supercar cowl induction tid bit..

[markjohnson]

I have to agree about 1963-67 mid-year Corvettes being terribly un-aerodynamic regardless of how "swoopy" they look. As much as I think that they are the most beautiful car the General ever released, stand to the side of one someday and check out the side profile of that near-vertical windshield and a front nose that pushes as much air under the car as over it. I've seen reference to that 7-second reduction time before and it makes me wonder if some automotive writer mis-quoted Zora and meant to say 7 tenths, because that would actually be believable especially if you go by that basic rule of thumb that says a tenth is a car length at the top end. It's not to hard to imagine a 7 car length/7 tenths difference between two cars but think about how big the gap is between two roundy-round cars that finish 7 seconds apart! That's a big gap!

[StealthBird]

Well, what I was trying to say in the earlier post (not sure if I conveyed this properly) is that the 67 and 68 may have been within a car length of each other up to around 125-130 mph. At that point, the 67 may have taken another 20 seconds to get from 130 to 140 mph, while the 68 may have taken 13 seconds, thanks to the better aerodynamics.

The speeds quoted would have been at the limit of these cars top speeds back then, so I would imagine that the 7 extra seconds for the 67 model was all from 130 to 140 mph.