(curbside images by captchris from the CC Cohort)
(first posted 3/29/2012) Sometimes being great just isn’t good enough. In every objective parameter, the 1961 – 1965 Corvair Greenbrier had the VW bus beat hands down: twice the horsepower, wider seats, better driving position, superior visibility, roll down rear windows, a smoother ride, available automatic, more luggage space, four headlights(!). Geez; what more do you want, folks? Yet the Greenbrier, one of the most advanced and daring vehicles ever built by GM, failed. No wonder GM gave up trying to build exceptional vehicles; why bother?
The story of the Corvair Greenbrier and its commercial van and Rampside pickup (CC here) variants starts out the same way as the Corvair itself: a response to the rapidly growing inroads the VW was making, in both Beetle form as well as the bus and pickup. The VW micro-bus especially carved out a nice little niche left completely uncontested by the American manufacturers: an efficient, compact people mover.
All Detroit had on tap were its conventional wagons, which as they got ever longer and lower, were ever less inviting for certain folks to clamber into their third row seats, never mind the single-digit fuel economy.
Most of the Suburban-type vehicles suffered from lack of any back doors altogether. The VW micro-bus, with its big barn-doors and tall upright seating, found favor with everything from families to churches to those with wanderlust, given its easy conversion into a camper.
It only made sense that if GM was going to build a bigger and better VW sedan, why not build a better VW bus? And so they did; which was a substantial undertaking. But this was the bold, daring and ambitious GM of the end of the fifties: and so they built a completely new unitized body, borrowed a front suspension from other Chevys, and popped in the air-cooled rear engine and transaxle from the Corvair sedans (having fortified a few of its more vulnerable components). The goal, and result, was to make a highly versatile vehicle, with “at least nine lives”.
Here are all nine. Except I don’t see a bunch of stoned kids driving through an Iowa field to get to a remote quarry swimming hole to go skinny dipping. I guess Chevy hadn’t anticipated that quite yet. Nine lives was just a starting point; Greenbriers could be used in hundreds of ways that folks had never thought of. Just needed a bit of creativity. That was just a few years away.
I look at these old brochure shots and think: “What were folks not thinking?” This was the true origin of the American mini-van: compact, roomy, comfortable ride, reasonable amenities, automatic transmission available; what more do you want folks? Fake wood paneling? Probably.
Or this? As much as I have a certain perverse and suicidal fondness for these scary-handling, traction-less, rough-riding, noisy-engined, solid-axled, rear-brake-locking shit-boxes (I owned a Dodge A100), the front-mid engined Econoline and its ilk were in a different league altogether from the Greenbrier, in so many ways. Not size and price-wise; the Econoline and Greenbrier were squared off perfectly that way.
The Greenbrier rode, handled and steered and went like; well, let’s say unlike anything else out there at the time, unless Tatra had made a mini-van. With its 80 hp (95 – 110 in ’64 -’65) it had double the power of the VW bus, allowing actual American-style cruising speeds, instead of fighting headwinds at 43 mph, and hills at 31 mph. Not that the Greenbrier was exactly brimming with power, but it did the job, most happily with the optional four-speed stick.
That’s not how Mrs. Lloyd-Jones’ Greenbrier was equipped; it had the Powerglide. Just as well, as it only enhanced the capabilities of the all-time greatest wheeled non-four-wheel-drive snow-mobile in the world, never mind my grade-school neighborhood in Iowa City. On really snowy mornings, we’d run down to their house, and pile in her Greenbrier, along with the about 15 other kids from the neighborhood.
Please note that I said “down” to her house; the Lloyd-Jones lived half-way down a sloping dead end that ended down by the mud flats near the river. Didn’t matter; she’d put it into gear, the little six way back there would spool up like a city bus engine, and when the torque converter wouldn’t convert any further torque, the Greenbrier would slowly crunch its way through a foot of fresh snow, uphill, never spinning a wheel. The more kids, the better the traction. Never once was the Lloyd-Jones Lincoln School Express late or canceled. (BTW we didn’t have “snow holidays” back then; you either came, by Greenbrier or on foot, or didn’t).
And on the way to Lincoln School, we’d pass by Ted Gay’s house, where their Econoline Station Bus wasn’t leaving the station; level driveway and street notwithstanding. And we’d holler at Ted through the Greenbrier’s full-roll-down rear windows, as he trudged to school in his rubber galoshes. “Sucks to be you!” The downside of those windows were that one of Ted’s well-aimed snowballs could come flying right through. That can’t happen in a VW bus or Econoline.
If I was late, I’d have to find a third-class seat in the luggage area right over the engine, which was much deeper and longer than the VW’s; the distinctive soft and purring moan under my butt undoubtedly patterned my deep and lasting love for Corvairs, and greatly enhanced the thrill of having a Cor-snow-vair as my first car.
As the ad says: Traveling Fun Starts With A Greenbrier Sports Wagon.
Enough about the horrors of Iowa winters during the “Little Ice Age”; from the sound of things lately, Iowa has slipped down to Louisiana. But summer did eventually come back then (in the first week of June), and it was time to go camping. Well, not the Niedermeyers; my father had more than his fill of all the camping he was never actually going to do in WWII. But some families indulged in that sort of thing, and the Greenbrier had optional camping accessories that would make a VW Westfalia blush: roof top tents, awnings, cabinets, fold down beds, cooking arrangements of some sort or another; double ovens, as far as I know.
