Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
1965 Corvair vs. Mustang
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2009
- This is a dealer training filmstrip provided to Chevy dealers to teach their salesmen how to sell the Corvair over the Mustang. Message or email me if you'd like to get this on a high resolution standard full screen DVD. Digital conversion and audio visual work © Tim Verthein 2009
I sell cars and yes, this video is nonsense. However, back in the 60’s (I am that old) my dad had two Corvairs , a 63 and 65. The 65 was a 4 carb convertible Monza. I learned to drive on that car and in answer to some of the comments made here I never had it spin around in the rain. Yes it might leak oil but we found that double gaskets stopped that. It never overheated but it was wise to carry a spare fan belt. It had factory duals and once to save money dad put a set of Golden Rams on it. What a sound! I would never claim to be able to out run a Mustang but one night I was being chased by a guy in a Mustang who wanted to do me harm. On a crooked road it was no contest. He lost it in a 90 degree hairpin, my Corvair did not.
This was a turbo corvair, it may have been faster than the mustang. Its not like those old mustangs had great performance they really were just a fairlane with a different body
My father bought his first Corvair (a 1964 Monza) used and just when the "Unsafe at any Speed" book came out. The dealer let him have it for $365 even though it still had that "new car smell". We watched Mustangs rust out but that car kept right on going. Fast for its class, good handling, comfortable. Until the collector status put them out of reach we always had a Corvair in the family . . . probably the best designed car of the 1960s!
@Mark rapacki it's a matter of opinion of course but fact is that the opinion I've held for decades has withstood the test of time. Even Jay Leno agrees with me, not you.
@Mark rapacki hardly. What expert? I drove with Mario Andretti and worked for Andy Granatelli, most likely while you were wearing diapers. My eldest daughter currently drives my 65 Corsa Turbo. So what if you can still buy a Mustang today? That means nothing at all, today's Mustang shares nothing but the name with the 64.5 model! When the Senate actually tested the claims of Ralph Nader he finally admitted he picked on the Corvair because it was the biggest profit maker in the GM line. Last point was that at the end of the investigation it was found that the Corvair was one of the most, if not THE most, safe cars built in the United States! Like I said, you're entitled to an opinion but not your own facts. I mentioned Leno simply because he is a well known and highly regarded expert but if you want more that can be arranged. Ever hear of Top Gear, the original? They tried to wreck a Corvair only to discover the second generation was very competitive and often superior to European marques of the era. Good night 😜 P.S. last check there were a LOT more Mustangs rotting in junkyards than Corvairs.
The 1960s was the best decade for American automobiles. If i could go back to any decade with a million bucks I would do the '60s.
STRONGLY disagree, cars are LEAPS and bounds better today in every single aspect. The only debatable thing you can say is styling. And I love classics. New cars are just undeniably better
@@marioeid930 To each their own. I have a 2019 Mustang GT PP2 track ready car with a beefed up 5.0 and all the bells and whistles but I still prefer the cars and engines of the 1960s. And its not just the cars I like better but its the time those cars existed. I grew up in the 1960s and 1970s. My first cars were a Plymouth 'Cuda and then a 1970 SS Camaro with a munci 4 speed and a 12 bolt 4-11 rear axle. My fiends owned everything from Superbird Plymouth's to roadrunners to Mach 1 Mustangs to Buick GSX to 68 Camaros to 440 Roadrunners and on and one. These cars were 4000 new and 1500 used in good low mileage condition. Gas was 28 cents a gallon and insurance was cheap. The streets weren't crowded where I lived anyways. I have so many memories of working on my cars myself or with friends and having the time of my life. We cruised central and for the most part everyone got along. If there was a super rare fight it was settled with fists not guns. I will take the 1960s over todays high tech over priced over engineered rides in this crazy world we live in today every day of the week. My friend and I still say the youth of today will never know just how fun the 1960s and 1970s were.
Having been around at the time and owning a Corvair Spyder, I don't recall Corvair and Mustang EVER being compared to each other. Other than having four wheels and a steering wheel, they had nothing else in common!!!
Here in KC we raced Mustangs with our Corvairs in the mid/late 60's. SCCA Autocrosses & Gymkhanas. Corvairs won 9 outta 10 evenrs
I owned a 1966 mustang GT350 and there was no way I ever even thought of being beat by a glorified Volkswagon!
