RPO L88 - the torch was passed from the 1963 Z06 and the 1963 Grand Sport to these

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
Many Corvette people will know that the illustrious L88 RPO (Regular Production Option) package was available in 1967-68-69 only. However, a very special COPO (Central Office Production Order) car was built and raced in 1966. It is the first L88, basically a test mule, that was never available to the public. Here it was on display at Corvettes at Carlisle.

104-0407_img-jpg.1055


1966ChevroletCorvette-COPO-L88-p4.jpg

1966ChevroletCorvette-COPO-L88-p5.jpg
104-0408_img-jpg.1056

1966ChevroletCorvette-COPO-L88-p6.jpg

Following Duntov's addition of the new Mark IV big-block engine to the option sheet in 1965 (RPO L78), as a 425hp / 396 c.i., he knew he was on the right course for race wins.

The next step was in 1966, with the release of RPO L72, a 427c.i. / 450hp version of the same big-block. During the model run, insurance company concerns were being noticed, so the chrome air cleaner cover stickers started showing 425hp, rather than 450hp. Identical engine...different stickers. LOL.

Public acceptance of the L72 was so good that Duntov, in his infinite wisdom (y) decided that, in 1967, he would replace the Holley 4bbl carb on the L72 with 3x2bbl Holley carbs (435hp) and call it RPO L71. By 1967, both the L78 and the L72 were gone from the option sheet. But Duntov wasn't finished. Experimental work with aluminum head castings was paying off, so these new heads (RPO L89) became an option on an option in 1967. Yes, you could order RPO code L71/L89 which provided you with a 427 c.i./435hp engine with aluminum heads. Only 16 were sold to the public, making these a truly rare Corvette.

Maybe it's time for a brief reminder that there were two flavours of Chevrolet big-block engines in the late '60s. Passenger and Hi-Performance. 'Passenger' engines referred to the garden variety 427 (later 402 and 454) that came with 10.25:1 compression, 2-bolt main block, average size intake and exhaust valves and intake runners, hydraulic lifters and associated medium-performance camshaft, cast iron intake manifolds, typical breaker ignition systems, and the availability of things like air conditioning. Horsepower ratings ranged from RPO L36 390hp (single 4bbl carb) to RPO L68 400hp (3x2 carbs).

If you wanted more performance, you opted for the Hi-Performance versions, such as the previously mentioned RPO L78 in 1965 (396 c.i. with single 4bbl carb and 450hp...later downgraded to 425hp), L72 in 1966 (427 c.i. with single 4bbl carb and 425hp), or L71 in 1967 (3x2bbl carbs and 435hp)...or the L71/L89 (aluminum heads) to save about 80 pounds on the front end of the car. These had the beefier 4-bolt main blocks, 11.0:1 compression and breakerless transistorized ignition. The heads included larger intake and exhaust values, while the intakes were aluminum rather than cast iron and had improved runners and height.

But as always, Duntov wasn't finished. He had the Heavy-Duty engine options ready to spring on an unsuspecting world, which brings us back to the car shown above. The 1966 L88 COPO "mule" would lead to RPO L88 in '67-8-9 and become legendary! How does 12.5:1 compression sound as a starting point?

I intend to add more detail about the L88 and the ZL1 (over in C3) in the near future. Hopefully, I'm not the only one interested in these amazing vehicles of yesteryear. After all, there are so many lesser known amazing developments in the early years, such as the ZR1, ZR2, LT1, LT2, ZL1, LS6, LS7 and on and on.
1966ChevroletCorvette-COPO-L88-Penske.jpg
 
Last edited:

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
This L88 sits in a 1969 C3, but the body style doesn't matter; you'll get an understanding if you haven't heard one. Not the smoothest of drivers, I must say. LOL. This video was shot at the Cholmondeley Pageant of Power (southeast of Liverpool) in 2013.


One of the comments gave me a chuckle...


Doughbodyboy
5 years ago
"American muscle sounds like satan playing the drums, evil."
 

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
The following three pages, pertaining to the proposed L88, are taken from the 1966 Corvette Assembly Manual (GM Publication intended for use by workers during assembly. The drawings originated from November 2, 1965. These manuals (several 100 pages) are essential reference tools if you ever rebuild an older Corvette.

