A realtor friend of mine back in my hometown of Flint, Michigan recently posted a listing there for a most beautiful house in the mid-century modern architectural tradition. This house checked many boxes on my list of priorities, including aesthetics, layout, neighborhood and part of the city, square footage, and a few other things. It had me thinking about what it might actually be like to move back if I would be allowed to work from home. This train of thought led me back to a certain point in my life around eight years ago, when I had photographed our featured car and was having similar thoughts of returning to my birthplace city.
I’ve chosen not to post any pictures of the house in question out of deference to my realtor friend, but I did want to point out that Flint had seen an abundance of new construction with this space-age aesthetic from its vehicle manufacturing boom years of the 1950s through the ’60s. I grew up in an environment where all kinds of buildings – residential, commercial, and municipal – looked like they were plucked right out of “The Jetsons” and sprinkled throughout our factory town. This is perhaps one reason why I simply love the look of such buildings.
The defunct car dealership above sits directly across from the former Chinonis Chrysler-Plymouth-Dodge, where my mom and dad had purchased three, consecutive Plymouths from a salesman who had also been one of my dad’s former students at the university: a 1971 Duster, a ’71 Fury, and also a ’77 Volaré. While I had never set foot inside the above dealership, I spent plenty of time across the street at Chinonis, thanks to the Volaré (much to my parents’ chagrin), and came to love that showroom and the oil, gas, grease and exhaust smells of the sunken garage pit, as well as the sounds of cars starting up and the clanking of tools, drills and lifts.
Even places of worship were constructed in a mid-century modern architectural style, like the former Woodside Church building in the College Cultural neighborhood, not far from my parents’ second house in Flint. This structure, designed by famous architect Eero Saarinen, dates from the early 1950s. Woodside Church has since relocated downtown, and Mott College has recently purchased this building.
The Chevrolet Corvair, particularly the second-generation coupe, has long been one of my favorite-looking cars of the ’60s. Even though I was born close to ten years after the last, new Corvair had been introduced, it’s a car I have felt I can relate to, metaphorically, on a few levels, as I had written about here just over three years ago. By model year ’65, when the second-generation cars had been introduced, the long-hood / short-deck look was about to explode in popularity with the advent of the concurrently introduced Ford Mustang. One could say that much like mid-century architecture bucked more traditional design trends in favor of looking to a perceived future, the unconventionally engineered Corvair, with its engine in its long-ish trunk and luggage compartment under the hood, was unquestionably iconoclastic for an American car.
Though I like those proportions that the Mustang delivered en masse to the public, I have come to really love this Corvair’s graceful profile, clean overall styling and European-influenced details. I’m hard-pressed to think of another example of a car that wears the absence of the long-hood / short-deck look better than the 1965 and later Corvair coupe. I have also often been that one that “zigged” when everybody else had “zagged”, with one example being my personal attire, and I like that the Corvair rocked its grille-less face and long trunk with élan. That the fuel filler door was on the driver’s side front fender was another detail that looked positively exotic when I had first taken notice of these cars.
Returning to my fantasy from just a couple of weeks ago of owning the closest thing to my dream home that I remember having seen for years, I’m reminded of how often the proverbial grass might seem to be greener on the other side. I would love to own both that house and a car like this ’68 Corvair Monza. I would not, however, want to subject my around-town classic car to the elements by not parking it in a garage. Even with a carport that could house two vehicles, a feature of the house in the real estate listing, my car(s) would be shielded only from falling things… not from the cold, heat, and other elements. My thought is that expansion and contraction of its construction materials would definitely age a vehicle that’s not housed in a somewhat climate controlled garage.
Then, there would be the matter of the car itself, its condition, and overall driveability. When I photographed our subject car close to nine years ago, there were no signs on it that indicated that it was for sale, and it looked positively radiant in what looked to be the original, factory Seafoam Green finish. Nineteen Sixty-Eight was the penultimate year of production for the ill-fated Corvair, and of the roughly 15,400 units built that year, about 6,800 were Monza coupes.
The base-model 500 hardtop coupe was slightly more popular than the Monza coupe, with about 7,200 units sold. I wonder if the 500’s popularity relative to the Monza coupe could be attributed, at least partially, to the 500 undercutting the Monza’s base price by 10%, and also to the Monza’s base price starting within 3% or so of the base-model ’68 Camaro. This brings to mind my memories of the mid-’90s Ford Mustang and Probe, and we all know which of those similarly-priced cars was more popular.