Here are the Not-Niedermeyers, my not-father all relaxed and mellow, working on his tan and puffing on his pipe while waiting for the thick not-steak to get to a perfect not-medium rare, enjoying a nice lakeside camping spot with their one and only beloved and precious child Paul.
And then when Paul Not-Niedermeyer turned eighteen, and was ready to hit the road, his not-parents gave him the keys to the Greenbrier camper and said: “Bon-voyage, dear son. Go out and have some adventures; it’s an exciting big world beckoning out there. Oh, and here’s some money. Most of all, have lots of fun with the girls the Greenbrier will attract like flypaper, and don’t worry about staining the cushions”.
Well, I did have a bit of fun in the back of someone’s Greenbrier after I left home, although the cushions were in about this shape, and the stains were (mostly) from vomit. A bunch of guys from Chicago ended up in Iowa City, and I worked with them (briefly) on a construction job. They shared a Greenbrier almost exactly like this one, although I suspect what rust it had was a bit more malignant than the superficial rust-ina this California van is sporting.
Man, was I jealous. I suppose I could have worked a bit longer digging foundations and bought my own. But my job-ADD wasn’t quite up to that; it was easier to stick out a thumb and just MM about having one, and how I would fix it up, and that 140 hp engine I would put in it, and the anti-sway bar, and the wheels…….well, as I said earlier, I did end eventually up with a Dodge A100, but that’s another story. But there’s a lesson somewhere there, one I’m still working on.
Theirs had the three-speed stick like this one too…eerily familiar indeed. I drove it once or twice, after I was the only one still able to; never did like getting really sauced. I didn’t realize how much it felt like a small-scale GM transit bus until I drove one of those a few years later. The distant motor, which was well-hushed, especially with a few bodies strewn around back there. The slow shifter (well, the transit buses had “Powerglides”).
The steering, like the Corvair sedan’s, was a bit slower and vaguer than the VW’s. But the accommodations up front were decidedly better: the seating position was much less hunch-back provoking; almost sedan-like. Great visibility too, to make sure no drunks or lovers in the field by the quarry are going to be run over. And excellent braking balance in case I didn’t see one of them until it was almost too late. And of course the traction, in case I had to just drive on over them…but I covered that all-too-well already. “Can I have another drive?”
Oh, handling; we haven’t talked about that yet. Saving the best for last, of course. Like all things Corvair, it’s a bit of a multi-faceted story, although less controversial than the sedan. For one, the Greenbrier had a substantially better weight distribution, thanks to the driver’s compartment being over the front wheels. That advantage might have been partially offset by its shorter wheelbase. But the real issue is, what are we comparing the Greenbrier to?
The Corvair was pitched (literally) as a family sedan, at least in the beginning. So folks stepping out of their front-engined, rwd Bulgemobile might have their hands full (or heads cracked) when the unfamiliar Corvair exhibited some unexpected tendencies when they entered a turn too fast and jammed on the brakes.
But the Greenbrier was up against the VW bus and the Econoline. Hardy har har! Two of the most wretchedly-handling boxes ever put on wheels (that’s the pre-1968 VW bus I speak ill of). The Econoline’s two cart axles would hop, skip and lurch over every minor imperfection in the road; never mind a bumpy curve. The rear wheels were so lightly loaded, even its feeble little six would light the inner one up accelerating out of a tight corner.
Compared to those two, the Greenbrier was a Porsche 911; one of the later ones at that. Sure it would oversteer, and maybe even jack up some, like these on an autocross course (yes; there are two classes just for Greenbriers). With a camber-compensating spring, some good shocks, and a 140 hp engine, these can be pretty nimble indeed.
Of course, handling isn’t just about reeling in a badly executed corner at 9/10ths, or flipping out of one. When it came to all-round ride/handling/roadability/braking/steering, the Grrrreenbrier was in a distant class of its own. At least until the second gen VW bus came along in 1968, especially if it had a Corvair engine swapped into it, like a guy who came to smoke out some errant bees in our house did to his. Fit like a charm, like this one here. He said the thing would just whistle over the Donner Pass. I believed him, after he gave me a short ride.
Ok, so America didn’t take a shine to the Greenbrier. Like the Corvair sedan, 1961 was the best year sales-wise, with some 18,500 sold. By 1964, it was 6k. The only reason some 1,500 were made in the fall of 1964 was that Chevy’s new Econoline-fighter, the 1965 Sportvan was held up because it was stuck in the snow of a UAW strike. It’s doubly ironic that it was called “Sportvan” and that the brochure shows it at a ski lodge. Fake snow on a movie set in Southern California is my guess. Love that front beam axle showing so proudly in the picture. Sport indeed; of some sort.
Whatever. America, you had (and blew) your chance at a world-class vehicle (with a bit more refinement, anyway). Can you imagine a gen2 Greenbrier, with the ’65 ‘Vair rear suspension, and a snazzy restyled body, and a turbo option, and disc brakes, and a THM transmission, and…Instead, you end up with another crude and rude box on cart axles. What the Chevy II did to the Corvair, the Sportvan did even more obscenely to the Greenbrier.
Ironically, Chevy tried to play up on the Greenbrier’s image as a VW love-bus wanna-be, in this ad for one of their many other pathetic failed attempts at making a mini-van. I guess Chevy was cursed from the get-go.
Well, VW had the last laugh. They did keep developing their bus, and it ended being rather Greenbrier-esqe: nice seating position, more powerful engines, better visibility, even a six cylinder boxer! What, you say?
The VW-Oettinger WBX6: VW contracted with long-time tuning-house Oettinger to develop a six cylinder version of the “wasserboxer”. When VW decided to pass, Oettinger got the rights and built it themselves, in 3.2 and 3.7 L versions, with up to 180 (net) hp.
Looks right at home there too. Well, the Corvair turbo had 180 hp back in 1965! Enough lamentations. You’ve got your shitty Chevy Express vans, or whatever they’re called now. It’s what you obviously wanted all along, and deserved. But some of us still long for what could have been. Or actually was. I’d take this Greenbrier in a heartbeat. Let’s see…oversize cylinders, TRW pistons….
I’ve often felt the Greenbriar had the same marketing problem as the regular Corvair: Back in the ’60’s if a consumer wanted a ‘wierd’ car they bought foreign. If they wanted a ‘real’ car (front engine, rear drive, etc.) they bought American. GM may have had the resources to do ‘wierd’ cars as well as ‘real’ cars simultaneously, but the public wasn’t necessarily buying it.
Next, there’s the snob value, or lack of it. There has always been a certain cachet about owning foreign (my prime example is my MD sister who’s owned BMW/Mercedes/Volvo/Saab but always finds an excuse not to look at Cadillac – they just don’t have the proper yuppie liberal cachet in Bucks County Pennsylvania), and owning GM is about as far from that cachet as you could get. And that was even more evident in the pre-Japanese days.
My final theory was that, in the VW vs. Corvair sales fight, H.L. Mencken had the American public down cold.
I think you have something there, but I think in some ways ‘wierd’ is the wrong term. Alternative might describe better what some people were looking for.
If you look back at advertising from the fifties it was all about power and size; GM’s corporate structure had been built on that premise. Pay a little more for more power, size and status and everyone is happy. My father would always get the largest engine available for “peace of mind”, for just those times the advertising told him he might need that extra power.
For GM’s traditional buyers, changing the game was a big deal – GM is still dealing with this bias of the US car buyer. Looking at the ads for Volkswagen and Volvo from the 60’s, and later Honda in 70’s, I think they made a better case for why a buyer might want to downsize, and why it was worth their while to do so.
So maybe GM had the right product, but it was too early, or poorly marketed. But either way I know my parents never would have bought one.
My use of ‘wierd’ came from being the son of a Chevrolet dealer when the Greenbriar was new. To my father (and no doubt a lot of people in our very conservative coal and steel town) anybody who bought a foreign car was into wierd cars just for the sake of being different. He sure couldn’t understand any other reason for buying one when good ‘ol American iron was easily available.
I agree with both of you. If GM had called it Häagen-Dazs and claimed it was imported from Norway sales would have tripled.
Weird! not “wierd”. Weird! Weird! Weird!
I believe the problem with the Corvair was how it was marketed. Chevrolet pitted it against other vehicles of similar sizes, but with totally different drivetrains. The Corvair lineup was rear engined, rear-wheel drive. All the cars that were offered by American car makers were front engine, rear-wheel drive. If Chevrolet wanted people to buy the Corvair, they should’ve compared the Corvair against cars like the Volkswagen and Porsche, both of which had the engine in the back of the vehicle, and were air-cooled.
Are you referring to Mencken’s statement that the people know what they want and deserve to get it, good and hard?
I love the early days of US vans, because it was clear the automakers were figuring out what would work. Funky/cool styling, funky/not-cool driveability, and dirt cheap as all hell during the 70s on the used market.
Indeed GM has created some of the most advanced, most innovative cars. Perhaps more than any other automakers we thought of as being innovative. Too bad they, like this Greenbrier, seem to never succeeding in getting the public’s love and affection. The Corvair, EV1, and now Volt, seem to attract only endless criticism, not to mention red ink to their beloved bottom line. Maybe they’re cursed?
When you’re talking “endless criticism”, you’re primarily talking auto blogs. And (as it’s become painfully obvious in auto blogs over the past half-decade or so) the easiest and cheapest way to show that you’re a serious, well-informed car guy is to slag, slag, slag GM. For anything. When they do something wrong, pillory them to the heavens. When they do something right, find some minor quibble in that success and pillory it to the heavens. And when in doubt, slag, slag, slag GM.
So you’re saying GM’s problem is mainly lack of love from blogosphere journalists? That ought to be easy to fix. Just give them all a Cadillac CTS-V wagon with manual tranny to drive!
GM’s (and the other American manufacturers) problem is that for the last 50 years, compared to primarily Japanese cars, the American cars broke. American cars sold fantastically well compared to the weird European imports because the Euro cars weren’t any more reliable. American customers might have like some of them because they were more economical, had better handling, “safer” or more utilitarian but those sales were only enough to create a niche market compared to the American models.
What broke the American manufacturers’ back was the energy crisis, when customers started migrating to the smaller, better gas mileage Japanese cars. What they discovered was that these cars never broke. When these new customers were looking for something bigger or sportier, the Japanese manufacturers were more than happy to provide them with bigger and sportier cars.
The Japanese manufacturers created an entire generation of buyers who had never considered an American manufactured car.
Furthermore, except for Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth, none of the American brands came close to figuring out how to make a minivan. Chrysler vans have abysmal reliability records (stop, don’t tell me how you had a great one, look at the statistical records) and those though bought Honda or Toyota had a great experience particularly as you watch both companies pay attention to their customers and continue development of their vans.
Even today, if you look at the frequency of repair records for American cars they still don’t come close to matching those of the primary Japanese brands. Until American manufacturers can build cars that just don’t break, they will never win market share back from the Japanese.
The Amer
It would be interesting to see VW sales compared with Greenbrier sales. I’m thinking the overall market for a mini-bus in the early ’60s was actually quite small – so being competitive in sales might still have been disappointing for GM.
It might also be interesting to compare to Econoline sales numbers. My impression is Ford did quite a bit better with it’s forward control van. Perhaps the more conventional engine placement helped with sales?
Greenbrier had been used as a model name for Chevy wagons before this, if I’m not mistaken. Even so these vans (and the Econolines and A100s) just never really caught on, at least in a big way, as family transport. We would have to wait for the ’80s, and Chrysler to put America in vans.
I’m sure the driving position was a big draw back for sixties baseball moms (American kids did not play soccer back then) sitting up front with no protection and feeling like a bus driver. America had not yet fallen in love with trucks (those were for work) and women especially did not want to feel like truck drivers, or been seen in something that could be called a truck.
I remember seeing plenty of these in work van form, back in the day. Well, actually not so many of the Chevy offerings, but lots of Econoline work vans, and some A100s (One of my brothers had one)
The Greenbrier name was not used before Chevy used it for the van. However it was re-used later for the 1969-72 Chevelle wagon line-up, the Greenbrier was the middle range Chevelle wagon while Concours was the upper range and the Nomad name was used for the lower-range.
At long last, the Greatest Hit arriveth! And what a sales
hitflop. Similarly to Syke and MrWhopee, I feel that GM’s innovation has less cachet than other firms’. Even when GM does everything right, there is an undeserved buyer’s bias against it. Imported is always more innovative than GM, even when it is not. I guess Chrysler’s ad line has it nailed down: “where its from” is as important as “who its for”. Of course they’ve hit the bias head on with the “Imported from Detroit” stuff…wow such a cool van and cool car a shame the public just didnt take them to there hearts like the vw,here in the uk we had the imp ,people never warmed to it but i must say the inp van[hillman husky] was very cool the only other cool vans we had were the commer vans of the 50s60s 70s,the bedford cf and the marina van go look youl enjoy
Well you can’t drive cachet.
I always felt the vw vans were troublesome with fragile engines and you can’t drive that.
I could have bought one of these but you couldn’t take it with you on board a Navy ship either.
I find myself wishing I had invested in one of these versus the 210 in my driveway. Just not enough to try to get one now. I like all the pub nose vans and this may have been the best thought out of the bunch. I appreciate it better after reading this.
It’s not nice to make someone salivate Paul. Nice job.
Another great article Paul. Totally spot-on about everything and a laugh a minute at all the right expense. This is exactly why I read every post here, every day, sometimes several times. Thanks again!
I think that this van suffered from a couple of fatal flaws. First, for the Greenbriar to be a success, the cargo version must also be a success in order to generate enough volume for the thing to make sense. Here, the Corvan was a flop compared to the Econoline. Just like the rear engine with its high rear floor made the pickup too difficult to use, the van suffered the same handicap. The Econoline allowed full access for loading both rear and side, the Corvan only from the side. Strike one.
Next, while the Greenbriar may have been the best of the early passenger vans, the market was simply too small. Those drawn to the VW bus were sort of, shall we say, individualistic people in the early 60s. Individualistic people did not go to the Chevrolet dealer to buy their vehicles. Those that did were probably cross-sold into a smoother, quieter, more conventional station wagon. Passenger vans had a lot of refinement to do before they would start to go mainstream in the 70s.
Finally, the things just cost Chevrolet too much to make. While Ford (and especially Dodge) would also invest in the unique platform, the competition at least got to take advantage of off-the-shelf running gear amortized over a bazillion Falcons and Valiants. Not so the Corvan/Greenbriar.
We must conclude that Chevrolet provided a sound answer to a question that not very many people were asking. When a new Chevrolet, with its wondrous dealer network, could not keep up with Ford in a given model, there was something seriously wrong. Greatest Hit? Mmmmmmmmmmm. Maybe Chevrolet, like Studebaker, was just too far ahead of its time. 🙂
One more thing: your description of the reason for the 1965 Sportvan’s delay — Funniest thing I have read all week.
jp,
You’ve got something there. Dad was never all that hot on the Corvair once it lost the sales race to the Falcon in 1960. He tolerated a lot having a son that thought the Corvar was way cooler than the Corvette, bringing odd models home for lunch during the summer so I could drool all over the car while he ate lunch in peace.
Although I hung out in the showroom regularly, I was still too young to really realize what was going on in the salesman/customer transactions. However, I have very little doubt that anyone coming in to talk about the Greenbriar was gently pushed towards a full-sized Chevy wagon instead. If for no other reason than the profit margin on anything full-sized Chevy was larger than any commensurate model of the Corvair. Remember the old GM dictum, “Little cars, little profits.” So I have very little doubt that the Greenbriar’s worst enemy was the Chevrolet salesman himself.
In my personal case, mom had a brand new full-sized Chevy wagon (company car) every year from 1959 thru 1965 when dad left the dealership. And there was definitely no talk of a Greenbriar in our house. No doubt my father looked at his wife and figured and most housewives out there had exactly the same car tastes. I do remember a Greenbriar being a rather exotic vehicle on the Hallman Chevrolet lot. You saw them about as often as you’d see a Corvette. And dad definitely did not believe in Corvettes.
You make a strong point here, Syke. In the “high-tech” business I’ve seen countless great products fail because the sales force had no good reason to sell them.
It’s easy to predict what a sales force will sell. Look at the highest commission, highest volume products, the ones that maximize the commission/effort ratio. That’s what sells. Everything else, especially strange new products they have not been given a good reason to learn about, will not sell.
I’m in the tech industry myself. As time wears on, forgotten gadgets and antiquated software gets forgotten. Wikipedia does a good job of cataloging, but it’s heartless (by design). A blog with a similar mission to “Curbside Classic” for tech industry products could be fascinating. “Silicone Classics”, anyone?
Silicon! Silicone Classics would lead to places like this. ;->
LOL (and I don’t use those letters lightly!) 🙂 Geez, I really was spacey this afternoon
This is one of the reasons Elon Musk has given for why he doesn’t want to sell Teslas through the traditional dealership model – electric cars are a tough sell and give the dealership far fewer servicing opportunities than an gasoline car on top of which a startup make tends to either be taken on as a sideline to an already-established one which offers greater incentives, or as a new-car “shingle” to allow a primarily used-car operation access to better financing.
Great article Paul.
BTW, the red vanagon pictured at the end looks to me like a South African made model (larger side windows is one dead give away) and I am not sure that VW SA put any Oetttinger 6’s in their vans, so this combo might be owner built. I’ll have to look into this more.
(Porsche put 3.2 sixes in nine Vanagons, and called it the B32. I’ve posted one page from owners manual).
VW SA did use the 1.9 and 2.1 wasserboxer, the 1.8 inline four, and 2.3/2.5/ 2.6 inline five motors. VW SA continued making Vanagons through 2002 (production stopped in Germany/Austria around ’91).
You are quite correct, VW didn’t officially sell WRB6 T3s with the facelift body in South Africa. It’s possible that they might have made some prototypes, but the project would in all probability have been killed because the 5-cylinders offered enough of a performance boost without the durability issues of a Wasserboxer. They also built some syncro prototypes with the 5-pot and big window body, of which a couple actually made it to market.
This red T3 is most likely an aftermarket WBX6 conversion, performed by a gentleman named Helmut Baumann, an ex-Oettinger employee, who fitted WBX6 motors to a number of privately owned T3s of various body styles and ages.
Left hand doors, now common on vans,were another Greenbrier/Corvan innovation, at least as far as I can recall, though they were rare.
Love the blue and white Greenbrier featured, I’ve been looking to pair one up with my 65 Corsa convertible. I cant decide between the Rampside because its weird, or the Greenbrier.
Where can I find parts my 1961 greenbrier: dash gages, windshield, grille, headlights, seats….
I’ve got parts dash gages grill headlights and a lot more call me at
818 743-3055 anytime
kevin. corvar van lots of parts
It’s a damn shame that Chevrolet discontinued the Corvair Greenbrier when they did. I believe it should’ve been continued along with the rest of the Corvair line. 🙂
I always liked the rampside version of the pickup. Except for the intrusion of the powerpack at the rear, it was a totally practical vehicle for hauling.
Then you are sure to love the Rampside that we featured here last year.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1961-chevrolet-corvair-95-rampside-it-seemed-like-a-good-idea-at-the-time/
As someone who was actually in the market for a compact van/pickup type vehicle in 1961, I will have to echo Mr. Cavanaugh.
I ended up buying a 1961 Econoline pickup (with a rear cap). (Later vehicles that I owned of this ilk included a VW pickup, a Chevy Sportsvan, an Econoline van and a Dodge A-100 van).
Missing in all cases was the Greenbrier.
Why? I needed utility. All of these vehicles could accommodate any kind or shape of cargo, including long items, plus diverse recreational uses, because they all had smooth load decks (even the VW). And for most of the time I owned these vehicles they weren’t even needed for work (occasionally, yes). I just needed general all around utility. And the Greenbrier didn’t provide it except in an awkward, convoluted sort of way.
And I think, from a women’s point of view, for family usage, the idea of driving a bus was really “out there” in more ways than one, in those days.
The main issue with the Greenbrier was the engine. Weird, noisy, air-cooled motors were quaint in VW bugs and lawnmowers, but not in a “proper” American vehicle.
I know I never wanted one. Same for VW – never wanted one of those, either, especially when I owned my avatar. Why would I?
However better than a VW they may have been, it doesn’t really matter, they didn’t sell. I never saw that many VW buses when growing up either, FWIW. Cars, cars, cars.
One thing I will say – the Corvair vans sure were nice-looking!
I never Wanted a Corvair at All. My furure BIL had a 62 Monza Conv in midnight blue that I loved to ride in. But It Was No Mustang. It Was better than my other BIL’s Karman Ghia as a 3rd Passenger. And at 3 I should Have Been in Something in an Open Convertible, Amazing I didn’t fly right out.
But want These Vans ? No. Were They the first Chevy Van’s?
I was just looking at these pictures again. If all of the weight is over the back wheels, why is all of the sagging done by the front end on this example?
GM coil springs have a bit of a rep for sagging, and maybe the fronts were weaker than the rears? But I would say this slight nose-down attitude is not uncommon; more so than the other way around, anyway.
I have never seen a Corvan in the flesh but I have been curious about them. The lack of success tells a lot about branding. The VW Van was cool, the Corvan was not. Is there a reason for this? Not at all; the Corvan was a better vehicle in every way than the VW. Yet the VW was cool with young people, who have disposable income to burn.
A modern day comparison would be Apple products. Do they really deserve their prices? I would say no but there are plenty of people, especially young ones, who are willing to pay the extra charge to get a product they conceive as cool. VW Vans were cool, and are cool, which always stands the test of time.
I’m an old fart that has never owned anything but a Mac computer. My latest is a MacBook Pro. Elegant design and flawless performance. Don’t put down the kids-they appreciate good design and value for the dollar, as do I.
Do BMWs really deserve their prices? I would say no but there are plenty of people, especially middle-aged ones, who are willing to pay the extra charge to get a product they conceive as cool. ;->
I like the classic headlight bezels. Left-right symmetrical and shared with the Corvair sedan. One part instead of four. I don’t think we can find such parts design efficiency today.
I don’t care much for vans, but the Greenbrier is an natty-looking thing — the contrasting nose and side coves are a nice touch.
I happened to get a copy recently of the September 1961 issue of Car Life, which has a comparison test of the Econoline, the Greenbrier, and the VW Type 2. Interestingly, the Econoline was quicker to 60 mph by more than 6 seconds, primarily because it had a three-speed manual, while the Greenbrier had Powerglide. The Greenbrier took more than 32 seconds to hit 60, although the Volkswagen never quite got there at all. I imagine the four-speed would have been a big improvement.
I like the Greenbriar it definitely has some appeal unfortunately it wasnt sold out here GM sold its English Bedford CA which despite being highly manueverable was slow and had poor handling later replaced with the CF in 69. The few Greenbriars here are private imports and Ill be pleased to finally find one when I do.
Funny you should mention the “wasserboxer” since I only discovered the term this week. Ran into an old flame, who asked what motor she should get for her ’82 T3 ( the 1.6 NA Diesel has died, and was pretty gutless when it was alive ). So after telling her to push it off a cliff and buy something made in Japan, I came home and tried googling the T3 to see if it had any merit at all, and discovered the wasserboxer. Still think it’s a silly place to put the motor.
I would go with the pushing it off the cliff choice. Refitting it with a wasserboxer would cost much more than the van is worth. That is if one could find a good wasserboxer, which was not exactly a paragon of reliability itself. At the very least it would need a rebuild before installation. Said installation would not be easy since it is a totally different engine type.
I swapped in a ’92 digifant controlled I4 gasser in my ’82 diesel westy. It is a pretty simple swap. I did it back in ’94 and it powered that van very reliably over a lot of rough roads for 14 years (until van was t-boned, sigh).
VW gas I4 engines up to about 2000 m.y. will bolt onto vanagon diesel bellhousing. Can get away with not regearing the low ratio diesel tranny if short on funds.
alternately, and a bit more work, would be to swap in a TDi diesel. Transmission would have to be regeared however.
good place to get info would be the vanagon/eurovan section of the Samba – http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewforum.php?f=20&sid=3a0b76c2899abd3c78599c2687f6fb83
I had a toy Greenbrier pickup when I was 4-7 y/o in mid 60’s I never saw any on the road and thought it was a made up design. It wasn’t a Tonka, but metal about 1/12th? size. An off brand from Woolworth?
I eventaully saw pics of the Greenbr. van in magazines and some on road, then I said ‘that’s my truck’! But I don’t think I ever saw a pickup until maybe ’69-70.
Like all my old toy cars, I smashed it up.
Speaking of toys: GM never issued dealer promotional models (1:24th scale) of any of the Corvair vans. I’m fairly certain I’ve got the complete set ’60-65 which were: ’60 – 700 4-door sedan, ’61 – 700 4-door sedan, then ’62-65 were Monza coupes and convertibles. I don’t believe there were ever promo models of the Lakewood, Greenbriar or any of the trucks.
After a quick image search, it appears that Nylint made a Rampside pickup, complete with opening ramp. Looks like a pretty cool toy.
Syke, you’re a lucky man to have those promotionals. I missed the golden age of dealer promos, though I did get a few Volvo 240 and 740 promos in the ’80s from Lundahl Motors.
Somewhere at home I have a turquoise and white promo of a 58 Edsel. It is kind of beat up as it was used as a toy. I saw it in the toybox of another kid in the neighborhood and traded something for it. I knew enough even then that Edsels were a certain kind of cool.
Here’s a pic of one of my 760 GLE promos. Most of my original promos were tossed when my mom found them with missing parts, but I’ve got quite a crop of replacements thanks to ebay.
I’ve always found the 760 series to be the best looking car Volvo ever offered.
I had one too, I wonder if I can still find it?
I went to a Benedictine monastery in western Arkansas for high school in the early 1960s. The school had a black Greenbrier that was used to shuttle we students to various affairs beyond our campus. We called it the monkmobile. Father Nick only knew one way to drive it-pedal to the metal. It had a top end of 80 mph. The only thing dangerous about the monkmobile was sitting in the second row directly behind Nick. Nick had a penchant for chewing cigars and Red Man, and frequently spit juice out of the open driver’s side window. Some of that ejecta would occasionally find its way back to the second seat’s occupant. First-yearmen quickly learned that this was not the best seat in the house.
I think that the abbey got tired of buying engines for the thing (Nick averaged one a year) and the monkmobile was eventually replaced by a 1965 Ford wagon.
Does this van have dual ashtrays in the middle of the dash? Very cool in a 60’s kinda way. Or are those air vents?…..
Well said Paul, well said!
I’m sorry guys. I’m going to have to give you a “back in the day” story that is based on reality rather than faded memories.
I worked in the service dept. of our local Chevy dealer during the Greenbriar years.
Fist fights would break out among us when one of us was ‘forced’ to work on one as ea. of us pleaded with the Service Manager to force it onto someone else. They were a nightmare to repair and the labor rate book murdered us everytime. The work done under warranty was the highest of any Chevy model at time. Owners went ballistic that most repairs left them without their vehicle for days. Also, undercarriage rust was standard from the fatory. The mechanical components chosen from the parts bin weren’t suitable to the Greenbriar and the handling was downright scary. Our body shop saw it’s share of roll overs. Please! My memories are from hands on working under the engine. Not from sitting over the engine.
Not surprised at all. Nothing will make a mechanic weep faster than something different that’s harder to repair than the usual run-of-the-mill cars that pass thru day in, day out. Probably another reason why dad could never get excited about the Corvair.
modified
related
There are still a few of those camper conversions around, even at least one being devoted to its intended use:
http://thisisnottoscale.blogspot.com/
The Greenbrier was fantastic as a garageable passenger minivan but the market for that wouldn’t exist for another 20-odd years. As a work van, it had some drawbacks. The high rear floor being one. Also, adding cargo in the rear improved the weight distribution of an Econoline but made it worse in the Corvan. GM did, however, sell a bunch of these to Bell Telephone. Many of the Bell Tel vans found their way to the used car market, where they could be identified because they had windows in the doors but not the rear body.
There’s a Corvan sitting in my dad’s neighbor’s yard right now. It’s in about the same shape as the one pictured(plus a few Illinois holes).
Maximum Bob’s first “new” American car was a Corvair sedan. Corvair and variants (much like the XR4ti and Scorpio) were doomed in the States from the get go.
Paul, did Mrs. Lloyd-Jones live off of Park Road or Rocky Shore Drive by any chance? I’ve driven through that neighborhood many times. It’s across the river from the Iowa River Power Co. – a former generating plant that is now a bar and restaurant. My cousin had his wedding rehearsal dinner there in 2008. Good food too.
Oakridge Avenue, the dead end part that drops down to what was called “mosquito flats”. We lived on Holt Avenue, and then on Park Avenue, just around the corner from Holt, a half block from the City Park, which was my “backyard”, especially the pool in the summer: mornings, afternoons, and evenings, even.
I had other friends who lived in the area you’re describing, including a friend whose Dad had a Corvette.
My dad had a 1963 Greenbrier with the removable table. It was AWESOME! My family of 7 travelled all over the country in it, including cross-country to Washington D.C. and Philadelphia. There was one camping trip that took us WAAAAY up into high mountains, driving on a road that was EXACTLY like the ones in those old Roadrunner cartoons. One dirt lane carved into the side of a cliff, not even enough room to pass, no guard rails, sheer drop, thousands of feet. The road was full of huge potholes. The Greenbrier was able to negotiate most of them. There were a couple that we had to get out with camping shovels and fill them in, they were so deep. Dad got sick of the dealer not stocking parts for it and traded it after 2 years. I’m still mad at him!
A gorgeous Greenbrier has been for sale here for a while now. Apparently the previous owner is Billie-Joe Armstrong from the band Green Day (I’ve never heard of either the person or the band). They reckon it’s the only one in NZ. I’d never heard of Greenbriers until the CC article on the Rampside pickup. I should hate them, what with being rear-engined and all, but this one of Billie-Joe’s looks fantastic! Photo is from trademe, and the auction is here: http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used-cars/chevrolet/corvair/auction-448772748.htm
I’m pretty sure these commercials wouldn’t stand up to modern standards, but they’re pretty enlightening none the less.
http://youtu.be/2D1nqEqs0iY
I love the one where the Econoline PU’s front bumper scrapes along the ground during the braking test.
When Greenbriers were new I used to walk by Kelly Chevrolet on Livernois Ave. almost everyday home from school. I really liked Greenbriers and would often walk around them on the lot checking every detail out. I remember one in particular that was red with a white stripe and outfitted with the camper package with the pop up canvas top. Wow! that was something I always wanted.
At this particular dealer I never saw a Greenbrier in the showroom. They were over on the side of the dealership with the pick-ups and large trucks. I suspect their positioning coupled with the fact they didn’t have power steering (something my Mother always insisted as a must have) were factors in low sales.