I've owned a ‘66 Mustang and early and late Corvairs. A stock Corvair can't keep up with a V8 Mustang in straight line acceleration. My Mustang would never handle as well as the '67 - '69 model Corvairs. The early swing axle Corvairs were dangerous without a rear sway bar and that suspension design was far inferior to the '67 - '69 models. I raced a '65 Corvair Corsa in autocross and it was very competitive in “C” class. However, it would not have been competitive with the stock carburetors because of float starvation. The cheap solution to the problem was to replace the carbs with a small Holley 4 barrel and a manifold adapter.
OOPS! I meant to say '65 - '69 Corvairs
The Mustang Won the SCCA b production Class for 1965 66 and 1967! there was never a Corvair that won any of the races I was at!
Thanks for giving us this peak into history. Whether or not this film was a load of propaganda meant to sell product... it is terrific to have the chance to see it.
Cheers, David
Having autocrossed a Corvair for 5 years, at the same track where the Mustang club ran their cars, the owner of the track loved it when the Corvair guys were there, because we could keep our cars on the track. The Mustangs were all over the place, tearing up the lawn and wrecking the property because they couldn't keep them under control. Corvair = better lap times on a road course.
Ya, GET YOUR YENKO STINGER. Little 6PACK POWER UP YOUR KIESTER....💪AIR COOLED POWER BABY👍
I stumbled upon this video. Growing up, my Mom had a '65 Mustang. In college, I had a '65 Corvair. I've owned an '11 Mustang, and now I have a '16 5.0. The funny part is that the Corvair WAS fun to drive, as long as it could keep oil. LOL If Chevy had kept with it, I could have seen the Corvair as a Miata type of car that was just under the Corvette, but affordable to someone who wanted a bit of sportiness.
And until the crankshaft seals started leaking.
Since I first wrote this...I ended up selling the Mustang and restoring a '66 Corvair Corsa LOL
They do make seals that dont leak
The Corvair and Mustang were entirely different automobiles starting with 3 fundamental differences: engine location, engine cooling, and design versatility: the Mustang was only intended as a 2-door, whereas the Corvair was available as a 2-door, 4-door and a station wagon. Both offered a convertible. The cars appealed to a different set of customers. These salesman slide shows on the net are a hoot to see because they give us a glimpse of how fiercely the car companies tried to point our the differences in their cars, whether the differences were real, imagined, or of no real consequence to buyers. Most cars were bought based on styling, price and brand preference. The truth is that both of these cars were cheaply built and death traps in a crash, but collectors love them. I do appreciate the folks that are uploading these dealer/salesmen slide shows. 👍
Poor Ford dealers, they probably never got rid of all those Mustangs!
Well, according to this comparison anyway!
+carsbyjeff For pocket change, I'm sure they sold them all to people who drive the safe straight roads of Kansas and elsewhere.
carsbyjeff LOL. Well, it was early...they called it the "Falcon Mustang". And oh, that Magic Mirror Laquer.
Yeah poor Ford dealers they only sold 559,451 Mustangs in 1965.
Yeah, it must have sucked to be them.
they cant mess with mustang today
The second-generation Corvairs (`65 and later) had a lot going for them, and were far and away the best small American car ever built at the time. I had 2 Corsas, one which I did a Crown V8 conversion on. It motored down the road quite well with a 327/365 HP `Vette engine where the back seat used to be, and weighing only 2700 lbs., it shocked the crap out of lots of muscle cars :-)
That is one of the dumbest
statements I have ever read. The cars were junk. Not much better than a Yugo!
B Benningfield, How many corvairs have you owned? If yes, please give details, if no, then STFU, you're talking out your ass and not making a meaningful contribution.
B Bennington, That is one of the dumbest statements I have ever read. You are one of the most miserable human beings I have never even met. Not much better than Jeffrey Dahmer.
I would love to do a Crown conversion, that is serious HP this light and well balanced. Hmm, how bout a 32v Northstar...
