CorvetteForum - Chevrolet Corvette Forum Discussion

CorvetteForum - Chevrolet Corvette Forum Discussion (https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/)
-   C3 General (https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c3-general-119/)
-   -   Why is the '69 considered the best year of the C3s? (https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c3-general/2788472-why-is-the-69-considered-the-best-year-of-the-c3s.html)

Scott333 03-07-2011 12:41 AM


Originally Posted by tompugh (Post 1576954121)
Why is the '69 considered the best year of the C3s? Why, why, why? discuss...

My first Corvette (purchased 1996) was a 1969 coupe, M21, L46, N40. I wanted a chrome bumper car, so that narrowed the field to 1968-1972. I really like them all, but I like the clean(er) lines of the 1968-69 without the flared mudflap just a little better, and the 'gills' a little better than the egg crate. The exhaust tips are round like the midyears. They are the last of the 1960s, and I wanted a 1960s Corvette since I was about 7 years old.

I knew about some of the problems '68s had, and the '69 had the return of the "Stingray" emblem...

For all of those reasons (and others), 1969 was the year and the car for me. Some day I would really like to have another, just like it :thumbs:

jr9170 03-07-2011 02:12 AM


Originally Posted by Alan 71 (Post 1576961084)
Hi,
For me it's because in 69 you could order a black, black, black, 427/435, convertible. (Yes, the 68 is close but the 69 had some of the 68 bugs worked out).
Regards,
Alan

Please make believe this is a 69.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...0/DSC_0295.jpg

:yesnod: :thumbs:

jr9170 03-07-2011 03:17 AM


Originally Posted by early shark (Post 1576975374)
It's not often that the newer models get improved materials in their making over the older models, but in the corvette model this was the case. Although I like the '68, '69 Corvette style very much, my preference is for the '70 thru '72 models with '71 being my favorite...why?

The materials used in their construction and styling changes. I prefer the cast metal front grilles over plastic, also the metal rocker mouldings over fiberglass, the metal side marker housings over plastic. I also prefer the restyled seats, center console and dash and door panels.

I think the flared wheel wells are more manly and the squared exhaust styling more aggressive in appearance.

Warren,glad to see you back...:thumbs:

7T1vette 03-07-2011 12:48 PM

The differences between the '68-'72 cars are relatively minor. Some folks gravitate to those differences because of personal taste. All of them are beautiful cars. But I would suggest the 'best of show' to be the 1970 cars: it has the upgrades mentioned above and also has the most powerful engines (other than the L-88's, of course). For those that prefer the earlier C3's...more power to you. I had a '68 and loved it, too. Now I have this '71 and I appreciate the differences.

Vampyre 03-07-2011 12:59 PM

I heard it was the 1981's :)

redcruz1120 03-07-2011 08:33 PM


Originally Posted by Rally68 (Post 1576954708)
I think you have a typo, you mean 68, right?

He meant '74

toolman1981 03-07-2011 08:35 PM


Originally Posted by Vampyre (Post 1576987151)
I heard it was the 1981's :)

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

LancePearson 03-07-2011 08:48 PM


Originally Posted by jr9170 (Post 1576984069)
:yesnod: :thumbs:

I bid and lost on a 69 convertible before getting my 76 but what I like is the front end of my 76 and the back end of the 69 with its chrome bumper, sort of squared off look. Don't know what the two would look like on one car but I am not all that wild about the chrome bumper front end but love the ass!

Lance

bb62 03-07-2011 10:49 PM


Originally Posted by LancePearson (Post 1576991820)
I bid and lost on a 69 convertible before getting my 76 but what I like is the front end of my 76 and the back end of the 69 with its chrome bumper, sort of squared off look. Don't know what the two would look like on one car but I am not all that wild about the chrome bumper front end but love the ass!

Lance

You've never seen a 73?

LancePearson 03-08-2011 07:28 AM

wow!
 

Originally Posted by bb62 (Post 1576993108)
You've never seen a 73?

I never realized that rubber bumper shapes came in one end at a time until you said 1973. Looked them up and liked it esthetically. I guess they had to do the back as a rubber bumper to meet the 5 mph safety laws? Wonder how the 1973 shape was aerodynamically versus the full fledged rubber bumpers front and year.

thanks for pointing the 73 out to me. There is Soooooooooooo much to learn about Corvettes.

Lance

mashinter 03-08-2011 11:09 AM

'69: high compression, solid lifter, big block with side exhaust!

GD70 03-08-2011 02:46 PM


Originally Posted by Solid LT1 (Post 1576981497)
That dealer built 69 LT-1 shure was a slow SLUG compared to the one Car Life tested in the 1970 model year. The 70 model went 102MPH in the 1/4 mile where the "69" dealer modified car only went 99MPH. I'm thinking it was running a std points ignition rather than the K-66 that was amnditory on the 70-71 LT-1 Vettes.

