Redpill me on Corvairs
My dad claims they are pieces of shit and that's why nobody bought them. I thought most people at the time didn't buy anything with less than 8 cylinders which is why Slant-sixes are hard to come by.
Are they really pieces of shit? Is that why they're cheaper than other classics of the time?
Lots of people bought in line sixes, even when a veeyate was available. Just like today.
Corsair was mostly the victim of bad marketing. A lot of people thought they were unsafe. It also didn't help that the drive train layout was unconventional with the engine in the rear. People weren't used to that from an American car in a time where everything was FR and added to the uneasiness feeling for the consumers.
>>14736184
Deathtraps, basically.
They caught fire like a Pinto, and the engine tore free from it's mountings in a front or rear impact, and crushed you to death.
>slant six
what does Chrysler have to do with the Corvair
they were cheap as hell when they were new so a lot were bought the safety issues only apply to the early models (and can be remedied with a compensator) the later models (like you posted) are fine
>>14736184
The rear engine/RWD made them dangerous at speed, since the front wheels had almost no weight holding them down. Same thing that happened to the Toyota MR2: they're good cars, but if you get into a hairy situation, it's hard to keep in control.
They're not as bad as you would've expected a car this different from an industry this conservative to be, especially the second gen which fixed some things, but they're not exactly good.
>>14736697
>>14736691
Can tire pressure differential not compensate for the weight balance?
>>14736702
It could, and it'd be nice for city driving, but I don't trust a partially-filled tire on the highway, where you need the extra traction the most
>>14736702
it helps
one of the main problems was people giving it pressure like in a FR
>>14736184
They didn't sell because they were different. It was also the least American American car you could buy. The handling characteristics didn't help anything either.
>>14736184
Ralph Nader wrote "unsafe at any speed" about the corvair. This is the main reason people stopped buying them, and GM quit making them.
>>14736726
>didn't sell
they sold almost 2 million of them
The nail in the Corvair's coffin was the combination of RR and swing axle suspension. To put it mildly, strange things could happen when the back end got a little skittish.
trying to buy one but it seems like 4 speeds are hard as fuck to find cheapy.
God dammit.
So i have a question about the engine and air-cooled engines in general, on motorcycles it's not really a problem but what's the lifespan of an air-cooled car engine? because it's tucked away and whatnot?
>>14736790
look at VWs
just do preventative maintenance like youre supposed to
Id say most of the engines have been rebuilt by now but I think the some of the engines had shitty head gaskets
>>14736832
I assume you mean frequent oil changes and high octane fuel?
Could a rich burn contribute to lifespan in any meaningful way?
>>14736848
I think some would be fine on regular but most would want premium an actual Corvair dedicated forum would be better
and nah just tune it all up to spec
I think the Corvair has an unjust bad rep so I kinda like them but Ive never fucked with them beyond looking into them a little
>>14736885
Alright well thanks for the help m80
>>14736890
Whoa, hold the fuck up. You can't just come in here, politely ask your well thought out questions, get good advice, and leave.
This is /o/ dammit where you are a fag and you better start arguing mister. There is a shitposting minimum asshole, abide by it.
>>14736184
The Corvairs were awesome and innovative cars for their time.
They were among the first production cars to be available with a turbocharged engine (1961 the turbo flat 6 was added as an option on the Corsa trim level).
The Corvair was actually meant to tackle the original Volkswagen Beetle in the compact economy car market.
What REALLY killed the Corvair wasn't a problem of the Corvair. In 1967, a man named Ralph Nader wrote a book scandalizing the Corvair called "Unsafe At Any Speed". The book only had facts about early build Corvairs and completely ignored any safety updates the car DID get trying to paint it as the most dangerous car on the road.
His main point were that the Corvair's rear engined design made it unstable like a swinging pendulum. Of course these accidents were all people driving like morons and then tried to sue GM for their own idiocy. The Corvair is no harder to drive than a Porsche 911, but where's the outrage there?
Ralph Nader is solely to blame for the Corvair's bad rep and the car eventually getting killed. This is what happens when politicians decide to take up a cause without doing proper research.
Ralph Nader can burn in hell
>>14736941
>which is pretty much what>>14736737 said.
>>14736937
s...sorry
fuck Chrysler...r..right?
>>14736983
That's better