Corvair sold 235.528. Falcon Mustang sold 559,451. Chevy had to go to the drawing board to build a Falcon Mustang of their own. Some things haven't changed
I love Ford Falcons so I liked it when Chevy called the Mustang the "Falcon Mustang". I love old Corvairs, Chevy II's, Falcons, Mustangs, Gremlins, Valiants, Galaxies, Thunderbirds, Hudson Super Wasps, and even Pintos! Just as long as it is not a Hyundai or a Kia. (If you like Hyundai's and Kia's don't get upset. I am sure that they are nice too in their own way.) :).
What do you think of a FIAT? xD
Yeah, I'd rather get a Pinto over a Hyundai/Kia because with the Pinto at least you get a crappy collectable rather than just a crappy car as with the Korean makes.
@@harryroger1739 🤣since2012 My crapy Sportage and American manufactured Optima
have over 350000 absolutely trouble free miles on them...
The first generation of Mustangs were built on a Falcon frame. Obviously Chevrolet was trying to make a comparison that was apples to androids.
I also like old Plymouth Barracuda too but I guess everyone forgets about them!.
I hear you about that. I regret selling just about EVERY old car I ever sold!!!! I flat out refused to drive anything newer than 1972 until about 10 years ago, so I've had a LOT of cool old cars over the years. I also refused to own anything with an automatic transmission until I bought the truck I drive now, and I wish it didn't have a slushbox either. The sad thing is it's nearly impossible to buy a new vehicle with a manual trans these days except for sports cars and econoboxes.
I had a 1965 Corvair 500 Coupe I bought in 1972 (while I was in High School) for $330.00. It was from a "little old lady" & had about 21,000 miles on it. Had cold factory air that still worked (would freeze you out!). It was white w/ turquoise interior. Had the 164 cu in engine with 110 HP (not turbo). I put a 100lb sandbag in the front trunk and that eliminated the one thing that Ralph Nader hated about this car-that in windy conditions, the nose would sway a bit.Sold it for 1,250 in 1978!
It's unforgivable that Chevrolet discontinued the Corvair when they did. It may not have been for everyone, but I believe that it would've offered people something different from what Detroit, Dearborn, Kenosha, and others were offering at the time. It's too bad that Chevrolet had discontinued the Van and Greenbrier.
Jason Carpp
You can thank Ralph Nader for killing the Corvair. It was an excellent car that was perfectly safe if you remembered that the bulk of the weight was in the rear, like a VW Beetle or a Porsche. Ralph Nader is a moron and to this day I swear someone paid him to crap on the Corvair. Great car!!
My biggest car buying regret is trading my beautiful 65 Corsa convertible for a piece of junk Camaro. I guess that's what comes from being young and stupid. If I could find that car I'd buy it back in a heartbeat.
Part of the problem was that the Corvair was relatively expensive to produce.
No map pocket! Holy shit I cant live without it. I have to buy a corvair.
You couldn't get those damn maps folded back up up anyway ! Lol !
"...a fancy Falcon." hilarious writing...straight out of "Mad Man". i could just hear someone from GM going to a meeting at SCDP's office with this dialog and then giving the keys to someone like Pete Campbell to drive home and test out the hot new Corvair. Then during his commute from Midtown Manhattan to Cos Cob, CT. someone cuts him off and he makes a quick maneuver around a corner too fast and flips the car over. loved that show.
Way easier to flip a '65 Falcon mustang than a '65 Corvair!!!
@@markmailander6441 This is true. My '65 Corvair handled way better than a car of its vintage should have, and the center of gravity was much lower than a Mustang's.
Makes you wonder, why is Ralph Nader have such a hate for Corvairs.
Years ago, I had three Corvairs, 1965 Monza, 1966 Monza, and lastly a 1967 Corsa, sadly I traded them all away. Foolish me!
They were really great cars, even in the winter. Great traction!
Some of the corvair advantages are rightly stated - it certainly had more space than a mustang, and more sophisticated suspension meant it at least rode better. Keyless locking is not necessarily a beneficial feature, the Mustang kept you from locking yourself out. Water cooling is perhaps more of a hassle than air cooling but it certainly meant that the Mustang heater was better.
But their performance comparisons were more suspect. The turbo monza - the fastest corvair - could approximately keep up with a the regular 289 Mustang (probably the same could be said for the 6 cylinder mustang and the NA corvair), but the turbo was notoriously finicky, and the corvair had no answer to the 289 HiPower.
