I was recently back home in Flint for the annual Back To The Bricks car festival, which brought over 250,000 people downtown for Saturday’s big show. That event is the culmination of nearly a full week’s worth of activities in Genesee County, Michigan. Last Saturday, downtown’s main artery, Saginaw Street, as well as many other surrounding streets, were cordoned off from regular traffic and densely packed with all sorts of interesting cars. Most of them were domestics, but there was quite a bit of global representation, as well. This little, white Chevette stood out from many of these cars with its humble, endearing presence.
I’d be willing to bet money that: a.) it is the most pristine ’86 Chevette in all of existence; and b.) it was the slowest of all running, like-condition cars featured at the show. It is a Chevette in the least-lightweight body style (five-door hatchback), in an upscale trim level (CS) with added niceties, diesel-powered by a 51-hp, 1.8L four-cylinder engine, and with a five-speed manual transmission. One source cites an as-new 0-60 mph time of close to twenty seconds for a car like this one, which sounds about right. Granted, my 2.3L-powered ’88 Ford Mustang LX 5-speed was no Indy racer, but realistically, one would have to turn off the A/C in either car to inspire any level of confidence on an inclined entrance ramp to an expressway.
I was positively floored last spring (April 2016) when I had spotted a 1980-or-so Chevette (pictured above) in the parking lot of a local grocery store in my Chicago neighborhood, in decent, apparent condition. If the above, gold example was in astonishingly good shape for an un-pampered, disposable econobox from the year your forty-something-year-old author was just starting grade school, the titular, mint-condition ’86 CS could be considered the “Holy Grail” of Chevettes, perhaps second only to a first-year, ’76 “woodie” with Di-Noc on the sides. Yes, indeed – I’ll bet the interior of our featured car has never dealt with the likes of a QP hamburger or Boston Cooler (Vernor’s ginger ale with a scoop of vanilla ice cream) from Flint-area fast-food favorite, Halo Burger.
Don’t even try to understand the “why” or how the featured, privately-owned Chevette still exists, over thirty years from the factory and looking like it time-warped just last week from the 1986 showroom of nearby Applegate Chevrolet. Save your brain cells. Instead, think back to a person or thing that was (or possibly still is) the object of your affection, for which no one else seemed to understand your affinity. (As for me, I’ll offer up personal examples of Chicago-based Malört liqueur, Corn Nuts, and reruns of “The Ropers”.) That someone else has so lovingly cared for this Chevette makes me love it, too. Its existence in such beautiful condition should be enough to merit, minimally, even just a little of your respect.
Downtown Flint, Michigan.
Saturday, August 19, 2017.
Related reading from:
- Paul Niedermeyer: CC Outtake: Is This The World’s Best Preserved Chevette?;
- Keith Thelen: CC Capsule: 1980 Chevrolet Chevette – A New Contender Emerges; and
- One of my own, previous finds (also from the Flint area): Cohort Outtake: Chevette – Still Haulin’ the Groceries.
Well said, Sir! The connection to the rest of the CC tribe explained.
The Back To The Bricks is a great event. Unusual rides are plentiful & the people are fanatical about cars. I was there in 2012 with my blue 1979 Buick Century Turbo Coupe. I meet up with two other people that also had rides like mine. Can’t tell you how many people went nuts when they saw our three cars sitting side by side. The Century Turbo was only built in Flint so that certainly made the appearance of three of them on the Bricks a sight to behold. Was sad to hear that Buick City was gone.
Don, that’s so cool! I was there in 2012, so I’m sure I saw your Century Turbo aeroback. I know exactly where this is (right near Halo Burger, right?)
I never knew the Century Turbos were built exclusively in Flint – I’m sure your car got a lot of love that day!
Ditto about Buick City… I haven’t driven past the old site for at least a couple of years. It’s still painful. I toured the factory last in the summer of 1991 as a teenager, when the Buick LeSabre (built there) was the darling of J.D. Power & Associates.
Truly a remarkably well-preserved Chevette. Sounds like a great show, too. And there’s that nice blue Century Turbo Coupe I saw on here last week and meant to comment on. I went back to the Automotive Urban Legends post and left the reply I intended to before I got sidetracked lol. Very nice car!
I’ve never understood the constant slagging on certain GM models, especially the Chevette and Cavalier. They both did the job expected of them, providing transportation to people who couldn’t care less about cars, other than as a daily means of getting somewhere. And they certainly did the job, as the 191k version of a 2001 Cavalier (ex-county government car) has been showing me on a near daily basis.
