I would also hardly call a Mustang from the late 90s with a 3.8 V6 a “Muscle Car” . . . that was just a regular car, no more than that
I’m not using today’s standards at all. I’m comparing them to the cars that came before them that started the true muscle car era.
I missed the nap icon. I’m with you on 60s/early 70s muscle cars, too.
At the time, GM tried to make the design a world car, something carmakers have tried to do frequently. The objective is to cut design and tooling costs as well as cost savings for parts costs because of perceived higher numbers. There was a Vauxhall which greatly resembled the N.A. Chevette, but I’m not sure if it was called Chevette, or carried a more familiar (to Brits) badge. AFAIK the Euro version was at least a bit better than the one we got.
"There were no small fwd vehicles when the Chevette was introduced in 76"
Sorry, but Honda was around, although not a big player at the timer, and their Civic was then, as now, FWD. It was super tiny, even compared to Datsun/Toyota offerings, but its drive train was tough as well as economical. Too bad they never expanded. 
At that time, Japan was still trying to recover from WWII. I don’t think they had the cash flow to sell any output at cost, whatever the motivation.
Their methods of continuous improvement on the production line provided the carmakers (and other products too) with quick correction when issues occurred, resulting in reliable products with few design flaws.
In addition, they bent over backwards to make good any field flaws. I had a '68 Datsun 2000 which went like stink until it spun a bearing. I suspect it was caused by leadfooted test pilots, who also damaged the shifting forks in the 5-speed tranny (rare at the time). Nissan flew in a new transmission, and repaired the engine (parts were available in North America) pretty quickly, all under warranty. Regrettably, I had to get rid of the car (we became a family, and needed space plus something with a real heater).
So, what did Daimler call the sand colour they also offered?
Are you perhaps thinking of “desert silver” . . . ?
Dunno. Tat name makes me think of a metallic paint. The cars I knew - and drove, briefly, didn’t have metallic paint.
Going off-topic a bit (as if we’re on), M-B used to put out a pamphlet or brochure that talked about the relative visibility of exterior; as I recall, the yellow (that wasn’t much less garish than the taxi colour) was judged to be the best overall, because of visiblity at night as well as in winter in snowy conditions. Interesting that, despite that brochure, you’d be hard-pressed to find any M-B dressed like that; they seem to be iether black, white or silver - like every other brand on the road!
Um . . . were you around in the 1970s?
Benz had some truly bizarre colors at that time . . . not as garish as Mopar colors . . . but truly bizarre, considering the typical colors nowadays
Sorry, I didn’t make it very clear that I was referring to M-B’s current offerings. I agree, in the 70s many car makers slapped some strange finishes on their vehicles. Besides the paint, phony woodgrain was popular on much more than station wagons, and interiors came in some ridiculous shades. Ford, for instance, seemed to feel that a colour that I think of as Butterscotch should be the primary colour, and not just for the vinyl seats, but every trim piece inside the cabin. I’m sure they must have had some other interior tints, but that one seemed to be everywhere. Maybe someone figured that if someone barfed, it wouldn’t show. After all, the performance stunk so bad, no one would have been surprised if the inside did, too.
I worked at a Volkswagen dealer in 74 - 75 and drove plenty of the 1975 FWD VW Rabbits that were sold there at that time.
CSA
I NEVER made that statement. Go Re-read what I said.
I SAID. MOST small cars were RWD. Never ever said ALL.
So since MOST small cars were RWD…the Chevette being RWD had nothing to do with bad sales, since there were so few FWD vehicles to take sales away.
I re-read…
Mike, I remember when the Chevette was introduced. I also remember (having been familiar with Volkswagen’s Rabbit & and soon-to-be Dasher) wondering, “What is GM thinking by coming out with a new small car that is RWD when the trend was very obviously going FWD ?”
Domestic FWDs were already in the works and hit the road a very short while later. GM would not launch a new model that it expected to sell for only a year or two, would they? It was clearly a mistake on their part.
CSA
VW was about the only fwd small car at the time. If they had 5% of the market I’d be extremely surprised. I don’t think the trend was obvious. Main reason companies went to fwd was production cost. Chryco was the first domestic company to really embrace FWD. And even then it really didn’t become mainstream for many years later.
But that’s still besides the point. The point is that the Chevette (and most small domestic vehicles) didn’t do well was because of quality. There were so few FWD vehicles (domestic an foreign) that they couldn’t have taken too many sales away from the Chevette (which is the reason you sighted as the reason the Chevette didn’t do well).
Funny, I cut-and-pasted that sentence. If it wasn’t said, how did I get it?
Man, you seem to be thin-skinned if a minor thing like this gets you
shouting. There are much more serious things to get upset about.
Just chill.
1 Like
Not from my post you didn’t. In fact I couldn’t find that line anywhere in this thread. Show me.
Capital WORDS is NOT shouting. It’s called emphasizing a point. Capital whole sentences is considered shouting.
You want to debate me…then debate against what I said…not what you THINK I said.
MikeInNH:
“Then you make this statement saying you knew nothing about the market back in 76.”
common_sense_answer:
Mike, again I was going from my experience and recollection.
MikeInNH:
“To my point. There were no small fwd vehicles when the Chevette was introduced in 76. They didn’t come out til later. Your first statement insisted that it was GM who introduced a RWD vehicle into a FWD market. That is FALSE.”
Mike, although I was there and have a good recollection, don’t take my word…
Let me quote the famous automotive writer, John Pearley Huffman, writing about the 10 cars that damaged GM and what he said about the Chevette…
“The Chevrolet Chevette was already outdated when it appeared in 1976. Based on GM’s “T” platform, it was a primitive, front-engine, rear-drive subcompact in a small-car world that was busy being revolutionized by front-drive cars such as the Honda Civic and Accord, Volkswagen Rabbit and Ford Fiesta.”
Looks like my hindsight is 20/20!
CSA
Yup…everyone did eventually go to fwd. And in snow country I’ve found FWD far superior in snow then RWD. Vehicles like the rwd Chevette did horrible in snow. My wifes Datsun 510 did OK with 4 snow tires. But her fwd Accord did much better.
But most people in this country don’t live in snow country, so they don’t need the added benefit of FWD vehicles. So I again I can’t see why FWD vehicles ate into the Chevette sales.
And as I stated before…companies went to FWD because of production cost.
The main reason for going to FWD was better space utilization. The British Mini as designed in the 50s was miniscule, yet had good interior space.
We had a RWD 1977 Dodge Colt, a Mitsubishi model rebadged by Chrysler, and it was very cramped compared with a Ford Fiesta or similar small FWD vehicle.
There may have been some cost savings by bundling the whole drive train together, but I doubt if it is significant. Sir Alec Issigonis was knighted because of his breakthrough design, although by then you could buy several French cars that were FWD and very space-efficient.