What are the pros & cons of the 68s?

[Jim R.]

Re: ...nobody wants 'em...

I think the 68 is a great car also, a friend of mine in high school had a 427/390 4spd roadster, it was medium metallic green not shure what the color was called, but was a sweet green ,with black rag top and rally wheels,gosh we had alot of fun in that car ,i like the key on the dash also and pushbutton door handles,hang on to those 68s.

[Jim R.]

Re: ...nobody wants 'em...

I have to agree with chris on the 68 , I own a 67 now and i think they downgraded the 67 by moving the backup lights above the license plate ,it sort of reminds me of something you would see on a 4wd or even a boat ,also gone where the nice emblems ,and for this era car i dont care for the emergancy brake being between the seats,just my opinion and i own one but a spade is a spade.

[Terry B.]

Re: ...nobody wants 'em...

I think Chris Patrick's earlier posting said it better and with more research than I would have put into it. I would like to add that I have owned my 1968 427/390 Roadster for 7 years and just completed a frame off restoration. It seems it was a Michigan car and the previous owner was told "it won't ever rust, it's fiberglass." I have been able to find every part I needed to restore my '68 including the complete correct smog system, correct dated carb, all the correct suspension parts that needed replacement, and many many more parts. The search is part of the fun! About the only thing that a '69 has that my '68 wasn't fitted with was side pipes and to that I say I need to keep my hearing as long as I can. I can also hear my radio and have a conversation when I'm driving.

Just one more thing....later in the 1968 production year, the 1968 Corvette was voted Car and Driver's Car of the Year!

[Jim B.]

Re: What are the pros & cons of the 68s?

I guess I just have to get into this. I am an original owner of a 68 roadster 327/350HP. I still have it and will never let it go. Most of the differences listed by Lawrence were corrected in the later 68's. My car was made in July of 68 (very late) and it has all of the gussets (kickup and front end) that later sharks have. My floors have no damage nor are they thin. I think that many of the previous posters were correct about some early issues being fixed. As the current owner of two Z06's (C5 and C6) we all know of the early Z06 problems that were fixed to make it one of the greatest corvettes of all time.

As far as drivability, my 68 was my daily driver for almost 5 years. I tracked it at several SCCA events. It was an attention getter at all events and stoplights. I drove it on several cross country trips and never had an issue with the ride or any leakage in any rainstorms.

I think all corvettes are worth a look and if it appeals to you go for it. The first of an era is hard to pass up.

By the way, when I bought mine the 69 was in the showroom and I chose the 68 anyway. I liked the key not being on the steering wheel and the 68 had a 5 year 50,000 mile warrantee (I still have my original POP.) The 69 had a 12 month, 12,000 mile warrantee. Makes you think doesn't it.

Jim Boudreaux
38390

[mike cobine]

Re: What are the pros & cons of the 68s?

F41 vs base suspension? I wonder why?

[mike cobine]

One great car - and still have it

This is one great car and I still have it. Others have come and gone since, but this one is sticking around.

And no, it doesn't have the 7 inch rally wheels on it. They are on a shelf where they belong, but there are 8 inch for serious driving.

[Terry F.]

Re: What are the pros & cons of the 68s?

I believe it can be done. You need to drill out the old rivets and install a new aluminum or stainless rivet head. I have done similar in other situations. Detailed work but can be done. Sharp drill bit and a drill press. Then attach it the same way it was at the factory (spin rivetted).Terry

[Greg L.]

Re: What are the pros & cons of the 68s?

Thanks everyone for that great feedback...I kinda thought that Paul's comment might stir things up a little so I just sat back and listened.

My personal preference is still the 69 but that is probably because that is what I have now. I like the "Stingray" on the side and the map pockets of the 69 but on the other hand I like the 68's wood wheel and ignition switch location... One thing that I didn't realize and find quite interesting to see is that as the 68 model year progressed, they worked out a lot of teething problems that the early cars had which brings me to a pretty important question. By about what time frame(s/n or date) were these little bugs worked out? I don't really think I'd be interested in an early 68 but a later one that had the frame and body stiffened up like the 69 would be something to look at.

As far as all the "68 only" parts, I guess if I get a complete car and don't have to chase all over for these one off parts then what does it matter if they are hard to find? If anyone ever hits it then that will be the insurance companies problem and not mine.

[Anthony S.]