I had a few friends who had Chevettes back in the day. And all of them used their cars for a good bit of long-distance interstate travel. The one never mentioned secret of this car is that being an Opel (aka, German design) it had wonderful behavior on the interstate. Yep, all my friends were smart enough to get their with the manual transmission, but once you got it up to speed you had a car that was quite a bit better on cross country travel than most of its competition.
+1!
I had the opposite experience with Chevettes on the highway. I spent time in 2 (One an employer’s and the other a rental on a weekend trip) and both suffered from an excruciating front-end shimmy at speed.
Took MANY long trips in my Chevettes – I owned two at different times – a ’79 2-door and an ’82 2-door. Both with manual, both lacking A/C (thank God!)
If only they’d had cruise control on those trips – wold have been helpful crossing Nebraska and Wyoming (in January no less.)
After coming off of my ’60s cars I really enjoyed the handling these had (Compared to My Fury or Chevelle) and had fun on Ohio’s two-lane state routes between Cleveland and Ohio University. Passing people on such roads took planning and strategy.
They were damn easy to fix, too.
I’ve never understood the constant slagging on certain GM models, especially the Chevette and Cavalier
My personal objection to the Chevette is that it was such a knee jerk reaction by GM management to the disaster that was the Vega. It was a total abandonment of any attempt to apply modern engineering. It was literally the most primitive car GM could bolt together, a cynical plan to ensure they couldn’t screw it up. It was, at the most generous, a mid 1950’s design – certainly not as good as the 1960 offerings from any of the big three or Rambler for that matter.
Bad as Chrysler and Ford’s worst products of that era might have been, they at least always managed to get the damn steering wheel centered properly in the interior. Remember that? A friend had one that had cardboard interior panels. That particular car (an automatic) also impressed four of us one day (two guys and two girls) when it refused to pull away from the curb on an uphill slope – it couldn’t handle the weight of four college kids.
It was the Kraft-Dinner of cars – sure people gobbled them up – because they were cheap- and some people acquired a taste for them but that doesn’t mean that they were good cars.
Look at the competition of the time: the VW Rabbit, Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla, the Horizon. The closest analog was the Pinto, and (despite the flaming by the press) that was a better car than the Chevette too. Then, GM kept the car in production for 12 years with no real improvements. By 1988, Honda was on the fourth generation of Civic…. and building it in Maryland.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/1988-10best-cars-1988-honda-civic-page-9
That’s why.
That’s hardly an objective perspective on the Chevette.
It wasn’t primitive for its time at all; it was a typical competitive European design, an Opel Kadett. Keep in mind that FWD was still not common in 1975. And the Rabbit had very serious teething issues in its first few years. It had massive problems, not unlike the GM X Cars of 1980. More on that to come in a long-term review of a 1975 Rabbit by R&T.
The Corolla and all of the Japanese competition except the Civic and Subaru were RWD at the time. The Crolla didn’t go FWD for almost a decade later.
The Chevette was given almost universally good reviews. It had no real faults. The 1.4 was underpowered some, but it went away soon. The Chevette was praised for its good handling and all-round qualities.
Obviously it wasn’t a very ambitious effort, but that’s what much of the European/global market was still doing competitively. Chevy’s production quality and some of their materials were undoubtedly not up to the Opel’s.
The biggest sin was as others have said: they just kept it in production without any real significant improvements, and the rest of the small car market increasingly left it behind. But in 1975, it looked quite competitive, and it was.
I’d have taken a Chevette over a Pinto any day.
The Datsun F10 was released about the same time as the Chevette. The Corolla may not have become a FWD car for a decade, but the FWD Corolla-Tercel would be released in the US in 1980. The Corolla may have been conventional, but it was also much better than the Chevette at pretty much everything. Toyotas rusted, but so did early Chevettes. Both were improvements on the Vega in that regard.
The Chevette may have shared a platform with the Kadett C, but the Kadett C wasn’t an innovative car. It also gone by 1980, replaced by a more contemporary reaction to strong selling FWD cars from FIAT, Ford, Renault and VW.
A GM car getting good reviews shouldn’t be taken as proof of anything other than that they were the largest advertiser in the industry. The Vega got good reviews. The X-cars’ glowing reviews lasted longer that the first cars off the production line did.
I suppose that if you wanted a US brand subcompact in 1975, the Chevette was fully competitive. Pintos were better at keeping up with traffic, but they were packaged even worse. Gremlins were much better at keeping up with traffic while having packaging that was positively perverse and fuel economy little better than that of a much more useful compact. The Chevette delivered VW Beetle performance and economy with a little extra room just in time for the Golf/Rabbit to show what a clean sheet of paper could do relative to a car designed in the ’30s.
I’m not trying to put the Chevette on a pedestal. It was a modest and expedient solution to the problem of getting a small car on the market quickly. But it was not grossly uncompetitive for its first 3-5 years. But by 1980 or so, it was falling way behind. Things were changing quickly.
