What the hell am I doing? I mean, there’s no way the Chevrolet Corvair would have made it into the era of Reaganomics and leg warmers. Front wheel drive would likely have taken over, just as it did with every other carmaker. Still, here I am, following the whims of some crazed readers who grab the attention of a deranged founder (Jason Torchinsky) of a fringe automotive website, creating a fake fifth generation of a car that barely made it to a second series. It needed to be done.
We’ve already taken this car, which died in 1969, through two imaginary generations in the seventies:
Platform Sharing And The “VersiFrame”
Admittedly, the car had its fans; some people found the rear engine format ideally suited to space efficiency and driving dynamics. It’s a drivetrain layout that still underpins what is arguably the best all-around high-end sports/GT car you can buy today. Is the Corvair worth saving again?
If you know General Motors history, you know the company had a habit of taking unique automotive concepts, and launching them when the beta testing stage should have gone on a bit longer; the products just weren’t ready for market yet. [Editor’s Note: GM also had a habit of launching products far too late. Take the Quad-4 engine, for example. But the Bishop is right. -DT]. Of course, the World’s Largest Automaker then refines the ill-launched concept to the point where it’s a pretty damn nice car just in time for cancellation due to poor sales — poor sales resulting from the issues with the initial model. It’s hard to defeat bad PR.
Wait, you think I’m talking Corvair? I could be, but the aforementioned disturbed readers asked me to use the next Corvair Chronicles article (which you’re now reading) to simultaneously resuscitate yet another GM car that followed this fix-it-then-kill-it-path; pop it in the blender, please, and set the thing on puree.
For the Generation V Corvair, we’ll have our imaginary General Motors do what General Motors will always do if given the chance: save costs through platform sharing. You might remember how in the early eighties, the X body (Citation) front wheel drive chassis debuted, and this same platform was scaled down for the smaller J body (Cavalier) and scaled up for the mid sized A bodies (Celebrity). We’ll take this idea and run with it. Also, I was gonna have this car launch in 1980, but we’ll do the old school GM thing and delay the introduction until at least mid-1981 because of “production challenges.”
sources: Wikipedia/IFCAR, Wikipedia/IFCAR, and Wikipedia/Mr Choppers
Let’s say that despite the front-wheel drive Citation and Celebrity being sold alongside one another, our Corvair (which fills the Cavalier slot) would stay rear-engined. Owners of the Generation IV car would have been used to the front and rear trunk versatility and torque-steer-free traction, so let’s keep these advantages that a front drive subcompact wouldn’t have. How can we do this?
Our answer would have been called “VersiFrame” structures. These common assemblies feature subframes with integral independent suspension systems, an engine cradle, and space to mount ancillaries like a radiator. The Versiframes can mount in the front of the car for larger four and six cylinder engines on X and A Body cars; they can mount in the rear for the Generation V Corvair. The flat engine is now gone and replaced by a new compact 2200cc inline four cylinder engine that sits transversely and essentially horizontally at the rear of the car.
Unlike earlier Corvairs, the Generation V has the radiator at the very back of the car like a bus; it’s very wide and low profile with twin fans. How does it get air? From a scoop below. Hey, don’t mock this — a lot of cars (especially sporting Pontiacs) have no front radiator opening (or even a visible heat exit) and they don’t overheat.
source: General Motors via GMPartsNow
The Gen V Corvair features a structure that the Versiframes attach to on the inside, and the outside is covered in easy-to-change-out dent-free plastic body panels that…wait a minute. Are we saving the damn Fiero now, too? Why, yes we are! One of the bright spots of innovation for GM in the early eighties, the plastic panels’ spirit deserves to spread beyond the slow-selling underdeveloped two-seater that reality gave us. You readers have spoken.
Here are the models that make up the full range of Generation V cars from the imaginary 1980s:
Corvair
Interesting how well the Fiero visual language translates to other body styles. Nobody was really into retro in 1980, but the four headlight nose features subtle “sideways V” shapes in the light buckets to mimic the 1965-69 car, along with the recessed turn signals below.
sources: Wikipedia/crwpitman and General Motors via Motor1
Available as a two and four door sedan, it’s also offered as a wagon with painted D pillars to give a wraparound look, as well as trunks up front and at the rear, over the engine.
source: Dyler/Gateway Classic Cars
In back, there is the aforementioned scoop under the bumper for the radiator; hot air escapes through a grille in between the tail lights:
Corvair Monza
As with the earlier cars, the Monza coupe is virtually the same as the sedans but adds a sloping nose with pop up headlights. You’ll lose some cargo space in the frunk but it is made up a bit by a hatchback (in this case all glass). Also, this would give you the door handles hidden in the B pillar.
