Why not buy a '68
05-21-2007, 11:46 PM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Why not buy a '68
I've been doing a lot of reading lately (learning and shopping) and have come across in a bunch of places that one should NOT buy a '68. 
No real reason except that parts are hard to acquire. Is this the only reason? I'm aware that there are some things on the '68 that are not on other cars.... but it can't be that bad can it? 
A '68 in decent shape and not needing much work should be given a fair look shouldn't it?
Thanx in advance for any and all thoughts.
shmoky
No real reason except that parts are hard to acquire. Is this the only reason? I'm aware that there are some things on the '68 that are not on other cars.... but it can't be that bad can it? A '68 in decent shape and not needing much work should be given a fair look shouldn't it?
Thanx in advance for any and all thoughts. shmoky
05-22-2007, 12:08 AM
#3
Safety Car
So far, I've been able to find whatever I have needed for my 68
According to the research I did when doing the resto, I learned there were some quality control issues from the factory, but if the car you're looking at has already had a frame-off done(and done right), then this shouldn't be a problem. I say go for it
According to the research I did when doing the resto, I learned there were some quality control issues from the factory, but if the car you're looking at has already had a frame-off done(and done right), then this shouldn't be a problem. I say go for it
05-22-2007, 02:07 AM
#5
Pro
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Honolulu Hawaii
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-22-2007, 08:04 AM
#8
Race Director
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Cape Cod, Mass.
Posts: 18,790
Received 4,605 Likes
on
2,174 Posts
2023 C3 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2021 C8 of the Year Finalist Unmodified
2020 Corvette of the Year Finalist (performance mods)
2019 C1 of Year Winner (performance mods)
2017 Corvette of the Year Finalist
2016 C2 of Year
2015 C3 of Year Finalist
My 68 is probably the nicest Vette I own or have ever owned. Most of the bugs have been worked out in nicer cars by now. The car mags back in the day had very early cars that weren't ready for prime time and gave the car very poor write ups. Later production cars were much better than the early cars they tested, but unfortunately the bad rep stuck. 68 has some 1 year only parts that can be challenging to find but most parts are available. Don't pass up a nice 68. Look for the same problem areas you would on any 68-72.
05-22-2007, 10:17 AM
#10
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jan 2006
Location: Wilmington DE, Drive it like you stole it, 68 327 4 speed coupe
Posts: 8,319
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
68 had solid body mounts as well a s some fitments issues, all easily fixed.
The people who dont like 68 dont have one, those who do love em
Last edited by sweethence; 05-22-2007 at 01:43 PM.
05-22-2007, 10:56 AM
#11
Race Director
The main differences in 68 and later (iirc) are the push-button doors, consoles, back-up lights, rally wheels.
These should be on the car you're looking at. Most are available, but at higher cost than 69-72. Parts availability isn't an issue imho.
As far as the 68 being bad cars, mine has only lasted 39 years and is still going strong.
These should be on the car you're looking at. Most are available, but at higher cost than 69-72. Parts availability isn't an issue imho.
As far as the 68 being bad cars, mine has only lasted 39 years and is still going strong.
05-22-2007, 12:53 PM
#12
Team Owner
Member Since: Jun 2000
Location: Southbound
Posts: 38,928
Likes: 0
Received 1,470 Likes
on
1,249 Posts
Cruise-In II Veteran
Not a thing wrong with '68s. I love mine.
I will openly state, as all '68 owners know, there is a crap load of one-year-only parts on a '68, some of which can be extremely difficult to find and expensive when a replacement is found. Otherwise, the '68s are the first of the C3s.
I will openly state, as all '68 owners know, there is a crap load of one-year-only parts on a '68, some of which can be extremely difficult to find and expensive when a replacement is found. Otherwise, the '68s are the first of the C3s.
05-22-2007, 01:44 PM
#13
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jan 2006
Location: Wilmington DE, Drive it like you stole it, 68 327 4 speed coupe
Posts: 8,319
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
The main differences in 68 and later (iirc) are the push-button doors, consoles, back-up lights, rally wheels.