Note the UPC L88 at bottom centre. Page A1 indicates how Chevrolet referred to the L88 engine (V8 Engine, 427 H.D.) which is the Heavy-Duty version of the 427 that I mentioned a few posts back. The page shows the road draft tube (#6, 7, 8 and 9) that I referred to in another thread. Rather than the typical PCV (positive crankcase ventilation) on street cars of that era, the road draft tube simply dumped un-burned gases to the ground, rendering the vehicle non-compliant with road use regulations.

The only car built to these specs in 1966 was the Penske COPO (Central Office Production Order) car illustrated higher up in this thread. The official, but still very hush-hush, RPO (Regular Production Option) release came in 1967 (20 cars). By 1968 and 1969, the word was getting out so 80 were sold in '68 and 116 in '69. One more thing - Chevrolet intentionally underrated the horsepower of these engines to deflect the attention of people like me who wanted the big dog in 1967. Chevrolet engineers knew that due to the outrageous camshaft profile (thus providing insufficient low-rpm vacuum for power brakes on city streets), and due to the absence of cooling fan shrouding (thus contributing to overheating at low speed), and due to the need for frequent lashing of the valves in this solid-lifter engine (requiring the removal of the valve covers and the associated spraying oil mess), and the difficulty of obtaining fuel with sufficient octane to prevent detonation (this is a 12.5:1 compression engine after all), they only wanted those who intended to race it to know that it was available in 1967. It wasn't in sales literature, nor were dealership staff aware of it. And, yes, by rating it at only 430hp, just under the L71's 435hp, they tricked guys like me into NOT buying it. How they got away with the underrating, without telling a falsehood, is a story for another time. LOL.
1966ChevroletCorvette-AIM-proposed-L88-p1.jpg
1966ChevroletCorvette-AIM-proposed-L88-p2.jpg

1966ChevroletCorvette-AIM-proposed-L88-p3.jpg
 

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
This photo shows the sticker that was attached to the interior of factory L88 cars in '67-68-69. It references the 12.5 compression requirement for high octane fuel. An explanation of the different research octane and motor octane numbers is at the link below this photo.

1967ChevroletCorvette-103-OctaneSticker-glovebox-crop.jpg

Octane rating - Wikipedia

___
 
Last edited:

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
This story, from the October/November 1976 issue of Corvette News Magazine (GM publication - now defunct), is about one of the 20 L88 Corvettes built in 1967. But, this is NOT just another car story. Once you read it, and you find out what this car was purchased for in the mid-'70s, you will agree that "Our Most Unbelievable Corvette" is just that...unbelievable. It is now worth in excess of US$3,500,000.

1967ChevroletCorvette-L88-11miles-p1.jpg


1967ChevroletCorvette-L88-11miles-p2.jpg
 

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
Given the absence of response to this thread, I'm left wondering if everyone already knows about the L88, or maybe I'm not telling the story in an entertaining way. Why don't I offer the following link from one of the largest classic car insurers in North America and the UK.

Click here to see the L88 to own...
 

Roscobbc

Moderator
The reality for most 'Vette' people (and as much as they would like to possess a L88 spec car) will they they will never, ever be in a position to afford one - whether a C2 or C3.
My 'take' on things was to consider what a L88 would have meant if built 'today' using the same basic components bit with current engine and material knowledge. So, using my '68 L36 as a base, weighing-up the limitations of the cars chassis and transmission I built-up 'my' interpretation of what I considered a 'streetable' L88 'today'. Drivetrain other than clutch (Centerforce) and wheels (18 Boyd JYD's and Toyo rubber) is stock. If an L88 was supposedly putting out 550 hp then the stock drive train must be capable of handling that kind of power and torque. I chose 'cubes' and torque rather than outright revs and horsepower on the basis of wanting to achieve relative economy and driveability. So the original 427 was 'mothballed' and a fully prepped, seasoned 454 was sourced and fitted with a stroker rotating assembly, oval port heads (rather than L88's square port heads) from Brodix and a hydraulic flat tappet cam for ease of maintenance. Engine peaks 570 bhp @ 5950 rpm (probably 1000 rpm of so short of L88) and maxes out on torque at 606 ft/lbs @ 3850 rpm. Engine 'pulls' comfortably from 1200 rpm - with 3.08 rear and M21 - the will exceed UK's national 70 mph speed limit in first gear - yet 'squeeze' out 15/16 Imperial mpg on cruise and low double figures in town driving. Does that sound like an affordable, modern interpretation of what an L88 could be?
 

