Cohort RalfK (Don Kincl) has posted some finds from a walk in his neighborhood in Puyallup, WA. One that caught my eye was this 1967 Chevy II 100 two door sedan. Why? Well, having had Corvairs on the brain recently, it truly is the anti-Corvair, with its tall stance and boxy body. And of course, original cars like this are getting quite uncommon, especially these, as so many Chevy IIs gave up their bodies to a hotter calling.
I always love the brochure shots for the cheapest stripper cars; they’re inevitably in settings totally unfaithful to their actual owners and use. Here’s a fine gentleman in his suit picking up two stylish women with their shopping at an upscale mall in his four-cylinder 100. Right. Should be a cheap old codger picking up his dowdy wife at the Salvation Army thrift store.
Yes, the Chevy II 100 four cylinder was “Chevrolet’s easiest to own,” exactly $38 cheaper than the Corvair 500 coupe.
But then the Corvair 500 had a bigger, more powerful and much smoother 6-cylinder engine, and of course a very handsome hardtop coupe body. Never mind four wheel independent suspension and the best handling of any American car. What a steal for an additional 38 bucks.
Note: a rerun of an older post.
Has CC covered the gestation of the Chevy II from when GM realized that its somewhat exotic compacts weren’t what the market demanded to when the Chevy II/Nova reached production? I’m curious what best handling means in this context. Was there ever a test that demonstrated the second generation Corvair’s superiority to the Valiant or GT350, two cars which actually dominated competitions in relatively stock trim?
The 1st gen Corvair didn’t put in a huge effort in SCCA racing classes. Maybe because of the suspension geometry. The Europeans had essentially invented sports car racing and the Germans, Italians and English had all of the right people behind them. The 2nd gen car gathered some success and a Yenko Stinger was D Production champion in 1966. But then the Camaro came out and all of Chevrolet’s backdoor support went to that. In addition, Group 44 had factory support and major publicity behind them.
I consider it a tragedy that the Corvair was not embraced by Americans. It would have given us a different focus on performance and better prepared us for the small car revolution of the Seventies and beyond. I don’t care mush for the 1st gen Corvair and think it’s unattractive. But the 2nd gen looks great and had decent power and handling.
Had a 62 corvair, dad bought it new for mom and I got it in 65 when dad died. I had front suspension and oil pump problems fixed. Plus I had a few times going around a curve and the the rear end went in front. When did these chevy 11 come out, would have been a lot better than the corvair. I belong to a facebook corvair club, but not really a fan. Late in life I’ve learned to stay away from American vehicles.
Agreed. You could include Ford Mavericks in that group, Many of those gave up their life as a daily driver to become a drag strip terror.
Sheesh, only $38 measely more dollars. Even in 1967, that was a paltry sum for all you got with a still handsome Corvair hardtop over a stodgy 4-cylinder Chevy II 2-door sedan. Even with the Corvair’s bad reputation by then (whether deserved or not), it’s still a no-brainer as to which was a better buy.
A comparison of sales between the two for that year would be interesting.
There’s our sales info right on our front page:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/us-car-sales-and-market-share-by-brand-and-model-category-1946-1975/
Corvair: 27k; Chevy II: 107k Not a good year for either of them. The new Camaro was a prime reason.
After two years, the Corvair 500 would be worth $200 more in trade than a four-cylinder Chevy II 100, albeit $75 less than a six-cylinder Chevy II. (The trade didn’t care much for the Corvair by the end, but they REALLY didn’t like the four-cylinder Chevy II.)
Yes, a Corvair was a better car than the Chevy II. But some people preferred a simple uninteresting car. The Corvair was exotic, the Chevy II was safe and understandable. GM is filled with lovers of new ideas, but most drivers just needed a daily driver.
It’s always been like that. A manufacturer will come up with some terrific, revolutionary design and the buying public will ‘claim’ it’s what they’ve been waiting for.
