As I write this, we are now in the first week of the last, full month of summer this year in the northern hemisphere. It has been a great, memorable season for me that started with my first trip to the Indianapolis 500 over Memorial Day weekend. There have been lots of other adventures with more still to come, including my first trip back to the big “Back To The Bricks” car festival after skipping a year, later this month in my hometown of Flint, Michigan. Maybe seven weeks ago, I had spotted a final-year C1 roadster (or replica thereof) in Chicago’s financial “Loop” district while walking to work from my morning train. I spotted our featured car last week, just one block away.
This gorgeous, fourth-year C2 is in one of my favorite, icy shades of my favorite color, called “Trophy Blue” from the factory. To me, the color blue embodies summer, with the sky, swimming pools, and glistening Lake Michigan all being some shade of blue. The contrast between the styling of this Sting Ray’s artfully sculpted, low-slung, fiberglass body and that of the slab-sided, high-waisted Toyota Prius taxi beside it serves to embody just what a radical design the C2 must have been when new. Granted, the Prius, like the Chevy II compact that sat beside the Sting Ray in dealerships, is supposed to be boxy in its role as a practical, efficient, non-nonsense people-hauler, but I love that this Sting Ray just grabbed my attention in morning rush-hour traffic like a sucker-punch to my eyeballs.
Its driver looked roughly ten to fifteen years younger than me, which would make the car about twenty-five years older than him. In my mid-to-late 20s, would I have driven even a ’56 Corvette around as a statement? If I was making the kind of money that doing so would have required, the answer is a solid “maybe”. Out of about 27,700 total Corvettes for 1966, this roadster (Chevy-speak) is one of about 17,700 convertibles produced that year. The crosshatch grill inset distinguishes the ’66 from the ’65, and the “gills” on the ’67 number five instead of three. I was somewhat shocked to learn that the convertible outsold the stunning fastback by a ratio of almost 2:1 that year. I’m still torn as to which bodystyle I’d prefer, if money was no object.
Starting at a weight of almost exactly 3,000 lbs. in base form (and within twenty pounds of the fastback, which cost about 5% more than the convertible), the roadster’s standard power came from a 300-hp 327 V8. Paired with the three-speed manual, the base car would be good for a 0-60 time of 6.5 seconds and a 14.9-second quarter mile. I love that this car’s color is fittingly called “Trophy Blue”. This dynamic-looking performance car masterpiece from America’s space age must, indeed, be a trophy in the garage, and in the eyes, of its fortunate owner. Like many historic buildings in the Windy City, the Sting Ray remains a monument to great taste and a fine, flagship representative of the litany of GM’s stylistic “Greatest Hits” of the Bill Mitchell era.
Downtown, The Loop, Chicago, Illinois.
Monday, July 31, 2017.
Related: Paul’s take on driving a similar ’67 Corvette convertible
A very nice thing to see on the way to work, Joe. What is it about the Corvette of this vintage that made it magical both in the 60s and now?
As for the Trophy Blue, count me as a huge fan. It seems that every manufacturer had a version of that color in the 60s, and it was (and remains) a perennial favorite. Yet somehow neither I nor anyone in my family ever bought one. Except for the top half of my mother’s 80 Plymouth Horizon, so there’s that.
Thanks, JP! Now that I think of it, I seem to remember this color also being popular in the 80’s.
(My grandparents also had a two-tone Horizon!, but theirs was burnt orange over tan.)
This genre of light metallic blue was definitely big in the 80’s and early 90’s. My grandfather had an ’88 Plymouth Voyager in “ice blue”, which was very similar to the corvette’s hue. And it seems like about 40% of the late-run Cutlass Cieras still on the road are a variant of the same color.
The Chevy II was boxy, That Prius is just ugly. Hate those ‘flame’ headlights!
A friend’s widow inherited one of these roadsters. Wonder what it would be like to live with as a daily-driver? But that’s a beautiful car!
Happy Motoring, Mark
I always liked the looks of the gen 3 Prius, and in retrospect it strikes a nice balance between the blobby gen 2 and the wedgy and cheater-paneled gen 4.
I’m also certain that more car guys would think that way if it had a 2ZZ and six-speed manual option…
That is Just. So. Pretty.
An old friend whom I haven’t seen in over 10 years has owned a ’67 Stingray 427 for over 30 years in the slightly darker, more vivid “Marina Blue”, which is more of an assault on the senses than this shade. His car is universally considered to be a real “Trophy”, and indeed it is, but with its “427” badges and factory (I think) sidepipes it just doesn’t do the design justice the way the featured car does in my opinion.
