When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I was driving my 1967 427 coupe when the C3 came out in fall of 1967.
Although it looked "cool" the various automotive magazines called it "junk" and forever cemented my belief that one should not buy the first model year of any car. This is the car that I was driving:
The Car & Driver road test of the 1968 427/435HP model was scathing! (This is not a quote, but is very close, I believe) "First gear was a soft cry of non-violence. In second gear, it shot ducks. We rejected the first test car because it was not ready, and in our opinion, was not representative. GM "fixed it" they said.....it was "READY!" It was, to laugh!" The 1968 model year had quality control problems, and also overheating traced (I believe) to inadequate bottom breathing radiator inlet. I eventually DID buy a C3 (1969 L-88), which also had overheating problems, but which formed an excellent platform from which to build a winning race car This is the 1969 L-88:
I was driving my 1967 427 coupe when the C3 came out in fall of 1967.
Although it looked "cool" the various automotive magazines called it "junk" and forever cemented my belief that one should not buy the first model year of any car. This is the car that I was driving:
The Car & Driver road test of the 1968 427/435HP model was scathing! (This is not a quote, but is very close, I believe) "First gear was a soft cry of non-violence. In second gear, it shot ducks. We rejected the first test car because it was not ready, and in our opinion, was not representative. GM "fixed it" they said.....it was "READY!" It was, to laugh!" The 1968 model year had quality control problems, and also overheating traced (I believe) to inadequate bottom breathing radiator inlet. I eventually DID buy a C3 (1969 L-88), which also had overheating problems, but which formed an excellent platform from which to build a winning race car This is the 1969 L-88:
On that 15 l88 car what is that in the side window by the pillar, some sort of swamp cooler?
Before I was drafted, I did not care much for the style of the C-2's. When I got home on leave in the end of March, 1968, after a year in Vietnam, I could not believe what a new Corvette looked like! It looked like a jet airplane with it's wings cut off! Nothing on the road looked like it. Lou.
If you are curious about "aero" devices, then I figure you might be interested in THIS "aero"...
Also, note that the "hubcaps" are actually the cooling fans from a Corvair, by GM of course;-)
Originally Posted by The13Bats
On that 15 l88 car what is that in the side window by the pillar, some sort of swamp cooler?
Talladega in August is a pretty warm place to race. The heater hose A/C was the best that I could improvise, that would survive the 180mph draft
Last edited by 63Corvette; 02-26-2017 at 08:30 PM.
If you are curious about "aero" devices, then I figure you might be interested in THIS "aero"...
Also, note that the "hubcaps" are actually the cooling fans from a Corvair, by GM of course;-)
Talladega in August is a pretty warm place to race. The heater hose A/C was the best that I could improvise, that would survive the 180mph draft
Whats going on with the hard top on that yellow car?
So im curious when the 68 came out it was so vastly styled Different to the midyears, t tops, all kinds of stuff not seen before, how was it received, did people love it, hate it, were t tops a must have,
Then how was the 73 and 74 up received with the plastic bumpers back when they came out
I graduated from college in 68 and wished I had the money to buy one back then. Most people my age loved them. I had to settle for a used 66 Mustang 2+2.
Whats going on with the hard top on that yellow car?
That is called "aerodynamic lift" That car was actually faster with the hard top lifted, then it was when it was properly tied down..............although it is amazing that it did not disconnect and crash into another competitor. In the 1970s we didn't understand aerodynamics, and were just beginning to experiment a bit.......
Whats going on with the hard top on that yellow car?
That is called "aerodynamic lift" That car was actually faster with the hard top lifted, then it was when it was properly tied down..............although it is amazing that it did not disconnect and crash into another competitor. In the 1970s we didn't understand aerodynamics, and were just beginning to experiment a bit.......
That looks open pretty wide but must not have taken all that much to get these tops started , i was about 17, i had this 72 mild 454 convertible, top was not bolted down in the rear, just latched up front,
Late one night on a long empty back road a buddy tells me lets see what it will do, i doubt it was much past 100 but the rear edge of the top started lifting heard it, felt it, only an inch or so scared me back down to sane speed, next day i learned how the top bolted down in the rear.
Not too long ago I read a couple of magazine articles circa 1970 and they said at the time that people were highly critical of the 68 and felt it was a let down from the C2s. They said something about the 68 having an "inferiority complex"...
As for me I didn't really notice the 68 until the early 70's but at that time I thought it was the best looking car of all time by light years. I remember gushing over it to my father and him saying something about how he thought it was gross and I responded that it was aerodynamic. I must have heard it somewhere but at the time I believed the 68 looked like it did precisely because it had been manufactured to be aerodynamic. It wasn't until a long time later I found out that wasn't the case.
Originally Posted by mrvette
at any rate, as the 70's went by, I just cried how all that plastic crap had ruined car designs....Vette's included and it all the fault of the Fed.gov and Ralph Nader......sure, they were marginally safer...
I'd say quite a bit safer. In modifying my 79 to chrome bumpers I'm really struck by how massive the crash bars are and how pathetically flimsy the ends of the chrome bumper cars are. I've had a lot of second thoughts about doing this from a safety perspective as I've worked more on it. If I had it to do all over again with how much effort and money I'm putting into this I wouldn't, I'd just put the pace car spoilers on it, paint it, and be done. But I'm too far into it now in terms of time and money so there's no turning back.
