<VV> re- 1969 quality\1968 quality

[Bill Elliott]

It's not so much the era as the way Corvairs were assembled in '68/'69. 
1967 was likely the high point of Corvair assembly quality with 1968 
being second worst (1969 being by far the worst). That's too radical a 
change to blame on the era in general.

I have worked on and with a lot of Corvairs and I have yet to work on a 
'67 that was assembled poorly or a '68/'69 that was assembled well. 
Simple stuff like a nice straight line of seam sealer... applied 
carefully about 1 inch from the actual seam!

Bill

Bill H. wrote:

>                                          B"H
>
>IT's a shame about quality in that era...there were
>some great cars that came out of Detroit in the late
>Sixties.  But...
>
>The husband of a friend of my mother's,bought a brand
>new 1968 Continental Mark III, one of the most
>expensive cars you could buy.  No matter how many
>times he brought it back to the dealership, they
>couldn't fix all the bugs.  Finally, they just took
>the car back and gave him a regular Lincoln
>Continental instead.
>
>Consumer Reports stated that the car they tested that
>holds the record for defects, was a 1969 Dodge
>Coronet.  It had something like over 50 flaws from the
>factory upon delivery.
>
>At the same time, I heard a story of a fella who was a
>taxi driver and his  '67 Chevy cab ran over 350,000
>miles and was still going strong after he moved away.
>
>Speaking of high mileage, a fellow at work bought a
>'76 Dodge Aspen (known for poor quality control) and
>drove the heck out of it, 325,000 miles without the
>valve covers ever being removed.
>
>Regards...Bill Hershkowitz '69 Monza Coupe 110 PG
>
>
>      
>  
>