Pretty good review with facts and some opinions. I've had my L-71 1969 Corvette since early 1970. Being the second owner, the car had just over 3,000 miles on it and today it's approaching 180,000 with the engine having never been out of the car. I've modified the features I didn't like over the years. The car is essentially a daily driver but looks brand new. In the past decade, it's been a rare occurrence that someone hasn't come over and wanted to know all about the car when I'm at the gas station. IMHO the car still looks as timeless today as it did in 1969. One of the modifications is adding Borgeson Power Steering and a 13" Formuling France Racing Steering Wheel. The difference between the manual and the Borgeson is unbelievable. These are wonderful cars.
I do not know what planet he was on in 1968 but I was here on Earth when this car came out and the wow factor knocked everyone out that saw this car ! The Chevy dealer in town was selling them like no tomorrow and when you saw one it was a shock it made the 1984 corvette debut look like just a firebird!
This is the most beautiful Corvette IMO from top to bottom. Only thing it needs is beautiful Italian carburation like Webber ( Classic version of Individual throttle bodies). A set of 4 double barrel Webber’s or 2 quad barrel carbs would not only give this beauty amazing induction noise but also give the engine bay a much deserved exotic power plant aesthetic. If this car had an Alfa Romeo, Lamborghini or Ferrari badge it would EASILY be a multi-million dollar trade value.
I like that the 68 wasn't called a stingray. Now it makes it stand out over the other ones. Plus the Stingray doesn't mean squat, its just an emblem and nothing else.
Great review about a fantastic car. I have driven many sports cars in my life, but 2 weeks ago I had the opportunity to review myself a Corvette C3 327 Convertible from 1968. Well actually it caught fire in August last year, by my first attempt when I started filming the car. 3 weeks ago it was restored and so I made my review. As I said before I have driven and owned many sports cars, like Porsches, Ferraris and Aston Martins, or exotics like Iso Rivolta. But until now I have never driven something like the 1968 Corvette C3 Convertible. I was overwhelmed by the sound of it. And above all it was great to drive, like riding a canonball. It showed me that a car must not be the best to make the biggest impression. Because it made a huge impression on me. And after reviewing one week later a modern Audi TT TF this impression only grew. Because the Audi is tremendously fast, but you only have to steer, in the Corvette you have to drive yourself and not the computer: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_f6Yw8HDf1c.html
You can't actually see the headlights through the grill - there is a plastic protective cover to protect the lights from road debris. The owner of this car must have removed them.
And adding to it there was actually a recall on these covers on early 68 cars, seems at higher speeds the covers would deform and could prevent the headlight buckets from opening. This was corrected in production and for later cars but Chevrolet learned much about the 68 the hard way.
C3s are definitely for people that enjoy *driving* their car and while I know they have their little issues I wouldn't trade my '71 for a new Corvette fresh off of the assembly line.
You're not supposed to see the head lights through the grill when they're down. What you're pointing out is actually a mistake, the person who built this car, forgot to put the shields in. The shields also protected the lights from debris hits when they were down.
@@DriveSteady You do a good job. No nonsense and straight forward. I restore classic and antiques for a living at a high end shop. We do a lot of corvettes, most recent is a 1969 L-88 roadster that we went full Duntov with. We don't do custom or modify, only full, correct restorations. Pebble Beach level. I'm full of a whole bunch of useless info on these cars....ask me what ever you like. :) I own a 1980 L-82
@@MAllen-ng8pl Why? I also own a 1969 Dodge Charger 440, 1963 Pontiac Catalina 389 4 speed, 1969 427 corvette, 1962 327 Corvette ... plus, you don't know how I have my 1980 L 82 set up....stock? Modded? You don't know so.....whats the problem here?
When you were talking about the technology of the car, I guess you were not aware that the indicators bar for the rear tail lights which is located under the radio , they used fiber optic cables to light them, yea a fiber optic cable coming from each of the 4 tail lights going to the indicator bar under the radio. When you hit the brakes they would brighten just like the tail lights. I own a 68 with the 350hp/327, That is how I know. First time I ever saw a fiber optic cable used on a car.
Many Chevrolet cars in this time period had the fiber optic light monitoring system as an option, definitely a very cool and high tech for the day feature.
GM was apprehensive about calling the 1968 a "Stingray" because they weren't sure how the public was going to accept it, since it was such a drastic change, people saw the C2's as "Stingrays", but when the 1968 Corvette outsold all prior models, (go figure) they put the name back on the fender in 1969. But anyone can see, That's a "Stingray" none the less that had kept the same body style till 1982... Heck, I've seen people remove the emblem from the later models after resto-mod conversions or customizing and replace it with the actual Stingray emblem.( :)
If you look at a C2 from above, it resembles the shape of a Sting Ray. If you look at the C3 from above, it looks more like a shark. But calling a car shark didn't sound right to the marketing folks at GM eventhough the prototype of the C3 was christened Mako Shark. Go figure.
Good video ,and explained about the difference of the 68, even people says it's not a stingray, just put the letters and or the shark letters,and even it'll be a more unique, car, thanks.
And 430hp is what it made as installed in the car. All these claims of 560hp are nonsense considering the factory exhaust manifolds and system used on the car back then. You weren't getting anywhere near 500 hp without open headers.
My 72 was also short throw when new but some were delivered long throw. Zora was asked about this and said all were speced for short throw but apparently at St Louis that didn't always happen.
The headlights, when down, should not show. Your car is missing the black plastic pieces that hide the headlights. Also, the fourth, from the front, shark gills should be painted black.
Any corvette that came after 1967 are known as Mud Sharks. The 1968 was the worst year for the corvette. They routed a who knows how many feet of rubber house that ran to a vacuum tank. This was the vacuum to open the head light doors and whipper door. The problem was as these cars aged the rubber got brittle and would crack releasing the vacuum for headlights and whipper cover. You pretty much had to replace all the rubber hose with new hose. Its almost as bad as having to rewire the car. I have been a corvette gearhead dating back to the early sixties and have owned eight different corvettes through my life all C2's or older. one 1970 454. I own a 1963 roadster with a 2010 LS 1 engine and 4L60 trans with 3:55 posi. I have been certified by Bloomington Gold in Corvette restoration since 1985.
Would it be fair to say...avoid the first year of a model/style change? Let the engineers work out the bugs, first. Tell me your opinion. The C1 '53-'54 almost torpedoed the future of the Corvette with that damn Blue Flame Straight 6! It only put out 150 hp, Plus, it was ugly as hell! John Keating
The C3 "wasn't well accepted"? Looking at the production numbers, it sold better than C2 out of the gate. Dipped after the first 2 model years, then sold very well throughout it's production run. I prefer the styling of the C2 myself but the C3 was very successful. Maybe a little revisionist history?
Yes many many issues were corrected and improved during 1968 production and for 1969, the 1968 car really struggled with quality issues, overheating, ride quality, cowl shake, noise, etc. The frame was even strengthened for 1969 and braces added under the dash to help with flex and cowl shake. The early 435hp convertibles with the F41 suspension got roasted in most road tests of the day about the cowl shake and how bad they rode.
Adjustable strut rods cure the camber changes when rear suspension travels up and down,I was lucky after spinning out at the autocross track in third gear a fellow driver said get the adjustable strut rods before you race again!
Mine was is 1968 and it has factory power steering and power brakes. It is not like they were not an option just because the car is a 1968. This guy was not even born when this car was made lol, he does not know.