The problem GM had was that with their cost structure, they couldn’t make a profit on very small cars, so they didn’t even try to build something competitive to replace/update the Chevette.
It’s funny to see the cars planned during the Carter era today and realize that they did make lots of small cars in our darkest hours. The X-cars were about as big as a modern Civic is. The J-cars were smaller still. Chrysler’s K-car started about the size of the 2012 Civic, although on a significantly shorter wheelbase. I was pretty young while this was going on, and my parents sold their only full-sized car before I was born. An intermediate ’66 Coronet hardtop was the biggest car they owned on my watch, and it was much smaller than something like a Buick Electra 225. I can’t imagine what adults who had spent the ’50s and ’60s watching mainstream cars growing into the 1971 Oldsmobile 98 only to have industry attention focus to cars four feet shorter with a quarter to a third the power less than a decade later felt about having their expected prosperity ripped out from underneath them.
“Obviously it wasn’t a very ambitious effort…”
General Motors – The Number One Corporation on the Fortune 500 for decades produces the Chevette.
Parturiunt montes (The Vega Program), nascetur ridiculus mus (The Chevette)
That slightly angled steering column was indeed maddening, and it was not restricted to Chevettes, either. My 1984 Olds 98 suffered from that design compromise as well, but perhaps it was less perceptible because of the car’s bigger size. Perhaps GM diehards didn’t notice it but not being a GM guy it irritated me just a little bit every time I drove the car.
I drove a cherry, low mileage BMW E30 325is last week. The crooked steering wheel I never noticed when almost every car I drove was a BMW drove me nuts.
Three secrets to happy Chevette ownership:
1:) Later model (Approximately ’82 or newer) Four-speed manual transmission, power nothing.
2:) Minor upgrades (good radial tires, gas shocks)
3:) MAINTENANCE! Decent routine maintenance. Keep the front end lubed!
Note: Owned my ’84 2-door hatchback (purchased used) for 7 years and 100K miles. NEVER noticed the “offset steering wheel.” Followed the above steps & was rewarded with a fun & nearly anvil reliable car that fit my budget perfectly.
I once drove a brand new ’86 Shove-it from Cleveland to Philly… it was the most miserable trip of my life. I so wanted to abandon that sorry excuse for a car on the PA Pike and torch it… And better than its competition? Hardly. At the time I owned an ’84 Escort and that little car was infinitely better in every way than that gawdawful penalty box.
I’m right there with you, I think they’re horrible little cars, speaking from experience. Both to own and drive. This must be misplaced nostalgia…
These were the best-selling cars in the U.S. for a couple of years. Where are they now?
Unless there were two white Chevette’s there, that one was a diesel model. But does that make it more or less likely to have survived?
Great show, I’m very glad to have taken your advice to attend. I ended up spending a full 8 hours and shot an insane number of pictures.
Props to Michigan for the correct use of “historical” rather than “historic” on their antique-car plate.
Very true. Aside from Michigan and California, I can’t think of another state that uses “Historical” for these types of plates (though there may very well be another).
To me, “Historical” is the best description for such vehicles, and is much better suited to its intended use than “Antique,” “Classic” or “Historic.”
Dan, this is (indeed) the same car, and whoops… missed the “Diesel”. Wow! I wish I had taken a picture of the original window sticker – did you get it?
I don’t think I got a picture of the sticker, but I will check when I get home.
Doing the Old 27 Tour in Mid Michigan today.
Dan, the Old 27 Tour is something I’ve never heard of (to my knowledge), before you mentioned it. I’ll have to research that!
There is some kind of 80’s cosmic harmony when one sees that Chevrolet’s biggest vehicle (full size van) and their smallest (Chevette) shared the same instrument cluster.
Joe, it sounds like you had a terrific time.
Now, if Dan Cluley saw the same car, which I’m thinking he did given the paint marks on the ground between his and your pictures, this ’86 Chevette diesel earns another distinction as it was one of only 200 diesel Chevette four-doors made that year.
That gives you 51 throbbing horsepower but an EPA estimate of around 60 mpg. Neither the gas or diesel version would dazzle a person with sparkling performance, and this car may be a real unicorn. An awesome find.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/automotive-history-shockingly-low-volume-production-cars-the-chevrolet-edition/
Wow, Jason – you (and Dan Cluley) are correct. So equipped, this 5-door hatchback would have done 0-60 (mph) in… wait for it… at least 19.9 seconds.
This car actually had the window sticker on it. I was trying to get more pictures of it, but you know the “car show” effect, when the car sitting alone that you’ve just started taking pictures of attracts a small swarm of other onlookers. Its base price of $6,487 translates to about $14,500 in 2017. Mitsubishi Mirage money!
