The “Wussification” of Society

[StarvedForChange]

GM's actions in response to Nader's own hit piece have nothing to do with the Corvair being a good car or not.

So you decided NOT to read the entire Road Track article as I suggested. Ok, let me help:

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/classic-cars/a13733502/yes-the-chevrolet-corvair-really-was-a-handful-to-drive/

Larry Webster, editor-in-chief of classic car insurance company Hagerty's new automotive publication (and the former editor-in-chief of Road & Track) set out to see exactly how scary an early-generation Corvair could be. He explains the inherent compromise of the early car's suspension:

"A pair of short half shafts connected the [rear] wheels to the frame-mounted differential. Only the inboard ends of the shafts could articulate, so as the suspension compressed or extended, the wheels tilted at extreme angles. This had the effect of dramatically reducing the rubber on the road. In an aggressive turn, the rear end tended to lose traction before the front, causing oversteer, or fishtailing. That wasn’t all, however. There was a chance, a slim one, that the outside rear wheel could tuck in under the body and potentially trip the car into a rollover. These effects were further exasperated when owners failed to heed the Corvair’s unconventional recommended tire pressures: 15 psi in the front and 26 psi in the rear."

Webster took two Corvairs—including a yellow four-door that, get this, was originally owned by Ralph Nader—to an airfield to see what they'd do in different cornering scenarios. Almost immediately, he experienced oversteer that only got worse as the speeds rose:

"To avoid spinning the car, I have to counter-steer almost immediately after initiating the turn. To racers, this behavior is known as “loose,” and it’s generally preferred to a front end that simply understeers, or plows. But I could see how the lightly trained driver might get into trouble. That was Nader’s point: The average driver wasn’t equipped to handle an over-steering car."

It's a nuanced examination of the car—one that's backed up with real-world testing and conversation with retired Chevrolet engineer Jim Musser, who worked on the Corvair (both the car and the court case) and eventually became head of R&D. For the record, Musser claims that Chevy kept the Corvair around longer than it would have under natural circumstances, specifically to avoid the appearance of being cowed by Nader's actions.

 

[RF667799]

So you decided NOT to read the entire Road Track article as I suggested. Ok, let me help:

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/classic-cars/a13733502/yes-the-chevrolet-corvair-really-was-a-handful-to-drive/

Good job not pursuing your non sequitur.

I read the article, but thanks for posting excerpts supporting my point.

The car could oversteer when driven aggressively and there was "a slim chance" it could roll. These might be made worse by people not maintaining the car properly, though the article doesn't quantify how much worse.

Note the suspension had already been updated by the time Nader's book was published.

And hey! That guy's wearing a helmet in a car! Somebody must have the idea it could protect his head in event of an accident.

BTW...who characterized the Corvair as "a great little car"?

 

[StarvedForChange]

Good job not pursuing your non sequitur.

I read the article, but thanks for posting excerpts supporting my point.

The car could oversteer when driven aggressively and there was "a slim chance" it could roll. These might be made worse by people not maintaining the car properly, though the article doesn't quantify how much worse.

Note the suspension had already been updated by the time Nader's book was published.

And hey! That guy's wearing a helmet in a car! Somebody must have the idea it could protect his head in event of an accident.

Good job cherry-picking parts of the article and not accepting it all in context. If the car was safe, GM wouldn't have had to try to hire hookers and illegally tap Nader's phone. GM would have just won the lawsuit. Have a nice day.

 

[RF667799]

Good job cherry-picking parts of the article and not accepting it all in context. If the car was safe, GM wouldn't have had to try to hire hookers and illegally tap Nader's phone. GM would have just won the lawsuit. Have a nice day.

I note you didn't point out anything of significance that I didn't address, but just went back to your non sequitur.

I also note you didn't say who characterized the Corvair as "a great little car". I think you made that up.

 

[Chomsky]

okay, this picture doesn't look very dangerous (except smashing heads on blacktop) but i wanted to post it because i had a bike like the one in the middle.

I always wanted an Apple Krate!

Just look at that thing! A springer front-end? Front disc-brake? 5spd stick-shift? And lots of chrome?

Who needed girls?

(You would not believe the prices they fetch, today!)

 

[Chomsky]

LOL. I'm actually old enough to remember the Pinto. There was PLENTY wrong.

Definitely not one of Ford's "Better Ideas"!

But then Vega's weren't paragons of safety & reliability, either!

 

[RF667799]

Definitely not one of Ford's "Better Ideas"!

But then Vega's weren't paragons of safety & reliability, either!

Vegas gained a bad reputation over the years. Their engine was indeed problematic. They sometimes started rusting literally on the dealer's lot. I've read where some of that might be attributed to the novel method of shipping them- standing on end on railcars allowed water to impregnate places water shouldn't go.

All that being said, they sold a lot of them for awhile. They were Motor Trend's Car of the Year in '71. I certainly wanted one when I was 16. I thought- and still do think- they were attractively styled. Much better than the rather bulbous looking Pinto to my eyes. Kind of Camaro-ish in the front clip. I always enjoyed driving one when I got the chance.

