Curated Content Editor

The Least Sporty, Slowest Corvettes of All Time
By Bryan Wood

shawn 84&92

Performance is subjective. The Corvette has always been very competitive and would out perform most cars of its year model. They have never been slow compared to their competition.

Why would someone write an article that basically blasts every Corvette made before the C5?
What a genius.

cv67

Except the Dodge lil red express. Ran 14s
Too many retrictions in those days to make any kind of power, lucky if one got a decal package

confab

Yeah, but it's beautiful.. I love the late C3's.

I don't think anything was really fast back then. The Carter years weren't a boon for performance cars, generally.

MrJoelieC

Here's the thing that everyone kind of forgets. (Myself included) "It's all relative.."

And what I Mean by that is that it's all relative to the time period. Take 1985 for instance.

in 1985 the Corvette was the 7th fastest production car... (Insert Jeremy Clarkson voice ) "In the world"

at 220 horsepower the Corvette could compete with the likes of Maserati, Porche, and the Fastest car at the time, a Ferarri Testarossa. That let's remember was only 1.3 seconds faster than the Corvette's 6.6-second 0-60 time....

Is it slow by today's standards? Hell yes... Nobody's arguing that.... What I would argue is that Corvettes past is far from embarrassing in it's numbers... Because anything else being sold at the same time was just as slow and it was well within the realm of the rest of the competition...

parkwood60

Sorry. next time I will be sure to include a contemporary road test for comparison. For instance, the 1953 Jaguar XK120 got to 60 mph in 8.5 seconds according to Road and Track, compared to the 11 second Corvette time. With the 327 and Powerglide the 1964 Corvette was a second slower to 60 than the 289 manual Mustang. A Porsche 911 from 1980 would get to 60 mph 2-3 seconds ahead of a California 305 automatic Corvette.

And, if you bother to read the details, I never said "everything before the C5 is slow." I am pointing out specific motor/tranny combos in specific years they were the slowest. Some C4s are plenty fast. The Crossfire Injection ones with an automatic are not.

Why not look at this list as a shopping list for Corvette bargains if you are going to do an engine swap anyway? Not the straight six cars, obviously.

The Rabbi

My brother had a 53. It had a 3 spd manual and was a bear to drive, sort of like an old p/u.

bosshog8

Don't worry, the C5, C6 and C7 will be plenty lame when the C8, C9 and C10 are here. Articles like this are so utterly pointless.

pologreen1

Might be slow, BUT... It's a Chevy.

Slow compared to a Ferrari maybe? Even back then you could build up a a Vette aka Chevy motor relatively cheap and have a blast.

Only the purists keep them lame and tame. Very few corvette are really worth any money anyways no mater the year, unless new on the lot. Compared to cars that out perform or out class them.

The photo is cool.

pologreen1

So you and this poster work together? Are you both even Corvette owners? Just curious by the writings and posting around here.

I'm not a vette guy but they are a great platform and stay relevant and keep with technology.

Did you get paid to write that or do you just get bored and type about old irrelevant cars from decades ago?

91 black convert

Why is this thread even in here? C4General discussion.

jay23ls

The forum editors always post them in subforums (C3, C4) they think the material is most related to.

jay23ls

A good article would have been about the evolution of the Corvette. But it compared the first Vettes to econoboxes of today

Who cares about a Nissan Versa being as slow as a C1?? haha I'd rather be slow as fawk in a C1 than in a Versa

RIC96

This topic was a waste of bandwidth... except for the pretty yellow c3.

ghoastrider1

I enjoyed reading this article. It was well written and has shown just how far out favorite car has advanced over the decades. However, I did have a bit of a problem with comparing cars over 30 or 40 years apart. Its apples and oranges. My 86 runs circles around any 56. Many examples were also compared to the worst chevy had to offer against the best of another model. Just not valid. It , I suppose, has gotten a reaction from me/us, which is what good writing is supposed to do... even tho its a BS article.

warren s

Corvettes from the mid 70s to early 80s may get out accelerated by a V6 Alitima, ----

BUT if you’re looking for a platform with virtually unlimited aftermarket support, and prices are still reasonable, an 11 second car is just a few weekends of work away……..without spending a fortune…

cv67

back then when a vette, camaro, mustang etc came down the st easy to spot
these days I cant tell a vette from anything else most new cars all look about the same to me. Distinctive looks part of the allure.
Wouldnt mind a late C3 for a driver. Dont have to be a coke dealer or J-Rocs neighbor to have one

a Tpi would have been ideal for the C3s

bb62

What you guys are forgetting is that the primary street performance competition for new Corvettes of the mid 70s to mid-80s was not Ferraris and Porsches - it was OLD Corvettes. There is a reason why stock C2 Corvettes with high HP motors became so valuable. People thought performance was NEVER coming back. I bought my first Corvette in 1981. I drove the 81 Corvette and thought it was pathetic. I ended up buying a 1964 Corvette with the 365HP engine instead - a sub 6.0 second 0-60 car with low 14 sec 1/4 mile. The difference in performance was dramatic compared to the vast majority of C3s at that time.

shawn 84&92

That C3 pic deserves an article all by itself, beautiful!

cv67

THIS!!!

Should be a copy/past response to all these daily "will my car be worth a lot" threads;collector cars will not be had for 5 or 10k
today you can sign a paper and drive off with a 10 sec car that gets 30mpg with a warranty.

People buy late C3s and 4s cause they are cheap vettes (its a good thing!).

Who is going to pay 15-20k for one just based on looks, I wouldnt.