But when they actually put the new car into production and it comes down to laying down their hard-earned cash, suddenly, those same consumers all go to the tried-and-true, safe, boring option. The Corvair versus the Falcon is a perfect example; they loved the Corvair but bought way more Falcons.
A “4, buzzer” would be like a lawn mower engine in this car..lol
Surprised to know the 153 Super-Thrift (man. 3sp) was available in the 1969 Chevrolet Nova 4-Door Sedan .The longest radiator shroud in existence? She thus obtained an estimated acceleration of 18.1 sec for the 0-60 and a quarter mile time of 21.7 sec.
https://www.automobile-catalog.com/performance/1968/102620/chevrolet_chevy_ii_nova_coupe_153_super-thrift.html https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/the-little-engines-that-could-part-4-six-minus-two-equals-roughly-unpopular/
Was 67 the last year for the original style Nova ? The next generation Nova was better looking and not so boxy.
Yes. 68 Started the “new shape” (still called “chevy II” Nova though).
Now as then these were good looking and completely familiar cars to the average American buyer .
In 1967 $38 was a weeks pay for most Americans, not a small amount of $ .
Because I like driving I may well have bought a Corvair over Chevy II, the 4 banger was a non starter .
-Nate
The first car that my Uncle purchased sight unseen, over the telephone, was a Chevy II for his wife to drive, in the mid 1960’s.
Today’s twientysomethings may not believe this, but at the time this was a quite unusual and novel way to buy a brand new car.
My Uncle said that he called his lifelong school chum and Chevy dealer owner, requesting a 4 door Chevy II, with automatic transmission, a heater, and “Not a dayum thing else. Make it as low cost as possible, please”.
The dealer delivered a 4 cylinder,semi automatic transmission, baby kaka brown model. Unk and Aunt drove it over the weekend, Unk stopped by the Chevy dealer on the way to work and wrote a check for it
My Aunt loved it, because it was slow and predictable and she could see all four corners from the driver’s seat. “I like a car that won’t get away from me” she often said.
My Uncle despised it so much he never drove it again after the weekend test drive.My cousin’s first drives were moving the “Brown Turd” (as Unk and his sons referred to it, out of my Aunt’s hearing range) out of the way so my Uncle could drive his own car,
A Western Auto added below dash A/C unit helped to tame the Oklahoma heat, It made the glacial acceleration of the 4 banger even more nonexistent,
My Aunt often forgot to pull the semi-automatic transmission down into low gear when leaving a stop sign. Drivers behind her shook their heads in irritation.
It proved to be a reliable and durable car. My Aunt and her two later college aged sons and lots of deferred maintenancecould not kill it! Gawd knows the boys tried.
Finally, about twenty five years later, my Uncle donated it to his church as nobody in that small town who knew them and the car would buy it.
There’s been a lot of speculation over the years as to why Chevy continued to produce the Corvair after Nader’s hit piece. Some folks say GM kept making them just to show they wouldn’t be cowed by Nader. Some conjecture that they were trying to recover the R&D money they spent developing the 2nd generation cars. the 27k units sold in 1967 was a drop in the bucket towards Chevrolet’s total sales, and it’s impossible to know if the Corvairs were even selling at a profit in the later years.
Was Corvair a better “driver’s car”? Undoubtedly. But the sales figures show that that’s not what folks wanted.
Earlier this month, Corvair enthusiast Tony Richards posted a YouTube video of an interview he conducted with David Newell. Dave is acknowledged as the go-to person when it comes to Chevrolet history, including the history of the Corvair.
Dave asserts that a combination of mechanical issues, ill-advised actions of GM personnel, and public perception had a hand in the decision to stop production of Corvairs.
This is contrary to the general perception that Ralph Nader killed the Corvair. In fact, Chevrolet had already decided to discontinue Corvair production at the end of the 1967 model year, and furthermore, that decision was made back in December, 1964, months before Nader published Unsafe at Any Speed!
Click or tap on the following link to see the full interview.
I think you’ll be intrigued by Dave’s insights, some of which a little known among Corvair enthusiasts today.