I dont get the c3 vs c4 values

In a really hot small block, like a 302 or the current generation, the car
rips through the air with the authority of an arrow - fast, quick, and not a
lot of sensation.

A big block shoves the world backwards, and that is a heck of a sensation.

Unfortunately, they both get there about the same time, so which is best is
really based on what you desire.


"Dave in Lake Villa" > wrote in message
...
> 'After all, what sense is it to pay $65,000 for a '66 big block that any
> C5 can blow away'
>
> If you think a half-second (or so) over a quarter mile is being 'blown
> away'...then okay !
>

"Tom in Missouri" > wrote in message
k.net...
>I don't even own a C5 but I know that they will blow away a '66 big block.
>
> They will out accelerate it due to a couple of extra gears.
>
> They will outbrake it like you can't imagine.
>
> They will out corner it in a way that will make you sick.
>
> And if they didn't, would you really be proud of the name "Corvette"? Try
> thinking back to any friends or aquaintenances you had in the '70s who
> were
> Mustang fanatics. Then the Mustang II came out. How proud were they of
> "Mustang"? Today, Mustang II is a bad dream they try to forget, and is
> usually never mentioned.
>
> A similar feeling ran through Corvette. The older Corvettes (virtually
> any
> from '71 back) would blow away the then-new mid '70s Corvettes. It wasn't
> a
> contest. I remember people telling me that as much as I loved Corvettes,
> I
> should really buy a new one at least once just to have one. Back then, I
> couldn't see it. I loved them for performance, and performance was in the
> old ones, not a new one.
>
After I sold my 61 in order to get a station wagon that I needed to raise a
family my friends sometimes let me drive their Corvette to keep me envious.
One of them stopped by and let me drive a 69 L88, (yes, he still has it and
a few more, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58 his favorite, 65, 67, 69 L88, 84, and 90
ZR1), which I promptly scared the hell of my wife and myself with. Thinking
back now it think it was the overall car and not just the power, it was just
a scary ride. The C6 comes on so smooth that it don't scare you until you
look down at the speedometer. Then you think, " how did I get to this speed
so quick" and let off, and you're only in 4th gear. Can I say the L88 was
faster then the C6, probably not after this long and the ride is so much
different that it's very hard to compare. I can remember thinking this 69 is
sure a slug compared to the 61.

Don't knock the Mustang II, it's front end is under more street rods than it
is still under Mustang II's. It was good for something. By the way, there is
a new Mustang in the dealer showroom that looks bitchin, medium gray with
stripes and looks oh so much like the 69 Boss. Got to go take a look at
that.

--
Dad
05 C6 Silver/Red 6spd Z51
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd

"Tom in Missouri" > wrote in message
k.net...
>I don't even own a C5 but I know that they will blow away a '66 big block.
>
> They will out accelerate it due to a couple of extra gears.
>
> They will outbrake it like you can't imagine.
>
> They will out corner it in a way that will make you sick.
>
> And if they didn't, would you really be proud of the name "Corvette"? Try
> thinking back to any friends or aquaintenances you had in the '70s who
> were
> Mustang fanatics. Then the Mustang II came out. How proud were they of
> "Mustang"? Today, Mustang II is a bad dream they try to forget, and is
> usually never mentioned.
>
> A similar feeling ran through Corvette. The older Corvettes (virtually
> any
> from '71 back) would blow away the then-new mid '70s Corvettes. It wasn't
> a
> contest. I remember people telling me that as much as I loved Corvettes,
> I
> should really buy a new one at least once just to have one. Back then, I
> couldn't see it. I loved them for performance, and performance was in the
> old ones, not a new one.
>
After I sold my 61 in order to get a station wagon that I needed to raise a
family my friends sometimes let me drive their Corvette to keep me envious.
One of them stopped by and let me drive a 69 L88, (yes, he still has it and
a few more, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58 his favorite, 65, 67, 69 L88, 84, and 90
ZR1), which I promptly scared the hell of my wife and myself with. Thinking
back now it think it was the overall car and not just the power, it was just
a scary ride. The C6 comes on so smooth that it don't scare you until you
look down at the speedometer. Then you think, " how did I get to this speed
so quick" and let off, and you're only in 4th gear. Can I say the L88 was
faster then the C6, probably not after this long and the ride is so much
different that it's very hard to compare. I can remember thinking this 69 is
sure a slug compared to the 61.