Many things that look decent at a distance often tend to reveal their flaws at close range without the use of intense scrutiny. The minor rust around the rear wheel well on the driver’s side of our featured car reminded me of just about every Michigan car, ever. This Corvair could have been a seven-year-old Chevy Cobalt coupe for its minor cosmetic imperfections and apparent light wear. I’ve been on a waiting list for covered parking in my condo building in Chicago for over a decade, and am now only at the number three spot from the top of the list. Would I really consider uprooting my life and making a(nother) major home purchase for a house without a heated garage, which has been one of my “must-haves” for years?
And then, there’s the issue of location. I realize I’ve made reference to some of the crazy traffic scenarios here in Chicago, especially around morning and evening rush hour, but there’s also that part of me that just dreams of cruising up and down North Sheridan Road and Lake Shore Drive next to Lake Michigan in my new-to-me classic, on the way to some fun destination in the greater Chicagoland area. If I bought a house in, and relocated to, Flint, while I would be thrilled to be back in the place that will probably always be ingrained in me to some degree as “home”, I would suddenly lose many aspects of the beautiful life, things, and people I’ve been blessed to encounter here in Chicago.
My time in the Windy City has seen me basically grow up from young adulthood through the eve of (meaning “not quite”) middle age. I may be ready for a major life change at some point, but is now the time and Flint the place? It’s an open-ended question as I type this.
As I flipped back through the pictures of that gorgeous, mid-century modern house, I thought about just how “me” it is, as my friends with whom I’ve shared the listing have enthusiastically both agreed and volunteered. It probably didn’t hurt that the sellers had similar tastes in furnishings to what I have in my place, and whoever was in charge of the photography did a great job with the pictures. However, and as also with the Corvair (if it or one like it was for sale), as much as I admire both house and car, part of me would feel a certain responsibility, out of respect for both, to stand back and let somebody else who really has the means to take care of them have a legitimate crack at ownership.
Asked another way, would I want the inherent beauty of both to be jeopardized by my somewhat limited means of maintaining them? Both house and car are objects and not people, and thus cannot physically “die”, but I’d have to say that given the rarity and historical significance of each, I think I’ll just close my internet browsers now for the sake of their preservation and hope that my realtor friend earns a good commission. Still, in closing, I’ll paraphrase the great poet Langston Hughes: we must hold fast to dreams, because they are often what continue to drive us, both literally and figuratively.
Downtown Flint, Michigan.
Sunday, February 20, 2011.
The right car in the right setting with the right colour — written by the Great Joe D.
Pure CC gravy.
The thing that kills me about the Corvair is how great both generations looked. Still can’t decide which one I like best.
I prefer gen 1. Like most things Detroit, gen 2 looks bloated up to me (see gen 2 Mustang).
I mostly agree, but do like both. The gen 1 was intended to be an “import fighter” so, it was styled to look “European”. When the reality of the very American looking Falcon far outselling it, GM immediately started a more domestic looking restyle. I dont think it is coincidence that the gen 2 and Impala both introduced in ’65 have similar design language.
The gen 1 was intended to be an “import fighter” so, it was styled to look “European”.
You have it backwards. There were no European cars at the time that looked anyhting remotely like the Corvair. In fact, quite the opposite is the case: the 1960 Corvair started a huge design revolution in Europe, and within a short period of time, many European cars looked like the Corvair.
The gen1 Corvair shares quite a few design elements with other GM cars. The “flying wing” roof of the sedans is virtually identical to the one used on full-size GM cars in 1959. The front end is actually similar to the ’59 Olds, except for no grille. And its smooth flanks were seen on a number of ’59 GM cars. The element that was unique was its very strong horizontal “belt line”. That was a new element but certainly not copied from any Europeans. They copied it like mad.
Just like the gen1 reflected GM big car styling of the time to a large degree, so did the gen2 in 1965.
You got that right, Paul —
On my 1st trip to the Middle East, in 1967, I was amazed at the proliferation of these Corvair Wannabes — badged as the NSU Prinz.
I kind of prefer the second gen Corvair, Mustang, and Cougar, as well as the Torino, Camaro and Firebird. I like a more full-figured, um, car.
It was a very short amount of time, a “sweet spot” for me, between the light and tight first-gen shapes and the 70s mega-bloatation-nation.
Tatra87, thank you so much. And I will say this about both generations of Corvair – much like with my affinity for both generations of AMC Javelin, I will periodically flip-flop between which Corvair I like the best. I’d say the second-generation Corvairs have been my favorites most often.
That car and write-up is just the cat’s pajamas!
Prettier than the four-door, and almost perfect in its conception. Love the green, but you’ve let the light rest beautifully on it in black and white.
Interesting, you mentioning the four door, and it made me think how the Gen 1 looks perhaps better as a sedan (as it was designed) yet Gen 2 looks best as a coupe or convertible.Intentional? Perhaps, or perhaps coincidental. But as I recall, the Gen 1 did not have a coupe originally,only a sedan and wagon, and the Gen 2 never was offered as a wagon.
Gen 1 Corvair coupes were better looking than the Gen 1 sedans but vice versa for the Gen 2s. The late model 4-door is better proportioned than the 2-door, IMHO.
I agree! The Corvair is one of the few cars that I like better as a four door.
But I’d wouldn’t kick the two door out of the driveway.
Agree on the gen 1 sedan. Those horizontal winglines and that flying roof on the four-door body work a treat. Dante Giacosa saw it in New York and used it for his Fiat 1500. This fifth scale model was his two-door that never made it – to me prettier than the gen 1 coupe.
Tasty. Never seen it before.
But like all of these European Corvair-babies, its tall and short proportions are a wee bit challenging.
Great writing. I’d love to hear “the rest of the story”. Flint symbolizes all things Buick. I’d love to hear about your parents experience buying and driving a Plymouth in what I’ve always imagined as being a Buick company town.
What’s funny about my parents is that they owned almost everything *but* GM cars when we lived there, and when they finally bought a used ’88 Chevy Nova CL, that car was a Toyota Corolla under the skin.
After the Plymouths, we owned an ’84 Ford Tempo GL and an ’85 Renault Encore.
Buicks were (as you pointed out) very popular, and come to think of it, one might have suited my professor father’s personality very well.
You could always enclose the car port and heat it 🙂
R&D Man, this would be one solution, but that would then compromise the integrity of the original design of the house in question. It looks great with the carport, but enclosing it would wreck it somewhat, I think.
Still, to your point, there might be some creative way to do this and make it look original.
We used to live in a seventies house with a double-width double-length carport. Best thing was you could open a gate and drive through to the back lawn for washing. Also had a nice big garage back there if you needed to shield the car from the elements totally. But I get you that some house designs just don’t look right if you enclose the carport.
I’m also a great fan of the second-gen Corvair. It ranks right up there with the Isuzu 117 as one of the best late sixties coupe designs.
Joe, you’ve hit upon so many things here….
Ownership of an old car, even one in driver condition, isn’t easy. There is indeed the matter of space, then the matter of regular exercise, plus maintaining it when things (invariably) break. Being fortunate enough to have three bays in two garages attached to the house, the downstairs one is stuffed full of Ford, rendering the space useless for anything else I may need it for.
Home buying….all I will say is my parents bought a house in Cape Girardeau, MO, last spring (something they should have done 40 years sooner). Their new house makes me nostalgic (which is atypical for me) as it was built in that sweet spot of the 1960s and space utilization is phenomenal – quite unlike my current abode built in 1987. Their house alone had me briefly daydreaming of moving back to that part of the world, but that is a fantasy best left alone, much like you describe.
Jason, right! Some ideas, on paper, seem great – but then when you consider everything else, so much more comes into focus. This past Thanksgiving, I was thinking about how great it is to live exactly where I live.
I love mid-century architecture and like you I dream of owning a mid-century house. Quite frequently, I peruse real estate listings just for that purpose… I’ll share one of my favorites from this past year:
But as a car enthusiast, I often feel somewhat guilty that I’ve never been able to muster much passion for either the Corvair or Mustang. I think my relative lack of interest in these cars stems from the fact that in the 1970s/80s when I was growing up, they were both relatively common, examples on the road were often beat-up and unexciting to me, and I was too young to have experienced the excitement that either car generated when new.
I’ve been slowly changing my perspective, though, as tends to happen over time. But oddly, I’ve never associated the Corvair’s styling with my beloved mid-century modern architecture. Now that you mention it, I don’t know how I’ve missed it over these years. The pieces all fit… I’ve just never noticed.