Corvair Corsa
Here is the only Corvair that uses the 2.8 liter V6, in this case mounted to the VersiFrame and placed above the rear wheels. This mid-engined car loses the trunk but still has the frunk, plus a very small amount of space behind the front seats (but strictly a two seater). Yup, this is what the Fiero would be in our alternate reality:
However, I’m doing different things with the bodywork. I was never really sold on the notchback or the ‘fake rear window’ thing of the Fiero GT (where the glass is actually totally outside of the car). I also hated how the full perimeter rub strip on the Fiero just got cut off where the nose started on the GT; the Corvair Corsa continues this strip all the way around.
I’ve added Maserati Merak style ‘flying buttress’ trim in back to visually continue the roofline down; the quarter windows are now real, for the slightly expanded passenger compartment. Oh, and NO four-cylinder option at all. I can’t go for that, can’t go for that, can’t go for that, yeah. Sorry.
Corvair Monza QuadForce
With a VersiFrame system, it opens the possibility of having the engine in back and, if you give up the frunk space, add another VersiFrame with a second engine and transmission at the front of the car. That would be insane, but guess what? We’re gonna go totally off of the rails now. Behold the Corvair QuadForce. A sum total of eight cylinders, two turbochargers (one each motor), and four driven wheels. Also, it would need two transmissions, and I shudder to think how to get the clutches and gear selectors to sync up with a GM cable shifter. Still, if not, we’d need to go automatics to solve that issue. This thing would likely never see the light of day (Because Corvette) and only make it to concept stage or as a homologated competition car to be a bone in the throat of Audi UR Quattros in the WRC (imagine a Group B Corvair Monza QuadForce monster with 400+ horsepower).
Pontiac Pomona
The Corvair twin to give Pontiac dealers a small car to sell continues with a Generation V Pomona. This thing kind of designs itself since the eighties Pontiac brand language is so strong; note that we’ll offer this only as a pop-up headlight sport coupe and as a five-door hatchback exclusive to this brand.
The Inside Story
The Fiero concept of the gas tank mounted under the center console continues since the front bench option is long gone. Ergonomics were finally coming into focus by the eighties and the Corvair would have a unique take on this concept. The idea is to keep all of the controls within very close reach of the driver. Concentric knobs next to the wheel are mounted on a ‘pod’ with the gauges that (optionally) can adjust for angle (see the two release catches on both sides of the pod). The radio is mounted on the center console so that just like on i-drive equipped BMWs you can adjust it with your elbow planted on the armrest; after living with that system for over a decade I will say that it’s nice not having to ever reach for anything. The dash is mostly empty now with more glove boxes and storage compartments than any other car (remember, the gas tank is under the center armrest so no storage there) or extra gauges on the sport models.
You know, the lovely Autopian readers were right- the Fiero does deserve saving, and if the looks and technology it presented could have helped give life to another underappreciated GM car, all the better.
The Vans and Pickups
I know your question: WHERE’S MY DAMN VAN?!? I know, I know, but I ran out of time and space once I started adding new noses and doing ASC-style roof chopping. However, I promise you the next part of Corvair Chronicles will be devoted to the updated Chevvan and a bunch of new variations on this mini bus. You like camping? Falconry? Stay tuned.
After that, the most challenging part of all- the late eighties and nineties. Can a sixties concept really survive as the century nears its end?
The Daydreaming Designer Imagines A World Where The Corvair Never Went Away – The Autopian
A Daydreaming Designer Imagines The Corvair Surviving Into Days Of Disco – The Autopian
Let’s Figure Out The Best ‘Worst Car’ From Those Stupid Lists Of ‘Worst Cars’ – The Autopian
A Daydreaming Designer Imagines An AMC Sports Car Based On The Look Of The Pacer – The Autopian
#/media/File:Chevrolet_Citation_II_front.jpg){kind=link}
Hello, Powertrain engineer here.
When you move your rear mounted powertrain to the front you translate it, you don’t rotate it about Z. Your Quadforce diagram shows a front mounted powertrain with the engine in front of the axle. Assuming it’s the same powertrain assembly (because much, much, much cheaper) you now have a car with 5 reverse gears on the front axle. Top speed limited by the reverse gear ratio in both directions.
What you should have if you use the same powertrain assembly is a front-mid engine. Sounds much more race car, and makes for a less understeery rally car to take on the quattro.