I actually saw a Trabant parked in our town yesterday; a drag race between it and this amazing Chevette would be intriguing. Paralyzingly slow, but intriguing.
If this ever happens, I’d love to see the YouTube footage!
“Mitsubishi Mirage money!”, but, the Mirage is a much better car. Standard power steering, Windows, AC, rear wiper, AM FM CD radio, Bluetooth stuff that I don’t know or care about, plus the best warrantee in the business, for 10 years or 100,000 miles, or until they fold in the U.S., whichever comes first.
i find that the few small cars of this era survive because a lot of them seem to be automatics, which made them miserable to drive. I worked for several dealerships in the late 70’s to mid 80’s….i found that a fun small sedan was transformed by unnecessary weight and automatic transmissions. Occasionally i find old Datsuns, Toyotas, or even Chevettes, that are clean and low mileage, only to be crestfallen by a slushbox.
Jefr, I’m glad you mentioned the transmission option… After Dan Cluley (above) informed that this one is a Diesel, the ’86 Diesel came only with a 5-speed manual.
To your point, though, I can’t imagine driving some of the imported economy cars of the time frame you referenced with an automatic transmission. My family’s 1985 Renault Encore was an automatic, but stripped down – so its acceleration felt somewhat peppy, from what I remember.
The only thing I have time to fix this morning is the title, so I’ve removed “Automatic”. 🙂
That’s an interesting point. Besides the lack of incentive to drive, an automatic also solves the “novice driver learning a manual” issue, which probably did in quite a few small cars. (I’m still sorry about the Rabbit, Dad.)
Great find, I had an 87 Chevette CS in high school.. Mine was a 3 door with an automatic and AC. It was soooooooo slow.
I loved that car and would love to find another.
Mine even had the same wheel covers and big plastic dent strip.
One of the best disposable American cars.
With the 5 speed manual transmission it wasn’t irritatingly slow, typical excellent GM air conditioning, much more reliable than any Italian or French imported car of this time period.
But: when some expensive-to-repair item failed on a “Shov-ette” it was time to dump it and move on.
“typical excellent GM air conditioning”
I don’t think this guy agrees with you!
Anything is possible in the movies. #RollEyes
Very cool find! I know I’ve never seen a Chevette this pristine, not even ones featured in movies of the 1980s! This is also the first I’ve ever heard of a “Boston Cooler”. I can assure you, I’ve never seen one in Boston 🙂
Never heard of a Boston Cooler, either. However, you made me think of trips to the meat aisle of the grocery store and seeing Boston Butts for sale.
You may not have had this delightful cut of pork, but I’m sure you’ve seen some Boston butts!
I grew up within 200 miles of Flint and I never heard of a Boston Cooler either. I’m more of a Black Cow (root beer float) kinda guy.
I love it!
“Take your big, black cow… and get outta here… ♪♫”
Thanks, Brendan!
I’m fairly certain that the “Boston Cooler” is a region-specific thing for us Michiganders. 🙂
Wow, I love rare finds like this. The diesel version is icing on the cake. I wonder if the diesel is what preserved this car? When most Chevettes were cheap beaters for kids nobody wanted diesels. Great find!
has the Chevette already been given the full CC treatment? I’d love to know what they had in common with the UK Vauxhall of the same name. We never got five doors, (but did get 2 and 4 door sedans) and I believe only 1.3 litres (1256 cc ? & v rare 2.3 HS/HSR models). In the UK I think the opposite is true re auto transmissions – apart from idiots like myself who teach themselves left-foot braking in them, they tend not to get thrashed and live relatively long lives
Yes, they all grew out of the late 1960s GM XP-949 programme for a small car that would be produced internationally.
It’s not as simple as that. The XP-949 was primarily a US program, to develop a sub-Vega Chevrolet, and called the H-Car. Vauxall was working on their own mini, the S-Car. And Opel was working on their Kadett replacement, the T-Car.
Chevrolet pulled the plug on their subcompact, due to a lack of perceived demand for a car smaller than the Vega. Opel was given the responsibility to develop their T-Car, to be the basis of a new global (but not US) small car, for which Vauxhall was given the job to design the 3 door hatch version.
When the Vega collapsed, GM US decided the T-Car was the best and quickest solution, so they federalized the Brazilian version of the 3 door hatch, which actually was the first of the 3 doors to go into production, before the Vauxhall. The Chevette is based on that Brazilian car, and used its engine, which had been designed by Opel. It was Opel that gets credit for the basic T-car development. GM US had essentially nothing to do with it by that time, except when they rushed it into US production.
