There is a 67 390 HP coupe on ebay, that the owner claims that he has a letter from the previous owner that it came from the factory with a Rocheater Carb. More E bait? Dale
-
-
Re: 67 carb.
Dale,
Is this the one:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevrolet-Corvette-67-Chevrolet-Corvette-427-390hp-Numbers-Match-Options_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6168QQihZ009QQi temZ190199270732QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW
Maybe the seller doesn't know the difference between a Holley and a Rochester.
Looks like a nice car, any comments guys.
Jerry Fuccillo
#42179Jerry Fuccillo
1967 327/300 Convertible since 1968 -
Re: 67 carb.
Dale,
Is this the one:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevrolet-Corvette-67-Chevrolet-Corvette-427-390hp-Numbers-Match-Options_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6168QQihZ009QQi temZ190199270732QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW
Maybe the seller doesn't know the difference between a Holley and a Rochester.
Looks like a nice car, any comments guys.
Jerry Fuccillo
#42179Jerry Fuccillo
1967 327/300 Convertible since 1968Comment
-
Re: 67 carb.
Dale-----
Regardless of what sort of "written certification" that anyone supplies for such a car, I consider it extremely unlikely that St. Louis ever built such a car. For one thing, St. Louis wouldn't have had a Q-Jet carb in the plant during the 1967 model year to install on the car assuming that an "IL" coded engine came through with a Q-Jet manifold. I consider it highly unlikely that they would have built a car that did not conform to 1967 Corvette specs. In the extreme, is it possible? Yes, in the extreme, it's possible but HIGHLY unlikely.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re: 67 carb.
Dale-----
Regardless of what sort of "written certification" that anyone supplies for such a car, I consider it extremely unlikely that St. Louis ever built such a car. For one thing, St. Louis wouldn't have had a Q-Jet carb in the plant during the 1967 model year to install on the car assuming that an "IL" coded engine came through with a Q-Jet manifold. I consider it highly unlikely that they would have built a car that did not conform to 1967 Corvette specs. In the extreme, is it possible? Yes, in the extreme, it's possible but HIGHLY unlikely.In Appreciation of John HinckleyComment
-
Re: 67 carb.
I figured it was fishy, but I dont profess to know it all.( Still learning thanks to this board) Thanks for the responses. DaleComment
-
Re: 67 carb.
I figured it was fishy, but I dont profess to know it all.( Still learning thanks to this board) Thanks for the responses. DaleComment
-
Re: 67 carb.
I was at the Carlisle Swap Meet several years ago and was looking for a correct intake manifold for my Dad's 1967 390 coupe. We found one with the correct numbers but the secondary carberator bores were larger than the primary bores. The intake was designed to accept a Rochester carberator and not a Holley( the bores would have been equal size).I never did find out why this was the case; I suspected that part number should have been changed to reflect the discrepancy. Kieran #11373Comment
-
Re: 67 carb.
I was at the Carlisle Swap Meet several years ago and was looking for a correct intake manifold for my Dad's 1967 390 coupe. We found one with the correct numbers but the secondary carberator bores were larger than the primary bores. The intake was designed to accept a Rochester carberator and not a Holley( the bores would have been equal size).I never did find out why this was the case; I suspected that part number should have been changed to reflect the discrepancy. Kieran #11373Comment
Comment