'70 Corvette LT1 Debut? - Page 2

**Bill Pritchard** · #11 03-26-2010, 09:31 AM

You're saying there was a strike in the spring of 69 which affected 69 model year Corvette production? Was the Corvette the only car affected by the strike? Not being argumentative, just trying to understand....

StealthBird · #12 03-26-2010, 09:45 AM

The 1969 Camaro and Firebird extension run to November/December 1969 was not due to a strike, it was because of tooling issues (specifically, the failure by Fisher Body to create the rear 1/4 panel dies for the 1970 model). I think the "strike" reference may be in regards to the Van Nuys plant strike, but that didn't have anything to do with extending the 1969 model year.

Now back to the Corvette LT-1.

LS6 RAT · #13 03-27-2010, 06:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You're saying there was a strike in the spring of 69 which affected 69 model year Corvette production? Was the Corvette the only car affected by the strike? Not being argumentative, just trying to understand....

[/ QUOTE ]

The strike in May 1969 delayed a lot of orders for the Corvette at the St. Louis plant, John Delorean decided to extend Corvette production beyond the normal model year run in order to full fill those orders, rather than return them to the dealers. '69 Corvette production continued thru December of 1969, long into the normal changeover model run.

**mockingbird812** · #14 03-27-2010, 06:36 PM

Good history lesson guys. THanks! Can anyone provide info on when the LT1 engine development was completed? Any idea who oversaw this development (engineer)? And - to summarize, both the '70 Camaro & Corvette were delayed for the same reason - May '69 Strike. Corporate decision was made to extend the model year to fulfill dealer orders?

**Bill Pritchard** · #15 03-28-2010, 07:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
And - to summarize, both the '70 Camaro & Corvette were delayed for the same reason - May '69 Strike.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sam,

Nope

....apparently only the Corvette was delayed due to a strike. Per StealthBird's response, above,...

"The 1969 Camaro and Firebird extension run to November/December 1969 was not due to a strike, it was because of tooling issues (specifically, the failure by Fisher Body to create the rear 1/4 panel dies for the 1970 model). I think the "strike" reference may be in regards to the Van Nuys plant strike, but that didn't have anything to do with extending the 1969 model year."

Evidently just a coincidence that production of the '69 models of the two different vehicles was extended several months.

**olredalert** · #16 03-29-2010, 06:49 PM

-----Yup, Sam,,,,The January date is correct and I can give you first hand info on that as I bought an LT1 Vette vert brand new. It was ordered on spec by a dealer in Mass. and came in in late January of 1970. I think Ive mentioned the car before more than once. I was back in Mass that January to take my physical and head out to the front (so to speak). I would be lying if I said I wasnt depressed, and then I flunked that physical. Went back to my Moms to get ready to go back to Florida and saw all these new Corvettes getting unloaded off the truck. Ended up putting a deposit on that one that day! GMAC was my friend back in those days. The dealer was a holding yard of sorts for new Vettes that were ordered by other area dealers and I had quite a number to choose from but they were the first anywhere in New England for sure......Bill S

**mockingbird812** · #17 03-29-2010, 08:42 PM

Thanks Bill. that the same 'vette that you used to tangle with a certain red mopar 'vert?

I'd be interested in what Marlin has to say wrt Don Yenko's knowledge of the LT1 as he made his 1st order of Deuces mid December 1969. I don't have Marlin's email at work so i can't email this link to him. Anyone

.................thanks!

king_midas · #18 03-29-2010, 09:47 PM

The LT-1 was ready to go before the end of '69 Corvette production, and I think I remember reading somewhere that emissions decals and engine suffixes were made available for '69 Corvettes before the '70 production run began.

Interestingly, the L-46 was available in '70 also, which means that this mixture of engines does seem theoretically possible for '69 production (same reciprocating assy.).

Based on this, were any '69 Corvettes produced with the LT-1?

**YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY** · #19 03-29-2010, 10:04 PM

To my knowledge, there is no documentation from Don Yenko and his thoughts on the 'vette LT1. The prevailing thought was that Yenko was simply following his previous model by putting the highest performing 'vette engine in a non-vette automobile - in '70 he chose the Nova to avoid the insurance scrutiny. I'm not convinced that Don did a lot of due diligence on the LT1, he saw 370HP in a 3180 lb car and knew he had a winner - so he submitted the combo for COPO approval. The kick was getting the 4.10 rear, as it was not an RPO in '70.

**YENKO DEUCE REGISTRY** · #20 03-29-2010, 10:08 PM

Just had a chance to read the whole post here. Rick is correct, the initial 'mule' of putting an LT1 into the Nova was available for the press day sometime in mid-late '69. The Mule Nova was actually a '69 version, and the press kit noted that 'neat Nova powered by an LT1 - not available to the public'. Perhaps Don keyed off of that, but most of us think what I typed above. The Mule was the COPO test version of Don's request.