That’s a very good, thorough yet concise reply, Paul.
Interesting timing, since just last week I photographed a 1977 Chevette for a future CC. That find got me thinking a good deal about Chevettes, and how they were such exciting and timely cars when introduced for 1976 — but who on earth would have thought that the car would be produced without major changes for 12 model years?
These later models fascinate me, since they’re really a page out of time. It would be great to see. And given that this one is a diesel, that means the survival rate for the 200 ’86 Chevettes is at least 0.5% — that’s more than I would have imagined!
“but realistically, one would have to turn off the A/C in either car to inspire any level of confidence on an inclined entrance ramp to an expressway. ”
Amen to that. On my 1983 Chevette, I called the A/C button my off ramp turbo button since the minute I pushed it, I was able to get up to speed to get off the ramp into traffic.
Out of all the cars I have owned since I started driving, I actually miss the Chevette the most. It was basic transportation but it got me where I wanted to go and never had any issues. I was able to load it up with anything that I needed to transport. The only issue I came upon was when it was time to change the plugs and wires. The dist. was under the A/C compressor. I guess GM figured the AC take rate on these cars were going to be low so they designed the engine as if it did not have A/C
Now if somebody was offering to sell me a good condition Chevette in 2017, would I buy it? Hell yes! My commute is not on the highways anymore so it would be the perfect commuter car.
Faint praise: An Air conditioned Shove-it, straining in third gear to merge, was still a rocket when compared to a 2 speed automatic transmission equipped ’61 Falcon station wagon! That Ford pig was Dangerously S-L-O-W.
The above Falcon wagon had a dealer installed air conditioner, with a HUGE Borg-Warner (?) compressor. Dialing back the temperature knob, to disengage the compressor, was a reflex action when TRYING to merge into traffic.
A 60 Comet with the 144 and Fordomatic took 27.5 seconds to 60 in a period road test.
By comparison, a 61 Falcon sedan with the 170 and stick did it in 14.5, which was actually .9 seconds faster than a 70 Maverick did with the same combo and a match for a 200/3-speed auto 70 Maverick.
I have to chuckle a bit, as those 0-60 times of 16 or 19 seconds still were both faster than my VW 1200, which sold by the millions in the US and managed to get us where we needed to get.
I realize that it’s nice to have some oomph when you want it, but folks managed to get along with 20+ second 0-60 times for a very long time; much longer in Europe. How often do you really wring out your car in full throttle acceleration?
Great point of reference, Paul.
I would say the need for a decent 0-60 time would also depend (partially) on region. When my family test-drove a mid-80’s Pontiac T1000 Chevette-twin (https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/front-lawn-classic-1983-pontiac-t1000-no-need-to-shove-it/) , the dealership (the defunct Superior Pontiac-Cadillac) was right off the Dort Hwy. exit ramp of I-69, on a stretch of expressway with a fair amount of fast-moving traffic that included many semi-tractor / trailers.
GM was really humming in Flint back then, and lots of transport for suppliers and other business was done by truck, and many merge lanes in the area are notoriously short.
My folks had a little VW in the late 60’s, but the demands of the traffic situation in the small, Ohio college town where they lived were much different than in Flint, where they moved. I think they went from that VW to a ’72 Plymouth Fury in short order (talk about a change!).
I still remember the Toyota Corona commercials proudly stating “Zero to sixty in sixteen seconds”.
Wow! Pretty insane to see one of these so well preserved. As stated above, these cars were totally unloved in their day. Most likely, the brown one was in that condition when the featured car was new. But these were in fact good cars, in that role. A Chevette would have been lucky to see an annual oil change. A wash and wax? PFFT! And still they would plod on in quiet humility. There’s something to be said for that.
I got a good laugh at that last pic, JD! You may have found the ONLY picture of a Chevette that actually tries and succeeded at making this car look dynamic! I wouldn’t have thought that was possible.
Never tried a Boston cooler, but as warm as this PDX summer has been, that sounds pretty tasty…
Since you mentioned questionable/acquired/underappreciated pleasures…
Anchovies.
sour beers.
Women who rock copious amounts of bold makeup
Brendan Small’s music
’70s stoner vans
Any cheese with veins of mold or that smells like a foot
Motorweek tested a Pontiac 1000 (basically the same car) with automatic in 1981. They got a 0-60 time of… 30 seconds, the slowest car they ever tested.
Was the parking brake on?
To be fair they did mention that it got up to 55 in a reasonable time; but that last 5 mph took a long time. Given that the national speed limit was 55 at the time, that could be considered “good enough”, albeit just barely.
They did also say that the car hadn’t been broken in yet.