Fast forward to 1997 and finally I was up for a Greenbrier camper. Two were for sale at a St. Vincent de Paul lot near Burbank, Ca. and without hesitation I called the charity lot and took the next flight from San Franciso to Bubank. Ugh too late! The Greenbrier was sold but the second Greenbrier was available, only problem was that it was actually a Rampside with the camper attached. I never saw one before, but realized this Rampside had the camper on it from the day it was delivered. The camper shell was beyond salvaging, but the pristine condition of the Rampside’s bed and sheetmetal convinced me to buy it.
I’ve never regretted buying the Rampside, it is by far my most favorite vehicle. Fifteen years and 180,000 later it still serves me everyday. I’ve rebuilt the engine once and had to do a valve and seat job since, but it still runs!
I have driven both the early Econoline and an A 100 and found only the heater works better in them over the Rampside.
That thing was butt ugly, no doubt about it. Features, capabilities, and all that jazz doesn’t matter if it looks goofy and the Greenbriar did./
Interesting how some of the styling is similar to a full size Chevy pickup of the same vintage, when you look at the windshield and front vent windows. The back window and roof of the Rampside look identical .. Wonder if they are interchangeable ? Nice vehicle, similar to my dad’s VW bus.
“unless Tatra had made a mini-van”
Which it actually did )
Wow! Wouldn’t you know; of course they would. And what an awesome looking thing. Ans with the aircooled v8 out back. It just needs the three-headlight front end like the early 603.
Thanks for filling in another detail of Tatra knowledge.I wonder if any still exist?
I agree. I’ve. Always been interested in the Tatra car, and I’ve never understood why neither the T87 or the 603 were ever sold in North America.
Saw one in “Phineas and Ferb” recently…
Cute! I love the psychedelic design on this.
The Econoline, A-100, VW Bus and the Chevy/GMC front engined vans had flat front ends, but the Corvair-based forward control trucks and vans stuck out a little bit, giving them the appearance of having small hoods. Why was this? What was the reason for them not having a completely flat front end?
Once Again, Paul and I are in complete agreement on a car.
How sweet it is!
Lovely van. I always had hoped to own one some day. But I fear I cannot think of a valid business case for having one. Much, much better than the overpriced and ubiquitous VW van.
Odd that this came up. You wouldn’t believe what I saw being dragged down the road other day, except that I caught the picture.
It was almost surely going to be a waste of film, but I shot anyway.
I gotta say it. Those taillights look to have been strongly influenced by the 1959 Chevy car. From 100 feet away, you would swear they were leftovers from the four year old parts bin. Especially the full length ones that extended onto the doors.
Great find. I don’t think my eyes have ever seen one of these in the wild.
I’ve been thinking about how autos during some eras, weren’t designed by form/function, but by emotion. The Greenbriar is a form/function vehicle during an age of emotional design.
During the 1950s, form/function was replaced by emotional flight designs. A few years before the Greenbriar, GM vehicles looked like silly road ships. There are few form/function in most vehicles between 1957-1962, except the Lark, the Falcon and the Corvair.
So the Greenbriar was not a design that sold on emotions. The form of the Greenbriar was logical, so buying a traditional version in the form of an Econoline made sense to those attracted to the form of the vehicles. The key to me is that the Greenbriar was a “left brain” decision during an era when vehicle buyers sought out vehicles that satisfied their “right brain”. GM Sales personnel didn’t know how to sell this vehicle.
Today, we are in another era of form/function, in my opinion. The SUV shape and purpose is what sold it to millions. Ever since the gas crisis, vehicles have returned to form/function taking priority over emotions. Emotional cars like Brougham vehicles, had to convert during the late 1970s-1980’s, and many lost favor during this transition.
So – anyway, that has been my thinking recently.
My brother had a 60 Corvair, oil leaking pain to fix, no heat, not a good car for Minnesota. VW’s suffered the same with poor heat.
Same mistake as the Chevy Astro, too big. Vws big mistake here was not keeping their van lineup evolving to what became the minivan and letting chrysler steal that idea. Vw sholda seen it coming.
Great article, thanks for reposting!
I wonder what if Chevy had ditched the swing axles and updated the styling (perhaps to resemble the 1967 trucks a bit) and continued with the Greenbrier/Rampside until 1970 or so when the big vans became so popular. Not even bothered with that ‘Chevyvan’. BTW, speaking of the 1965 Chevyvan, I remember they built a few cargo versions with the 153 4 cylinder. What a pleasant vehicle that must have been.
Something real bad happened to America at the end of 1963, a shift from endless possibilities, optimism and a true spirit of adventurism to this inward looking negativity, paranoia and a cheapness that went all the way through society. Someone visiting in 1962 and returning in 1968 would’ve thought they’d landed in a totally different country. From Dallas in November ‘63 to the Ed Sullivan show in January’64 something went mightily awry.
It’s a crying shame that the Crovair Greenbrier was discontinued when it was. GM never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. It’s probably just as well that they did. Had they not, I’ll bet ol’ Ralph Nader would have had fun criticising the Greenbrier for its weird handling behaviour.
I like to see quirky cars. Only somewhat so in my driveway, but enthusiastically in others. A couple of years ago a guy up the street bought a Corvair van. Then another. Turned out he bought 6 of them, intending to make the best one into a driver and sell off the rest for a profit to finance his. Pretty soon it was down to one, according to plan. Then after a while it was down to none. We chatted a bit and he said they were just too weird for him. Not too far gone, just too weird. Bummer, I like seeing oddball cars in the neighborhood.