To each his own, as they say. Granted, no Corvette of this vintage could accurately be considered “conservative”, but I love the purity of design displayed on this one. It just makes me think Bill Mitchell is smiling down on it as it sits idling at that intersection.
And the cars today are. So. Sad. This side by side picture shows how much car design has sunk to gutter level or maybe below today.
One could just as readily conclude car designed has improved over time. We’re not talking of an objective quality.
I like that image of Bill Mitchell smiling down… His brand of artistry has yet to be matched, IMO.
Braver man than I am, I don’t think I would drive such a magnificent machine in downtown Chicago rush-hour traffic.
I do drive my 1963 roadster in traffic. Mind you, not every day and not in downtown Chicago! It’s red, stands out in a sea of metallic grey SUV/CUV/Toyota/Honda/BMW anonymity, and catches a lot of eyes. I’ve even been followed about a mile or so to where I was going, by an onlooker and we had a great few minutes chatting, after we parked. Turned out he had a 64.
There’s a local with one like yours. Stock looking but with an ultra-lumpy cam and straight pipes so you hear it before you see it.
Any self-respecting car guy or gal would put one of these on his/her top 5 (okay, maybe top 10) bucket list of cars to own. You can even generally “hate” Corvettes and still lust after a C2. …literally almost everyone respects them and would want to own one. The ’63-’67 ‘Vette is one of the very few cars of any era that transcends time, space, class, taste.
Very cool spot, Joseph! Reminds me of the time I pulled into the parking lot of my bank and sitting there was a silver w/black stripe C2 Roadster. 427 badge, red interior. There’s something about seeing a car like this in the wild where one just cannot stop staring…
Thanks, Chris! And stare I did. It has been funny in some of my spur of the moment shots, where I catch a glimpse in frame of an observer’s expression of frantic photo-taking. Some laugh, some look confused, and occasionally, I’ll just see a smile of approval. 🙂
Beautiful photos as always Joseph.
Always thought it interesting that the Sting Ray convertible cost less than the coupe.
I could be wrong, but – notwithstanding some small-volume models – that may have been one of the last times that any convertible cost less than its fixed-roof counterpart.
BuzzDog, that would be an interesting fact to research – what was the actual make / model / year of car where both body styles were offered, where the convertible cost less than the fixed-roof version? I’m thinking I agree with you – this C2 has to be one of the last instances…
As this price differential applies to the Corvette, I checked a few different sources. It appears that the coupe was more expensive up through 1975, the year of the “last” Corvette convertible that wasn’t really the last year for the convertible (it reappeared in 1986).
In ’75, the coupe was approximately $250 more than the convertible. Interestingly, the auxiliary hardtop cost about the same as this price difference. When the convertible reappeared in 1986, it was $5,000 – or 18.5 percent – more than the coupe. But unlike most American convertibles of that era, they were not built as coupes and then shipped off to a third party such as Cars & Concepts to be made into convertibles, as was the case at the time with the Chrysler convertibles.
Part of the explanation for this is likely that the Corvette came only as a convertible up until 1962, so during the C2 era, and maybe even into the the C3 era, the convertible was seen as the “regular” Corvette. I don’t think the coupe outsold the convertible consistently (if it ever outsold it at all) until after the C3 was introduced.
Thanks, everyone! I hope I never learn to take all the cool car-spotting opportunities here in Chicago for granted.
Great shots Dennis! I love your photos and writing, even don’t I always have time to comment. There is a Vette Roadster that is almost identical to this car that has been here locally for at least 20 years. I see it tooling about every now and then. I too really like this blue. These old cars with real colours just look so much nice, such a contrast in modern traffic.
I generally prefer a C2 hardtop over the roadster. But the only C2 I have driven was a ’64 Roadster (4-speed). Even though I preferred the hard top, that drive from almost 20 years ago was one of my most enjoyable ever!
Sorry, Joe! It was a typo calling you by your last name, and I can’t go back to edit (seems to be a problem when I use internet explorer).
No worries, Vince! You’d be surprised how many times I’m called “Dennis” at work. And thank you for the kind words, and I agree about the contrast between the featured car and those around it.
Great shots. Brings back very happy memories of my drive in that ’67 last summer. I’d like to take it for another spin, tonight.
Thanks, Paul. Looking at your piece made me jealous all over again.