Oh yeah, I remember for a few years when Ford would advertise a car’s 0-50 time, like the Fiesta ad’s did.
Incredible to find an example of this most Kleenex-like of cars in such pristine condition. And a rare diesel version at that!
My parents owned a 1979 5-door Chevette that gave excellent service for many years on my father’s 75-mile daily commute to Chicago. He bought the car with the three-speed automatic to better cope with the stop-and-go expressway traffic, in which acceleration mattered little (two teen-aged sons with newly minted driver’s licenses may have had something to do with that decision, too). A subsequent job transfer to the hilly Atlanta suburbs made the lack of power (the car could not go more than 20 MPH up a steep hill) a safety concern and the lack of air conditioning a source of great discomfort.
He traded the Chevette for a 1984 VW Rabbit Diesel, which was possibly the only car with less power on the market at the time. However, the Rabbit’s 4-speed manual provided much greater flexibility, allowing for much less excruciating hillside ascents, and the air conditioning was appropriate for the warm and humid climate.
Chevettes seem to be pretty thin on the ground these days, I honestly can’t remember the last time I saw one in the wild. As it happens two of my siblings purchased Chevettes back in the late seventies; my brother and his wife purchased one new and it was okay, in a sort of no frills, basic transportation way. This one had the four speed manual and it felt reasonably peppy, if not really quick. My sister purchased a used ‘vette with the three speed auto and it was a complete and total dog. I don’t know if the car had other issues but the few times I drove it would make its way up to 58 MPH or so and then it was as if someone was riding the brake. It would probably go a little faster than that but it wasn’t really worth the effort. I can safely say that the VW Rabbit I owned then was a more sophisticated design, had better assembly quality and was much more fun to drive than either of the Chevettes.
I unironically enjoy the taste of Malört. Especially after dinner.
It’s true – it settles the stomach!
It does! But it seems to have the opposite effect on some people…
It’s also pretty good added to a tall glass of Radler.
Car and Driver once got in hot water with Chevrolet during the 1980s because Patrick Bedard called the Chevette the “American Skoda”.
If I recall correctly, Car and Driver featured a story on third-world cars, and included the Chevette. This would have been about 1985 or 1986.
I do recall that story! Back when “C&D” still had their “irreverent” sense of humor and had not been transformed into a corporate version of “Consumer Reports”; as they are today.
How far the mighty has fallen!
Have a soft spot for Chevettes. First car I ever drove, at 14, illegally. Best friend’s car.
There’s one for auction in Auburn next week, but I’m always looking for 76-78, with a manual. This one looks nearly new, though. Crazy estimated price
http://auctionsamerica.com/events/feature-lots.cfm?Order=runorder&feature=&collection=&grouping=&category=Cars&SaleCode=AF17&ID=r0633
Count me as one who appreciates these little cars.I owned an 83 3 door for 9 years and put 189,000 miles on it. I was one of the rare people who over-maintained mine. Maybe it came from the fact that I have always done that to all my cars, or the fact that it was my daily driver, or the fact that my Dad was a mechanic by trade. My Chevette was a 5 speed manual and I immediately switched over to larger tires, better shocks and installed a rear stabilizer bar. The difference in handling was like night and day from what it was with the original setup. Mine was a very reliable little commuter scooter, never failed to get me where I had to go. I did not have AC but, living in Ohio at the time, really didn’t need it. The ventilation system with the drivers window rolled down was perfectly adequate. My only complaint was the lack of power, though take that with a grain of salt because, prior to the Chevette, my daily driver was a 68 Chevelle V8…Honestly, this little car had an interior that wore like iron. It had cloth seats that looked something like corduroy. When I sold it, the interior looked like brand new, not a worn spot on the drivers seat anywhere. The seats in the 95 Beretta that replaced the Chevette as my next daily driver were exactly the opposite..they were coming apart at the seams within two years. A co-worker ended up buying the Chevette, again, testimony to the car’s condition, and reliability..how many people would feel comfortable selling a car to a co-worker? It provided her with many more years of service. I left my position at Ohio State and never saw the car after that. I can honestly say this little car was far superior to the lousy 81 Escort, and later, 85 Lynx my buddy had. He bought both of those cars brand new and had nothing but trouble with both of them. I’d buy a Chevette again in a heartbeat, although, living in Tucson, and being older now, I don’t think I’d handle no AC very well….here’s my little Vette back in the day, alongside my 80 Monte Carlo, which I still own.
Hi, Jim.
My name’s PRNDL and I was also an overmaintainer of an ’84 Chevette.
At the time, I worked for an auto parts warehouse, so I had access to good quality parts at wholesale prices. Oil was changed religiously every 3K and all repairs done by me.
