1969 frame question

[Jim D.]

A buddy of mine asked me today if there was a way to reinforce the frame on his 69 (I didn't ask if it was a coupe or roadster). He said that if you put jack stands at each corner, the doors wouldn't open and if you did get them open, they wouldn't close due to the frame flexing. I asked about frame rot, etc. and he said there is no corrosion anywhere. Now the weird part. He said his frame is a "C" channel, not a box frame. This is a 300HP, auto car that he bought when it was only 3 years old. This guy has built many cars is very experienced, just not with Corvettes, so he knows what he's talking about. Every 63+ that I've ever seen has had a box frame. What say the experts?

[John H.]

Re: 1969 frame question

A buddy of mine asked me today if there was a way to reinforce the frame on his 69 (I didn't ask if it was a coupe or roadster). He said that if you put jack stands at each corner, the doors wouldn't open and if you did get them open, they wouldn't close due to the frame flexing. I asked about frame rot, etc. and he said there is no corrosion anywhere. Now the weird part. He said his frame is a "C" channel, not a box frame. This is a 300HP, auto car that he bought when it was only 3 years old. This guy has built many cars is very experienced, just not with Corvettes, so he knows what he's talking about. Every 63+ that I've ever seen has had a box frame. What say the experts?

Jim -

Excessive body/frame torsional weakness is what delayed the '68 coupe launch by six months, while the one-piece Targa Tops and upper birdcage pieces were redesigned (twice) and the T-Bar and frame diagonal braces were added.

After that, I can't imagine Engineering building any weaker frames for evaluation or Milwaukee shipping any frames without inner side rails, or any cars making it out of St. Louis with the frame side rails missing (which lots of things attach to).

[Jim D.]

Re: 1969 frame question

Thanks for the reply John. I had heard the 68 had issues and thought they were all fixed for the 69 model year. Is there any chance that a 69 with an oddball frame was produced? The owner is adamant that this is a100% original car.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1969 frame question

Thanks for the reply John. I had heard the 68 had issues and thought they were all fixed for the 69 model year. Is there any chance that a 69 with an oddball frame was produced? The owner is adamant that this is a100% original car.

Jim-----

In my opinion, there is absolutely no chance, at all, of ANY 1969 Corvette (or, any 1963-82, for that matter) ever being originally built with a c-channel frame. It would just make absolutely no sense, at all. The 1969 frame was just the evolution of the 63-68 frames. Why would GM have started making a radical revision to the frame and use it for only a few cars? The only possible way it could happen would be if the car was some sort of engineering test vehicle, and I highly doubt that such a car would ever have been sold.

[Jim D.]

Re: 1969 frame question

I agree 100% Joe. I'm going to try to examine this car personally. That should answer some , if not all, the questions. Thanks for your input.

[Duke W.]

Re: 1969 frame question

...what Joe said. Also, as the years passed the basic '63 frame got reinforced with gusset plates on the transmission cross member to frame rail, and I think '69 was the year when the frame got reinforcing braces at the rear kickup, which primarily improved bending stiffness.

Take some photos. This one sounds interesting!

Duke

[Terry B.]

Re: 1969 frame question

Duke,

You are correct about the C-3 frame getting reinforce braces at the rear kickup, however it was with mid '68 production. I believe it was started late January of 1968.

Terry