Jump to content

1973 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454, 4-Speed


Recommended Posts

With some many of the 68-72 cars around,  I've always been strangely attracted to the  later cars.    I guess this would be the one.   I think you could get the 454 in 73 & 74.

 

https://www.mecum.com/lots/FL0122-485373/1973-chevrolet-chevelle-ss/

 

This SS was built in Canada, majority were built in the US

Very rare, 1 of approximately 8 produced in Canada known to exist

Rotisserie restoration

Matching numbers LS4 Turbo Jet 454 engine

72,000 miles

M21 4-speed manual transmission

Swivel bucket seats

NOS inspection sticker

Period correct G70/14 tires

Original spare tire

Factory tinted glass

Positraction rear end

3.42 gear ratio

Power steering

Power brakes

 

 

image.png.b4bfe4d6316ca2dde0d80cfdebad87f9.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought my first new car in 1973, a Chevelle SS like the car in the picture.  The dealer has the 350 and a 454 on the lot. As much as I would have liked the 454, I was driving 120 miles a day round trip for work so I chose the 350 with automatic and 2 barrel carb.  Car was an incredible rust bucket and got terrible gas mileage.  I can’t imagine how much gas the 454 would have used.  This car looks great but no thanks!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO the 72 is a bargain, they command a lot less than '68 - '71 but still have the look of that series.  If your going for a lower hp later car seems like a good compromise.

Yes AJ, "strangely attracted" fits the collonades. 😁

 

Had a '69 and would love a '68 with the vent window.  Anyone not running Crager Supersports on these should be ticketed...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in 79 I traded in my 71 ElCamino on a 74 SS 454 ElCamino. It was loaded, A/C, power windows, locks Swivel buckets, tach, guages, etc. It was rusted out by 81. I bought a 76 Laguna and it was rotten also. Those Collanade GM's were poorly built.

 That one looks nice though. Obviously not a Canadian wintered car. The salt would have eaten it decades ago.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve_Mack_CT said:

IMHO the 72 is a bargain, they command a lot less than '68 - '71 but still have the look of that series.  If your going for a lower hp later car seems like a good compromise.

Yes AJ, "strangely attracted" fits the collonades. 😁

 

Had a '69 and would love a '68 with the vent window.  Anyone not running Crager Supersports on these should be ticketed...


I personally prefer the 70 to 72 body over the 68/69.  But I really prefer the wheels on the 71-72.   I guess that would make 71 the one to have, but I really like the subject car for some unknown stupid reason. Probably the same reason I’m interested in that Saab.  Want something seldom seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO the government required front bumper sure did no favors for the 73. I agree that the 72 is the nicest for the money. I also cannot understand why the window design for the back seat does not seem right. Can't put my finger on what it is, just looks a little odd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do like the elcamino version of the "colonnades." 

I have posted before, 73 Monte Carlo - worst car I ever owned.  Rusty, not a great runner, leaky sunroof and creaky swivel bucket seats.

It died a slow death after I sold it to gas station owner where I worked (great guy, saw me put sign in it one day and paid asking, whatever it was, without even looking at it) for a station runner.  I still had to suffer driving it on occasion though!

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like these cars. I like the 68-72 but they are a bit cliche. And were they all really ss models?🤔 I like the body on the 73's, as far as being built bad, most cars in the era leave a lot to be desired. Thats why we 'restore/rebuild' them. Kinda like the bionic man. Built bigger and better, LOL. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve_Mack_CT said:

I do like the elcamino version of the "colonnades." 

I have posted before, 73 Monte Carlo - worst car I ever owned.  Rusty, not a great runner, leaky sunroof and creaky swivel bucket seats.

It died a slow death after I sold it to gas station owner where I worked (great guy, saw me put sign in it one day and paid asking, whatever it was, without even looking at it) for a station runner.  I still had to suffer driving it on occasion though!

 

I had a 73 El Camino SS in high school, a 454 4 speed car - 1981.   $900.  Put a throw out bearing in the car, it had headers, which made me hate headers.  HP in spades but that rear end!   Any punch of gas and the thing would hop.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, B Jake Moran said:

I had a 73 El Camino SS in high school, a 454 4 speed car - 1981.   $900.  Put a throw out bearing in the car, it had headers, which made me hate headers.  HP in spades but that rear end!   Any punch of gas and the thing would hop.  

 

Why did you hate the headers?   Mine gave me no problems and sounded awesome.  I had the original mufflers on my car but I don't think any baffles were left at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, alsancle said:

 

Why did you hate the headers?   Mine gave me no problems and sounded awesome.  I had the original mufflers on my car but I don't think any baffles were left at that point.

Maintenance.  About once every 2 weeks I had to tighten them down.  Gaskets, gaskets, gaskets!  I got very good at replacing gaskets. And inopportune times, like scooping the loop.  Rev it to impress a girl, and pop. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, B Jake Moran said:

Maintenance.  About once every 2 weeks I had to tighten them down.  Gaskets, gaskets, gaskets!  I got very good at replacing gaskets. And inopportune times, like scooping the loop.  Rev it to impress a girl, and pop. 

 

 

I never had to tighten mine once.  Maybe I was just babying it too much?   The tires on the back were 50s and they would have cost a fortune for new ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, alsancle said:

 

 

I never had to tighten mine once.  Maybe I was just babying it too much?   The tires on the back were 50s and they would have cost a fortune for new ones.

To associate with our loosely knit group you had to go through at least one round of a good bleach soak & smoke.  

I know traction on the Chevelle body is a nightmare, can only imagine it on the elcamino.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...