All eyes were on Pontiac’s GTO in 1965 but Chevrolet wasn’t about to roll over and let John DeLorean’s division make off with all of the hot-rod fun. In typical fashion, Chevrolet chose to do battle with a new version of their venerable small-block V8 engine and this 1965 Chevrolet Chevelle Malibu is a very nice representative of their effort. It’s located in Swarthmore, Pennsylvania and is available, here on eBay for a current bid of $30,400, with reserve not yet met.
The 350 HP, 327 CI V8 engine, known as regular production option (RPO) L79, saw the light of day with both the 1965 Chevelle and Corvette. The bowtie would later add a 375 HP version of the brand new 396 CI Turbo-Jet engine to the Chevelle, but only 201 were assembled in ’65 so it’s considered a niche model. This hot 350 HP mouse motor didn’t require a Malibu SS wrapper, it could be cloaked in a plain brown 300 deluxe stripper, or a Malibu, such as our subject car. While this famous engine continued as a popular Corvette option through 1968, it bounced around in lesser models, moving to the Nova in ’66, and then back to the Chevelle/El Camino in ’67 & ’68 as a 325 HP version. The ’67 & ’68 Nova shared it too, but barely in ’67 as there were only about six or so assembled – the theory was that Chevrolet’s marketers didn’t want an explosively powerful Nova detracting from brand new Camaro sales.
This is a pretty rare model, of the 294K Chevelles built in ’65 only 6,021 (2%), according to the L79 registry, were exalted enough to be so bestowed. So, how does this number matching L79 327 CI V8 powered Chevy move out? The seller states, “Motor was completely redone and has approximately 8000 miles. Car is very FAST“. He further adds that the Muncie four-speed manual transmission and twelve-bolt limited-slip differential have gotten a redo too. If you’re seriously interested, the seller will make an operational video available.
The exterior presents as perfect though the listing mentions, “Paint and body are very nice but does have some minor blemishes“. What’s not stated is if the Regal Red finish is original. The overall exterior vibe is one of clean simplicity – this is an attractive but innuous-looking Chevelle with its white stripe tires and full wheel covers.
It’s the same story inside as this could have been any old typical ’65 Malibu. The only hint that something’s up is the curved Muncie four-speed floor shifter. It’s a stock, and according to the seller, an original environment with its matching vinyl and cloth bench seat upholstery and simple instrument panel sans engine gauges. The minimalism of it is perfect!
The seller mentions that this Chevelle and his other L79 cars are recorded in the L79 registry and sure enough, it’s there. This is a beautiful and rare Chevy, a performance model that is often overlooked. I have no idea what the reserve on this Malibu is but it’s one to watch and see where it tops out. So tell me, have any commenters had experience with an L79 Chevelle?
Back in the 90’s I bought a 65 Chevelle Malibu SS convertible, with the 300 HP 327, a 4-speed and a 12 bolt. It was green with black interior and a white top. I really liked that car, and it was quick enough. This is a real beauty.
“Squelch” control so said original ad!
First this Chevelle with the desirable power train and next the Pontiac with another desireable power train. I want them both Finally we are getting good cars to think about Cars built properly
Owned a 68 Chevy II with a nicely warmed over L79 & 4-sp. in the late 70’s. That car was fast. Sent a number of rat powered car owners home crying. Paid $1800 for that car, that L-79 would wind tight & it did it fast! Still regret selling it, even after all these years.
Nice. Black paint would make it a bit of a sleeper. These are cool, and the hi winding motor w manual trans is an ideal pairing.
Does It have a 12 bolt rear and the axle ratio would be nice to know so A/C can be added. Looks like a nice cruiser.
yes it has a 12bolt but what would the axle ratio have to do with AC?…..I personally wouldn’t think of adding AC to a car this original
it gets 110 or more here in nm,a/c is manditory!
In 60/70’s you couldn’t get AC option if you choose 3:70 – 4:11-4:56 gears. The compressor would burn up ( faster rear for drag racing)
sorry but that’s not correct, the rear gear ratio has nothing to do with how fast a motor spins, whether it be a 2:87 ratio or a 5:14 a motor only spins as fast as it was designed to, in this case hydraulic lifters limited the L79 to 5800rpms……putting 5:14s in isn’t going to turn that motor into an 8000rpm screamer…..I suspect putting steeper gears in had more to do with not having a performance drag on the motor with the AC compressor as people that chose those ratios obviously had performance in mind so not an option, I could be wrong, wouldn’t be the first time….BUT, how would you explain all the suburban, camper specials, an those type of rigs in the desert southwest in the 60/70s that were optioned with 3:73, 4:11, or 4:56 ratios and had AC?
Going down the highway at 70 mph at 4000 rpm or better depending on tire size will burn up the a/c compressor if you have it on. I’am only talking about the compressor
I understand that, but the motor spins the compressor, therefore rear gear has nothing to do with how fast motor or compressor spin…simple remedy….change pully size on compressor to slow down rate of spin on 3: 7 an up ratios if constate rate of spin is a concern….there’s still the issue of trucks, vans, suburban’s and what have you that had high numeric ratios and AC….you could cause the same effect with 3:08 gears pulling a camper on long uphill stretches out west by shifting down one or two gears….AC wasn’t available on solid lifter motors from chevy not from the rear gear ratio but from the overall high rpm capability of the motor itself, 6500rpms +, the hydraulic equipped L79 was a remedy to that…..I could see certain motor AND ratio combinations being a negating effect on AC availability but it’s too simple to overcome gear ratios alone.
And you couldn’t get air conditioning, because of the 4:11 rear gearing.GM wouldn’t allow it.
In 1967 I ordered a GTO with 3:90 ratio . Couldn’t get AC in 69 ordered a SS 396 350 hp with 4:11 gears GM said no AC unless I changed the rear gears to 3:36 ( not high rev engine’s) 5,000 rpm redline?
Well I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree if rear ratio is the only roadblock to AC, lol…It still doesn’t make sense AC was available in pickups, suburban’s, and like vehicles with 3:73 and up ratios…..He**,wouldn’t be the first time I’ve been wrong, I’m on my 3rd wife if that tells you anything. I will say one thing, I was on the American snowmobiler site for awhile several yrs ago and there was no way anyone could have differing viewpoints’ without it turning into a personal attack from someone, usually that would be someone that highjacked that thread, once it started it was like a pack mentality and several would start piling on.. it was too bad it wasnt run like this site as Ive been a snowmobiler since mid 60s and it could of been an interesting site….that site is long gone now….
What a nice rare car for some lucky person.
Did they build a camaro with an l79 in 67? In, gi’me one with Z/28 under pinning please
No, 67 Z28 was a 295hp 283. they’re only qualified under 5 liter motor Next year they built the 302 from a small journal 327 block using the 3 Inch stroke 283 crank 4inch Bore. 325 Hp. that stayed through haft of 68 69 and 70
Both motors were underrated.
67 Z28 was a 302…
Muncie 4spd w 3.31 final drive.
67, 68, and 69 were all 290hp 302s in Z/28…..305 ci is the 5 liter maximum…..70 was changed to LT1 360 hp in Z/28….same motor was 370hp in the vette
Yes, My Recall Mistake sakingsbury20 and Mr. 19sixtyfive.
Even though I am sure there was an early Run of maybe less than 100 67 Z28’s that used the 283 I read in Hot Rod Magazine they even had Factory Gift of Headman Headers packed away in those tunks. Double Hump 202 Intake valves with the famous 3030 solid lifter cam. God My Memory does get chit Incorrect,at times. excuse Me.
No worries! I get a little fuzzier each day, coming up on 70 in less than a month.