Don't knock the Mustang II, it's front end is under more street rods than it
is still under Mustang II's. It was good for something. By the way, there is
a new Mustang in the dealer showroom that looks bitchin, medium gray with
stripes and looks oh so much like the 69 Boss. Got to go take a look at
that.

--
Dad
05 C6 Silver/Red 6spd Z51
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd

'After all, what sense is it to pay $65,000 for a '66 big block that any
C5 can blow away'

If you think a half-second (or so) over a quarter mile is being 'blown
away'...then okay !

1/2 second is about 75 feet. 5 car lengths seems like a pretty good
definition of blown away to me.

ME: IF all youre going to do is drag race with it, then i suppose half
a second is important ; assuming that most of the time will be spent on
the street with either car.... half a second is about the blink of an
eye ---- and to that i say , so what ; on a 100 yard run from
start....you wouldnt even be able to feel the difference. Guaranteed !

'After all, what sense is it to pay $65,000 for a '66 big block that any
C5 can blow away'

If you think a half-second (or so) over a quarter mile is being 'blown
away'...then okay !

1/2 second is about 75 feet. 5 car lengths seems like a pretty good
definition of blown away to me.

ME: IF all youre going to do is drag race with it, then i suppose half
a second is important ; assuming that most of the time will be spent on
the street with either car.... half a second is about the blink of an
eye ---- and to that i say , so what ; on a 100 yard run from
start....you wouldnt even be able to feel the difference. Guaranteed !

"dave" > wrote in message
...
> 'After all, what sense is it to pay $65,000 for a '66 big block that any
> C5 can blow away'
>
> If you think a half-second (or so) over a quarter mile is being 'blown
> away'...then okay !
>
> 1/2 second is about 75 feet. 5 car lengths seems like a pretty good
> definition of blown away to me.
>
> M-oronic E-mbryo: IF all youre going to do is drag race with it, then i
> suppose half
> a second is important ; assuming that most of the time will be spent on
> the street with either car.... half a second is about the blink of an
> eye ---- and to that i say , so what ; on a 100 yard run from
> start....you wouldnt even be able to feel the difference. Guaranteed !
>
Hard to take isn't it dave, something being "blown" without you being
involved.
--
Dad
05 C6 Silver/Red 6spd Z51
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd

"dave" > wrote in message
...
> 'After all, what sense is it to pay $65,000 for a '66 big block that any
> C5 can blow away'
>
> If you think a half-second (or so) over a quarter mile is being 'blown
> away'...then okay !
>
> 1/2 second is about 75 feet. 5 car lengths seems like a pretty good
> definition of blown away to me.
>
> M-oronic E-mbryo: IF all youre going to do is drag race with it, then i
> suppose half
> a second is important ; assuming that most of the time will be spent on
> the street with either car.... half a second is about the blink of an
> eye ---- and to that i say , so what ; on a 100 yard run from
> start....you wouldnt even be able to feel the difference. Guaranteed !
>
Hard to take isn't it dave, something being "blown" without you being
involved.
--
Dad
05 C6 Silver/Red 6spd Z51
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd

