<VV> Corvair & Camaro

[airvair at earthlink.net]

"Because they can" is a poor excuse for doing something that is stupid. I
can step in front of a bus, "because I can" but does that make it a good
idea? No. Same thing with putting an engine in the front of a Corvair. Why?
Because 1) the chassis wasn't designed for it, 2) they already made a car
just for that application (it's called a Camaro), so that 3) you don't have
to go to all that expense, effort, etc. to do something that's already been
done, BUT most importantly 4) because (as I pointed out) it's heresy.

Besides, a stock Corvair (especially the 4door) is ALREADY a "really good
looking car with a usable back seat." So right from your first sentence
your arguement goes out the window already. 

And the reason the Camaro looks like a Corvair isn't ONLY because of
"family resemblence" but because it was meant to be its replacement (one
way or another). My contention on that point is that the Camaro, far more
than any other Chevy, has had every last line lifted from the Corvair.
Other than the thick "C" pillar (which is what the 4door has, anyway), the
Camaro IS the Corvair, styling-wise. (BTW I just WISH I had a dollar for
every time my Corvair has been mistaken for a Camaro, or that I myself
have, on first glance, mistaken a Camaro for a Corvair.)

And I've always wanted to graft a LM Corvair drive train into a '67 Camaro,
and then see how the Camaro people feel about THAT one! For that matter,
why hasn't anyone done that? Maybe because Corvair shells are a dime a
dozen, whereas a Camaro roller is at least $3500, and for a gutted,
no-interior shell, no less..... Cheap-a$$ butchers!

I could go on, "because I can", but why?

-Mark


> [Original Message]
> From: James P. Rice <ricebugg at mtco.com>
> Subject: <VV> Corvair & Camaro
>
> All:  Beside giving you a really good looking car with a usable back seat,
> the core reason folks make a front engine/rear drives out of a Corvair is
> fairly simple.  It is also the reason folks join chapters and not CORSA,
> join CORSA and not chapters and do a lot of other things.
>
> The Reason Is:  Because they can.  I've come to realize a lot of Corvair
> people, maybe more so than the general population, are compelled to do
stuff
> differently.  It is ingrain, part of our heredity and/or environment.
> Contrariness is both a DNA and a learned method of dealing with all kinds
of
> situations.
>
> Of course the Camaro looks like the Corvair.  If you also review the big
> Chevy and the Chevelle and even the Corvette you will see the family DNA.
> This is no accident.  So we should neither be surprised or beat our breast
> about the obvious family resemblance.
>
> Pete Estes wanted to name the car we know as the 67 Camaro "Corvair", but
> the marketing folks screamed "NO!!!!" to/at him loud and long.  This
little
> fact, if you were paying attention to the various "back in the day"
speeches
> at various Corvair events by various ex-GM staff as printed in the
> Communique, is one of the may small pieces of evidence the Corvair
> production was scheduled to stop at the end of the 66 model year.  Or was
> Chevrolet going to sell our car and the new front engine/rear drive car at
> the same time with the same name?  I don't think so.....
>
> Now then, why doesn't somebody graft a Corvair front and rear body panels
> onto a Camaro?  Or...how about a front engined Corvair with a drive shaft
> coupled to the Corvair transaxle and IRS?  I don't think anybody has done
> that yet.  Kinda a Crown Conversion gone bad.  Or good, depending on your
> contrariness.  Of course, they you would have something similar to a
Pontac
> Tempest (Opps), only with a real good IRS.  Oh Wait! A similar idea is
what
> got IRS banned by the SCCA for over 2 liter cars in club and Trans-Am
> racing.
>
> Historically Yours,
>                    James Rice
>