Go Back   The Supercar Registry > General Discussion > Supercar/Musclecar Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-31-2006, 06:49 AM
Gregs396 Gregs396 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pa.
Posts: 104
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

The LS-3 didn't start until 1971, and it was a 300HP version in the Camaro. The 1970 had either the L-34, or the L-78 402.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-31-2006, 06:22 PM
Mr. T Mr. T is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Spokane Valley, WA USA
Posts: 1,423
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

Thanks for the replies guys. Yes, the LS3 did not become a BB RPO until 1971. Maybe adding the LS5 and LS6 to the RPO Chevelle/Camino engine list had something to do with dropping the L35, and Chevrolet thought they had enough engine variations for 1970. So, since you couldn't get the L35 in a Chevelle or El'Camino, you couldn't get it in a Camaro or Nova.
__________________
Tony
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-31-2006, 06:39 PM
Mr70's Avatar
Mr70 Mr70 is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Illinois
Posts: 20,947
Thanks: 70
Thanked 3,596 Times in 1,449 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

Because in 1970,we saw the birth of these brand new engines:
*LS-3 402/330HP-Malibu & Monte Carlo
*LS-4 454/345HP-Passenger series
*LS-5 454/360 & 390HP-Corvette-Chevelle-Monte C. & Pass.
*LS-6 454/450HP-Chevelle
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-31-2006, 11:13 PM
Gregs396 Gregs396 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pa.
Posts: 104
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

Once again, there was NO LS-3 until 1971......
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-31-2006, 11:20 PM
Rixls6 Rixls6 is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: between Chicago and Milwaukee, IL
Posts: 2,685
Thanks: 22
Thanked 129 Times in 46 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

There definitely was an LS3 available in the Chevelle in 1970. I've personally seen build sheets for some 1970 Chevelles stating the option "LS3".
Rick
__________________
Rick
69 Chevelle SS396 Silver L78 M21 Post Sedan (Berger Chev.)
69 Chevelle SS396 Black L78 4-speed 4.10 Post Sedan

Don't text and drive.
Somebody's life may depend on it!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-01-2006, 12:54 AM
ohhawk ohhawk is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Iowa
Posts: 430
Thanks: 3
Thanked 68 Times in 19 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

www.chevelles.com/shop/ss_ident.html#70

Check first paragraph on LS3 commentary.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-01-2006, 01:47 AM
nuch_ss396 nuch_ss396 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Western North Carolina
Posts: 1,713
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

WAIT !

Maybe this is the rationale:

Since the 396 was bored +.030 ( actually a 402 ) in 1970,
the HP rating would have been boosted and perhaps that is
why the L/35 disappeared. Still to this day, I wonder why
they made the 402. It almost seems like a manufacturing
mistake that got away from them. Does anyone know for sure
why the 402 came into existence?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-01-2006, 06:39 AM
Gregs396 Gregs396 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pa.
Posts: 104
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

I have been told that it was to make the 402 and the 454 pistons the same size for standardization purposes, but can't be 100% sure about it. It seems that I also read it in one of my many books...
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-01-2006, 09:20 AM
Kurt S Kurt S is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 3,110
Thanks: 2
Thanked 832 Times in 379 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

[ QUOTE ]
I have been told that it was to make the 402 and the 454 pistons the same size for standardization purposes, but can't be 100% sure about it. It seems that I also read it in one of my many books...

[/ QUOTE ]
I had heard it was emissions related. Over 400 ci engine had different requirements. But I've never seen docs on this, haven't seen exception like this, and like the piston explanation better.
__________________
Kurt S - CRG
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-01-2006, 03:18 PM
Hotrodpaul Hotrodpaul is offline
Yenko Contributing Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,019
Thanks: 0
Thanked 80 Times in 46 Posts
Default Re: Why no L35 in 1970?

402 Pistons : 4.125" Dia.

454 Pistons : 4.250" Dia.

Thats a big difference. If they made them the same size they would have a 427.

Paul
__________________
70 Camaro LA Z-28 03B Citrus Green LT-1 M-40 3.73's
69 Camaro X-77 Z-28 10C Cortez Silver M-21 3.73's Deluxe Project X - SOLD
69 Camaro X-77 Z-28 01B Garnet Red w/Black top, M-20 3.73 Deluxe Houndstooth
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

O Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.