Re: What are the pros & cons of the 68s?

Greg,

I have a '68 small block convertible. Much like you, I wanted a chrome bumper C-3, & I narrowed that down to a '68 or '69. I really like the shark slits on the side as opposed to the "egg crates" (no offense to anyone) of the 70-72. I also liked the key on the dash (seemed more like a classic) and the smooth right dash without the map pockets, they look like an afterthought to me.

Of these, I was leaning towards a '69, then I came across my car & fell in love with it. It is my guess that the car you find will be your judge regardless of the year.

As for the '68 only parts, I have been able to locate the correct parts that I have needed on E-Bay or from the major and minor Corvette suppliers. John Pirkle has supplied me with the correct starter & alternator & I got lucky & found the right carb cheap. Most of these searches were half the fun, as I am currently hunting down a smog system piece by piece. While I have no desire to have my car judged, I still want the car to be correct.

As for shakes & rattles, it's a Vette thing, along with the leaks & hot feet ( I fixed the feet thing).

Personally, I am quite happy with the ride quality of my car, then again it's a pleasure car and I rack up about 1-2k miles a year. Most of the ride complaints were from the days when the cars were new & it was driven every day.

As for improvements throughout the '68 model year, my late January did not have any dashboard bracing that was installed in later cars & I just missed out on the under car & engine side firewall insulation by 200 cars. I'm sure that the late '68's may have the improvements you are looking for, so look for a summer built car.

No matter how it works out, you'll be getting a really great car.

p.s.......I have 2 friends who love to bust my chops about the lack of the Stingray emblem. My answers, "it's easier to wax that area" or "bite me."

Good luck,

Anthony

[Patrick H.]

Re: What are the pros & cons of the 68s?

"If anyone ever hits it then that will be the insurance companies problem and not mine."

You'd better double check your coverage before you say that. Many times, if it fits, they don't care if it's correct. I'd never rely on them to make it their "problem" if I had another accident.

Patrick

[Bryan K. Montford]

Re: What are the pros & cons of the 68s?

I love every rattle in my 68!
Bryan

[Chris Patrick]

Re: ...nobody wants 'em...- apology

Jacob wrote me privately, upset that he felt I personally attacked him and was very rude to him. I'm the sort of guy who believes that if you make a mistake or cause a problem in public, then any apology should be just as public. I can't stand the newspaper page A-1 accusations and then the page G-12 apology a week later.

Jacob, I'm sorry if I was rude or if I attacked you. I get upset when I read messages that plug into many things that somebody years ago made that were not necessarily true, and then people keep passing them on as gospel.

In no way did I want you or anyone to think I dislike your preference of one model over another. That is everyone's right. My favorite years are '59/60, '63, '67, '68/69, '79, and '92-'95. When it comes to "better", typically the second year ('54, '57, '64, '69, '79, '85, '98, etc.) are the better cars. But that doesn't make the first year junk, although many magazine writers get off on saying just that. And it doesn't mean anyone's decision to own or prefer one of these is better or worse than the other. It is only the misconceptions and preconceived ideas I get upset over.

One is the '68 Corvette as a junk model. The '63 with its initial outing had several such cases also, but being the classic it is, no one remembers those. The '68 used by Car & Driver had several fit and finish items that made the authors not want to use it. One '63 in the review tossed a half-shaft and thrashed through the luggage area. How would you like to have been in that car? Think it got a good review? Yet you never hear of it.

Not long after the Sting Ray was out, some accidents caused the high mounted gas tanks to burst into the passenger area. About the only mention is in Corvette: America's Star Spangled Sports Car, where a very brief comment about the '68 having the same gas tank location although an issue of these in accidents had been discovered. EVERYONE knows about Pintos, but have you ever heard anyone mention that about a Corvette?

Another is how someone gets into Corvettes a year or two ago, and after reading one book or two, think they are an expert. This is not jabbing at you, just a point in general about many in the hobby. I'm sure you have run into the same type in business, other hobbies, and so on. Often they are ones who can throw money and thereby think they are God's gift to the rest of us.

Again, I'm sorry if I offended you, and I probably was over the edge more than I should have been, but I think you see my passion for getting these things right.

[Jacob A.]

Re: ...nobody wants 'em...- apology

Chris,

Thanks very much. I really appreciate your apology and comments.

Save the Wave!!!!

Best Regards,
Jacob Angel
#40987