<VV> [FC] Corvair Research

[Bill Elliott]

There is a whole  field of engineering study now dedicated to "human 
factors". A product may be safe and effective but if it differs in human 
interaction that other similar products (or the "intuitive" way of 
operating it would cause the product to malfunction), it is considered 
to be of flawed design. In the world of medical equipment design, this 
factor has recently been given HUGE weight by the FDA when approving new 
devices.

One of the first places we saw this theory applied in the automotive 
world was the Audi "unintended acceleration" issue... while the Audi, 
like the Corvair, was found to be of a safe and effective design, the 
pedal placement differed significantly from the average American car. 
(It did not differ significantly from say BMW or Mercedes, but Audi was 
the victim of its own success... the 5000 enjoyed a MUCH greater direct 
crossover of owners directly from American marques like Buick..So the 
average Audi owner was more likely to have that as their first European 
car (particularly with an automatic gearbox) than any of the other 
marques). This was seen as an "engineering flaw" for Audi when "human 
factors" were considered. The gas pedal interlock was a fix for the 
"human factor", not for the car.

You can readily see a parallel to the Audi story with the Corvair. 
First, the average owner was coming directly from an American car 
(unlike say Mercedes or Porsche) where terminal oversteer was the 
primary handling characteristic rather than the incessant understeer of 
American car. It was also the first American car with such a 
differential between front and rear tire pressures... a difference not 
intuitive to the average person (or the average filling station or garage).

So from those perspectives the Corvair indeed was of "flawed" design.... 
it might be interesting to apply these modern engineering evaluation 
standards to the Corvair design rather than trying to make the 
conventional case that the design itself was flawed from a "pure" 
engineering perspective... might help the grade with a 
politically-correct professor as well...

Of course the lower insurance losses for the Corvair of the period 
versus its peers could also be shown as proof that the overall design of 
the Corvair was superior enough to more than overcome what could be seen 
as human factor design flaws....

Bill



BBRT wrote:

>Isn't it sad we all understand and accept the comments ....  Don't tell he 
>truth if it impacts one's grades.... Since it is an "engineering" class it 
>is NOT supposed to be political/politically correct/accepted by non-and 
>anti-automotive media and population.. It is SUPPOSED  to be based on 
>research and facts, not (biased or opinion) information, but facts.
>
>Chuck S
>
>  
>
>  
>