Talk:Chevrolet Corvair

message: There is the Greenbrier so I am trying to find a good picture for it:) Whopper 02:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  whats missing 

message: Could someone please comment on this?  It makes no sense.. what's so bad about taking the key out?: "The first Corvairs (1960 – 1964) were factory equipped with an ignition lock wherein it was possible to start the car and then remove the key. Doing so in Southern California and being caught by the Los Angeles Police Department was a guaranteed ticket to a weekend in jail." --JeffryJohnston 19:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huh? 

message: What happened to the Ralph Nader related information in earlier versions? I certainly think it's pertinent to the car's history. 65.9.150.134 21:30, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nader removed? 

message: Charisma was never Nader's strong suit--he always tells us what we don't want to, but need to hear.  I put much of it back.  I've seen Nader (the man who refuses to hold a driver's license, nor to own a car) since the old days of The Tonight Show, with Johnny Carson.  Unsafe At Any Speed is a must read for anyone considering buying an American Car.  More than almost single-handedly leading to the demise of the Corvair, one needs to read the chapter on the Ford Mustang in Nader's book,to appreciate the incredible way the car had it's body design taken to the engineers, telling them, "This is how it's going to look, now make it into a car--and make sure to keep the cost below $3,000."  The marketing was even more incredible than the engineering.  Before anyone had seen one, there were folks who paid cash to be put on a list to get the "first one in town."  One woman wrote to Ford, before its big pemier to say, "The new Mustang is more exciting than sex!"  My wife's best girlfriend bought a brand new 1965 Mustang.  I drove it partway through a blizzard to New York City.  What a piece of crap.  I don't know which was scarier, trying to get ahead of the storm, or the way the crappy thing handled going down the Empire State Thruway at 85mph.    
I saw Nader at our church during the 2004 campaign.  Again, he told me a lot of things I did not want to hear, (but needed to).  When he left the building, he was driven to the airport (he always travels coach) in the back seat of somebody else's van. 
I also referenced, On a Clear Day You Can See General Motors, by John Z. DeLorean.  For every potential American car buyer, I believe it is an even more essential read than Nader's book.  In it he talks about how GM would design  front suspensions for their cars by getting them to fail after a few hundred miles on the test track, and then upgrade just as little as possible to save a production dollar or two. DeLorean is referenced in WP, but like most of the sites on Google, everybody wants to talk about his car fiasco and his cocaine problem, instead of his hard-won bad news about General Motors.      
I am 60 years old, have been a motor-head all my life.  Like DeLorean I grew up in the Motor City, where I still live.  When I was ten, my old man put a wrench in my hand and said, "If you're gonna drive 'em, you're gonna fix 'em."  Although I appreciate high performance, I much prefer quality.  My first two new cars were Volkswagens, the second from Pennsylvania and the last two have been Hondas, built in Ohio by Americans.  I cannot tell you how many times I have returned to my parked Honda to find a big glob of snot in the middle of the windshield, especially in Dearborn.  For a while I was seeing bumper stickers that read, "REAL Americans buy American cars."  I later saw one on a Volvo which said, "Real Americans buy what they want, (or QUALITY)"--W8IMP 03:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Put back [[Nader]]--[[DeLorean]] too!

message: The definition of independent suspension I learned was that camber, caster, and toe all had to be independently controllable during suspension motion.  Swing axles don't allow independent camber control, therefore aren't fully independent suspension. -- Aqmxv 14:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh No, the IRS! 

message: Is it fair to say that the name was artificial and doesn't mean anything?  Was it a play on the words Corvette and corsair?  Maikel 13:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: Someone needs to look into the engineering section. Someone wrote it referring to themself a lot. 75.37.67.193 08:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its an awful section of the article, its written with little referencing and from a personal point of view. How's about removing everything referring to personal problems and ask for cites for the rest? Alastairward 12:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engineering 

message: Essay by some guy who never owned one  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.189.243.248 (talk) 18:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Junker, Clunker, Ball of Flames 

message: Why hasn't anybody created a chapter on this article about the Corvan 95 commercial vans, Greenbrier passenger vans, Rampside pickups, and Loadside pickups? ----DanTD (talk) 19:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapter for Corvan/Greenbrier/Pickups 

message: Why is it impossible to fix the "Production notes" chapter? 1963 doesn't want to fix. ----DanTD (talk) 01:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production notes 

message: The article is ripe for a new editing team. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-write

message: Someone should mention the Corvair engine was very popular in  kit planes and Benson Copters. 
 It had about the same weihght, and nearly the horespower, of a Lycoming flat six, while being
 MUCH cheaper.  The Corvair flies again!Tintinteslacoil 02:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Engine?

