We recently took a deep look at the new Corvette, thanks to a 1954 Road and Track Test and tech analysis. Interestingly, in the same issue there is also a road test of the Nash-Healey, the first genuine production sports car by one of the major American manufacturers. The approach was rather different, as it was a joint project initiated by Donald Healey and Nash’s George Mason, who met on an ocean liner as Healey was heading back to England, disappointed that Cadillac wouldn’t sell him their new ohv V8 engine.
But Mason was quite willing to hand over the engine and drive line from his Ambassador, and the result was the 1951 Nash-Healey. And for 1952, Pininfarina was commissioned to design and build a new body. The result was a lot of transatlantic shipping and high costs, resulting in a $6,000 price tag, compared to the Corvette’s $3,515 price. That and the fact that the V8 Thunderbird was on the way resulted in 1954 being the last year for the N-H, and only a mere 520 were made over its four year lifespan. But given that it had a six cylinder engine of very similar in size and rated power to the Corvette’s, but teamed with a three-speed manual and overdrive, it makes an interesting point of comparison.
Despite the Nash-Healey’s manual transmission, its 0-60 time of 11.5 seconds was a bit slower than the Corvette’s 11.0. The gap widened further in the 0-80 run, with the Corvette finishing it three seconds sooner. Given that both had almost identical curb weights, it says that the Corvette’s 150hp 235 CID six was probably even stronger than the 10hp more it was rated at compared to the N-H’s larger 252 CID 140 hp ohv six. And clearly the Corvette’s Powerglide did not put it to any disadvantage.
As to its looks, there’s probably very few who are going to find the N-H the better looking of the two, despite it originating from P-F.
Since the pictures aren’t very good, here’s what the N-H looked like.
An acquaintance had the (even rarer?) coupe. I see the roadster occasionally at car shows.
The dash is especially nice, more German than British. Too bad Nash didn’t copy it for their cars.
Posted March 18, 2020 at 10:06 AM
No, *this* is what a Nash-Healey looks like. The featured car is what it looked like after they got done botching it for its second year. So, yes I prefer it to the Corvette, but only this version hits that top rung.
I suppose we should not be surprised that the Chevy six was stronger than that in the Nash Ambassador. For whatever reason, Nash just never seemed to make speed and racing a real priority. At different times we saw lots of manufacturers advertising their performance chops – Hudson comes to mind – even when they didn’t necessarily have the strongest hand to play for the start.
Also, this car had a really big gap between 1st and 2nd gear, something that did not afflict the ‘Glide in the Corvette nearly so much.
+1 And it was Pininfarina who botched it!
That early Nash-Healey looks very similar to the Healey Model-G Alvis 3-liter roadster produced from 1951-1953. I think all of the pre-Austin-Healey cars that Donald produced had a common chassis design.
Yes; the Nash-Healey was a Healey with a Nash drive train and a bit of cosmetic surgery.
Interestingly, the first version of the N-H had the slightly smaller 234.8 inch Nash six, bit Healey put on an aluminum cylinder head with two SU carbs. Not sure if the heads really flowed much better, as it still was rated at a fairly modest 125 hp.
The one in this version had more displacement, but kept the Nash head and now used two Carter carbs.
As to your comment about Nash not prioritizing speed or performance, neither did Chevy until just about this time. The Corvette six was stock, except for the three carbs, a split exhaust and a mechanical cam. The head was the same though. Healey made or could have made similar changes, and its power did increase to 140hp.
Nash did prioritize performance, in 1950 several light body Nash-Healey’s ran the 24 hours of LeMan’s, placing 4th out of 59 cars. The following year they came in 3rd place, only behind Mercedes 300 SLR’s and as the year before ahead of Ferrari’s and Aston-Martin’s They then ran the 1,000 mile Mille Miglia, A race discontinued a few years later as too dangerous, they placed 5th. then at LeMan’s again, placed 4th or 5th After that Nash merged with Hudson, forming AMC and no more racing. Starting in 1952 or’ 53 Nash advertised their ‘Winning Nash Dual-Carburation LeMan;s engine’ which got the Ambassador up to 99-100 mph, was a decent handling car, but as one journalist wrote’One could be deafand by the protest of the screaming tire’s’. For racing, Nash did make mechanical changes for speed, but handling was better than all but Mercedes. Guess none of you are Old Farts like me, although I was only 2 years old in 1950, Nash was still advertising the LeMan’s six’ up to 1956. BTW the 234 WAS the big overhead valve six from the Ambassador, the Statesman six was a flathead 195 cu in of 80 hp At my restoration shop we restored a ’53 and ’54 corvette, plus a ’53 Nash=Healey, the original build quality of the N-H was better, although I liked the Corvette’s look’s more.
Didn’t the N-H have roll up windows and the Corvette side curtains?
It’s kind of difficult to decide if the brand association was a handicap to either or both cars.
The Nash-Healey coupe had roll-down windows. The roadster had side-curtains. The giveaway is in the dropped upper doorline and lack of exterior door handles on the roadster. Back in the day, a roadster was a car with side-curtains and a removable top. A convertible had roll-down windows and a folding top.
I just can’t get past that face
“And clearly the Corvette’s Powerglide did not put it to any disadvantage.”
Say what you will about the Powerglide, it is still the darling of the drag strip.
Wasn’t the Caddy V8 an available option on these albeit at much extra cost over the AM six or was it just a popular transplant? Allard managed to offfer both Ford and Caddy engines in his cars.
As I understand it, Allard sold an incomplete car, minus engine, so no engine supplier deals were necessary. The customer was typically a race team that purchased an engine from the parts department of a Cadillac dealer.
I wouldn’t have thought of it without today’s juxtaposition but the Nash-Healy and the Land Cruiser have surprisingly similar front ends.
Yes, both resembling a facelift where some incompetent surgeon pulled the jawline up far too high.
Well, just to feed your gearing obsession, this car has 27 mph per thousand in top, vs the 22 mph in top for the Corvette. And the GM car has three carbs, which, if all adjusted right, should give more even fuelling to six cylinders, therefore actually producing the (slightly higher) claimed output more consistently, ie: actually, as opposed to dyno/PR.
One would also have to query the near-identical curb weights, given the Healey’s tin body and same-ish size, unless GM was making a monster-weight chassis.
I think it’s as close as you’ll ever get in your quest to find proof of the ole PG equalling or bettering a 3-speed hand-job, and not convinced you’ve succeeded. Grand effort, though.
The N-H is actually pretty, and it would seem a cheap travesty to say “but a shame about the face”, so I won’t.
But I can still THINK, boy, is it ever.