Call it what you want, there were NO 69 LT-1 Vettes in my book, they couldn't spare the intakes from Z/28 production and now with more than 20,000 extra Z/28 clones, building a 69 LT-1 clone won't be easy either. Not having a 6500RPM redline on the tach and no screw in rocker studs makes it not desirable to a guy like me who appreciates the evolution of the species. Chevy spent extra $$$ on the 70 and up LT-1 motors after too many warranty claims on the 67-69 Z/28 motors as they spit valvetrain parts out at high RPM. The screw in studs and guide plates were invented by one of my heros Smokey Yunick for race applications and no dealer conversion would ever have these details performed during a conversion.

I'n reading that article I think th eowner of that Vette was something of a WHIMP and should have stuck with the 350HP motor as he didn't want to motor wound out during testing. I care for my Vettes but I also use them to their full potential just like Zora would want me to do:D

I spoke with my friend with the 69. It was originally a L-46. He's currently rebuilding the motor.
He's going to send me pics of the intake, carb & heads and show the dates. His has the 6K tach, solid lifters & cam, Holly w/GM stampings, hi-rise intake that has a "W" on it. Does not have the electronic ignition. He said whoever did the conversion did a lot of work replacing all the parts & data plate. The plate is old, not a recent replacement. I know anyone can get one of those. Either way it's still an interesting discussion weather it was dealer done, or not.
Glenn

Faster Rat 03-08-2011 04:13 PM


Originally Posted by 7T1vette (Post 1576987045)
But I would suggest the 'best of show' to be the 1970 cars: it has the upgrades mentioned above and also has the most powerful engines (other than the L-88's, of course).

So what engine in 1970 was more powerful than a 11.0:1 compression ratio solid lifter triple carbureted 427/435 L71...which was rated at 5300 rpm but probably put out near 500hp at 6500 rpm redline? Or what low-production engine in 1971 for that matter...the 9.0:1 compression solid lifter stroked LS6? I don't think so..........

For those of us who were involved with drag racing back in the late sixties, the factory muscle car maximum horsepower wars ended in 1969. Blame it on insurance, emissions or whatever...the handwriting was on the wall. I went into the military in 1969 and when I got out in 1972, I went to the Chevy dealer. I was absolutely shocked at what I saw available in the new car market. The oil embargo and gas lines in 1973 merely sealed the deal.

RagTop69 03-08-2011 05:06 PM


Originally Posted by 7T1vette (Post 1576987045)
But I would suggest the 'best of show' to be the 1970 cars: it has the upgrades mentioned above and also has the most powerful engines (other than the L-88's, of course).

Maybe I missed something, but the 70 versions of the 454 were rated at exactly the same hp as the 68/69 427s with the same carburation setups, no? The reason for the larger displacement was to offset the performance inroads made by mandated smog equipment. Was Chevy lying about the 454? The 427? Both?

Surfer69 03-08-2011 06:19 PM

C'mon, it's because people love the number 69.:D

bb62 03-08-2011 06:33 PM


Originally Posted by Faster Rat (Post 1576999134)
So what engine in 1970 was more powerful than a 11.0:1 compression ratio solid lifter triple carbureted 427/435 L71...which was rated at 5300 rpm but probably put out near 500hp at 6500 rpm redline? Or what low-production engine in 1971 for that matter...the 9.0:1 compression solid lifter stroked LS6? I don't think so..........

For those of us who were involved with drag racing back in the late sixties, the factory muscle car maximum horsepower wars ended in 1969. Blame it on insurance, emissions or whatever...the handwriting was on the wall. I went into the military in 1969 and when I got out in 1972, I went to the Chevy dealer. I was absolutely shocked at what I saw available in the new car market. The oil embargo and gas lines in 1973 merely sealed the deal.

Keep in mind that a stock L71 from 1969 was the slowest of the L71s and likely slower than the 70 small block LT1. This was due to the unbelievably restricted exhaust that was on all 69 corvettes - from 300HP to 435HP all had 2" exhausts. In stock trim, the 68s were quicker (and the stock 66/67s were faster yet) with the same ostensible engines.

69 Chevy 03-12-2011 08:07 AM


Why is the '69 considered the best year of the C3s?
Because I've owned one for 39 years. That's reason enough. :thumbs:

Yankeededandy 03-12-2011 08:39 AM

Because it was the last year for a manual 3-speed.

gdh 03-12-2011 08:52 AM

69 was a magical year, but since I did live it I have no memories. :D

sub006 03-12-2011 12:24 PM


Originally Posted by Rally68 (Post 1576954708)
I think you have a typo, you mean 68, right?

As the first-year Sting Ray, the '63 coupes got the unique, one-year-only back window split. And lots of rattles, leaks, etc.

As the first-year C3, the '68 got the unique, one-year-only outside door buttons. Not nearly as much compensation for the rattles, leaks, etc.

And '69 doesn't seem to be the "red-headed stepchild" the bargain-priced '64 seems to be. And I'm a 45 year '64 owner.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:50 AM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands