As the owner of a Corvair myself, I can attest that the little Chevy with a dubious reputation is actually a sensible collector car…as long as you buy a good one. This 1966 model has all the rear suspension improvements that Chevrolet implemented for 1965, plenty of power for modern driving, and a Powerglide for those who don’t want to shift gears. It’s for sale on Facebook Marketplace in Hanover, Pennsylvania, with an asking price of $11,500.
As many of us know, Corvair production plummeted for 1966 based largely on the success of the new Mustang; while Chevy managed to move 235,538 Corvairs in 1965 (not bad), they only sold 103,743 in 1966. The drivetrains were basically unchanged (except for some new “Saginaw” manual transmissions), and this car has the 110-horsepower 164 with the aforementioned Powerglide, which was undoubtedly a popular combination. The 110 had a hotter cam (see specs here) than the standard 95-horsepower engine, in addition to a higher compression ratio (9:1 vs. 8.25:1). Interestingly, Chevrolet showed both gross and net horsepower curves in their factory materials (see here), and the 110-horsepower 164 peaked at 90 horsepower net. When combined with a Powerglide, that’s still enough power to easily keep up with traffic today as long as you’re a little patient getting off the line, although the 3.55:1 final drive ratio might have the engine singing a little more than you’re accustomed to. Fortunately, you don’t really hear that engine noise out on the road; it’s all behind you.
The seller of this Corvair says that it “starts and idles properly” and that the Powerglide “functions as intended.” They also say that the car “runs and drives,” but the ever-present “well” is missing from that statement, so a test drive may be in order. Luckily, Corvair parts are very easy to source and information is very easy to find. Corvairs are simple cars that simply take a little getting used to if you’re used to front-engined cars with cast-iron everything.
A Corvair is also a fairly comfortable car for longer-distance cruising, although I will admit that I built seat extenders for mine to give my six-foot frame three extra inches of legroom. The bucket seats are OK (they’re the same ones GM used in many of their “sporty” models), and the flat floor gives your right leg somewhere to stretch, especially without the shifter on the floor that my convertible has. Interior changes for 1966 were mostly cosmetic; Monza dashboards were painted black rather than argent as they were in 1965, and the horn button got a slight update. Interior fabrics and door panel designs were likewise updated, and this example has the “Bright Blue” vinyl that went with the (probable) exterior color of Marina Blue.
The seller says the tires are new, which is good, because P185/80R13s are getting hard to find; in fact, unless you want to buy expensive boutique rubber, these Maxxis tires are your only choice. Maxxis seems to produce a run every once in a while, which makes me nervous, because my ’65 will be due for new tires within the next two years or so. The wheel covers were changed for 1966, and this image shows that there is no visible rust in some of a late-model Corvair’s most obvious spots, the rear quarter panel in front of and behind the wheelwell. Also, the bright rocker and wheelwell trim is still attached, meaning that if any rust work was done, it was probably done with metal.
The Corvair was apparently repainted “Corvette Blue” in 1997, and there are “no visible signs of rust.”
Yes, the beautiful second-generation Corvair is an attention-grabber wherever you go, and as an owner myself, I can tell you that as long as you buy a decent one, it’s a fairly low-maintenance collectible. It gets 20-plus miles per gallon in average driving (in my experience), keeps up with 75-mile-per-hour traffic, and is a little different from your average 1960s collector fare. This one seems to be a pretty nice example.
Note: As of Sunday, it looks like this one is marked as having a sale “pending,” so this Corvair might be off the market. Don’t worry. There are plenty to go around.
Related Reading
Curbside Classic: 1966 Chevrolet Corvair Monza – The Best European Car Ever Made In America (by Paul N)
Ultra-Low-Mileage 1969 Chevrolet Corvairs: More Common Than You’d Expect (by me)
Museum Classics: Ypsilanti Automotive Heritage Museum, Part II – The Corvairs (by me)
Vintage Car Life Road Test: 1968 Chevrolet Corvair Monza – “This Really Enjoyable Automobile Deserves A Much Better Fate” (by Aaron Severson)
This car is absolutely stunning in appearance. If it drives half as good as it looks, it’s quite a bargain at $11.5k.
The second generation Corvair is truly under appreciated. Superior to the new Mustang in all respects. This is what the car should have been in the first place, but we all know how that story went. By 1966 the Corvair, no matter how improved, just couldn’t overcome Gen. 1’s reputation. The conventional, but brilliantly marketed Mustang, was the final blow. Nader had little to do with it, as his book didn’t come out until the handwriting was on the wall. In typical GM fashion, the car was canceled after being substantially improved.
“Superior to the new Mustang in all respects”
That is quite a statement. Please tell us how that is so.
See Paul’s previous piece on the Gen 2 Corvair. Sums up perfectly why this was such a unique, desirable car. Ford invented the pony car with the Mustang, and its pleasant demeanor and brilliant marketing made it wildly successful, but underneath it was still basically a Falcon.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1966-chevrolet-corvair-monza-the-best-european-car-ever-made-in-america/
Nice deflection. You said: “Superior to the new Mustang in all respects”.
I have read the article you linked before. In no way does it prove your assertion.
The 1stG Corvair was an uncomfortable mess. The 2ndG was beautiful and handled better, but was still uncomfortable in really cold weather or really hot weather. No matter what options were ordered for the Corvair, they were still slow, even the Turbo. Read the vintage tests of the Turbo, it was a drivability mess.
Yes Mustangs were Falcon based, but one could option them from a grocery getter special to the 271hp GT with disc brakes and tight suspension. Carrol Shelby turned the lowly Falcon into a full on race car quite easily. The “lowly” Falcon platform was able to be turned into a bunch of different products, the Corvair was a dead end: rear engine cars were and are a niche product. Yes a lot of VWs were sold but the market moved past them to FWD for family cars……hence the Rabbit and its success.
No matter how much GM could have spent on the Corvair, it was going to be nothing but a tiny blip in sales in the US market.
As a long term owner both a 65 Mustang with 6 cylinder and a 65 Monza convertible, both equipped with an automatic, stating “all respects” is a little over zealous. My Monza handled vastly better, had more comfortable seating, factory mounting points for shoulder belts for increased safety, in coupe form better visibility, a fuel tank mounted / isolated from the cabin, and a much better instrument panel with actual number on the gauge faces. I can also say the unibody construction felt stronger -less willowy than the Mustang
The Mustang was an easy straight line cruiser with more scoot, power steering that lacked any road feel, seats as accommodating as my brick front steps, a dead reliable heater that wouldn’t give me carbon monoxide poisoning like the Monza, and the top of the gas tank as the trunk floor (I love the splash of fuel in the cabin after a rear end collision). Working in the engine bay while it was running without the hot exhaust gases blowing directly on my ankles and up my body into my face was also a boon.
OK a question: “, and a much better instrument panel with actual number on the gauge faces.” HUH? All the Monza panels I have seen have a speedometer and a gas gauge with rarely a clock in the middle. The standard Mustang panel had a fuel and temp with sweep speedo with numbers. The 65 GT panel (standard for all 66s) had a full set of gauges.
I bought my youngest son a 1965 Corvair Corsa after he fell in love with it at first sight. It was an abandoned impound at a friend’s holding lot. It had the 140 HP 4 carburetor engine and the Corvair 4 speed. After a pinion bearing in the differential unscrewed it’s retainer when the locking tab broke, I purchased a 1966 transmission and diferntial from a friend and installed it.
As purchased, the unique to the 140 hp were installed backwards so the balance/PCV tube had long hoses connecting the two heads to the balance tube. The primary carburetors were wrong and not even the same, secondaries were correct. I bought a good rebuildable pair at Corvair Ranch in PA. Engine had the normal oil leaks and headers with glass packs and no lower sheet metal nor heater hoses. Since I had to drop it to switch transaxles, I ordered a full engine gasket set from Clark’s Corvair parts. Engine had .030 oversize pistons and cylinders, an Otto OT20 cam, so it wasn’t a stock 140. The cm gear was not fully seated and installed slightly off as the keyway was not lined up on the key (press fit gear). I was able to order a service manual and the 1966 suplement for the car to get the Saginaw transmission information. I picked up a couple more engines and a 1964 Monza. The extra engines provided the missing lower sheet metal and I was able to located a pair of 140 HP exhaust manifolds. The mufflers and tailpipes were still available from Walker, hardest item to find was the left side muffler bracket. Since many of the studs for the heads and rear housing were improperly installed I made a pair of stud installers from some hex CRES bar stock and some 1/4″ square stock length gauges. Once everything was prepped I reassembled the engine using teniques I learned from a friend who built VW and Porsche engines.