Regarding garages, I know how you feel. My wife and I rented a garage-less townhouse for about a zillion years before buying a house about 4 years ago, and a garage was at the top of our must-have list. But in a cruel twist of fate, the house we bought doesn’t have a garage. Sometimes I find myself staring into the back yard, envisioning a make-believe garage back there, but knowing full well that it’ll never happen. Oh well… can’t have everything.
And I’m glad to hear that you’re now #3 on the garage wait list — I know you’d mentioned that you were on the list before… can’t wait to hear the good news when you finally get it.
Thanks for this outstanding article!
Interesting choice of that particular house you shared the listing of. In my opinion, it’s not really such a good example of mid-century design, as it is a mish-mash on the inside, including lots of colonial revival elements. The cabinets, hardware, chairs, trim and other choices are heavy-handed with “non-pure” design details. I was not at all surprised to read it was a builder’s own home. Builders are notorious for building their own homes without proper professional architectural input, as they tend to hate architects, and think they can do just fine without. It’s practically a timeless meme, the builder’s own home.
Here’s a more typical genuine mid-century moderne (inside and out) house built in Eugene in 1950 designed by two UofO architects. 2100 sq.ft. Sold last spring for $508k. Here’s the link:
That house in the Zillow listing is very, very cool.
It seems nice and “unmolested”my but a half mil for 2Br?, I’m not a Realtor,but I think I could get 2 in Pittsburgh for that kinda scratch! (I’m sure Post WW2 suburbs like Monroeville or Penn Hills has a few here and there.) LOL. But Mid-Century Modern is hot now. Fortunately my tastes in architecture run towards towards much older houses, My current Manchester (North Side Pittsburgh) house was built in the 70s- The 1870s! Alas no room for an extra ‘Vair – or a Century!
The Woodside Church building is definitely not “Googie” architecture. Googie is named after now a torn down coffee shop in Los Angeles, which was actually a lot less Googie than a lot of others. Googie is more commercial-cartoony-modern-futurist. That church is pretty mainstream mid century modern.
I’d like to see the house that your friend sent you the link for though.
That was supposed to be a blog post reply, not a comment reply.
Where did “Edit” go?
that house is awesome and the price is great. looks like its been very well cared for over the years. I dont like the new houses with the open concept and this is nice haveing the big living room being separate from the kitchen. And all the room on the driveway for vehicles is another bonus. I would keep it as is puerple rugs and all.
Eric703, I also really dig that house. It’s probably way more square footage than I could ever use or fill up (for that matter), but I love all the details that went into it. I’m not a fan of the mauve-colored furniture or some of the wallpaper I saw, but this house had / has huge potential.
I was lucky enough to grow up in a mid-century modern house, one designed and built by the architect. My parents bought it in 1968, and we moved in on my 6th birthday, and Mom still lives there today. There are things that I love about the house that my parents absolutely hated, and restoring it would be a chore, but feasible for the next owners. Terrazzo floors, multi-level, cantilevered upper floor, fireplace box and chimney inside the house, and multiple exterior finishes (brick, wood siding, and mica specked “sparklecrete”) create a look that is more Jetsons than anything else. The issue is/was that my parents were more colonial/conventional, and never appreciated the funkiness of the house, or if they did, it was not fully apparent to me. They carpeted and tiled over the terrazzo, added vinyl siding, and never accented the really MCM features. If it is your cup of tea, I would highly recommend living in one. If not, let someone who enjoys it more have at it. I would hazard a guess that the Flint MCM homes have seen a lot of changes to them inside as our house did, so one not altered is a rare find.
There are some great nearly original mid-century homes in east Long Beach, California designed by Cliff May.
That one has no attic space. The roofing is right on the other side of the ceiling. It would conduct a lot of heat into the house in summer. And out at night in winter. There’s probably something that can be done on the roof side to improve it so the interior look isn’t changed, but I don’t know what. And all the typically very large window/glass door area on midmod houses is single pane and obviously energy inefficient. Anyway, they are often awesome designs but often do need a ton of money to update for energy efficiency.
Speaking of cars….one of the best midmod cars is the 1961 Lincoln. Everyone knows about the body style, but I think the interior is equally good and definitely midmod.
The house is in a mild climate area. That said, there are foam panel insulated roof systems now available for such situations and not that expensive. We are doing this for my mom’s beam ceiling house.
I agree that the ’61 Continental, with it’s squarish shapes, looks best next to a mid century modern building.