message: I've seen lots of articles about swapping a small block chevvy into the rear of a 
Corvair or even a Porsche 911/912.
Apparently it can work pretty well, not an abomination to drive. Of course, the mid-engine gives much better balance, but at the cost of the rear seat. Installing a radiator in the front helps combat the rear weight bias.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.227.251 (talk) 19:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  swapping V8 in place of original engine 

message: The handling section does not clarify what the danger of oversteer is or indicate clearly the options that can ameliorate oversteer potential.  The section fails to clearly designate tire pressure differential as a specific strategy used on the Corvair etc.  The section now duplicates information on Nader, from the Reportage section.  
Instead of protecting "my edits," (See WP:Ownership), clarity and communication need to prevail.  Let's see if we can collaborate to improve the article.  Isn't this much more clear and succinct:
::The Corvair initially featured a rear swing axle design, which unless ameliorated by any of several design options, could allow rear tires to undergo large camber changes during fast cornering, leading to oversteer — a dynamically unstable condition where a vehicle can lose control and spin.
::As one option to avoid potential oversteer characteristics, Chevrolet considered including a front anti-roll bar on the original 1960 Corvair, which would have shifted weight transfer to the front outboard tire, considerably reducing rear slip angles.  
::Instead, Chevrolet relied on a tire pressure differential — low front and high rear tire pressure — to avoid oversteer characteristics.  The tire pressure differential allowed the front to understeer (increasing slip angles faster than the rear) before oversteer would develop. Vehicles such as the Volkswagen Beetle and Renault Dauphine also used tire pressure differential to avoid oversteer characteristics.
::Owners and mechanics, however, could also inadvertently but easily over-inflate the front tires, thus eliminating the tire pressure differential and inducing oversteer characteristics. 
::*In 1962, the front anti–roll bar become available as an option.
::*In 1964, the front anti-roll bar became standard equipment and the rear suspension was modified to include a transverse leaf spring extending between the rear wheels to limit rear wheel camber change, and carrying much of the rear weight combined with softer coil springs.  
::*In 1965, the Corvair received a fully independent rear suspension, reducing the rear roll center to half its previous height and using fully articulated half-axles that offered constant camber on the rear tires in all driving situations. Motor Trend called the 1965 Corvair "the first American production automobile on the road with fully independent rear suspension," considering the Corvette a limited production vehicle.  
842U (talk) 17:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What is all this? I didn't change your edit. I simply added some of my sentences back in in modified form to fit your edit. None of your work was deletedVegavairbob (talk) 17:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Criticisms section I basically created first of all..The Handling section is not meant to be a crash course in oversteer or handling. It is meant to explain the Corvair's initial cost cutting compromises which you all but deleted, There is nothing wrong with the Handling section. It is, as I said, also a general history of the car's suspension development.Vegavairbob (talk) 18:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Handling section 

message: I've rewritten the intro to reflect the car's legacy and mildly introducing the basic facts around its controversy.  I've structured the First Generation handling controversy and handling characteristics together -- as these are probably the most salient aspect of the Corvair.
The sections related to reception includes some widely sourced criticism... and then there is a criticism section related to two specific (unsourced) areas of focus: the steering column and the heater exhaust entering the car: it seems like these could be handled with a sentence and not whole sections. Thoughts? 842U (talk) 13:16, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job. --Biker Biker (talk) 14:58, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section 

message: An image used in this article, File:1966 Corvair Monza.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files missing permission as of 21 September 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:1966 Corvair Monza.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: I read:  "The first Corvair engine produced 80 hp (60 kW)". Being the owner of a 1960 model, I wanted to know what the real power is according to most recent standards. In 1960, engine power in the US was  bhp (brake horse-power),according to SAE standard. In the '70s, the standard was changed to be more realistic and the "new" hp was @ 80% of bhp. Using conversions tables I could finalize the sequence: 80 hp (bhp) = 64 hp (SAE) = 65 hp (DIN) = 47.7 kW (not 60 kW). Am I right?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.29.166.151 (talk) 18:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engine power 

message: GM also had a concept of a Corvair rebadged as an Oldsmobile 66. I can't find proof of that though, because the website that had it is gone, and as far as I know Internet Archives either can't or doesn't want to revive it. ---------User:DanTD (talk)  15:39, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not just a Pontiac Version 