And then, handling. Well, the weight distribution they talk about, which, together with the suspension, is what gives a Corvair more planted cornering than the lighter rear on the Mustang. But that only applies at moderate speeds. The real problem lies when your try to corner too fast - the Mustang will plough and understeer, or, if you power it through (provided you have one of the V8's) you can easily control the slide. The Corvair? Go around a corner too fast, and suddenly you're facing the opposite direction as before and you've crashed into a tree. Catastrohic oversteer, which was improved when the swing axles were replaced, was nontheless still the downfall of the Corvair from a safety standpoint. 70-30 weight distributions is NEVER a good recipe when making a safe handling car. Cars today strive for 50-50 for a reason.
Early on I learned to drop a 50lb. bag of rock salt in the front trunk. That's all it took.
Great piece of history! Thanks for posting it.
Comparitive sales material is always fun to see and read. ANY business wants to sell more, but no product or service is perfect. Compromise is inevitable. As a business, your sales and marketing people find ANY advantage, even a theoretical one, and use it to persuade the customer to your side. The Corvair had its merits, but the Mustang's style and performance image started a new class of cars that continue today. The Camaro, Firebird/Trans Am, and Challenger all owe their existence to the '64 1/2 Mustang.
If you want to start getting in to who did what first GM had several of them as well. 1st electric start was Cadillac. 1st automatic trans was hydramatic (GM/Oldsmobile.) 1st turbocharger was the Chevy Corvair. Ford guys like to claim that the Mustang was the first pony car, but the Plymouth Barracuda went into production several months before the Mustang did. The bottom line is ALL of them have made innovations the others have copied.
Chevy had an interesting shade of pink in 1965, it was called evening orchid. It's kind of a silvery metallic pink, and looks beautiful on the right car. I know the Lincoln color you're talking about, just like the GM color, it looks great on the right car.
A/k/a "Iris Mist" on 1965 Pontiacs. A one-year-only color and one of the loveliest colors available that year
This is Great! So, NOW we know why the Corvair outsold the Mustang in '65....
I love how Chevy was trying to denegrate the Mustang as the "Falcon Mustang"...
@allusernamestaken01 Hey, it works for Porsche. Once they got rid of the swing axle on the Corvair and went to a more modern independent system (I believe '65 was the first year for that), all they needed to do was fatten up the rear tires a bit to add stability to the rear-engine design. It has great traction in a straight line but simply needs more rear tire than front to increase stability. The main problem with rear-engine designs is the fact that most people will drive them incorrectly.
And the second-generation Corvair's rear suspension was based on the '63 Corvette Sting Ray's design, and had virtually none of the handling issues of the earlier models, provided you maintained the air pressure (which many people didn't do then and don't do now)
The Corvair helped create the market for the Mustang. The Corvair is the ideal classic/collector car for someone who is new to the hobby-Corvairs are still affordable, they are fun to drive and easy to work on, and there is a large group of Corvair enthusiasts who are ready to help people maintain and improve their cars.
Don’t listen to the naysayers-Corvairs are reliable, safe cars, and the common faults attributed to the car are either completely false or wildly exaggerated-and EVERY Corvair flaw is caused either by improper/neglected maintenance or a lack of knowledge about the car.
Who the hell wants a 4 door Mustang?? Lmao
The Car Crazy Guy who the hell wants a Mustang, yuk!
Yeah, just think of what happened to the T Bird!
@korranda Let me say this out front- I love the Stangs, always have. That said, the Vairs are phenomenally more advanced cars- the early Mustangs were really just Falcons with fancy sheet metal. Still, it's hard to make up for that V-8 power, despite the Vairs' superior handling and braking.
I raced Vairs for 8 years- if the course was open, the Stangs had the advantage, if there were a lot of turns (esp. tight) it was all CORVAIR!
"The Corvair, with its over-steer, allows you to miss the tree you are about to hit. The Mustang, however, allows you to see the tree you are about to hit." should have been added to the video
titanic553,
Actually, the '63 Corvair I had would have allowed me to see the tree I was going to run into in the rear view mirror after so thoughtfully rotating 180 degrees, to allow the tree to be attacked destruction derby style, rear end first.
