<VV> Production numbers

[Bigwave Dave]

The reason the 66 Corsa is broken down by engine is because it is generally
consider a separate model. What I mean is that the turbocharged engine was an
option for 62-63 and I'm sure if you asked, many would say that the Monza
Spyder was a different model than the regular Monza even though at that time
it was only an option package.. Even GM considered the Turbocharged engine
option enough of a difference to make it a separate model officially in 1964.
For whatever reason (insurance, PR ??), GM decide to remove the separate model
status for the turbocharged cars for the 65-66 model years. As you know GM
initially was going to continue using the Spyder name for the late model Turbo
cars but it was decide just before production started to use the Corsa name
for both Turbo and base 140hp cars. So even though the Turbocharged engine was
now relegated back to a option package status, many still consider the factory
Turbo cars as separate Corvair models. That perception was only reinforced by
GM when they changed the Turbocharged engine option to a separate Corvair
model for one year during the 5 year period it was available.  Also be aware
that even though the 62-63 Turbocharged engine was only an option package, and
the model and vin are for a standard Monza, the production numbers are often
listed separately since exact numbers produced for Spyder coupes and Spyder
convertibles are known. Unfortunately this kind of breakdown for coupes and
convertibles are not available for late model Corsas. Look at the way owners
of Turbo cars list there cars. They rarely say they have a 62 Monza with the
Spyder option package, they just say they have a 62 Spyder. Often late models
are listed a 66 turbo convertible. We known that the 62 is a Monza and the 66
is a Corsa. Its the Turbocharger that defines them.
    I agree that a 1969 140 Convertible is rarer than a 66 turbo convertible.
I'm sure they are a lot of combinations that are rarer. Its the perception of
being a different model that I'm talking about. I don't think many 140hp
owners have perceived their Corvair as a separate distinct different model due
to engine horsepower as much as a Turbo owner does. Even GM thought so in 64.
I own both a 1966 turbocharged Corsa Convertible and a 1969 Monza 110hp PG
convertible. When I list my cars, I usually list them as 66 turbo Convertible
and 69 convertible. Turbo convertible defines the 66, and just convertible
defines the 69. They are special in other ways but I usually don't list that
unless I am specifically discussing that aspect of the car. So all Corvairs
are probably rare or unique in some fashion. My list was just trying to break
them down into the large perceived groups.
    You know what, maybe I'm the only one who perceives the Turbocharged
models as being separate and distinct, but that is the reason I listed them
that way. Tony Fiore also listed the 66 turbo vert separately in the Corvair
Decade and that is where I got the number 585. It is simply the ratio of
known Corsa coupes and convertible made versus the known number of
Turbocharged options installed. There is no other factory data available that
I or Dave Newell knows of to get a more accurate estimate. What other stats
that support a number of 520 as posted earlier, I have never seen them. GM
production records for the Corvair during this period were reportedly
destroyed by a fire many years ago. If anything, I would say that the number
is probably greater than the 585 and not lower. The Canadian 66 Turbo
convertible estimated numbers have increased over what one would expect by
straight ratios as more factory data has appeared. Using ratios gives us a
value of 56. Kent's updated estimate from partial GM records is 94. Read about
it at Kent Sullivan's Corvair site.

Happy Holidays :)

Bigwave Dave T.



----------------original message--------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:30:40 -0500
From: Marc Sheridan <sheridanma@adelphia.net>
To: VirtualVairs@corvair.org
Subject: Re: <VV> Accurate numbers?

If you break down '66's by engine, then you have to do the same for the '69's
for an accurate comparison. A '69 140/4 convertible, like Rick Norris has, is
more rare than a '66 180/4.

Maex Sheridan

---- Tony Underwood <tonyu@roava.net> wrote:

> There's a fellow in the local chapter with a really nice '66 turbo ragtop
> who researched the stats and talked to a bunch of people and he said he had
> it on good authority that fewer than 520 were built which makes it more
> scarce than the '69 ragtop.