1973 - 1977 Corvette

[rdefabri]

Anyone here own (or previously own) a 1973 - 1977 Corvette Stingray? I am curious as to thoughts, especially L82s. Also, thoughts on how it compares (or doesn't) to your S30.

I have always liked the "soft" bumper cars, I've had opportunity to drive them when younger, but never owned.

[e_racer1999]

honestly, my L28 240 smoked a ~'73 last time we raced.

a little too "cushy" for my likings

[Arne]

I prefer the chrome bumper cars ('68-72) myself, appearance-wise. But every time I drive one, I am unimpressed. The chassis and suspension are essentially unchanged from '63 through '82, and the early Sixties design just doesn't cut it for me. They feel over large, rather flexy and crude.

Then again, I'm a bit prejudiced - I've always preferred the smaller, lighter sports car design model. All Corvettes of that vintage have going for them (in my opinion) is looks and a big torquey motor.

[rdefabri]

Yea, I know they weren't exactly quick - my 240Z is an L24, so not that modified that I think I could smoke one.

I got to thinking that my 240 might take more to get it right...it's in fair shape, but needs some work. That's not to say I expect a Vette to be cheaper, but I have always been intrigued by them.

I know the SCM is high on them..

[Hrududu]

Then again, I'm a bit prejudiced - I've always preferred the smaller, lighter sports car design model. All Corvettes of that vintage have going for them (in my opinion) is looks and a big torquey motor.

Thats why they made the Opel GT LOL

[rdefabri]

Arne,

Yes, I tend to like the smaller, lighter cars myself. My old man had a '61 Corvette (so pre-IRS), but it looked good, drove like a tank. Granted, my "E" is 5 years newer, but there's no comparison between the two. That is amongst the many things I enjoy about my 240Z.

I know the "mid-years" Corvettes (C2) drove better than my Dad's car, but I don't recall they were so much better - point being that a 1982 "sports" car riding on a near 20-year old suspension doesn't say much for it.

The flip side is that the big motor excites me (although it really wasn't that big in the smog years). I should go drive one to see how good/bad the car really is compared to my 240.

[240ZMan]

FWIW, there's a guy with a chrome bumper (pre '73?) vette who comes to our Z club track days. He's got a roll bar and some engine mods (not sure what though). He's about as fast as my L28 240 on the straights, but has weak brakes and evil handling through the twisties. It's not fun to get stuck behind him since all the passing is limited to the straight and he doesn't often pull over to be passed. I know his handling is evil because I've been stuck behind him before for laps at a time. His braking points are much earlier than mine.

Not sure if there is much correlation to the newer vettes you originally asked about ...

[Stickerman]

I looked at a 74 once, I couldn't figure out why it was so slow until I researched it some. This should make you not consider one anymore.

The base L48 engine put out 165 hp (123 kW), and the optional L82 engine put out 205 hp (153 kW). This was the lowest horsepower Corvette since the first year of production.

205 HP in a very heavy car. No wonder a Z will smoke one.

[Z train]

My GF(at the time) had a 79 Vette and my stock 78 Z would walk it easy.Pissed her off to no end.

[rdefabri]

'79 Vette yes - 77 and earlier Vette, no way a stock Z smokes an L82 - no chance without mods. L48, I'd say possible, but not an L82. Somewhere in my archive, I have a road test of a 1977 L82, manual tranny and it ran something like a 7.3 - 7.4 second 0-60 time. An unmodified 280Z isn't going to run that quick, it's about a half to whole second off.

All the C2 and C3s (1963 - 1982) had essentially the same suspension - compared to contemporary iron, the Corvette was likely the weakest handling sports car out there and it's not nimble by any means. Although in stock form, the 240Z has a tendency to oversteer, it's still nimble.

By 1977, the L82 was neutered to the point of about 190 hp, so it's anemic for sure, but not a dog. Straight line for the mass-manufactured bunch, it's still pretty quick for the time.

Of course, we as Z owners have our biases, but I am trying to look at it more objectively - I get the sense that the Vette is typical American iron - straight line quick, weaker handling.

No one here has ever owned one I guess? Any desire or am I just nuts?

[Stickerman]

The lowest HP was in 1975, see my quote above. The L82 was never below 205 HP

[bobc]

I drove a 1973 454 t-top Vette for 10 years as my daily driver from 76-86. I bought it after I sold my 1972 240z. I used to drag race with a friend of mine that had a stock 350 in his 69 Vette and we were about equal, but I don't think there was anyway my Z could have kept up with the 454.

Handling wise, unless you want to go pretty fast (notice I didn't say very fast!) in a straight line, there is no comparison. The Z will outhandle the Vette in a heartbeat. Ride wise, the Vette is a big, heavy, smooth riding car. The Z, as you know, is a sports car.

From 1973 forward the Vettes got more and more anemic, but the weight stayed pretty much the same, so an early 240Z or a 280z would probably outrun a later Vette. Embarrassing!

Outside of the engine, expense wise, the Z is going to cost you a lot less to repair than the Vette. Get a Vette catalog and do some comparison shopping on parts.

Investment wise, I'd have to say if you get a 454 or an L-82, I think you'll do better than a Z. There's still that Japanese thing going on with car values, even though I think the Z may come around one day.

Which one would I pick today? Well, I've got 2 Z's in the garage and no Vette's