I say "would have" because I was quick enough sawing the steering wheel full lock left-right-left-right until the tail stopped wagging to make it across the narrow bridge I was on the first time it tried to kill me. Thought sure we were going for a swim. Somehow, even as ignorant and inexperienced as I was, I knew to step on the gas rather than the brakes to get it straightened out. Whew.
Headed straight home to order an Empi Camber Compensator, front anti-roll bar, and wider wheels (after a change of underwear). Ended up being a pretty good handling car with the right tire pressure settings. Sill, I really looked forward to getting a '66 with the full IRS instead of the '63's swing axles.
The second generation Corvair ('65-'69) had a fully independent suspension just like the Corvette. They handle exceptionally well, even with the engine hanging out over the rear axle.
Today in 2019 you could get maybe $2500 bucks for a running Corvair and $25,000 for a running fastback Mustang.
I think the value ratio is less than tenfold. Mustangs are the less risky buy, everybody knows and loves Mustangs and parts availability probably is a lot better.
That said, I have a soft spot for late manual Corvair coupés and convertibles, especially the Monzas. They were different from most other US stuff and their designers didn't just throw more weight and horsepower at problems - I like that.
Y Block and MEL.... That's like mighty mouse and Gigantor! The y block was tiny, the absolute max displacement you can get out of one of those is 340 CID or so while the MEL is freaking HUGE!!! I can certainly see having different bellhousings for the Y and MEL but at some point you would think they would have settled on one or two and stuck with them instead of ten or twenty! Trust me, that's one that EVERY Ford guy I've ever talked to doesn't get either.
Keyless front door locking? By pushing down the door lock pin and then close the door from the outside?
+DolleHengst ...I was wondering that same thing.
wow it must have been quick, one showed up at our local cruise night with a toranado 455 big block turned around backward! it was very cool!! can you tell me how the heat worked in them? were they like a bug or did it actually work?
Urban legend. Corvair, the ONLY car proved by the National Highway and Safety Administration and private tests to NOT roll over, and be as safe, or more so than other cars of the era. Look it up. Funny no one seems to point out the other dozens of cars Ralph said should be taken off the road. The Corvair was just one small part of a very large book detailing troubles with MOST of Detroit's cars at the time. A book written by a man with no drivers license, who had never owned a car.
Maverick.. I used to have a '72 Maverick! 6 cylinder with a 3 on the tree. It was fun to drive and was a great daily driver. Now here's the problem with the 351C. WHY would Ford put the bulletproof bottom end in the 351 with crappy heads and the weaker bottom end in the 351 with the really good flowing heads? The 351 W has the same main journal size as the 429 does while the Cleveland's is smaller (and weaker.) It's just one of many things Ford did that defies reason. (cont.)
I love these old car movies. Of course, being a Ford man, I would prefer the Mustang. But I do like the Corvair. Especially the later models.
I owned a 1964-1/2 Mustang V8 and a 1967 Corvair. They were both fun cars to drive, and they both handled decently at the limit. The Mustang felt more precise, and the interior felt a bit snug, whereas the Corvair felt like it was designed to feel like a larger, softer car and seemed to have more room inside. The Corvair definitely had a big advantage when driving in snow, however.
The whole Nader's "Unsafe at any speed" thing was proven to be bullshit as early as 1972, by a report of the Department of Transportation, who concluded that the Corvair handled at least as good as contemporary cars, both american and foreign.
The real issue is that americans were used to front-engined, front-loaded, (sometimes) understeering cars, whereas the Corvair is clearly an oversteerer. And you know, "oversteer is when the passenger is afraid, understeer is when the driver's afraid".
So the Mustang didn't have four doors or a lockable glove box. How on Earth did Ford manage to sell any of them?
Lee Iacocca was one hell of a salesman...and he knew how to tap into the millions of baby boomers who were wanting something different--not to mention making it attractive to everyone else (remember the ad calling the six-cylinder Mustang "the Sweetheart of the Supermarket Set"?)
my mustang is outside in my driveway. where is your corvair ?
How do you even Compare the corvair to the Mustang??
true
Ford sold 680,989 Mustangs and Chevrolet sold 247,092 Corvairs in 1965. Without this film I wonder how many Mustangs would have been sold.