This 1958 house, however, is in Michigan. Heating costs? Most likely not built with A/C. Look at the open-able windows.
I’ve always thought GM built the Corvair for 2 or 3 years out of pure spite and face-saving. They had already decided not to put any more money into the Corvair program as they were launching the ’65s, they had a crash program to deliver the Camaro as a direct Mustang-fighter for the ’67 model year, and then Ralph Nader hit and it was clear that it would look like backing down if they dropped the ‘Vair after ’66 as they had planned.
You caught the car at a nice architectural intersection, the corner of Queen Anne and Wright. It’s facing Queen Anne, which doesn’t quite seem appropriate.
Of course, if you buy a Corvair, this will probably be the scene at some point in your ownership. 🙂
Been there, done that. Except I did it in a bare garage with almost no tools. I found a large timber (6×6), took the rear wheels off, used two cheap scissors jacks to lower the rear so the engine sat on the timber, then unbolted the engine, then jacked the body up high enough that I could slide the engine out on the timber. Did it twice, actually, within days of each other. Thought it was a bad throw out bearing; it was actually the flywheel rivets giving out. Fun times, in the depths of an Iowa January, 1973. At least there was heat in the garage, and a record player.
Would like to see a link to the house for sale. I don’t know of a single realtor who wouldn’t want his listing distributed to a wider audience. One never knows who might see it and make an offer.
And yes, a well written and interesting article.
The feature car looks like a pretty good survivor for a Michigan car. I thought the four-door was the only Corvair left for 1969, but it does, indeed, look like it was just the convertible that was dropped for the last year.
Seems like I read somewhere that those final-year Corvairs were nearly entirely handbuilt in a small corner of the factory as production wound down. I’m going to guess they just used up whatever parts they had left on hand.
It was the opposite . Only 2-doors remained after ’67.
No they weren’t hand-built in a corner. Where do you hear stuff like that? They ran off the assembly line, right until the last one.
I like that they referenced the upcoming Vega right around 0:57.
Another great article, Joseph. It is interesting to hear the ‘what ifs’ of other people, although most of them are in the same grain.
Corvair’s have always held a soft spot in my heart. My parents bought a well used ’63 Monza when the ’62 Lark threw a rod bearing. Dad was not ready for a new car payment so he bought a get by car. He spent more on it than he paid for it over the year he had it. But it was the first car I drove on my own, and somewhat mastered the clutch and four speed even though I overused the starter from killing the engine so many times. They were a nice size (I might think differently now), and were fun to drive. The second generation was a true upgrade to me, styling as well as the mechanical side.
As has been mentioned, the surrounding architecture in the photos is almost as interesting as the car, especially the house directly in front of it.
As a long term owner of a 65 Monza convertible, i can say that these are a pleasure to own and drive with superior parts availability from Clarks’ but a garage is required. They are one of the most cleanly styled cars of the 60’s and easy on the eyes. Your photos show it well.
Tom, it’s awesome that you mentioned Clark’s. A few years back, I bought a vintage “Clark’s” t-shirt that I still own.
A Corvair would probably be out of my reach only because I’ve never wrenched in my life, but I still dream about owning one (like your ’65).
I love the Corvair/Mid-century architecture tie-in, although I think a Corvair from 1960 might have brought things together a touch more. But when spotting Corvairs, one takes what one gets.
I live in a mid-century neighborhood, and the styles are all over – Colonial revival was a thing then but there are some wildly modern places dotted about here and there. One three doors up from me was sold a few years ago – an elderly owner had let the place deteriorate very badly. I thought about it for about 9 seconds, but realized it was more effort than I wanted to go to and it was not really a style that suited Mrs. JPC and I all that well. But I have been binging on an album from a mid-century female jazz singer who shall remain nameless for now, so your take on this car hit a sweet spot for me.
The Corvair? It is like that house up the street. I am glad it’s there, but will leave it to someone else to enjoy firsthand.
Correction, there was a 1969 Monza convertible produced as part of the lineup.
Right you (and Glenn Kramer) are. I’ve amended the text, thanks!
According to the brochure, the convertible and the 140 hp. engine were both available in ’69.
I always found the contrast between mid century modern architecture and car styling a bit strange. From a manufacturing technology point of view it makes sense. Squared off buildings and bathtub shaped cars.
The setting here is the GM Technical Center.