A classic when properly fitted with a SBC too.

 

[JBG]

Good job not pursuing your non sequitur.

I read the article, but thanks for posting excerpts supporting my point.

The car could oversteer when driven aggressively and there was "a slim chance" it could roll. These might be made worse by people not maintaining the car properly, though the article doesn't quantify how much worse.

Note the suspension had already been updated by the time Nader's book was published.

And hey! That guy's wearing a helmet in a car! Somebody must have the idea it could protect his head in event of an accident.

BTW...who characterized the Corvair as "a great little car"?

Can't you read? Or does the government have to treat us like Kindergarteners, and protect us from every harm?

 

[RF667799]

Can't you read? Or does the government have to treat us like Kindergarteners, and protect us from every harm?

It's a fact the car could oversteer when driven aggressively. That can apply to lots of cars.

I think your indignation is misdirected, but I can accommodate you.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

I had a gf who owned a Pinto. I'm not much of a Ford fan, but it wasn't a bad little car for its time.

Your girlfriend drove you around in a Pinto?

 

[JBG]

It's a fact the car could oversteer when driven aggressively. That can apply to lots of cars.

I think your indignation is misdirected, but I can accommodate you.

A car being driven driven aggressively is a weapon any way you look at it. I don't want or need your accommodations.

 

[RF667799]

A car being driven driven aggressively is a weapon any way you look at it. I don't want or need your accommodations.

I think you've lost the trail here, if you ever followed it at all. I don't know what you're on about, and you don't seem inclined to explain.

 

[StarvedForChange]

I note you didn't point out anything of significance that I didn't address, but just went back to your non sequitur.

I also note you didn't say who characterized the Corvair as "a great little car". I think you made that up.

Whatever, bye.

 

[RF667799]

Whatever, bye.

Next time add a little honesty to your posts, most certainly if you're trying to support a subjective opinion. Those conversations can be fun, but only when pursued in good faith.

 

[Absentglare]

GM's actions in response to Nader's own hit piece have nothing to do with the Corvair being a good car or not.

Yes, they do, if you can’t argue the merits then you attack the person, as they did.

You must be thinking of after they redesigned the suspension.

 

[Absentglare]

Vegas gained a bad reputation over the years. Their engine was indeed problematic. They sometimes started rusting literally on the dealer's lot. I've read where some of that might be attributed to the novel method of shipping them- standing on end on railcars allowed water to impregnate places water shouldn't go.

All that being said, they sold a lot of them for awhile. They were Motor Trend's Car of the Year in '71. I certainly wanted one when I was 16. I thought- and still do think- they were attractively styled. Much better than the rather bulbous looking Pinto to my eyes. Kind of Camaro-ish in the front clip. I always enjoyed driving one when I got the chance.

A classic when properly fitted with a SBC too.

So what if your car is rusting on the dealers lot? Stop the wussification, pay full price for a bucket of rust.

And so what if you crush your skull like a watermelon in a minor accident on a motorcycle because you weren’t wearing a helmet? Don’t be a wuss, walk it off!

Lead in the water? Don’t be a wuss, you’ve got to chuuugg!

 

[RF667799]

Yes, they do, if you can’t argue the merits then you attack the person, as they did.

That can be the case, often is the case...but doesn't necessarily have to be the case. Little was offered for evidence that was factually the case.

You must be thinking of after they redesigned the suspension.

There are two sides to most stories.

On Friday, July 21, 1972, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) - a branch of the federal government - issued a report on its two year investigation of the 1960-1963 Corvair. The report concludes: "The handling and stability performance of the 1960-1963 Corvair does not result in an abnormal potential for loss of control or rollover and it is at least as good as the performance of some contemporary vehicles, both foreign and domestic."

https://www.corvair.org/index.php/home/history-and-preservation/unsafe-at-any-speed

 

[RF667799]

So what if your car is rusting on the dealers lot? Stop the wussification, pay full price for a bucket of rust.

And so what if you crush your skull like a watermelon in a minor accident on a motorcycle because you weren’t wearing a helmet? Don’t be a wuss, walk it off!

Lead in the water? Don’t be a wuss, you’ve got to chuuugg!

Any point to that ramble of nonsense?

 

[RF667799]

I enjoyed this article about the Corvair controversy.


In total, there were 294 cases filed alleging defective design of the 1960 to 1963 Corvair. Of these, 10 were tried to a verdict, eight resulted in verdicts for G.M.

One of the losses was the Cantos case where, after four weeks of trial the jury found against G.M. However, before we appealed, the judge set the verdict aside. In his decision he said of the plaintiff’s case… “There is not a scintilla of cogent evidence to support this theory or the contention that the alleged oversteering characteristics of the car proximately caused the accident in this case”. He described the testimony of the plaintiff’s expert witness as… “Perhaps the most incomprehensible gibberish that this court has ever heard.”

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/2020/03/22/how-frank-winchell-defended-the-chevrolet-corvair-in-his-own-words

 

[JBG]

LOL. I'm actually old enough to remember the Pinto. There was PLENTY wrong.

Would it have been better for the Pinto buyers not to be able to afford any car?