<VV> bare-bones versus fully-trimmed

[kenfran at comcast.net]

My 1968 Corvair 500 (bought in 1970 for $900) was a perfect example of a
no-frills car. The only options it had were the 110 engine, wheel covers,
and a radio. (I added an 8-track) Had a 3-speed transmission. But I loved
that car, even had great fun taunting a Porsche driver on a mountain road
when he couldn't shake me while driving his fastest. (OK, so he was probably
not such a good driver, but it must have been very frustrating for him, with
me following his Porsche, gaining on every curve, with a car that sold for
about $1850 new.)
And I even left off the wheel-well trim and the rocker panel trim when I
restored my 1966 Monza, because I liked the cleaner lines, and the trim was
shot anyway.

Ken Franson
1966 Monza, 1965 Corsa
Member, Arkansas CC, CORSA

> Mark, there's absolutely nothing "wrong" with loaded-up cars, in fact
Corvairs are such low content cars that they need the stuff.  Here's my
point: Most of what we see at shows and the general direction of Corvairs is
to  become "loaded".  Accessories and options are installed by a succession
of  owners (and I fully support this freedom) but fewer and fewer
"mainstream"  Corvairs are out there as examples of how they really were.
Also, the  Corvair body design has wonderful qualities that are masked when
the car is  fully trimmed,
 luggage-racked, chrome wheeled, and otherwise adorned.   These things take
one's eye away from the body shape.