<VV> MOTOR TREND Disses Corvair!

[Bill H.]

                                                B"H

Well...one writer, who wrote a very well-detailed, colorful article about the Chrysler 300 Letter Series back in the 80s, he got to the 1960s in his historical review of the car, when this car was "cheapened" by Ma Mopar after the non-letter 300 came out in 1962.  I remember his words vividly, quoted as best I remember:

"The big outfits have their characteristic flaws...GM is too clever by half, witness the Corvair, the Tempest tranaxle, the aluminum block V-8.  Dazzling in the lab, dismal in the marketplace..."

What he was referring to as I understand it, is that Ed Cole's concept of the Corvair was a dazzling innovation, but its execution was not perfect, and sales reflected the public's wariness for new technology.

Keep in mind that the Corvair, like all rear-engine, air-cooled wonders, went totally against everything the big American auto industry stood for.  The public was brainwashed into buying understeering, front-heavy bombs with lots of tinsel and high-flying fins, and a light, compact, economical compact package was something they were terrified of.

Had GM made some minor adjustments in the Corvair's design, like a front anti-sway bar in the Early models, and designed a better heater that didn't conduct fumes into the passenger compartment or burn more gasoline, the car could have been a hit.  

I don't believe the Corvair is perfect, nor is it the epitome of motordom.  It's fun car to drive, it has classis Sixties styling, it's easy to fix and get parts for, and you can buy one for cheap.  It's just a nice little Chevy that deserved a better fate from both GM and the public, and it's a great collector car and a practical driver.

So I don't get too upset when anyone tries to dis the Corvair, since you can dis just about anything on wheels out there...Bill Hershkowitz 69 Monza 110 PG