At the time, I had a ’72 Monte Carlo for summers and weekends. (Sadly, gone.) My ‘Vette was replaced by an ’89 Beretta with 2.8 & automatic. Did I mention that I lived in Columbus at the time? One significant difference is that the ‘Vette was preceded by a ’74 Datsun B210. (1300cc w. 4-speed)
Three very different ownership experiences, but each had it’s own advantages. Presented with great examples of each, I would own again.
Wow! Lots of similarities between our experiences! I bought my Chevette used at Joseph Chevrolet in Cincinnati as I lived there at the time. Four years later I moved to Mount Vernon and Began running the Chevette from there to Columbus every day. On a good day, about an hour and ten minutes door to door, one way. After a few years of that, it was getting up there in mileage so I decided it was time to get something a bit newer. That’s when I bought the 95 Beretta. Kinda funny, even when I lived in Cincy, my commute in the Chevette was pretty much all highway, RT 52 to I 275. From Mount Vernon it was RT 36 to RT 229, To I71. Guess most of the miles I put on that car were almost all highway!
Wow ~ the subject car looks like new ! .
I know these were hated from new but as mentioned they soldiered on doing Yeoman Duty for 100,000’s of miles, easily if slowly .
The City of Los Angeles bought a bunch, all white 5 doors with automatics and AC, I drove them a few times and was amazed at how slow they were ~ nearly as slow as my 1953 VW Beetle .
However, they all had four doors plus the hatch and as mentioned, great AC even if it kept the top freeway speed to about 70MPH IIRC .
Too many here have never ridden the bus or bicycle to work else they’d understand why people like my Sister were thrilled to be able to afford one .
Cheap, reliable and comfy, good for daily driving or slowly crossing America they did it all .
I’m keen to see how much the red coupe on auction goes for .
I’d rather have a Toyota RT43 but that’s me .
-Nate
This is a rare find, although, believe it or not, I’ve seen one at the big Hershey Antique Automobile Club of America (AACA) fall meet on the show field.
My experience with a Chevette was while in a car pool. One person had a 1979 four-door sedan. The road noise at 55-60 mph was extremely high. The car was in good shape. GM had obviously skimped on the sound-deadening material.
Another car-pool participant had a 1984 Renault Alliance D/L four-door sedan. It felt and rode like a Mercedes compared to the Chevette. Now, comparing the reliability of those two cars…
The local pizza joint I part-timed at during my high school years had a Chevette as a delivery car. We mockingly called it the Vette as if it had anything in common with a Corvette. What I remember most about the that car was how insanely soft the suspension was setup. We all drove it the same: Put the car in D and mash the throttle all the way down. It didn’t matter how big the potholes were, the Vette’s suspension never hit the bump-stops. I feel like those old cars with super-soft suspension setups could handle our rutted back-roads better than the stiffly-sprung suspensions of today.
By way of PS: Vernor’s is awful. My Dad grew up in Detroit. Before it was a thing here, relatives would bring it to us when they visited. That stuff will clear out your nostrils! 🙂
By way of PSS: Vernor’s and ice cream might be okay. I’m willing to try.
What a fantastic find–a showroom example of a car that hasn’t even been seen as a cockroach since the 90’s. I spotted an ’80-ish Chevette last year and it was probably the first one I’d seen on the road in a decade. From today’s perspective it’s even vaguely good-looking.
The whole show must be a fantastic experience overall, too. That Spitfire GT behind it is a rarity too–and I thought it was missing the hood at first!
Truck trend tested an ’82 5 speed 1.8 Diesel Chevette and got 0-60 in just over 20 seconds.
Motor Week tested an ’82 3 speed automatic gas 1.6 Chevette and got 0-60 in 30 seconds.
Only 0-60 time I could find on a 1.6 gas stick shift was a 1980 Chevette 15.7 on zeroto60times.com
CR tested a 80 Chevette 4dr with 1.6/4-speed and got a 15.5 to 60. In a 81 test of a Diesel/5-speed 4dr it’s 0-60 was 30 seconds. My book, which is a 80-82 test compilation of CR reports, they did not test a Chevette in 82. I have a 76 CR test of a Chevette in which it did a comparison between plain and fancy Chevettes and the base 1.4/4-speed (with 3.70 rear gears) did 0-60 in 22.2 and the fancy woodgrain side adorned one with the 1.6/auto with 4.11 gears did it in 22.1!
Hi, everyone – thanks to the helpful readership, I’ve corrected the text (thanks, PN, for the correction to the title) to reflect the proper drivetrain on this beauty. 🙂
This is what’s awesome about the CC community.
I drove both an automatic chevette and and pre turbo diesel VW. I would take the chevette in a speed contest anytime!
