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 don't know if they should be considered "common" problems, but I would verify the following:
1) rear trailing arms not rusted and/or separating
2) spring mount bolt "ears" on differential not broken
3) strut rods not bent
4) bushings in good shape all around
5) no obvious signs of fluid leaking from brake calipers
I'm sorry to admit, with the exception of the brake calipers, I speak from experience. I've enjoyed working on my car, but even doing the the work myself, it's been expensive...and of course it's taken a lot of time. Buy one that's been freshened up or restored, the extra money you spend will be well worth it. My 2c
I don't know if they should be considered "common" problems, but I would verify the following:
1) rear trailing arms not rusted and/or separating
2) spring mount bolt "ears" on differential not broken
3) strut rods not bent
4) bushings in good shape all around
5) no obvious signs of fluid leaking from brake calipers
I'm sorry to admit, with the exception of the brake calipers, I speak from experience. I've enjoyed working on my car, but even doing the the work myself, it's been expensive...and of course it's taken a lot of time. Buy one that's been freshened up or restored, the extra money you spend will be well worth it. My 2c
Good luck!
Also, make sure the bird cage is ok - and have someone familiar with C3's check the car out for you.
I almost forgot...drive the car in traffic and then on the highway on a hot day. Overheating issues can be some of the most frustrating to troubleshoot and fix.
69-72 are my favs
I want a car that I could drive, and just a little worried that the bugs were All worked out from 68, and 69 will be a strong road worrier OR does the extra year to 70 make the 70's stronger cars
69-72 are my favs
I want a car that I could drive, and just a little worried that the bugs were All worked out from 68, and 69 will be a strong road worrier OR does the extra year to 70 make the 70's stronger cars
Your kidding right? They all have problems. If you lke the uniqueness of a 68 pick that one. If you like the clean lines of a 68 or 69 buy one of them. If you like the More aggressive lines of the 70-72 buy one of them. But reliability? The maintenance of the owners is the only thing that is going judge the reliably of your choice..
I am looking at buying a 350 4spd 69 convertible
Beside frame issues, any other common problems with this car ?
Thanx!!!
On ANY corvette convertible, you want to make there is no rust on the window posts. If there is, there is most likely rust lower down on the wall and isn't worth investing in.
The year of the C-3 does not matter they all rust. I'd look for a 68-72.
Take it from me... dont look for a 68 as I did. There were way too many bugs in the design that weren't worked out yet until 69. 69 is a more solid vehicle. I've talked to guys that worked the line on 68's and they admit it was a bastard year because of the mix-matched parts that were used.
Take it from me... dont look for a 68 as I did. There were way too many bugs in the design that weren't worked out yet until 69. 69 is a more solid vehicle. I've talked to guys that worked the line on 68's and they admit it was a bastard year because of the mix-matched parts that were used.
Thats your opinion. By your thinking. A 69 used most of the same parts as a 68 so there no good. 69 was also the frist year of the 350 so it's out of the running. 70 was a new body style and used most of the same running gear as 69 so a 70 is no good. 71 maybe? but 72, no they had smog stuff, first year thing again.
Thats your opinion. By your thinking. A 69 used most of the same parts as a 68 so there no good. 69 was also the frist year of the 350 so it's out of the running. 70 was a new body style and used most of the same running gear as 69 so a 70 is no good. 71 maybe? but 72, no they had smog stuff, first year thing again.
It's not just my opinion... its also the opinion from people that actually worked on the GM line. Either way you will pay more on a restoration on a 68 than a 69 if a lot of different parts are needed based on my personal experience.
Thats your opinion. By your thinking. A 69 used most of the same parts as a 68 so there no good. 69 was also the frist year of the 350 so it's out of the running. 70 was a new body style and used most of the same running gear as 69 so a 70 is no good. 71 maybe? but 72, no they had smog stuff, first year thing again.
I would have to disagree here also - '69 had a LOT of changes over the 68 - and all for the better.
It's not just my opinion... its also the opinion from people that actually worked on the GM line. Either way you will pay more on a restoration on a 68 than a 69 if a lot of different parts are needed based on my personal experience.
In the end, the guy will pick a year he likes.
I agree with you on that. Your right on the point.
Thats your opinion. By your thinking. A 69 used most of the same parts as a 68 so there no good. 69 was also the frist year of the 350 so it's out of the running. 70 was a new body style and used most of the same running gear as 69 so a 70 is no good. 71 maybe? but 72, no they had smog stuff, first year thing again.
The 70 model year no good? Give me some of what you're smoking. The only body "changes" to the 70 were that the fender arches were flared, the addition of the egg crate fender louvers, and grille to help "dress up" the car. (the 69's shark gills openings are more functional) So no, the 70 has no "new" body style. The 69 looks more of a race car. The 70 model year offered more sb engine options and the bb engine displacement was increased to 454ci. Also the 70 model year was shortend due to a strike. The 71-72 is no different from the 70 as far as the body style is concerned with the exception that amber turn signal lenses were used (72 model year) The 70 is a good year as those engines had higher compression ratios which were reduced in the 71 model year. With all that said my favorite model year is the 69 coupe.
Last edited by Oldguard 7; Aug 5, 2011 at 04:27 PM.
The 70 model year no good? Give me some of what you're smoking. The only body "changes" to the 70 were that the fender arches were flared, the addition of the egg crate fender louvers, and grille to help "dress up" the car. (the 69's shark gills openings are more functional) So no, the 70 has no "new" body style. The 69 looks more of a race car. The 70 model year offered more sb engine options and the bb engine displacement was increased to 454ci. Also the 70 model year was shortend due to a strike. The 71-72 is no different from the 70 as far as the body style is concerned with the exception that amber turn signal lenses were used (72 model year) The 70 is a good year as those engines had higher compression ratios which were reduced in the 71 model year. With all that said my favorite model year is the 69 coupe.
I see you understand the point I was making. There all good.