message: It says that the first generation Pontiac Tempest, Olds F-85 and Buick Special are related to the Chevy Corvair. I don't understand how they're related. To me, that's not possible because the Corvair had an air-cooled engine in the back, whereas the other three all had water-cooled engines in the front. Furthermore, the Corvair was built on the GM Z platform while the others were built on the GM Y platform. I also discussed this on the Talk:Pontiac Tempest page. I don't think that the Y-body cars are at all related to the Corvair. If they are, I would like for someone else to explain because I don't see any connection at all.--Kevjgav (talk) 12:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Connection between Corvair and Y-body cars 

message: Chevrolet did not initially provide a convertible version of the Corvair in 1960/61. The concept and design for the convertible was purchased from a Chevrolet dealer in Vassar Michigan (Ray MacGillvary Chevrolet), who took a Corvair and just cut the top off.  Initially done for fun, Ray MacGillvary's crew assembled a working, folding top.  Chevy saw the result, and eventually negotiated the rights to manufacture from Ray.
Also, with the onset of winter in the area, and seeing the rear engined 'vair with a clean bottom, Ray's crew took the front wheels off a Corvair and ran it across the snow and up the snow banks of the dealership and presumably elsewhere.  No comments as to how well the steering worked or how well the cowl under the front bumper held up.
50.172.36.144 (talk) 04:25, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corvair Convertible 

message: Over on the Chevrolet Nomad article you had this quote:
The Nomad's unique design had its roots in a General Motors Motorama show car of the same name that was based on the Corvette.  
The Corvair was also originally a Corvette-based fastback from the same year. Why is this overlooked in the article? ---------User:DanTD (talk)  01:35, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corvette-based Corvair concept 

message: This engineering difference should be added to the article. The Corvair engine rotation is clockwise looking at the flywheel, which at that time was the opposite rotation of all other major United States production automobile engines. I don't own a Corvair engine service and repair manual as my reference, so I can't add anything to the article myself.
Conversely, the Volkswagen Beetle and Microbus rear-mounted, air-cooled, flat opposed four-cylinder engines had counter-clockwise rotation looking at the flywheel, as did the similar Porsche air-cooled, flat opposed four and six-cylinder engines. Consequently, when Corvair engines were mounted in Volkswagens, a modification to the Volkswagen differential gears had to be done to correct the rotation, using the original Volkswagen gears. This engine swap was fairly common in the 1960s, and I knew two people who did it to their Volkswagen Microbuses. Linstrum (talk) 04:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engine rotation opposite - I can't find any mention of that 

message: The article currently states that the Corvair is the second production car offering a turbocharged engine, after the Oldsmobile Jetfire.  This is an often debated topic, but it was long ago established that the Corvair was FIRST.  The Olds was announced earlier, in August of 1961, but it did not make it to production until after the Corvair was being produced in March of 1962.
Both Chevrolet and Oldsmobile were working on Turbocharging programs in late 1961.There was a definite rivalry among divisions within GM. Chevrolet was always very secretive regarding their programs, and did not leak anything about the Corvair Turbocharging program. On the other hand Oldsmobile was not nearly as secretive and released some preliminary details of their turbocharging program in late 1961. This is the main reason many think Olds was first.
Now both programs were not anywhere near completion in 1961 and both Oldsmobile and Chevrolet produced Turbocharged "Pilot" show cars for the large and prestigious February 1962 Chicago Auto Show. The Oldsmobile Jetfire at the show was a hardtop, and the Corvair Spyder was a convertible. After the show ended Chevrolet immediately began production of both the new Convertible and Spyder Turbocharging option in early March 1962. Official announcement for both the Convertible and Spyder options was on March 27th 1962 which was several weeks after production began. The Convertible and Spyder option was then available to order in April 1962. Early production was primarily to supply showroom display cars to the thousands of Chevrolet dealers nationwide. These cars were to be displayed for several months before they could be sold.
Oldsmobile started production several weeks after the Corvair Spyder but also could be ordered by April 1962.
So it was practically a dead heat. Both developed around the same time. Both shown at the same time at the same Chicago show, and both available to order from the public in April 1962, but Chevrolet beat the Oldsmobile to production by several weeks so the Corvair Spyder is actually the first American Production car to have a turbocharger.
This information is sourced from GM documents and period automotive articles from March and April 1962 and information from the 1962 Chicago Auto Show among others sources.  These scans of the April 1962 issue of Popular Science provide the definitive reference, as does the scan of a Spyder body tag from the same discussion.  I will leave this here for now, but will change the article in the near future with this information, unless someone else objects or has evidence to the contrary.
https://corvaircenter.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1173467#p1173467 Playerpage (talk) 18:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production Turbo: Chicken or the Egg?