Virtually EVERY car made had a training filmstrip similar to this one. EVERY ONE. The Mustang included. The Jim Handy Company produced thousands of these training filmstrips for every make of car, every model, that were used in training salesmen in all makes of dealerships.
Didi they really say the 1:2 weight ratio between front and rare wheels is good for ride and handling?
Interesting that he refers to the Mustang as a "Falcon" Mustang. He also comments that the body of the Mustang didn't change from the '64 model. There was no 1964 model Mustang. The Mustang was introduced in April of 1964. While commonly referred to as a 64 1/2 Mustang, if was officially a 1965. I don't know of any car company that changes car bodies every six months. None that expect to make a profit anyway. Not knocking the Corvair. I loved the '65 and later models. I'm just not sure the facts are completely correct for either car. Total sales figures combined for the Corvair, from 1965 until its demise in 1969, fell short of the 1965 Mustang sales figures alone, by some 200,000 cars. I'm not really sure the buying public cared about anything this film had to say.
The Mustang is the Ford heartbeat in every respect, almost. But the weightless rear end, and handling performance in structured weather situations make the Mustang in said driving conditions, and I quote, a Mu-STINK! I owned a '94 still retaining that outdated Falcon platform, and experienced more bad weather bothers than I wish to remember! I WOULD take a '66 over a '65, and don't let for one thing, the malarkey and misnomers about there being a '641/2. The '66 had its' own much sportier dash and the '65 Falcon one was scrapped. Most of all, though, and I insist; the "Mr. Ed" that I'd by, HAS to, unquestionably have that 289. No Falcon sixes!
@@Allcatschew-l7yy Wow, 6 years since I wrote that. Where do I start. The 64 1/2 Mustang was really just an early release of the '65 and Ford sold it as such. There were a few subtle changes made to the mustang shortly after its release. Through their respective lifetimes, the Fairlane, Falcon, Mustang and later, the Torino actually shared the same platform, with the Fairlane essentially going out in 1968 with the introduction of the Torino, although the name hung around in the shadows until '71. The Falcon went away after 1970, but was really just a Torino. Throughout their coexistence, both the Falcon and the Mustang were offered with the same engine options ranging from 170 cu.in. all the way up to 429 cu.in, depending on year. If we're talking about U.S. models here, your '94 Mustang would have been an upgraded version of the Fox platform, with no relation to the Falcon. In fact, the rear suspension on your '94 had more in common with a Camaro than it did the Falcon. Now the dash and instruments in the 65/66 Mustangs were virtually identical with no resemblance at all to the Falcon. I own a 1966(289) and a 1967(390) Mustang. There were radical changes made to the Mustang between 1966 and 1967. You may be thinking about the 1967 dash.
You may be right. Putting it in the rear probably isn't too bad, aside from reverse rotation, adapters, etc. Of course, running the water up front and providing airflow to the radiator isn't easy to do cleanly. Those Mustang shock towers always did look like a pain to me.
I had a ‘62 Monza Spyder…
Fantastic Car…
I wish I had it now…
I love a 60’s Mustang, who doesnt, this comparison for the most part is nonsense I’d still take a sexy Corvair over the cliché Mustang.
Mine was pretty much a ZERO option car. No radio, no glove box, (only a plastic tray) no carpet (just a black rubber mat.) No power steering, no power brakes, no A/C, etc. I'm not sure if it had a fast idle cam or not though, considering it didn't have anything else I wouldn't doubt that it wasn't equipped with that either. Mine had the 200 CI straight 6 in it. The one thing I remember was the ten mile RPM drop between gears. That was a VERY wide ratio 3 speed!
You can buy a Corvair for about $400 bucks today, that same condition Mustang sells for over 4k today. I wounder what is best investment and more HP ? I have junked Corvair for scrap as they get more money, Mustangs are all worth effort to restore.
I wish they would bring it back with a water cooled flat six. Hey Subaru! Are you listening. The styling is still up to date.
Nearly ALL of the light greens were hideous. ALL of the warm greens looked like either bird shit or puke (take your pick) I define the warm greens as those who lean towards yellow or brown. Some of the dark greens and bluish greens are actually quite beautiful. The prettiest interior I ever saw was a '68 Mustang with turquoise interior, that was just damn pretty! The turquoise paint on the exterior looked really good too.