These should be on the car you're looking at. Most are available, but at higher cost than 69-72. Parts availability isn't an issue imho.
As far as the 68 being bad cars, mine has only lasted 39 years and is still going strong.
These should be on the car you're looking at. Most are available, but at higher cost than 69-72. Parts availability isn't an issue imho.
As far as the 68 being bad cars, mine has only lasted 39 years and is still going strong.
I am still looking for the list of 54 unique 68 items we made that one day
05-22-2007, 02:26 PM
#14
Team Owner
I have 2 '68 Verts right now and used to own 2 '69 Verts.. Didn't notice any major difference except for the one year parts.. A 38 - 39 year old car will rattle anyways
IMHO, 68's and 69's were the nicest looking C3's (I specifially like the side vents. The later egg crate grills on chrome bumpered C3's are not my favorites. I was never too much into the plastic bumper C3's except for the '80 - '82 Vettes.. Still nice, but I still prefer '68 - 69 and '80 - '82
IMHO, 68's and 69's were the nicest looking C3's (I specifially like the side vents. The later egg crate grills on chrome bumpered C3's are not my favorites. I was never too much into the plastic bumper C3's except for the '80 - '82 Vettes.. Still nice, but I still prefer '68 - 69 and '80 - '82
Last edited by GrandSportC3; 05-22-2007 at 02:29 PM.
05-22-2007, 02:40 PM
#15
Drifting
Member Since: May 2006
Location: Seattle Wash.
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing wrong with '68's. The information that these cars not being as good as '69 and later years is outdated and wrong. Outdated in the sense that articles written in 1968 outlining initial quality problems have all been corrected. Wrong in the sense that this myth still persists. Aside from the one year only parts, there is little difference between the other years. If you decide to buy a '68, make sure all the hard to find parts are there. Good luck!
05-22-2007, 03:14 PM
#16
Team Owner
The reason I didn't consider a '68 (or '69) is the lack of flaring behind the wheel openings. I owned a '68 when it was relatively new [7 years old] and liked the car just fine. But....got rock nicks galore behind each wheel; did paint touch-ups about once a week on city streets! Also, the '68 small block was a 327 (instead of 350), and the wheels were 7" width (instead of 8"). The seats were not high-back and headrests are hard to find; no shoulder belts available. Other than those things, I liked the '68 as well as any other C3.
05-22-2007, 06:59 PM
#17
Racer
Member Since: Jan 2006
Location: hidden valley lake Ca
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
05-22-2007, 07:02 PM
#18
Advanced
Member Since: Dec 2005
Location: Kingman Arizona
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buy a 71
I've been doing a lot of reading lately (learning and shopping) and have come across in a bunch of places that one should NOT buy a '68. No real reason except that parts are hard to acquire. Is this the only reason? I'm aware that there are some things on the '68 that are not on other cars.... but it can't be that bad can it?
A '68 in decent shape and not needing much work should be given a fair look shouldn't it? Thanx in advance for any and all thoughts.
shmoky
No real reason except that parts are hard to acquire. Is this the only reason? I'm aware that there are some things on the '68 that are not on other cars.... but it can't be that bad can it? A '68 in decent shape and not needing much work should be given a fair look shouldn't it?
Thanx in advance for any and all thoughts. shmoky
rcsron@hotmail.com
Kingman Az
05-22-2007, 07:31 PM
#19
Team Owner
Well when you talk to clueless people, you get sh*tty advice....
FYI, the two '69's I owned were both headache ridden POS compared to my '68. It seems EVERYONE has a '69 these days, I like to be different and it's the little things that set it off. LIke dash ignition, door buttons, 4 real tailights, etc...
FYI, the two '69's I owned were both headache ridden POS compared to my '68. It seems EVERYONE has a '69 these days, I like to be different and it's the little things that set it off. LIke dash ignition, door buttons, 4 real tailights, etc...
05-22-2007, 07:32 PM
#20
Almost all the American car makers made their best stuff in '68. As stated above, the few early cars that C&D and R&T criticized were just that, few--- '68 would be an awsome car to proudly own