That is a lovely car in a great colour. A Corvair is definitely on my wish list at some point. Not sure I could manage an automatic transmission though. They remain a great value to money classic as well as an interesting technical piece.
I came up with 4 choices of that tire size at America’s Tires.
https://www.americastire.com/fitmentresult/tires/size/185-80-13
If it was mine, I’d switch it to 14s. Steel wheels with the base hubcaps and maybe trim rings. I have a hard time warming up to full wheel covers. Or some period-correct alloys.
A nice set of 14 in Torq-Thrusts would look very nice if one could find the right size and offset.
Three of those four are trailer tires.
The Maxxis has a speed rating of 67 MPH. The others have a speed rating from 82 to 87 mph.
87 seems fast enough for any Corvair.
I take it back, that Maxxis option is also a trailer tire. None of those four are meant for cars.
It’s a free country, but I’ve never heard anyone recommend using a trailer tire on a car.
https://www.prioritytire.com/blog/car-tires-vs-trailer-tires-full-comparison?srsltid=AfmBOopOSJc5BbKTzcmFNoGH90wA7Cy3Y0fKOkAI_8vHbkxw2xEwlzEw
This is the Maxxis P185/80R13:
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Maxxis-MA-1-Performance-P185-80R13-90S-Passenger-Tire-Fits-1984-85-Pontiac-Fiero-Sport-1988-89-Chevrolet-Cavalier-Base/621184725?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=12601&selectedOfferId=5E83D4ED9DD931E8AE7050B85592D8F5&conditionGroupCode=1&sourceid=dsn_gdn_2005b0c9-e4c7-4f46-8aaa-443883a5e447&veh=dsn&wmlspartner=dsn_gdn_2005b0c9-e4c7-4f46-8aaa-443883a5e447&cn=00c3_fy27_mp_mp_lo_int_dis_pmax-main&wl9=pla&wl11=online&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=23143211640&gbraid=0AAAAADmfBIorTQJtKzXrs53gb_Ke69Uzy&gclid=CjwKCAjwpK3SBhASEiwAtV1SPP-KrjL5pLzoo6O8FobVZ3n8JSQNJzwH-RGrN2XBYZd9LhAk0z42XRoCIOEQAvD_BwE
185/70/13s have a lot more selection……but like was said above, 14in wheels mean a lot better selection.
Ticketed at 96 mph in my 65 Monza! Buried the “Needle” on my 64 Corsair many times! Loved those cars! Hated the “heater system”!
Yes, a very sweet ‘Vair indeed. Could I live with the PG? Perhaps. I’ve come to understand that the PG was not as slow as it was often made out to be. Yes, the long slow engine drone until the 1-2 shift makes it sound even slower, but period tests show that it was as quick or quicker than the 3-speed manual. But obviously the 4-speed is preferable.
This is a very nice example, and looks like a reasonable price if there are no hidden surprises. Corvairs are indeed simple cars and once you get used to them very easy to work on. This winter I’ll be dropping the 140 out of my “65 Corsa to do the intake valve seals and replace the seal around the engine sheet metal. (Thank goodness for Clark’s Corvair parts, they seem to have just about anything you might need.)
I’m currently pondering wheel/tire choices, right now it has a set of 15 inch wheels from a mid ’80s Camaro, too much tire and wrong look IMO.
The powerglide would be a deal breaker for me, but this will be a nice driver for someone.
You’re bringing back memories of the summer of 1965 and my father’s last few months as manager of the Johnstown, PA Chevrolet dealership. Knowing he was leaving (but keeping it quiet from the family, except possibly mom) I was quite surprised when he let his silver blue Impala SS coupe go and brought home a maroon Monza otherwise identical to the article’s car. That was his company car for the final three months he was at the store, and he certainly turned a deliberately blind eye to hie 15 year old son taking the car out thru the neighborhood on weekends. As long as I kept it off Menoher Blvd (PA Route 271) he trusted me me with the car. Unfortunately, that’s the closest I ever came to owning one.
