Automotive WI – Chevrolet produces sub-Corvair model

In a scenario where the Ford Cardinal project (aka the German Ford Taunus P4 / P6) is given the green-light for production in North America, what if Chevrolet in response produced a smaller rear-engined 4-seater sub-Chevrolet Corvair model (of similar size to the VW Type 3 / VW Type 4) powered by 1500-1800cc Flat-4 versions of the Corvair’s Flat-6 engine for the US market?

Especially as the Corvair Flat-6 unit was said to be a modular design capable of spawning anywhere from Flat-Twin to Flat-12 engines, with a 200 hp Flat-10 prototype engine actually being produced at one point in FWD form for what eventually became the Oldsmobile Tornado.

Though for the purposes of this ATL scenario, the Corvair modular engine family would be limited to just sub-Corvair Flat-4 and Corvair Flat-6 engines for the North American as well as Latin American markets.
 
And what would Ralph Nader say about this new effort?

BTW, my impression is that the Type 3 and Type 4 were different sizes, and if anyone dreams of capturing the Type 4 market, they have very weird dreams.
 
Couldn't GM just counter it with a European captive import/conventional subcompact rather than squishing the Corvair even more?
 
As much as I love a GM Type 3/4 rival, it probably wouldn't be that successful. GM most likely will not want to risk it and import a GM Europe car instead, as @Coiler suggested.
 
I would have liked to see a flat four go into the early Pontiac Tempests, than that slant flour( half a V8) and run that power thru that goofy cable drive to the transaxle
TempestDriveTrain.jpg
 
With less power, you don't get into as much trouble.
See the 29-40hp swing axle Beetles.

Add more power, like the 356 later did, yeah, handling was just as twitchy

Power isn't the prime factor, except that you can drive faster easier. The dilemma is road irregularity/undulation combined with lateral acceleration and the vagaries of traction. The problem isn't your, or my understanding of the problem, but rather, public perception of the problem as presented by Nader et al. I owned and drove a VW Type 2 that had been rolled.
 
BTW, my impression is that the Type 3 and Type 4 were different sizes, and if anyone dreams of capturing the Type 4 market, they have very weird dreams.

Couldn't GM just counter it with a European captive import/conventional subcompact rather than squishing the Corvair even more?

GM did not really have an early-60s equivalent captive import that could have challenged the Ford Cardinal in terms of size, engine displacement and sophistication, the Vauxhall Viva HA and Opel Kadett A were either smaller in terms of size or engine displacement until they were replaced by their more suitable replacements in the mid-60s yet V4-aside the FWD Ford Cardinal would have still been a more sophisticated offering compared to the Vauxhall Victor / Envoy (not even sure how much of a sales success the latter was in North America).

Was not quite sure of the Type 3 and Type 4 dimensions though upon further investigation was envisioning the sub-Corvair being roughly a similar size to the Type 3 (particularly the Brazilian 3-box 4-door model yet with similar Corvair styling to what was adopted by NSU for the NSU Prinz 4 / NSU Prinz 1000), with the sub-Corvair also sold as a Pontiac or Oldsmobile as was originally intended with the Corvair.

The 1.5-1.8 Corvair-derived air-cooled Flat-4 should put out around 50-100 hp (not including potential 100-120 hp 1.8 Turbo and 110-160 hp 1.8 Yenko Turbo variants), it would also be the case that like the Corvair the sub-Corvair model would receive Anti-Roll Bars as standard from the outset allowing it to avoid being the main focus of Ralph Nader's OTL wrath (with the latter more likely to call out Volkswagen for their complacency regarding the Beetle and Type 2).

The fact the sub-Corvair would utilize similar mechanicals to the larger Corvair wrapped in a smaller 4-seater body should also help to spread the costs compared to OTL.

138404.jpg
 
GM did not really have an early-60s equivalent captive import that could have challenged the Ford Cardinal in terms of size, engine displacement and sophistication, the Vauxhall Viva HA and Opel Kadett A were either smaller in terms of size or engine displacement until they were replaced by their more suitable replacements in the mid-60s yet V4-aside the FWD Ford Cardinal would have still been a more sophisticated offering compared to the Vauxhall Victor / Envoy (not even sure how much of a sales success the latter was in North America).
The fact the sub-Corvair would utilize similar mechanicals to the larger Corvair wrapped in a smaller 4-seater body should also help to spread the costs compared to OTL.

I owned a couple of Vauxhaul Envoys, from 1959, a captive import sold in Pontiac dealerships without enthusiasm. I bought them used, priced reasonably at $150. I got the impression American car companies didn't car much about captive imports, and this has been re-affirmed over time. Ford didn't sell the Cardinal, but did find success with the Falcon, as did Chrysler with Valiant, while the Corvair did inspire an engineering effort to solve some of the problems inherent with the design of the radical Corvair, which had begun showing in a short time. The General subsequently bore the Chevy II to market, and its dull pedigree bore rich fruits for the corporation. It was a better deal than the Corvair, investment-wise, and an engineering no-brainer. The General didn't need a smaller car to make money, and gas was quite cheap, so people didn't mind the size that offered room, conventional handling, and reliability.


Especially as the Corvair Flat-6 unit was said to be a modular design capable of spawning anywhere from Flat-Twin to Flat-12 engines, with a 200 hp Flat-10 prototype engine actually being produced at one point in FWD form for what eventually became the Oldsmobile Tornado.

Not quite factual, the modular engine evolved from an attempt to cure problems, and the engine built was only the flat-10, installed in a Chevy, and turned down for development by all divisions of GM, including Olds, which specifically turned it down for the Toronado, although the FWD Chevy installation was noted during the Toronado's gestation.


Marketing-wise, the Corvair did lend an air of revolution to convention in car design, but Ford and GM subsequently fooled everyone by converting plunky Falcons and Chevy IIs into fresh, exciting Mustangs and Camaros.*** That kind of excitement, and sales and profitability success would never have arisen from the womb of an unconventional econo-box that blew head gaskets, left puddles and threw belts.

***: mild sarcasm.
 
Not quite factual, the modular engine evolved from an attempt to cure problems, and the engine built was only the flat-10, installed in a Chevy, and turned down for development by all divisions of GM, including Olds, which specifically turned it down for the Toronado, although the FWD Chevy installation was noted during the Toronado's gestation.

I see, still the Corvair modular engine opens up many possibilities for expansion that Corvair and sub-Corvair aside could be used in non-Western markets outside of the US in Flat-Twin/4 and Flat-6 forms.
 
Top