<VV> Was-Chevy Comfort? - Now Corvair replacements

[Hank Kaczmarek]

Ned
Was my post in Russian?? I thought you were old enough to have lived through 
the last 45 years or so.

The Corvair was introduced as a smaller, more economical, fun compact car in 
the Chevrolet lineup, which had nothing but starndard and big boat cars at 
the time, other than Corvette of course. The BIG three were beginning to 
feel the heat of  VW, and suddenly,  Corvair, Falcon/Comet  and Valiant both 
arrived on the scene as US alternatives to the Beetle.

Now let's speed up to the late 60's---Nader took his shot, GM produced the 
LM in spite of it, but Valiant and Falcon weren't setting the world on fire 
anymore either.

Now Chevy decides 69 will be it for the Corvair.  Ford is coming out with 2 
economy models, the Pinto (sub compact) and the Maverick (compact) for under 
2000.00, Chrysler is bringing out a Mitsubishi sub-compact called the 
Cricket,  The Big 3 is still fighting the VW, which is selling like hotcakes 
for 1800.00, and on top of all of that, Now the Japanese have introduced the 
Toyota and the Datsun, in various models,  selling for under 2000.00.

Now if you want to feel that Chevy decided to say, the hell with it, we're 
not replacing the Corvair,  OK by me.  But they had to have something to 
keep from losing market share to all of these competitors.  If your opinion 
is that Chevy said. "We're discontining the compact Corvair, and we are now 
proud to introduce a new compact car", and that satisfies you, Fine by me.

Fact is,  the Vega DID replace the corvair as the compact. It also had the 
station wagon (kammback) as part of the line. It does have some of the lines 
of the Lakewood/Monza wagon, IMO.

The Vega had lots of engine problems, as has been discussed here, and Chevy 
started the Chevette as a replacement for the Vega.  Chevette had a better 
run, I know some Chevy mechanics who really like them, but as sales started 
to droop in the mid 80's,  chevy started looking for a replacement.

That is when the Sprint/Spectrum was developed with Suzuki.  I had a (sold 
in Guam) Suzuki 380 GSV, which was a Sprint in everything but the Chevy 
Badging.  The sprint was a micro compact (IMO), and it and the Spectrum had 
some problems, sales numbers and small profit ratio being the bigger ones.

Then the brains at GM decided that perhaps a Japanese alternative to the 
complete Corvair line was in order. Instead of a van/truck (since GM already 
had the S-10/Sonoma), The GEO line came out with the Metro as the 
subcompact, the Prizm as the compact small family car, the Storm as the 
sports model, and the Tracker as the mini SUV-fun vehicle.   In a way 
reminds me of the 500/700, Monza,  Spyder/Corsa, and the FC????

But it seems the General can never really dedicate itself.... So GEO is 
gone.  The Metro and Prizm stayed around as rebadged Chevy's for a while. 
And now the next generation has hit the road.

Of course, this is only an opinion.  Shared by many I know and have talked 
to. Sure isn't carved by tongues of flame on stone tablets.

I think personally that GM didn't want to pay for all the engineering that 
makes the Corvair such a great car. Still today considered the "car of 
tomorrow, built yesterday".  They wanted something water cooled, more 
maintenance free, slicker/cheaper to buy, with increased profit margin.

Your mileage and opinion, of course may vary.

Regards
HANK
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <AeroNed@aol.com>
To: <virtualvairs@corvair.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2005 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: <VV> Was-Chevy Comfort? - Now Corvair replacements


> In a message dated 1/21/2005 11:49:05 PM Central Standard Time,
> kaczmarek@charter.net writes:
>
> VEGA
> CHEVETTE
> SPECTRUM
> SPRINT
> METRO--and other GEO  models
>
> That all have tried, AND ALL HAVE FAILED, as replacements for  the
> CORVAIR........
>
>
>
> OK, I've wondered this for a while. How do you figure that the Vega 
> replaced
> the Corvair? Just because it started after the Corvair was finished? 
> Because
> it was the smallest Chevy? What about the Camaro?
>
> Why did they fail? They weren't as "good" as the Corvair? or they didn't
> sell well enough? How many vehicles have to be sold to be considered a 
> success?
> How many units? Using this standard, wouldn't the Corvair be considered a
> failure, how about the Camaro?
>
> I don't consider any of them a replacement for the Corvair, none were rear
> engined OR air cooled. None had the technological uniqueness, none had the
> variation of platforms.
>
> One GM line that comes close would be the Corsica/Berratta/Lumina Van of 
> the
> '80s. This drive train line remained almost identical in a 4 door, 2 door
> and mini van. Similar but not nearly as good as the original.
>
> Ned
> _______________________________________________
> This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are 
> the property
> of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, 
> mailto:vv-help@corvair.org
> This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America, 
> http://www.corvair.org/
> Post messages to: VirtualVairs@corvair.org
> List info: http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualvairs
> _______________________________________________