If your engine was to the right of the gearbox (which is the normal side even for Honda these days) you have a chance of still having room for the pedal box, assuming LHD only. I wouldn’t want to be the guy doing the steering rack package, but then, who ever does?
With the ability to run either or both engines at will you could drive this with just one engine most of the time, winter mode using FWD for economy, summer mode RWD to even out the wear. GM could call this “Displacement On Demand” like they did in real-life 1981 according to a Google I just did.
Citroen managed to make twin manual gearbox’s work in the 2CV Safari in the 60’s, so I’m sure GM could have got it to work with another two decades to practice.
(Yes, yes, I know Citroen turned the rear engine around in the 2CV Safari, but they weren’t focused on cost like GM, and also wanted to keep the back seats)
But, but, but the front engine is turned around and is utilized for regenerative braking, being spun in reverse, sucking in the exhaust from the rear engine and spitting out pure air from the intake whilst topping off the fuel tank.
Skwimjim- if you put one engine in first gear and the other in reverse you could make an incredible amount of tire smoke.
Captain Muppet- I was waiting for someone that actually knows their stuff to weigh in (as opposed to me just throwing stuff at the wall.). That actually is a great idea; if there is enough room it makes sense to have both powertrains facing the same direction, especially if it’s gonna be a stick with the lever manipulating the gears in the same direction. Then just move the spare tire up front; better weight distribution.
I know that other multi-engine cars I’ve seen (like that CRX with two motors which Car and Driver did in the 80s) you could choose which engine ran so you could have less fuel consumption and choose between front or rear wheel drive.
I appreciate the expert input!
Besides the Fiero I can see a hint of resemblance to the never-produced early ’80s Saturn prototype, especially on the sedan. Well done.
As for the vans, the mini-RTS would’ve still looked relatively fresh in the early ’80s so the pattern of one van generation per car generation could continue. If it needs to be updated to look like the newer cars, that could be a simple matter of painting the headlight surrounds body color instead of chroming them – but realistically they’d share more styling cues with the rest of the Chevy Truck line than the Corvair cars by this point.
nplnt- uh…I have indeed waited until around 1984 to update the mini RTS, and I’ve taken it a bit further than just painting the headlight surrounds. You’ll see it in Part 4; Mercedes Streeter has gotten a preview and she approves so hopefully you will as well!
Had it continued, I’d bet this is the generation where the Pontiac badge engineered version would have outsold the Chevy one, your design really fits into the whole Ride, Pontiac, Ride asthetic that was going on at the time, moved a lot of trunk lid spoilers and gold anodized alloy wheels. I also expect this is the last generation that would have turned any sort of reasonable profit for GM, given the rise of SUVs and proto-crossovers in the 1990s and the public’s gradually waning interest in small cars. But small cars and sport compacts were still huge, viable business in the 80s
Ranwhenparked- yes, the profitability would have indeed been an issue, despite the sharing of parts, and I do think this would be the last generation where the full line of cars had this design.
But don’t worrry- I have a new plot twist that will keep this thing alive.
“I can’t go for that, can’t go for that, can’t go for that, yeah. Sorry.”
Seriously, you CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT throw that line out there and end it with “Sorry” rather than “No can do”!!!!!!!!! Such a beautiful opportunity squandered. The Hall and Oates picture is pure gold, though, and I’ll share the Youtube link for a version done for “Live from Daryl’s House” series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yxoob6aPtk
That being said, you most certainly did not squander the opportunity for a really interesting alternate reality. Love, love the Pomona and the Corsa – those designs really hold together with the GM family design and have a lot of character. The Quad Force is completely bonkers and would have been a great entrant in the Group B wars. The Versiframe is an interesting speculation in the shared platform genre, and I like the interior design with the radio in a very convenient place. I’m not sure how it would wear in the long term, but I think I’d love just dropping my hand from the shifter to the radio. Best installment yet in this series, great work.
P.S. – It most certainly did not escape my notice that in this post you replaced the original Gen III “Chevette headlight” version with the more attractive “angled down Holden headlight” version and adding a blacked out grille. Massive improvement, thank you!
OrigamiSensei- Ha! You saw that. Yes, the focus group apparently liked the Holden face better so what the hell, let’s go with that.
Be still my beating heart!
Thanks for the 4th gen wagon render. It’s awesome!
Love your flexible architecture and the designs are spot on for the time. I’d autocross that Quadforce.
BigThingsComin- yes, I did indeed include that 4th Gen wagon since it was forgotten last time.
Glad that you’ve enjoyed the series, and honestly happy that you personally suggested this seemingly strange project to begin with!