Yes, car design tends to be loosely coordinated with architecture trends. I’ve seen modern photos of midcentury modern houses with a 1953 Studebaker coupe and another with an Avanti. Those make sense. This was the best I could do – yeah I know, that car again. Note: matching outfits too.
Well, the Lincoln’s looks are classic, classy and cool.
The woman’s style is kinda Wilma Flintstone.
(Betty was the hotter one anyway)
Imagine, what the Corvair’s place in history would have been, had Ford not cooked up that pesky Mustang.
I posed my odd couple about 10 years ago; I’ve always loved this picture.
Aaron, I just love that this picture encapsulates some of the absolute best of 1960’s car styling – between two cars that couldn’t be more different in execution, aesthetically speaking.
Joseph, everything that you post here is well-written, well-researched and makes one think. I like that you just don’t write about the cars but have the knack to tie the cars into their environment and their place in the overall scheme of things. Personally I think the Gen II Corvairs are much more attractive than the Gen I’s, but of course others might think otherwise. I tend to vacillate whether the two door coupe or the four door hardtop is the more attractive of the second generation. I had some seat time in both generations back in the day and can tell you that the second generation is much more pleasant to drive. Not that the first generation is terrible but the second generation just feels better designed and better put together; of course the second gen I drove was only a year or so old while the first gen was from 1960 and had been severely used since birth.
Thanks, everyone, for the good words, personal references, fact-checking, etc. – such things make it very rewarding for us on the writing end of CC.
While I didn’t want to snag pictures from my friend’s real estate listing for use on this post, I suppose it can’t do any harm to post the listing itself.
The old link I had for it is dead, but I did find the Zillow listing, and it appears that there’s an offer pending. Feast your eyes and enjoy!
Wow, that house is extraordinary! I can see how it checks all of your boxes. OK, a flat roof and large glass area in Michigan are downsides, but well worth it, given what the house looks like. If the offer falls through, I think you should buy it — that would be a perfect location for a CC meetup!
Fantastic! And what a bargain!
That is an absolutely superb example, and it’s apparently been restored immaculately. Did you notice the period appliances?
Even in Eugene, that would be pushing a million $. In CA? Several times that.
I prefer a classic American colonial house (my own crib is a restored 1870 farmhouse) and classic long hood/short deck large American cars but I can certainly appreciate both the Wright-esque architecture and a good ol’ Corvair.
Another great write up Joe!
Joseph, I always enjoy your pieces, in large part because of your tangential commentary on music and architecture. I immediately recognized the Woodside Church as an Eliel Saarinen building…it much resembles his church in Columbus Indiana (pic below). I was afraid you were going to say it had been torn down, but it appears to still be standing. But is it accurate to call it “Googie”? This term, to me at least, invokes more eccentric, space-age influenced forms. Eliel’s son Eero’s buildings were perhaps more Googie, although at the same time were maybe too smart to lump into the more populist Googie category.
In any event, keep it coming!
Thanks, mFred, for the good words.
You (and Michael Allen, who commented above) are right – Woodside Church is not an example of “Googie” architecture. I own a great book for reference called “Googie” by one Alan Hess that I’ve pored over for probably close to two decades, and perhaps when I was writing this piece, I may have been thinking of other architectural styles that were referenced in that book, with their tie-ins and relevance to actual Googie architecture.
As for the architect of the former Woodside Church building, are you sure it’s by Eliel Saarinen? Most references I’ve been able to locate on the internet seem to indicate it was Eero’s design.
Hmmm…I’m confused. Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_works_by_Eero_Saarinen does not list it as being by Eero…but neither does it show up on this list of Eliel buikdings.
Wonderful article about one of the loveliest cars ever built. As a disciple of all things MCM, I want to show you the coolest gasoline station in Beverly Hills, if not all of California .
My long obsession with Volkswagens makes me tend to gravitate to anything rear engined and/or air cooled so Corvairs have always caught my eyes. I think it was quite remarkable that GM even built such a radical car back then.
That aside, I think that the 2nd gen Corvair 2 door coupes and convertibles are one of the cleanest designed bodies ever. It’s a car that doesn’t have a bad line. It doesn’t look awkward from any angle.
A friend of mine bought a ’69 Corvair about a year ago. It’s a factory four speed manual car too. It’s been put on the backburner as he’s moving but once he gets back on it we have a deal. I’m going to let him take my VW Bus for a spin if he lets me take the Corvair for a spin. I’ve always wanted to drive one.