Chevrolet should have introduced Cup Holders to clinch the sale. I owned 13 Corvairs, including a Corsa 4 carb convertible. Beautiful machine!
Well I've never driven one but I have driven some 911s and I guess it's the same show: Trailing throttle oversteer.
Which one sold more than a million units in a mere 3 years?
All that proves is that the general public are morons. Nothing more and nothing less.
yet in 1965 mustang out sold corvair
the corvair is a gorgeous car though
1965 Mustang Launch Was The Most Successful Launch In The History Of Automobiles. Before Or Since...
Man, imo the carvair is one of the best-looking classics
Corvair's were no match for the Mustang. Sales proved that! The Corvair was Chevy's compact car. Chevy was just selling what they had. They had to play catch up The Camaro was really the comparable car to a Mustang but it wasn't ready until 1967.
The Mustang was built because of the Corvair, it states it plainly in Leffingwells book as well as others on the Mustang.
Incorrect. The very first Corvairs in 1960 were aimed to compete with the Falcon. By 1962 the Corvair had found another market. People seemed to enjoy their sportiness and GM went in more of a sports car direction for it. 1962 brought turbo charging and from then on the Corvair saw many performance upgrades and options. The Corvair had created a new market for itself and was selling very well at that time. Ford had no product in that market and began design on something to compete. The very first design of the Mustang was a rear engined 2 seater. But instead of doing something new and innovative Ford finally decided to hang new fenders around a Falcon and call it a Mustang.
Sales mean nothing. Beyonce outsells k.d.lang.
I'd take a Corvair. I have a 65 Monza 4 speed with headers. Not the fastest thing in the world, but it's so snappy and responsive. Handles great too.
You could only get MANUAL disc brakes on the Mustang in 1965. A/C was available on the Corvair, too.
Not True. MY 1965 Mustang GT has both front disc brakes and AC from the factory.
Well, i'm sold! I'll have a blue one with the wooden steering wheel.
That leads us to the famous engines. Chrysler has the Hemi. Ford has the Cammer. Believe it or not, Chevrolet actually designed and built prototypes of both, but produced neither because of the inherent design issues of each engine. They didn't build the cammer because they had the same problem Ford had with theirs, unreliable timing chains. The hemi has a heavy valvetrain due to the design dictated by the hemi valve layout. The 440 is actually a better all around engine.
That mustang is one tuff car
Wait? so you make the car back heavy to make it "easier to steer". have these people ever heard about oversteering?
I had never driven a Mustang back in the '60s...my Nephew purchased a '67 sometime in the '90s. I moved it out of the driveway once and was notably underwhelmed as I recall.
Oh...I rode in an old Karmann Ghia once...the guys brakes were metal to metal...left me wishing for a St. Christoper metal.
I do like the lines of the last Corvair edition and the Ghia. Bottom line, none of the three are on my bucket list if I hit Powerball.
The falcon mustang?
Almost 50 years later. Whose still on the road??
I would think that the Ford competition would have been the Falcon. The Corvair's all new pillar-less hardtop styling is timeless and the 4-door pillar-less hardtop must be the smallest 4-door hardtop ever built.
It was during the early 60's before the Mustang and to be honest the Mustang was nothing but a Falcon- Yes Corvair handles like a sports car- what a joke that was
+jim dandy Find a stock 65 Mustang and try to keep up with a stock 65 Corvair on a winding road and you won't be laughing.
+loctite222ms Exactly. I have a friend who has a fairly stock '65 Corvair convertible and it is a blast to drive and it handles very well for car of it's vintage.
Yes the Corvair Sport Sedans were the only compact sized 4 door hardtops ever sold in America
I agree with you completely on new cars. They're boring because they have no character or soul. The government gets most of the blame for that in my book. They can't design cars like they used to because of all of the regulations. Some of them are actually good and necessary, other regulations are just ridiculous. I also hate how new cars drive and feel. They're over refined which makes them numb, lifeless and boring.
Corvair had no water or antifreeze or water pump, never boils over!! super easy to steer.....no power steering pump.
