A classic car’s story is almost as important as it’s condition! Alright, maybe it isn’t that important, but it sure can make a car more interesting. This ’72 Corvette LT-1 has a lot going for it. For one, it’s in good shape overall. It’s also been in the care of the same owner since new and up until ’95 the owner still drove it, if that doesn’t catch your interest, maybe the performance LT-1 V8 will! This Vette is one of the last LT-1s built, it’s also one of only 240 cars to come with this performance version of the 350 V8. The little old lady that bought it new parked it in the barn sometime around ’95. It then made it’s way outside, but with a cover on it. When the seller found it, it was covered in dust and dirt, but a quick cleaning, some new fuel and a tune-up was all it took to get it running again! If you’d like to give this bright orange Corvette a new home, you can find it here on eBay in Henderson, Nevada with bidding already over $18k. So would the 225 hp produced by the LT-1 be enough to fill your performance needs?
People put those big, wide wheels on the back of these cars. They don’t realize that it puts extra stress on the rear wheel bearings and causes excessive wear. So, if I was the buyer, it would be one of the first things I replaced besides the wheels.
Another photographer with Parkinson’s disease. It’s simple… wipe off the lens of the camera and hold it still. So many people can’t do it.
225 hp was high performance?? Now I remember why I’ve not been impressed with “muscle cars” after ’71
Wrong HP…it was 255.
Hmm, so the little lady put mags on her vette and is her name david or was she just photo shopped into one of the photos? very suspicious but it’s listed as sold for now.
That photo looks legit to me. Shadow lines are consistent. David could’ve been her husband.
The LT1 was 255hp in ’72 down from 370hp in ’70, then in ’73 the engine was re-named L82 and by ’75 was down to 205hp through emissions.
Remember, by ’72, we’re talking net HP, not gross HP. Personally, I only trust SAE net or DIN horsepower ratings.
Actually, @ least for GM, SAE hp began in ’71.
sold for $19241 and had 40 bids.
Right Chris, 1972 was the first year of SAE NET HP ratings. Same engine and power with different reported HP rating. 1970 and 1971 still used gross HP rating which was a blueprinted engine at optimal timing with zero accessories attached.
Chiltons then must have used the lower “net” hp ratings in ’70 when they allegedly fudged the ratings for insurance purposes but then rating a ’70 LT1 at 370hp & a ’70 426 hemi at only 425hp would be a “double standard”, so who knows? All I know is that reduced compression ratios & emissions started to effect hp ratings in ’71.
Boy this whole thing bothers me. I have had a bunch of cars and Corvettes including 2 – 1972’s, one small block and one big block. I get that the LT-1 was “somewhat” special but there wasn’t a 1972 ANYTHING that performed very well compared to a 71 or older in ANY make or model. It was just a fact of “the times” and 1973 was 10 times worse than 72. The 1 of 240 number, not sure what they are talking about??? There were not that many LT1s made but it was alot more than 240. I think there were like 1800 coupes and probably more convertibles. I don’t claim to know those numbers but the LT1 WAS the hi-performance version of the 350. Is this ad suggesting that this LT1 is even more special than other LT1’s? Again, lost me. By the time you make this un-molested / un-touched and don’t forget UN-CARED FOR 105K mile car right you will have 50-100% more invested in it than you could sell it for. You can buy a nice LT1 DONE, restored (in a better color) on line right now for $38K. You can buy a great 72 350 restored driver that looks great for what this car sold for OR LESS. I am a big fan of ORIGINAL, even unrestored but I am not buying it on this car. Also, how many pictures of the drivers side does one need? How about 1, just 1 picture of the passenger side or, I don’t know, the interior, under the hood, God forbid the undercarriage. Sorry, stuff like this just pisses me off. Like I like to say, apparently these last two bidders driving the price up obviously know something I don’t. Maybe there is a bag of money from a bank robbery hidden in the quarter panel or something!! Maybe this was Elvis’s mom’s car. 19K, really.
240 is the number of AIR CONDITIONED LT-1’s made in 72, the ONLY year the a/c was avail with a solid lifer engine. This car WAS NOT one of those 240, it was one of the 1741 “regular” solid lifter, Holley fed special high performance engines/cars
Thanks Jim, I knew there was a better explanation.
APOLOGY, somehow the first time I looked at the photos there were only the first 15 which were mostly of the driver side of the car and nothing else. I just went back and somehow I am now seeing all of the other photos which are great and very comprehensive. Gotta love technology. No change in my opinion of the car. Still way overpaid on this one. Good luck.
I also was wondering where that 240 number came from. I knew they made 1741 LT1s in 72, so this flipper is either misleading us or misinformed.
Either way, I have a bad feeling about this car.
When I had my ’70, a bunch of us local C3 guys used to get together and one guy had a ’72 LT1. It probably had about as much power as my stock 350.
Jim, You are correct, 240 is the number of A/C 1972 LT-1 cars. Tom, you are right to be critical. I still think the lady in the picture was photo shopped in. Just a worn out Corvette that needs everything. However the engine was pretty much unchanged from 71 to 72. They had the same bottom end and compression ratio. IMO,The way they rated the horse power plays tricks on the mind.
I thought the LT-1 370HP had 11-1 compression ratio. The tag on the dash say’s 9.0
So after 1970, the compression dropped 2 points, and HP dropped 115. At least it still had 360 ft. pounds of torque. It’s still a neat find and probably unmolested. Just too much $$$
Actually, ’71 was the initial compression drop year…..listing both gross & net hp ratings….depending on when the sales brochures were printed (there were early/late issues).
I believe Chiltons rated the ’70 Chevy engine or ’70 1/2 Z28 LT1 at 370hp. The ’71 was rated at 330hp with the compression drop.
As I remember, the timing was retarded on the 72-73 cars compared to earlier cars. That had a tendency to make these buggers run VERY hot. Still, its a piece of history. I would not have paid 19K for it, but it would be a good starting place for a really nice weekend tourer. But those wheels should go back on a dry lakes speedster where they belong. Is it just me, or does it seem to be sitting higher than most Corvettes of this era?
$19,281 was the sale price.
not buying the whole “little old lady” story, not worth what sold for.