I'd say quite a bit safer. In modifying my 79 to chrome bumpers I'm really struck by how massive the crash bars are and how pathetically flimsy the ends of the chrome bumper cars are. I've had a lot of second thoughts about doing this from a safety perspective as I've worked more on it. If I had it to do all over again with how much effort and money I'm putting into this I wouldn't, I'd just put the pace car spoilers on it, paint it, and be done. But I'm too far into it now in terms of time and money so there's no turning back.
Not too long ago I read a couple of magazine articles circa 1970 and they said at the time that people were highly critical of the 68 and felt it was a let down from the C2s. They said something about the 68 having an "inferiority complex"...
As for me I didn't really notice the 68 until the early 70's but at that time I thought it was the best looking car of all time by light years. I remember gushing over it to my father and him saying something about how he thought it was gross and I responded that it was aerodynamic. I must have heard it somewhere but at the time I believed the 68 looked like it did precisely because it had been manufactured to be aerodynamic. It wasn't until a long time later I found out that wasn't the case.
I'd say quite a bit safer. In modifying my 79 to chrome bumpers I'm really struck by how massive the crash bars are and how pathetically flimsy the ends of the chrome bumper cars are. I've had a lot of second thoughts about doing this from a safety perspective as I've worked more on it. If I had it to do all over again with how much effort and money I'm putting into this I wouldn't, I'd just put the pace car spoilers on it, paint it, and be done. But I'm too far into it now in terms of time and money so there's no turning back.
Youre not fooling me, had you just done the spolers you would have been happy but still on the back burner felt like you settled, you will love your finished car, you are just in builders funk, it will pass.
I was trying to remember when i first started to notice corvettes what i thought, that late 70s thing, i saw the plastic bumper vettes as being the more refined models ( less power ) but easy to drive and the chrome bumper cars being the hipo brutes, harder to live with, it wasnt in my mind one was the older style i just thought more like different models same car, i still see c3s thst way, and when i went hunting big block was a must convertible second,
My 72 was hopped up, faded red paint, hurst shifter and loud under car exhaust...i had lots of vettes after than 66-86 and each was unique i never got over selling that 72 until i made that right getting my current 69
This was a great read. As someone who wasn't even a thought at the time, it's cool to hear the reactions to the car at the time it was released. I was born 18 years and 6 months after my '68 but have wanted a C3 since I saw one at a car show in the late 90's!
I wonder if I will ever wish I bought a C7 30 years from now? Meh, probably not!
On another note, yes my '71 LS5 Convertible gets attention, but lately I've been getting the weirdest compliments from young people when I drive my wife's '93 MB 190E. Bag boys, parking lot attendants, guys walking past. They ask all kinds of questions about the car; model, year, mileage, etc. They're shocked when I tell them the current mileage and that we've owned it since it was new.
Hey, at least they're talking cars.
Hud,
Not trying to offend but after 82 corvettes are with the exception of special rare models throw away like any other used car, my guess in 30 years you could find a nice c3 easier than a nice c7....
Green,
I have a 87 fiero for most intentions looks 8 or 9 out of 10 show car,
We hit a fast food drive thru and much to my shock, the young man working the window likely under 20 goes on and on how cool the car is and what is it, he heard of fieros didnt think he had ever seen one...weird to me, but yeah, way older than he was.
[QUOTE=The13Bats;1594186579]Hud,
Not trying to offend but after 82 corvettes are with the exception of special rare models throw away like any other used car, my guess in 30 years you could find a nice c3 easier than a nice c7....
QUOTE]
You might be right, but the same has probably been muttered by every generation! Everyone is trying to guess what the next 'collectable car' from the current stable will be.
I do not remember my intial reaction to the 68, but I loved C3s when I was in high school. (69-73) I also liked the C2 stying, especially the coupes. I always wanted a C3 but did not have the cash to get one back then.
Now a sidebar to Mr. Bat:
For a guy who regularly defends really strangely modded cars, I find it kind of amusing that you can slam the C7 the way you do. I would challenge you to drive a C7 and then come back with an opinion. When I say drive, I am not referring to an urban drive around the block at a dealer, I mean put the car through its paces. The Corvette has progressively improved generation over generation since the C4. Even the C4 was a nice handling if not overly powered car and many of them are used for autocross to this day. I love the C3, as every generation of Corvette, but when I want to cruise across country, I am getting in my C7. It is very fast and handles like it is on rails. It does this while getting 30 MPG on road trips. Not bad for a base car that will also turn 13 ETs off of the showroom floor. (end of C7 rant)
But different strokes for different folks.
Originally Posted by The13Bats
Hud,
Not trying to offend but after 82 corvettes are with the exception of special rare models throw away like any other used car, my guess in 30 years you could find a nice c3 easier than a nice c7.....
Last edited by crawfish333; 02-27-2017 at 03:13 PM.
The Mako II was shown in 65 so there was a bit of a preview regarding the 68. The first Corvette I rode in was a 68 or 69 and as far as I was concerned it was some futuristic space car.
Not too long ago I read a couple of magazine articles circa 1970 and they said at the time that people were highly critical of the 68 and felt it was a let down from the C2s. They said something about the 68 having an "inferiority complex"...
02-26-2017, 11:59 AM
This is the 1969 L-88: 
In the 1970s we didn't understand aerodynamics, and were just beginning to experiment a bit.......