IMHO the prettiest car GM ever sold. I owned a 65 Corvair Corsa convertible 1966 to 1972. 140 hp, 4 carbs, hardened crank, stellite exhaust valves, 4 spd, Positraction. Everything stated in the video was true. It could just run away from other cars on a twisty road, stuck to the road like glue. It was very roomy and comfortable inside. Unfortunately, I lived in Minnesota and the extremes of weather were really hard on it. The more primitive Mustang was a little tougher overall. I miss it a lot.
"unsafe at any speed"...so much for the Corvair
1 million Mustangs sold from debut to end of 1966, few cars have ever topped that
i got all the questions right at the end! i would have made a great corvair salesman. :)
Don’t confuse this with a comparison of the two disparate brands and models. This is a Sales Training boost for GM dealers to emphasise the USP that their product has over Ford’s.
In my experience new cars allow a person to walk away from a bad crash with little or no injury (Just visit your local body shop). Ideally I'd like a modern replica of the 1965 Corvair with all of todays safety features. I drove Corvairs for about 14 years, had a total of 15, about 6 at any one time, my favorite was the 1965 Corsa convertible. I liked my 1974 Mazda 808 coupe as much, but with safety concerns and looking after grandchildren I drive an Audi Quatro these days. Mustang - not 4 me.
Corvair was a beautiful automotive sweet HEART
In 1965 I had a ‘62 corvair spyder . I could out run a mustang in the quarter mile. First time I tried a HO mustang was the last time. He out ran me badly. I still enjoyed the corvair in high school.
Why they didn't add an outboard link is just beyond me. I can see it on a 36 hp or 48 hp beetle but not on a car that had the performance envelope of a Corsa. I love the Corvair.
I've already mentioned the worst of Ford's design flaws. Since you're a Ford guy I'm sure you have been frustrated with the fact that Ford used a different bellhousing for each engine family, which makes transmission changes a real PITA. At least Ford's trannys are good (GM's are better, but Ford's ARE quite good) my favorite is the FMX because it uses a Ravigneaux gearset instead of the more common Simpson gearset. Even though I prefer 4-speeds, the FMX is fun to rebuild.
We called the steering column back then the thoracic impaler
Nope. But could you get a Turbo in the Mustang? Didn't think so.
A supercharged 3.8 GM V6 would be a interesting combo!
Thanks for video. Even though its better car, people were buying the Mustangs more. It's sad how people behave sometimes.
I cannot imagine any intersection between the buyers market of these two makes...
0:15 I know it was based loosely on the Falcon platform but I've never before heard the Mustang referred to as the "Falcon Mustang". I guess that was the Chevy Marketing Dept. attempt at putting the Mustang in this place.
My first car was a corvair. The most fun of all my other cars.
And now we look at the sales numbers from 1965. And then we look at the prices of 1965 models going through Barrett Jackson or Bring A Trailer.
Back up lights are extra! Lol
Note: Both of these cars were featured in the movie outsiders
With all those advantages I should run down and buy a new Corvair, but the dealer said they didn't have any, I guess they sold out! LOL
G56AG lmfao
I can’t believe they tried to market Corvairs “keyless locking” as a desirable feature, when forced locking of the door from the outside on the Mustang was to prevent you from locking your keys in the car.
Long ago I owned a '66 Mustang..sweet little car. Today I own a '64 Corvair..sweet little car. Let the pecker measuring contest begin !
The Toronado big block is the big block of choice for Corvairs because the stock transaxle can NOT handle the torque of a big block. But.... Take the engine and transaxle out of a Toro and install the whole thing in the Corvair, and you have one seriously fast little car!
Unsafe at any speeds .Corvair sure did take a hit ..hell of a Dunbuggy
To be honest, Ralph Naders actually attacked the entire automobile industry with that book, and lead to changes in the overall safety in cars throughout the entire industry. He unfortunately targetted the Corvair a bit much, but it was an easy attack, because the Corvair was way ahead of its time in technology. The Corvair utilized uni-body construction and independent suspension, the combination of which was a first for any North American car. This combination is now the industry standard, as it has been proven to be safer.
I love both but I prefer the corvair.maybe because I own a 1963 convertible its super to drive.
@slt223 film strip, time to hit the clicker and change that picture!