Why limit the QuadForce to 8 cylinders? The Monza already had a V6 in the rear. Just add the 4-banger in front as you show and let’s have the US’s first 10-cylinder passenger car a decade early!
Just tell the GM brass that the extra engine is for all-weather safety and definitely not for performance that would embarrass the already embarrassing C3 Vette.
The responsiveness of a V6 and I4 being revved up and down is only one downside to your suggestion. Couple this with the different power peaks and red lines of each engine design and this would be the most exhausting thing to even try and drive smoothly.
With that said, can you imagine the noise of an Iron Duke in front and a 2.8 behind your ears just trying to do a 0-60 run?
My ears started to bleed from just writing this out.
NebraskaStig- actually, the V6 won’t fit in the back of the Monza without removing all of the rear trunk space (I had the V6 only available in the Corsa/Fiero). Also, I was proposing a new motor, not the Iron Duke; hopefully all aluminum and SOHC (maybe DOHC on upper level versions). Or something like that.
I love these, all of these, but I’m having a hard time getting over a Corvair being water-cooled.
Corvwater?
10001010- That’s trun, but even Jason (easily one of the biggest air cooling proponents going) agreed that we really should go water cooling; the challenges with controlling emissions, dealing with a real heater, and the quest for noise reduction would ultimately put paid to air cooling (even the Vanagon went wasserboxer). I mean, this is fantasy stuff but we try to add a bit of realism to it.
I agree it should be water-cooled for all those reasons I’m just getting hung up on the name.
10001010- I agree on the name. Corvasser? Coraqua? Coragua? Coreau (French)? Not really working.
GM loved redefining what names mean to suit current market conditions – see Oldsmobile 442, by the ’80s, they’d probably be claiming the -air in Corvair was for aerodynamics (which was a big thing then, just had to show a fake computer animated tracing of a car in a commercial to get people excited about cheating the air).
That said, they’d obviously have had to go to water cooling sooner or later, even if they wanted to be stubborn and hold on as long as possible, the mid/late 1990s would have been the absolute hard stop beyond which it was no longer possible no matter what.
And GM was stubborn, look at how much money they spent in the 1980s trying to avoid switching to acrylic enamel paints, building monstrously expensive exhaust handling systems to deal with the environmental issues of lacquer, only to eventually have to fold and switch like the rest of the industry
This is just the right kind of crazy.
The shape of the 80’s design has strong Beretta/Corsica vibes… Just a touch more angular, but not much, really. The dash design also reminds me of the 1st-gen Beratta/Corsica dash, too. 2nd-gen dash used similar knobs, just turned 90 degrees sideways for lights and wipers, similar to the 80’s Supra and some other imports.
UnseenCat- yes, Subarus had that as well. I just wanted to explore what could happen if they were turned to be more visible to the driver, plus have the minor buttons (rear defog, etc.) placed near the wheel as well.
Combined with the radio location, you would never need to go reach for any of the controls (except the cigarette lighter dead center on the dash).
I’ve driven several cars of the 80s-90s that had that style of controls. Better than fiddling with lots of little controls crammed on stalks and definitely better than touchscreens.
QuadForce with Portal axles all around for Paris -Dakar Rally
“Admittedly, the car had its fans”
It needed them: it was air-cooled.
Keeping the rear engine Corvair going for a third decade is Porsche 911 grade stubborn. I like the dash design with the knobs on the binnacle like a sideways version of the Citroën satellite controls.
For maximum weirdness could the VersiFrame be tweaked to produce a rear engined V8 sedan a la Tatra, and throw in some hydropneumatic suspension for laughs
Slow Joe Crow- I actually already did make a new era (1989) Tatra concept! It was water cooled and a flat engine to keep the cargo area decent sized:
https://www.theautopian.com/a-trained-designer-imagines-what-communist-czech-car-company-tatra-could-have-built-in-the-1980s/
I love this.
I wonder- What if in the 90s, GM bumped the corvette up a notch sooner, and used the corvair to go against the Boxster while the vette targeted the 911?
JurassicJeep- I certainly think there was room for a lower tier two seat sports car in the GM lineup. Had the Fiero been introduced with the V6, a more sophisticated front suspension (instead of the Chevette components in the original), fewer initial quality issues, and continually improved from there it could have quite successful. Remember that it sold over 100,000 units in the first year, then dropped down to about 46,000 per year in 1987 (second to last model year). Those are great numbers for a two seater.
Apparently Daryl Hall and John Oates both agree Corvair for the 80’s makes my dreams come true.
Data- but don’t let off of the gas in the middle of a turn. It’s a Maneater.