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
Thanks Roscobbc,
That's exactly the sort of response I was looking for. Good analysis, and explanation of what you did with your car. It sounds great.

I did something similar with my 502, to overcome some of the modern-day limitations that even an 11.0:1 compression L71 427/435 engine has (octane requirements, repeated valve hot-lashing), etc. - the engine that my car came with. It now sits in my shop, along with the M21. I too went with a 3.08:1 differential, replacing the 4.56:1 I had previously installed in there.

However, I also substituted a Richmond 5-speed transmission (for the Muncie M21) giving me the equivalent of an extra gear at the bottom end. For example, 1st gear in a M21 or M22 is 2.20 ratio, whereas in the Richmond it is 3.28. That's a huge difference when it comes to acceleration off the line, and gets it back in the realm of launching with a 4.56:1 differential.

I too made an effort to emulate a L88, in performance, using techniques that recognize the modern limitations of octane at the pumps.
A quick comparison, in the two transmissions, of the overall ratio in 1st gear - (1st gear ratio multiplied by differential ratio).
- Muncie M21 2.20 (1st gear) X 3.08 (diff) = 6.78 overall ratio
- Richmond 5-speed 3.28 (1st gear) x 3.08 (diff) = 10.10 overall ratio (that's a huge difference that is very noticeable off the line)

However, 5th gear in a Richmond 5-speed is not overdrive, as it is in a Richmond 6-speed. Just like with the M21's 4th gear, it's a 1:1 ratio in 5th.

By mating the Richmond (with its extra gear on the low end) and the 3.08:1 rear end (for highway cruising), we solved the hi-revving problem (requiring just 2,300 rpm at 60 mph, and 3,500 rpm gets 90 mph).

The substitution of a higher-performance roller cam and rockers in the 502, some head and intake work, a functioning ram-air stinger hood, MSD ignition, full-length side-mount headers and the loss of approximately 250 lb of original vehicle weight has provided me with a very pleasant driving experience. (y)

Thanks for the feedback. This is a spreadsheet that I prepared while determining what to do with the driveline during the rebuild.
comparison-ratios-700.jpg
 

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
By the way, the 11-mile '67 L88 in the 2-page story above has gained a mile since 1976. Yes, indeed. In the last 43 years, it has traveled a total of 1 mile...1 mile.

Which brings me around to the frustration of owning these very rare, low mileage vehicles. YOU CAN'T DRIVE THEM while expecting to maintain the value. I think our method is way more fun. Achieve the performance, but enjoy the thrill of actually driving them rather than just hauling them around in trailers.
xwrrd.jpg
Drive 'em!
 
Last edited:

Roscobbc

Moderator
I find that utilising the stock 3.08 rear end, 28" tall rear rubber and 2.20 1st gear minimises tyres 'going up in smoke' - off the line technique is to initially pull away from line without too much drama but 'nailing' the gas pedal at, say 10mph or so, getting the rear end to 'dig-in' and weight transfer to lift front end and back to sit down further - my theory is that on 1/4 mile I'll have one less shift than you, saving a 1/0th or two.........
 

Attachments

  • _DSC4315(15).jpg
    _DSC4315(15).jpg
    128.3 KB · Views: 2

67HEAVEN

Well-known user
By the way, the 11-mile '67 L88 in the 2-page story above has gained a mile since 1976. Yes, indeed. In the last 43 years, it has traveled a total of 1 mile...1 mile.

Here it is at its current home at Rogers Corvettes in Florida. Remember................just 12 miles, since 1967, on the odometer. That works out to less that 1/4 mile per year. :(

1967ChevroletCorvette-L88-12miles-sold640000-3.jpg

1967ChevroletCorvette-L88-12miles-sold640000-4.jpg

1967ChevroletCorvette-L88-12miles-sold640000-2.jpg

Notice the octane warning sticker on the console. Also, no radio; no heater/defroster.
1967ChevroletCorvette-L88-12miles-2.jpg

The fully-functional, air-intake-at-the-base-of-the-windscreen, 1967 L88 hood.
1967ChevroletCorvette-L88-12miles-3.jpg

By the way, the white car in the first photo in this post is 'another' 1967 L88 that Roger owns. See it up close below, and ask yourself if there's anything special about the yellow C3 sitting beside it.
1967ChevroletCorvette427Coupe-White-Black-L-88.jpg
 
Top