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.
The bone stock C3's were slow. Especially during the mid to late 70's. Just like every other Detroit car of that era - squeezed and choked by the EPA and the insurance monopolies. So what is your friend's point?
I'd rather have a slow, bone stock C3 than a slow, bone stock 1970's RUSTstang - at least the C3 has a real frame.. and it corners and brakes like a REAL sports car...
1C80, you got THAT right, with the money I got into my car TOTAL, I don't think anyone can come up with a quicker, significantly better handling ride, and certainly NOT better looking.....wife and I just now got a compliment from a stranger in the parking lot from shopping.....happens most often, at least once a week.....and too boot the paint is old and ugly, but from 20' away....well it's a winner....
too boot i'ts a convertible.... :D :D :D and when I put the hammer down, well there are a lot of cars that take me, but about 99% of what' out there even in this hotrod loving town, CAN'T......
I agree with groovyjay. The stock corvette and particularly the 75 is pathetic. A little 302 mustang will blow it's doors off.
Our vets need help in a big way.
1C80, you got THAT right, with the money I got into my car TOTAL, I don't think anyone can come up with a quicker, significantly better handling ride, and certainly NOT better looking.....wife and I just now got a compliment from a stranger in the parking lot from shopping.....happens most often, at least once a week.....and too boot the paint is old and ugly, but from 20' away....well it's a winner....
too boot i'ts a convertible.... :D :D :D and when I put the hammer down, well there are a lot of cars that take me, but about 99% of what' out there even in this hotrod loving town, CAN'T......
I would say that slow is a relative thing especially given the constraints put upon the domestic carmakers of the day. If we were to compare the mid 70's stock vettes with other moderately high volume stock sports cars ie. MG, Triumph, Fiat I still do not consider the C3 as slow. Wasn't this the era of the Mustang II - hardly a performance machine, Mopar muscle was also virtually dead. Now there was the Bricklin and then the Pantera which had a Ford engine, Ferrari, Lambo, etc but even at that the prices were much higher and the thought of crosscountry cruises was a fightening thought as repair and maintence could prove a real issue. Given what they cost, there ability to be easilly modded and repaired at any Chevy dealership (and most all small garages) the political circumstances even in hindsight I don't think of the mid 70's vettes as slow for there era. Ever drive a stock Pacer, Pinto, the mighty 4 cyl Mustang II - keep it in perspective. I am just glad that GM kept building them when the pressure to drop the Vette in the 70's reared its ugly head again. :cheers:
When the L98 C4's were out there were maybe clicking high 14 quarter miles. That is "slow" by today's standard. The C5 is close to a 12 second car and crap, a Dodge Neon with the hipo moter turns a mid 13 second quarter.
I cracked 13.98 @ 99.8 mph with the following setup
327 +.030
.445/.465" hyd cam
stock 1.94 heads
headers
2.5" dual exhaust with chambered mufflers
shift kit
Edelbrock Performer
Demon 625cfm
points distributor with 8.8mm wires and accel coil
(3.08 gears and wieghing 3250lbs) :cheers:
Hmmm,
I have a 355 with stock heads, headers with 2.5 duals, 625 carb, performer intake, 4 speed and 3.70 gears, and a 350 hp cam. I believe that this is the same cam as in the 350/350 ls6 engine, can anybody tell me what the specs are on it?
And anybody wanna make any predictions?please say 10 second car :jester