General Motors Dead Ends: 1963 Chevy Corvair vs 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Good morning! Today we’re going to look at the two times in the past when GM tried moving the engine to the back of a small car, left it there for a few years, and then gave up. But in both cases, the idea left behind some pretty cool cars.

Yesterday we were out in the desert, looking at two sun-baked rarities. One looks desirable until you find out it’s not only a diesel, but also an automatic, and the other is a K-car, which I know is a hard sell around here no matter what. The Peugeot won, but not by as much as I expected it to. It sounds like it came down to a “lesser of two evils” choice for a lot of you.

For me, it’s all about the transmission. A diesel Peugeot would be a fun car to tinker with, but absolutely dreadful to drive with an automatic. I’d have to know about the feasibility and parts availability for a manual swap before deciding. If it’s too much work, or cost-prohibitive, I’d happily rock a convertible Dodge 400.

General Motors has this maddening habit of having a great idea, cost-cutting it to death before it even reaches production, fixing problems on the fly, and giving up on it just as all the bugs finally get worked out. So many GM ideas could have been revolutionary, if only they hadn’t sucked for the first few years. That was definitely the case with these two, which in their final model years were both awesome little sporty machines. These earlier examples, however, had a few issues. These two have survived, and it sounds like they both actually run and drive pretty well. Let’s check them out.

1963 Chevrolet Corvair Monza – $3,950

Engine/drivetrain: 2.4 liter overhead valve flat 6, four-speed manual, RWD

Location: Dallas, TX

Odometer reading: unknown

Operational status: Runs and drives well

By now, we all know the Corvair story: It was a sales success, but its unconventional design made it a handful to drive, and too many Corvairs ended up backwards in ditches. Chevrolet gradually tamed its handling with a series of tweaks to the rear suspension, and finally fixed it altogether with a redesign in 1965, but the damage was done, and it ended up as the poster-child for everything that was wrong with Detroit in that book.

The heart of the Corvair is an air-cooled aluminum flat six engine, mounted at the rear. GM engineers were looking over Volkswagen’s shoulder for sure. The advantage to putting the entire drivetrain at one end of the car is a nice flat floor, which makes it easy to have a roomy interior. The disadvantage is that the heavy engine at the rear acts like a pendulum, which, combined with its swing-axle rear suspension, led to the Corvair’s widowmaker reputation. This ’63 isn’t as unruly as the 1960 model was, but it still demands respect. If you’re brave enough, the seller says this one runs and drives very well, and has new brakes.

This photo of the seats may worry you, but fear not – brand-new reproduction seat upholstery is included. The rest of the interior looks pretty good, though there are a few issues: the speedometer doesn’t work, which is why we don’t know the actual mileage. And while it has air conditioning, which is very rare for a Corvair, it doesn’t work, and the seller hasn’t looked into reviving it.

It’s straight and rust-free outside, though it looks like it could use a good buff and wax. The windshield is cracked, which may or may not have to be replaced depending on where you live. But overall, it’s a good twenty-footer. The slotted mag wheels really suit it, and really complete the look.

1984 Pontiac Fiero SE – $3,500

Engine/drivetrain: 2.5 liter overhead valve inline 4, four-speed manual, RWD

Location: Broken Arrow, OK

Odometer reading: 130,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

The Pontiac Fiero’s origin story is even weirder than the Corvair’s. Pontiac wanted a two-seat sports car way back in the 1960s, but GM said no, and to add insult to injury, took its design and gave it to Chevy for the Corvette. In the late 70s, Pontiac tried again, but pitched it as a small, efficient economy car for commuters. Never mind that it was mid-engined and sports-car-shaped. It worked, and Pontiac spent five years developing it into the sports car it was always meant to be, before GM finally pulled the plug.

In its first year, the Fiero was available only with the 2.5 liter “Iron Duke” four-cylinder, with either a four-speed manual or a three-speed automatic. The entire engine, drivetrain, and suspension is simply the front end of a GM X-body (Chevy Citation et al) moved to the back. And the front suspension is basically that of a Chevette. It’s humble stuff, but it works. This Fiero has been recently brought back from the dead, it sounds like, and the seller has done a lot of work to get it running and driving well. It’s not complete, however, and a bunch more new parts are included to finish the job.

Half of those new parts are piled up in boxes in the interior, it looks like, so it’s hard to get a good look at its condition, but what we can see looks all right. The driver’s seat side bolster has a hole worn through it, but that’s not surprising; you don’t so much sit down in a Fiero as fall into it. Other than that, it looks like it just needs a good cleaning.

The paint is absolutely fried. You don’t have to worry about rust on the exterior, of course; all the body panels are plastic. The steel structure underneath is vulnerable to rust, of course, but the good news is that it sounds like Oklahoma has only recently started using road salt when the wind comes sweepin’ down the plain. It’s worth a peek underneath to make sure, but the fact that it has been off the road for a while makes me optimistic that it isn’t rusty.

I imagine you’d all rather have a ’65 Corvair Corsa or an ’88 Fiero GT, but you aren’t going to find those in our price range. But hey, at least these two are manuals, and they both leave room for improvement. So which evolutionary dead end are you more interested in fixing up – the good-looking air-cooled killer, or the sports car pretending to be an economy car?