The neighborhood jock on his bike might blow your doors of the chevette, but his baby brother on his Fisher Price trike would give you a run for the money in the diesel VW!
I had done some online reading as I was sure I had seen chevette automatic diesels before finding out they were older (thanks for the correction Joseph) and a Wikipedia reference said there were only 346 diesel chevettes made in 1986, period.
If correct, this is one rare little Chevy!
After my brother totaled mom’s 1965 Dodge Dart sedan (225 /6, Torqueflyte, the car of my high school years) in 1979, mom replaced it with a not quite new 1978 Chevette 3 door hatch (1.8 L, auto, A/C). Compared to the Dart, it was glacial. Mom held onto it for about 7 years. TSome memorable things:
Acceleration was asthmatic. I actually deliberately would leave the A/C on at idle, start out then turn it off so to get that ‘nitrous-boost’ a la Mad Max’s Interceptor. About the only ‘fun’ moment I recall in driving that car. Atlanta is very hilly and it managed get up them, albeit slowly. On dry roads it handled okay, but it was not a good bad weather car (more likely due to mom always keeping worn tires on as long as possible).
The transmission leaked like a sieve after about 4 years. This is when I learned about the importance of keeping up the level of transmission fluid. The slippage was particularly bad when making sharp right turns. It was a long time before mom did something about it.
The timing belt snapped on me and my step dad came to get me; a friend of his who worked on cars for fun and profit put in a new one shortly thereafter. I remember what was left of it looked like a blown steel belted radial tire.
The hatchback was very roomy–I was able to haul everything from my college dorm in one trip. With the back seat down and a comforter blanket that mom kept in the back, it was adequate in making out with my g/f at the time.
It had front disc brakes – Mom managed to ignore the screeching sound of the rotors being lathed to death for almost 6 months when the calipers on the right side got misaligned. I was away at college and discovered this when I got home. (“Mom! when are you getting your brakes looked at??”)
Just before finishing grad school out of state, mom finally relented and got a new 1987 Chrysler New Yorker. I was never permitted to drive that car, but I was content to borrow dad’s 1975 Toyota SR-5 Hi-Lux, which I’m sure was infinitely more fun to drive. I miss her 1965 Dart because it was sort of funky, but I’ve never missed the Chevette. Mom wanted something to move her from Point A to Point B and back in the penurious way possible, and it was the right car for her at the right time. I guess.
It’s frightning to think Chevy Chevette’s are littering the grounds at car shows! Who in their right mind would even bother to give a Chevette a glance? But car shows aren’t what they used to be anymore. There are people showing off rubbish from the malaise era way too often nowadays. I remember those clunkers from that forgettable time in automotive history and I can’t believe anyone would go ga-ga over a Chevette or a Citation for that matter. There should be a rule that the cutoff for showing a car at show should be no newer than 1970 and resume with 2005 to current day cars to show. 2005 is generally the year regarded as the American auto industry coming back to its senses.
I don’t know, there are those of us who can’t afford the escalating costs of what some consider show-worthy. There’s a lot of snobbery in the car-show scene; it isn’t helpful to the hobby. If it has 4 wheels, there’s a fan club for it!
Y’know, just looking at a car and marveling that someone has had the desire to keep it in good condition isn’t going ‘ga-ga’ over it. I do not have an interest in owning a diesel vehicle yet I can look at the pictures posted above and enjoy looking over the ’86 Chevette without making baby noises.
If I’m not mistaken Jimmy Carter gave a televised address to the nation in 1979 where he used the word ‘malaise’. How would that apply to a 1971 model year automobile? I fail to see the connection myself.
If I saw a 1976 Chevette at a car show I’d go over and give it a look. I haven’t seen one in the wild in ages. Like it or not, it’s now a 41-year-old car and that’s a long time for a vehicle to still be around in running condition. Why shouldn’t it be allowed entrance to a car show?
Hello Carter: The term “Malaise Era” was coined by automotive photographer and author Murilee Martin. Based on his definition, 1971 is not part of the Malaise Era. Check out his article: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/05/what-about-the-malaise-era-more-specifically-what-about-this-1979-ford-granada/
Well frankly, I’ve gotten a bit tired of seeing the same, over-restored, millionaire’s trailer-queens at all the shows. I just watched a televised Mecum auto auction. I started to get excited because in the line-up outside, behind a Porsche, a Cobra and a Ferrari, was a mid-70s Pinto Squire wagon – the one with the faux-wood on the sides.
I was very disappointed though when I didn’t see it go up on the auction-block!
The ‘bargain’ of the show was an ’85 Alfa Romeo Graduate roadster, that went for $15K.
Happy Motoring, Mark