Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars. |
|
|
|
#1
10-30-2006, 07:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Why no L35 in 1970?
Out of complete curiosity and continuing knowledge, why did Chevrolet drop RPO L35 in 1970, for the Camaro, Chevelle, Camino, and Nova? Haven't come across any info on this subject. Thanks.
__________________
Tony 
|
|
#2
10-30-2006, 08:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why no L35 in 1970?
Mr 70 and others at www.yenko.net might have an answer for you ?????
__________________
Chuck Sharin [email protected] Auburn,WA (30 miles South of Seattle) 70 Camaro R/S Z-28, L-78, R/S SS 69 Camaro COPO "recreation"
|
|
#3
10-30-2006, 08:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why no L35 in 1970?
Duhhhhh, I obviously was not awake yet, and paying attention to WHAT site I was on...........
__________________
Chuck Sharin [email protected] Auburn,WA (30 miles South of Seattle) 70 Camaro R/S Z-28, L-78, R/S SS 69 Camaro COPO "recreation"
|
|
#4
10-30-2006, 09:23 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Why no L35 in 1970?
".... and then totally redeem yourself"
__________________
Marlin 70 Yenko Nova-350/360, 4speed M21, 4.10 Posi (Daddy's Ride) 69 SS Nova-396/375hp, 4speed M20, 3.55 Posi (Benjamin's Ride) 67 RS Camaro-327/250hp, 2speed Glide, & 3.08 Open (Danny's Ride)
|
|
#5
10-30-2006, 09:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why no L35 in 1970?
My guess is that the LS3 was being offered in `70 as a 330 Horse 402, so it took the place of the L35, and gained 5 Horse.
Also now you could get this LS3 in a non-SS Chevelle, but not in the SS as the lowest horsepower engine was the 402/350 in the SS. Rick
|
|
#6
10-30-2006, 10:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Why no L35 in 1970?
What Rix says is correct as I remember reading how GM had what they called their 'engine deproliferation program' before 1970 production, deleting as many similar suffixes as possible. . Inventory of so many different suffixes was a problem also keeping them all in the pipeline so if an engine was close to what they wanted, it was slated for production and the 'excess' suffix motors dropped. . Comparing how many total suffixes were offered between '69 & '70 should show a big difference. .
~ Pete
__________________
I like real cars best...especially the REAL real ones!
|
|
#7
11-04-2006, 05:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why no L35 in 1970?
"As it was, the leftover "396" identification on the fenders was incorrect anyway since the '70 Super Sport's standard Mk IV big-block in truth displaced the 402ci thanks to a minimal overbore first done very late in the 1969 model run. Not wanting to confuse a good thing, Chevy officials continued to advertise the '70 SS Chevelle as a 396, and all mentions of standard power listed the "396 Turbo-Jet", as did the air cleaner decal under an SS's hood. Scrambling the picture even more was the new 330hp LS3 402ci big-block, which Chevrolet labeled a 400. Not to be confused with the equally new, correctly identified 400ci small-block--a siamesed cylinder evolution of the famed Chevy V-8 that first appeared beneath the "Hot One's" hood in 1955--the LS3 Turbo-Jet 400 was available on all V-8 Chevelle models except SS 396s, the first time a big-block was offered by Chevrolet in an A-body without SS equipment."
....quote from Chevelle 1964-1972 Muscle Car History book Sounds to me like the short answer to the original poster's question is MARKETING.
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
