There are several natural or selected forms of Crassula capitella. One of them is Crassula capitella 'Campfire' (valid name) but this plant is often sold with non-valid names like :

Crassula capitella 'Coccinea'

Crassula erosula 'Campfire'

Crassula flammea

Crassula erosula 'Flame'

etc...

It's always the same plant but Crassula capitella 'Campfire' is the only correct name for this plant. There are no "varieties of campfire", just 1 plant.

Thanks Laurent.

I have seen a small variety that always stays small but grows very long. good for hanging baskets.

And, I have seen the larger varieties that are very large and also grow long and also good for hanging baskets. Should they be called Crassula capitella 'campfire' minima and the other maxima?

You can't give names. A valid name is the first name officially published with a description of the plant. If a plant has been officialy named and described several times, the first one is the good one (if the description is still botanically correct).

I've just found that I made an error : according to the new ICN, no official description of 'Campfire' has finally been found. It means that the cultivar name 'Campfire' is not valid either. As red forms of Crassula capitella exist in nature and as no official description of this red form has been published, this plant has no specific name and is just included in Crassula capitella. It's just a red form of Crassula capitella, nothing else, no other name.

ICN :"Though Tölken does not explicitely mention them, forms of Crassula capitella with leaves red for part of the season do exist in the wild (photos in G. Rowley, Crassula, p.96).

The earliest red forms seem to have been imported into USA. As early
as 1949 Harry Johnson listed "Crassula corymbulosa. Turns purple red in
sun." He first illustrated it in 1961, again calling it "Crassula
corymbulosa", but adding the trade designation "Scarlet Coral". This is
not a cultivar name, and also later names like Flame or Blaze or
Campfire are not cultivar names as there do not seem to exist
establishing descriptions anywhere. Those fancy names are best treated
as synonyms of C. capitella where the colour is the only difference."

There are several officially described forms of Crassula capitella :

http://www.crassulaceae.ch/de/artikel?akID=31&aaID=2&aiID=C&aID=2424

http://www.crassulaceae.ch/de/artikel?akID=31&aaID=2&aiID=C&aID=1615

http://www.crassulaceae.ch/de/artikel?akID=31&aaID=2&aiID=C&aID=2425

http://www.crassulaceae.ch/de/artikel?akID=31&aaID=2&aiID=C&aID=2426

http://www.crassulaceae.ch/de/artikel?akID=31&aaID=2&aiID=C&aID=2427

Laurent, Gracias Mon Ami, you are truly amazing to take all this time to give me such a thorough explantation. Especially, when you are so hard at work in your busy time!

I will go through the links and read all of them!

Pardon, you are mistaken yet again...I CAN rename it. here is the new name:

Crassuala roi-rouge "laurentii bosseur"

Lol

I was surprised to find that 'Campfire' was not valid either.

The private collectors will keep on naming this form Crassula capitella 'Campfire' because it will make exchanges of cuttings easier. As there are different red forms of Crassula capitella with no valid names (I have one named 'Momiji Matsuri'), we're not going to call them Crassula capitella red form N°1, Crassula capitella red form N°2, N°3, etc...

my god, that is so confusing lol

I see. I think I have a better understanding of what you've explained. Ultimately, nothing is written in stone as they say. Except of course the plants' taxonomic name.