Still consider it the best, and most desirable, Chevrolet ever made
I had a PG Corvair Rampside and it was surpisingly nice to drive. Of course on the vans and pickups the VERRRRY LOOONG shift linkage with multiple joints makes shifting the manuals very much an acquired skill.
The old joke amongst Corvair people about the Corvair Powerglide:
Find an old Corvair in the weeds, buy it, drag it home. Pull the engine, do a complete rebuild. All new brake parts. New wiring harnesses, all the body seals, complete new interior, fix the rust holes, repaint – oops – forgot about the automatic transmission. Pull the dipstick, nothing but a couple drops of a mysterious tar-like substance. Whaddya do?
Put in six quarts of Dexron and drive it!
Honestly, the Corvair PG is about the most indestructible element of the whole car. Two hydraulic pumps, and internal components apparently sized the same as the PGs that went behind the 409 V-8.
It’s one, great, looker!
Nice although I prefer the 1st. generation body style .
Anytime you fail to see clear statements about NO RUST / BONDO be suspicious ! .
It is true that no one who’s actually driven a PowerGlide Corvair thinks its slow .
-Nate
I have driven several Corvairs with the PG, a few GTOs and 442s with the PG along with Camaros and Firebirds with it.
The Corvairs were stone cold dogs, period. They did not have enough torque to get them moving in town and at highway speed, no passing gear.
GM V8 models had the torque to move smartly in traffic and on the highway but still did not have the versatility of the 3 speeds from Mopar and Ford.
GTOs and 442s did not use Powerglide, they used the Buick-built Super Turbine 300, which was similar to Powerglide in mechanical layout, but did not work the same.
Yep, you are correct, they did not come from the factory with the PG. But three of my buddies changed from a ST to PG after blowing them up. My best friends dad owned a junkyard in the 70s and there were tons of PGs they could have for free. They found ONE out of about 40 with the BOP bolt pattern and the other two they used some sort of adapter kit. Another friend had a 67 LeMans 326-2V with Olds Jetaway. They were fine with V8s.
Either one sucked compared to a THM350/400 however.
The Corvair desperately needed a three speed auto just for a part throttle kick down at around 35 to 40 mph. The PG was just horrible in it.
OK, fair enough. I’ve noticed that a lot of people don’t realize the ST-300 and PG are different transmissions, and I was wrongly thinking you were making the same mistake. My bad.
I came across a pale blue 65 Corsa convertible the other day. Man was it pretty. I’ve always thought the 2nd gen Corvair was the most beautiful car of the entire 1960s. I would love to have one.
Apparently my ability to upload photos is busted. Here’s a link to that Corsa.
https://i0.wp.com/blog.jimgrey.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/1965-Chevrolet-Corvair-6-26.jpg
That’s a beauty, Jim. It looks a lot like mine only nicer. 🙂
I prefer your white top to the black!
Beautiful Classic 66 Corvair Shown here …Love the Marina Blue Color.. have no doubt at all this little Coupe will sell especially at that price. I used to own a 65 Corvair Corsa Coupe back in the day .. it was White with a Red Interior . It also had the 140hp engine with a manual transmission… I put a set set of Chrome Wheels and Wider Tires on her . She was surprisingly quick and nimble. Put a lot off my miles on that Corvair and loved every mile up until I sold her and bought a brand new 70 Plymouth Duster 340 from my Local Dealership June 03 1970. I think the Corvair got a bad rap from Ralph Nader..but one should really drive one to see that for themselves.
I was 15 at the end of the 60’s. Never much noticed the Vair until I saw a first Gen where someone had installed a record player turntable under the dash on springs. Must have been an early attempt at an 8 track.
The second Gen car was definitely a style upgrade.
Wonder why no one seemed to make much noise about the rear engined 911? I know the early cars had the swing-out rear end too.
A huge issue was made over it. It is called trailing throttle oversteer or lift throttle oversteer. Get off the throttle too fast in a tight turn in an 80s and older 911 and you will be pointing the other direction real fast. Modern 911s use computers to limit that very dangerous process.
In those old 911s you really had to know what you were doing to push them to their limits. Corvettes, XK-Es and Sunbeam Tigers were much more forgiving at the limit.