Bob G wrote:
> On 18 Nov 2004 20:23:29 -0800, (Ralph) wrote:
>
>
>>I am not complaining. I just do not get it.
>>
>>I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do
>>not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000
>>documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand.
>>
>>Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison
>>between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4
>>6spd.
>>
>>So enlighten me...... without being insulting.
>>
>>Thanks
>
> ===========================
> I would never Insult another Corvette NUT...
>
> But I own a 95 black on black 6 sp with both tops...And I also own
> 64 72 76 & 79 Corvettes.... all were in shows this summer so they are
> all in damn good shape... The 79 is an Automatic the others are all
> Manuel...
>
> NOW.... The 95 is NOT repeat NOT the car I take out to have fun in..No
> question it gets up and goes, but it lacks any mechanical feeling...by
> which it really does not "feel" like a machine....at least when
> compared to my sharks...It also almost never turns a head...whereas
> any of my sharks turn a lot of heads...
>
> When comparing performance...well the 95 is at or near the top...when
> comparing fuel mileage it is absolutely at the top ..by a wide
> margin...BUT truthfully the 95 is nowhere near as much fun to drive
> the hell out of on the back roads....
>
> When you come to Value...well the 95 is most likely worth a little
> more then my 79 and my 76 at this time...it is depreciating...the 76
> is just starting to appreciate and the 79 is flat..holding its own...
>
> Insurance for the 64 72 76 & 79 (total of all 4) is just slightly more
> then what I pay for the 95 alone... Tags for the 95 cost me 70 bucks a
> year..(Vanity.. IO NO 1)! the other (all with Historic tags) cost me
> under 20 bucks each...
>
> Now I also turn my own wrenches....and honestly the 95 is not that
> difficult (computer not included) but all of the others are simple and
> easy cars to work on... and parts are generally cheaper also...
>
> Guess it boils down to the fact that I really enjoy being in a machine
> and not just riding ....can not explain it really.. but my excuse the
> French...ASS feels the difference and I smile a lot more driving the
> older one....BUT NONE are 1/2 the car the 95 is...and that 95 is not
> 1/2 the car a C5 is................
>
> Bob Griffiths
> 68 SS 396 Heeled
> 64 & 72 Corvette Rag tops
> 76 79 & 95 Corvette Coupes...
>
> None for sale...getting an itch to add a C5 to the fleet...which will
> fill up the garages...

Maybe this will help.

I bought my '79 in 1987 for $7,800. Sold it in 1994 for $ 4,000. Clean
today it would bring $8K to $10K. Well manicured, $ 11-14K.

Bob has the advantage of everyday comparisons that a fine stable of iron
provides but he is searching for the descriptor I call, "raw automobile."

There will always be a market for good-looking raw automobiles--we call
these "classics." They are great on the street and on sweeping back
roads. Gov. Arnold has signed the bill that lifts smog regs from early
& mid C3s and that will give these cars a further $$ boost.

I don't view the C3 (or C4) as a proper weapon for our tight mountain
roads--the C5 (and most likely the C6) is the better "driving
instrument" for that job.

C4s do a lot of jobs much better than C3s but in each of those qualities
they are overshadowed by the C5 -- Dad might say, "eclipsed." This
factor will probably keep C4 prices depressed and most C4s will follow a
faster path to salvage than will C3s. Left will be a few collector's
C4s. With some low mileage C5s approching $20K I'm getting very "tempted."

