getting back to making something with power. Hopefully it'll see the light of production, even better would be some sort of street pack. Supercharge the V6, put the six-speed behind it, throw some serious coilovers under it, raid the Z06 parts bin for brakes, and throw some sticky tires under it.
        • 3 Years Ago
        They won't make this street legal. If you want a 500+hp Camaro street car, go buy a ZL-1. Also, a supercharged V6 would be stupid when they already have a next generation small block coming out that'll be putting out just enough power to compete with the Boss 302.
      • 3 Years Ago
      FYI, I saw a different video than this, but the same day/car/tests, one run was a 9.90, not sure what engine that was.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Looks killer.
      • 3 Years Ago
      You could do a head-to-head race of all 3 at Z-Max Dragway as it has 4 lanes, not just two. I've only seen the Mustang in person and I'm afraid that it would put a whoopin' on the Camaro! It's also about $100,000.00 and you need a drag racing license just to buy one. These cars can't be licensed for the street either so no Saturday night cruising with these cars.
      • 3 Years Ago
      i wonder how fast?? top end quarter mile ETC
      • 3 Years Ago
      Why does GM keep doing this, they put up videos and then remove them when they hit the newsfeeds.
    • Load More Comments