Mike
'89 Coupe owner, occasional C5 rentor

Bob G wrote:
> On 18 Nov 2004 20:23:29 -0800, (Ralph) wrote:
>
>
>>I am not complaining. I just do not get it.
>>
>>I have a c4 ,my second. I love the body of a 1980-82 c3. But I do
>>not see how my car is on ebay and bidding around 17-18grand with 19000
>>documented miles and you have automatic late c3 cars for 15 grand.
>>
>>Aside from being more difficult to get in, I do not see a comparison
>>between a 81 C3 corvette with 60 - 80 thousand miles and a 1996 c4 lt4
>>6spd.
>>
>>So enlighten me...... without being insulting.
>>
>>Thanks
>
> ===========================
> I would never Insult another Corvette NUT...
>
> But I own a 95 black on black 6 sp with both tops...And I also own
> 64 72 76 & 79 Corvettes.... all were in shows this summer so they are
> all in damn good shape... The 79 is an Automatic the others are all
> Manuel...
>
> NOW.... The 95 is NOT repeat NOT the car I take out to have fun in..No
> question it gets up and goes, but it lacks any mechanical feeling...by
> which it really does not "feel" like a machine....at least when
> compared to my sharks...It also almost never turns a head...whereas
> any of my sharks turn a lot of heads...
>
> When comparing performance...well the 95 is at or near the top...when
> comparing fuel mileage it is absolutely at the top ..by a wide
> margin...BUT truthfully the 95 is nowhere near as much fun to drive
> the hell out of on the back roads....
>
> When you come to Value...well the 95 is most likely worth a little
> more then my 79 and my 76 at this time...it is depreciating...the 76
> is just starting to appreciate and the 79 is flat..holding its own...
>
> Insurance for the 64 72 76 & 79 (total of all 4) is just slightly more
> then what I pay for the 95 alone... Tags for the 95 cost me 70 bucks a
> year..(Vanity.. IO NO 1)! the other (all with Historic tags) cost me
> under 20 bucks each...
>
> Now I also turn my own wrenches....and honestly the 95 is not that
> difficult (computer not included) but all of the others are simple and
> easy cars to work on... and parts are generally cheaper also...
>
> Guess it boils down to the fact that I really enjoy being in a machine
> and not just riding ....can not explain it really.. but my excuse the
> French...ASS feels the difference and I smile a lot more driving the
> older one....BUT NONE are 1/2 the car the 95 is...and that 95 is not
> 1/2 the car a C5 is................
>
> Bob Griffiths
> 68 SS 396 Heeled
> 64 & 72 Corvette Rag tops
> 76 79 & 95 Corvette Coupes...
>
> None for sale...getting an itch to add a C5 to the fleet...which will
> fill up the garages...

Maybe this will help.

I bought my '79 in 1987 for $7,800. Sold it in 1994 for $ 4,000. Clean
today it would bring $8K to $10K. Well manicured, $ 11-14K.

Bob has the advantage of everyday comparisons that a fine stable of iron
provides but he is searching for the descriptor I call, "raw automobile."

There will always be a market for good-looking raw automobiles--we call
these "classics." They are great on the street and on sweeping back
roads. Gov. Arnold has signed the bill that lifts smog regs from early
& mid C3s and that will give these cars a further $$ boost.

I don't view the C3 (or C4) as a proper weapon for our tight mountain
roads--the C5 (and most likely the C6) is the better "driving
instrument" for that job.

C4s do a lot of jobs much better than C3s but in each of those qualities
they are overshadowed by the C5 -- Dad might say, "eclipsed." This
factor will probably keep C4 prices depressed and most C4s will follow a
faster path to salvage than will C3s. Left will be a few collector's
C4s. With some low mileage C5s approching $20K I'm getting very "tempted."

Mike
'89 Coupe owner, occasional C5 rentor

"Mike Ellison" > wrote in message
...
> Bob has the advantage of everyday comparisons that a fine stable of iron
> provides but he is searching for the descriptor I call, "raw automobile."
>
> There will always be a market for good-looking raw automobiles--we call
> these "classics." They are great on the street and on sweeping back
> roads. Gov. Arnold has signed the bill that lifts smog regs from early &
> mid C3s and that will give these cars a further $$ boost.
>
> I don't view the C3 (or C4) as a proper weapon for our tight mountain
> roads--the C5 (and most likely the C6) is the better "driving instrument"
> for that job.
>
> C4s do a lot of jobs much better than C3s but in each of those qualities
> they are overshadowed by the C5 -- Dad might say, "eclipsed." This factor
> will probably keep C4 prices depressed and most C4s will follow a faster
> path to salvage than will C3s. Left will be a few collector's C4s. With
> some low mileage C5s approching $20K I'm getting very "tempted."
>
> Mike
> '89 Coupe owner, occasional C5 rentor
>
I'd never say "eclipsed", my '72 has an entirely different reason to drive
it, the C5 and now the C6 is a traveling car that you can race when you want
to. I do agree, the C4 was just an OK Corvette, if you like the style and
can stand the shake, they're great. On the other hand I tolerate the 72's
awkwardness because I like to drive it, and love it's looks.
--
Dad
05 C6 Silver/Red 6spd Z51
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd