corvair vs valiant

[Guest bkazmer]

I'd like some opinions (with all good natured bias included) on comparing these two as driver level acquisitions (convt or 2-dr hardtop). I guess "option C" opinions are welcome too (but not yet another overpriced Mustang). I know we are rarely short of opinions around here, so let the fun begin

[Guest bkazmer]

I'd like some opinions (with all good natured bias included) on comparing these two as driver level acquisitions (convt or 2-dr hardtop). I guess "option C" opinions are welcome too (but not yet another overpriced Mustang). I know we are rarely short of opinions around here, so let the fun begin

[Guest AlK]

I am strictly a Mopar guy, although the Monza Spyder conv. could have floated my boat a long time ago. Regardless of brand bias which I admit I have, I feel that the Valiant/Dart line would be a better buy all the way around. I think parts are much more readily available. I have 3 Dodge Dart convertibles and a dart 4 dr sedan 3 with slant sixes and one with a mildly warmed over 273 V-8. I see a lot of the 2 types of Mopar vehicles around but few of the corvairs. Of the corvairs I do see they fall into 2 basic categories, parts cars/trash or pristine show car. There seems to be little in between. Please keep in mind that this is strictly my opinion, others may differ, and this is based on what I see in my area. Other parts of the country may be different. Also look at the ads in Hemmings and see how many there are for each vehicle and the prices.

[Guest AlK]

I am strictly a Mopar guy, although the Monza Spyder conv. could have floated my boat a long time ago. Regardless of brand bias which I admit I have, I feel that the Valiant/Dart line would be a better buy all the way around. I think parts are much more readily available. I have 3 Dodge Dart convertibles and a dart 4 dr sedan 3 with slant sixes and one with a mildly warmed over 273 V-8. I see a lot of the 2 types of Mopar vehicles around but few of the corvairs. Of the corvairs I do see they fall into 2 basic categories, parts cars/trash or pristine show car. There seems to be little in between. Please keep in mind that this is strictly my opinion, others may differ, and this is based on what I see in my area. Other parts of the country may be different. Also look at the ads in Hemmings and see how many there are for each vehicle and the prices.

[Bob Kinker]

I have to agree , the Valiant would be easier to get repair parts for. I also believe that the Dart/Valiant cars, when new, were more dependable than a Corvair ever thought of being. I'm a little biased, but I think the Mopars are your better bet.

[Bob Kinker]

I have to agree , the Valiant would be easier to get repair parts for. I also believe that the Dart/Valiant cars, when new, were more dependable than a Corvair ever thought of being. I'm a little biased, but I think the Mopars are your better bet.

[Twitch]

Monzas were without a doubt far superior to the Valiant in every sense- looks, handling, power, response, uniqueness. Remember Corvairs Monzas were "sporty" cars that had no translated counterpart in the Valiant econo car line up.

[Twitch]

Monzas were without a doubt far superior to the Valiant in every sense- looks, handling, power, response, uniqueness. Remember Corvairs Monzas were "sporty" cars that had no translated counterpart in the Valiant econo car line up.

[Guest mmuehlba]

I have had both , the Corvair was a convertible and yes the other was just a Valiant so one felt like a sport car and the other just a cheep four door with a six auto so for me it would have been the Corvair and even the cheaper Corvair models gave you a good feeling when driving . Mike

[Guest mmuehlba]

I have had both , the Corvair was a convertible and yes the other was just a Valiant so one felt like a sport car and the other just a cheep four door with a six auto so for me it would have been the Corvair and even the cheaper Corvair models gave you a good feeling when driving . Mike

[DizzyDale]

Dear Twitch,YOU sir have just said it ALL.IMHO the apples to apples comparison would be the Chevy II to the Valiant.diz

[DizzyDale]

Dear Twitch,YOU sir have just said it ALL.IMHO the apples to apples comparison would be the Chevy II to the Valiant.diz

[JohnD1956]

I owned both in the past. The 69 Valiant was very reliable but left me stranded in a South Bronx neighborhood one day. The 64 Corvair had some problems but never left me stranded anywhere. The Valiant ( 2 dr Sedan) looked and handled like an economy vehicle ( no hard turns, not much luxury) The Corvair handled like a semi sports car and looked great with the top up or down.

The Valiant worked off a more than proven engine ( the slant six with a 3 speed stick). The Corvair was in year 4 of the rear engine technology with a 4 speed stick. There was some odd things about the Corvair which today are mostly straightened out in the after car parts market ( things like the 2 piece flywheel which cost me several starter end caps before I learned about it.) The valiant had a great heater. The Corvair ought to have come with a warning about frozen feet in the winter.

Both cars were fun.

I let the Valiant go as it started to rust uncontrolably. I gave the Corvair to my brother when I left home with no place to keep it. The Corvair had some rust issues but was still basically solid. I imagine the valiant is still running today but unable to be driven due to serious rust issues. Meanwhile the Corvair is still running today and I just had a chance to drive it this past Easter sunday. Although it is substantially modified now, ( 4 bbl carb, quick turn steering and short throw shifter), it occurred to me that it's noisy and not as pleasurable as my Buicks. Then again it has been a work in progress for my brother and nephew, after it sat for close to 15 years.

The one thing I would recommend in either car is don't get one with an automatic tranny. Neither will be blistering fast, but the Stick Shift makes them unique and much more fun to drive.

[JohnD1956]

I owned both in the past. The 69 Valiant was very reliable but left me stranded in a South Bronx neighborhood one day. The 64 Corvair had some problems but never left me stranded anywhere. The Valiant ( 2 dr Sedan) looked and handled like an economy vehicle ( no hard turns, not much luxury) The Corvair handled like a semi sports car and looked great with the top up or down.

The Valiant worked off a more than proven engine ( the slant six with a 3 speed stick). The Corvair was in year 4 of the rear engine technology with a 4 speed stick. There was some odd things about the Corvair which today are mostly straightened out in the after car parts market ( things like the 2 piece flywheel which cost me several starter end caps before I learned about it.) The valiant had a great heater. The Corvair ought to have come with a warning about frozen feet in the winter.

Both cars were fun.

I let the Valiant go as it started to rust uncontrolably. I gave the Corvair to my brother when I left home with no place to keep it. The Corvair had some rust issues but was still basically solid. I imagine the valiant is still running today but unable to be driven due to serious rust issues. Meanwhile the Corvair is still running today and I just had a chance to drive it this past Easter sunday. Although it is substantially modified now, ( 4 bbl carb, quick turn steering and short throw shifter), it occurred to me that it's noisy and not as pleasurable as my Buicks. Then again it has been a work in progress for my brother and nephew, after it sat for close to 15 years.

The one thing I would recommend in either car is don't get one with an automatic tranny. Neither will be blistering fast, but the Stick Shift makes them unique and much more fun to drive.

[Guest Leonard Shepherd]

Since you are willing to listen to an Option "C", how about a Studebaker Lark?

I am a little prejudiced, since I have driven Larks most of my life. They have some good points for a driver.

Parts are available and relatively inexpensive, especially mechanical parts and there is a large club support. The 259 cu.in. V8 is the best bet, since it has good performance and gets better gas mileage, on the road, than the flathead six.

We have a joint meet with the Corvair Club every fall, and they have a good club support also. I see very few Valiants. The only one I have seen was at the Chrysler Meet in VA Beach last summer.

[Guest Leonard Shepherd]

Since you are willing to listen to an Option "C", how about a Studebaker Lark?

I am a little prejudiced, since I have driven Larks most of my life. They have some good points for a driver.

Parts are available and relatively inexpensive, especially mechanical parts and there is a large club support. The 259 cu.in. V8 is the best bet, since it has good performance and gets better gas mileage, on the road, than the flathead six.

We have a joint meet with the Corvair Club every fall, and they have a good club support also. I see very few Valiants. The only one I have seen was at the Chrysler Meet in VA Beach last summer.

[Guest bkazmer]

The Lark fits Option C, and I have a weak spot for independents. Limited body style availability, isn't there?

[Guest bkazmer]

The Lark fits Option C, and I have a weak spot for independents. Limited body style availability, isn't there?

[Guest Leonard Shepherd]

In 1959 the Lark had a 4 door sedan, 2 door wagon, 2 door hardtop and a 2 door sedan. In 1960 they added a convertible and a 4 door wagon.

The convertibles are the only body style that usually brings over 5 figures. 4 door sedans show up on eBay all the time and go for reasonable prices.

[Guest Leonard Shepherd]

In 1959 the Lark had a 4 door sedan, 2 door wagon, 2 door hardtop and a 2 door sedan. In 1960 they added a convertible and a 4 door wagon.

The convertibles are the only body style that usually brings over 5 figures. 4 door sedans show up on eBay all the time and go for reasonable prices.

[MarkV]

Why just these choices?

[MarkV]

Why just these choices?

[Guest 1926pack]

Well, if your going to go with the Corvair, get one of the later model ones, not one of the ones from the first couple of years production. You can tell the difference when the body style was changed. I had a 1960 Corvair which tried to kill me in more ways then I can count.

On an option C idea, have you considered an early 60s Jeep?

[Guest 1926pack]

Well, if your going to go with the Corvair, get one of the later model ones, not one of the ones from the first couple of years production. You can tell the difference when the body style was changed. I had a 1960 Corvair which tried to kill me in more ways then I can count.

On an option C idea, have you considered an early 60s Jeep?

[Rusty_OToole]

In the mid 60s I bought a used Corvair, later switched to Valiants and Darts so I know both cars well.

The Valiant is a better everyday car but the Corvair was more fun. For summer used today as a hobby car the Corvair would be my choice.

If you are not interested in being your own mechanic, and relearning how to fix cars, get the Valiant. They are a much more reliable,and standardised car.

Have not had the pleasure of owning a Lark but would definitely consider one. They were the only one of the original batch of compacts to offer a V8. Though the others did come up with V8 models later, Valiant being the last (1964). Corvair never did get any other motor but the flat 6.

Then there is the car that started the whole compact trend, Rambler.

[Rusty_OToole]

In the mid 60s I bought a used Corvair, later switched to Valiants and Darts so I know both cars well.

The Valiant is a better everyday car but the Corvair was more fun. For summer used today as a hobby car the Corvair would be my choice.

If you are not interested in being your own mechanic, and relearning how to fix cars, get the Valiant. They are a much more reliable,and standardised car.

Have not had the pleasure of owning a Lark but would definitely consider one. They were the only one of the original batch of compacts to offer a V8. Though the others did come up with V8 models later, Valiant being the last (1964). Corvair never did get any other motor but the flat 6.

Then there is the car that started the whole compact trend, Rambler.

[RocketDude]

I'm always willing to help out a pal....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1962-63-6...1QQcmdZViewItem

[RocketDude]

I'm always willing to help out a pal....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1962-63-6...1QQcmdZViewItem

[Dave@Moon]

Option C alternatives:

<span style="font-weight: bold">Ford Falcon.</span> While the first 2-3 years of Corvairs have very tricky handling, the first 2-3 years of Falcons have very conventional handling. The Falcon has the Ranchero pickup, the only compact pickup in the U.S. until the 1980s, but no hardtops or convertibles until 1963. Also it wasn't until 1963 that the Falcon got V8 engines. In 1964 & 65 they had the Sprint sub-model, which w/ a 289 and excellent handling is probably the best performing car of the bunch. After 1966 the Falcon was restyled and gradually made more boring/conventional in deference to the Mustang.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Rambler American.</span> In 1961-63 this was a boxy, boring sub-compact car that had a convertible and not much else to offer. The 1964-69 version was nicely restyled by Dick Teague, and had some very nice hardtops and convertibles in the line. In 1966/67 the line included the Rambler Rouge, a bucket-seat coupe/convertible that's the equal of any sporty model here, and almost totally unkown.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Rambler Classic.</span> Mostly a boring compact through 1962, it was suddenly restyled in 1963 and is arguably the best looking car here. Unfortuantely there are no sporty body styles in 1963, but in 1964 they added hardtop and convertible models including the 1 year only Rambler Typhoon--a muscle car in all but cost. A mid-sze after the 1965 restyle.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Studebaker Lark.</span> Every body style under the sun (except pickup, unless you count the full-size Studebaker p/u which used 1/2 the Lark body for a cab) and an available V8 after 1960. 1962 & 1963 models are a little more sophisticated in appearance.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Buick Special/Skylark, Olds F85/Cutlass/Jetfire, Pontiac Tempest/LeMans.</span> Compacts from 1961-1963, these cars are each very interesting in certain models. The Buick aluminum V8 is a wonderful power plant (made by Land Rover into this decade). The turbocharged Jetfire (ultra-rare) is probably the most collectible car in this class. Even the base model Pontiacs have a very unique (and somewhat unreliable) flexible drivershaft drivetrain. All are available in hardtp, coupe and convertible, however the 1963 restyles made each look much larger and put them into the intermediate class.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Mercury Comet.</span> Everything the Ford Falcon offers in rarer and more plush forms. A different car after 1966.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Dodge Lancer/Dart.</span> Everything the Plymouth Valiant offers in (barely) larger and more plush forms. The Lancer was made in 1961/62 only, thereafter replaced by the Dart.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Chevy II/Nova.</span> Chevy's Falcon, is offers much of the same with an economical (and SLOW) 4 cylinder available. The sportier Nova models are the more desirable. This is one car that gets better/faster/sportier the newer it is (through the early 1970s). The convertible was only made in 1962/63, and the hardtop died after 1967, but the pillared coupe that replaced it in 1968 is one of the sportiest ever--and was available in true muscle car trim. (It was no 340 Duster, however! )

And finally...

<span style="font-weight: bold">Volvo Amazon.</span> The Volvo Amazon (click link for Wikipedia page) is in the same size/price/weight/performance class as the American compacts. It was sold in a number of names during the 1960s, but it was a consistently interesting/sporty driver in the very best sense. Anvil-like reliability and low cost (purchase and operating) are it's best attributes. Other than the Falcon, this is the only car on this list that was raced successfully on a large scale (despite it's economical 4 cylinder engine), and still is on vintage circuts. There are only coupe, sedan, and wagon body styles available.

[Dave@Moon]

Option C alternatives:

<span style="font-weight: bold">Ford Falcon.</span> While the first 2-3 years of Corvairs have very tricky handling, the first 2-3 years of Falcons have very conventional handling. The Falcon has the Ranchero pickup, the only compact pickup in the U.S. until the 1980s, but no hardtops or convertibles until 1963. Also it wasn't until 1963 that the Falcon got V8 engines. In 1964 & 65 they had the Sprint sub-model, which w/ a 289 and excellent handling is probably the best performing car of the bunch. After 1966 the Falcon was restyled and gradually made more boring/conventional in deference to the Mustang.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Rambler American.</span> In 1961-63 this was a boxy, boring sub-compact car that had a convertible and not much else to offer. The 1964-69 version was nicely restyled by Dick Teague, and had some very nice hardtops and convertibles in the line. In 1966/67 the line included the Rambler Rouge, a bucket-seat coupe/convertible that's the equal of any sporty model here, and almost totally unkown.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Rambler Classic.</span> Mostly a boring compact through 1962, it was suddenly restyled in 1963 and is arguably the best looking car here. Unfortuantely there are no sporty body styles in 1963, but in 1964 they added hardtop and convertible models including the 1 year only Rambler Typhoon--a muscle car in all but cost. A mid-sze after the 1965 restyle.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Studebaker Lark.</span> Every body style under the sun (except pickup, unless you count the full-size Studebaker p/u which used 1/2 the Lark body for a cab) and an available V8 after 1960. 1962 & 1963 models are a little more sophisticated in appearance.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Buick Special/Skylark, Olds F85/Cutlass/Jetfire, Pontiac Tempest/LeMans.</span> Compacts from 1961-1963, these cars are each very interesting in certain models. The Buick aluminum V8 is a wonderful power plant (made by Land Rover into this decade). The turbocharged Jetfire (ultra-rare) is probably the most collectible car in this class. Even the base model Pontiacs have a very unique (and somewhat unreliable) flexible drivershaft drivetrain. All are available in hardtp, coupe and convertible, however the 1963 restyles made each look much larger and put them into the intermediate class.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Mercury Comet.</span> Everything the Ford Falcon offers in rarer and more plush forms. A different car after 1966.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Dodge Lancer/Dart.</span> Everything the Plymouth Valiant offers in (barely) larger and more plush forms. The Lancer was made in 1961/62 only, thereafter replaced by the Dart.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Chevy II/Nova.</span> Chevy's Falcon, is offers much of the same with an economical (and SLOW) 4 cylinder available. The sportier Nova models are the more desirable. This is one car that gets better/faster/sportier the newer it is (through the early 1970s). The convertible was only made in 1962/63, and the hardtop died after 1967, but the pillared coupe that replaced it in 1968 is one of the sportiest ever--and was available in true muscle car trim. (It was no 340 Duster, however! )

And finally...

<span style="font-weight: bold">Volvo Amazon.</span> The Volvo Amazon (click link for Wikipedia page) is in the same size/price/weight/performance class as the American compacts. It was sold in a number of names during the 1960s, but it was a consistently interesting/sporty driver in the very best sense. Anvil-like reliability and low cost (purchase and operating) are it's best attributes. Other than the Falcon, this is the only car on this list that was raced successfully on a large scale (despite it's economical 4 cylinder engine), and still is on vintage circuts. There are only coupe, sedan, and wagon body styles available.

[Guest Leonard Shepherd]

Very good Dave.

Just one correction. The V8 was available in all 1959 Larks except the 2 door sedan, and by the end of the model year, it was available too.

[Guest Leonard Shepherd]

Very good Dave.

Just one correction. The V8 was available in all 1959 Larks except the 2 door sedan, and by the end of the model year, it was available too.

[Steve Braverman]

I've never owned a Valiant, but I've had 12 Corvairs. The argument that parts are more available for the Valiant is totally bunk. Clark's Corvair Parts in Mass. has just about every nut, bolt, finnigan pin and frammis for the Corvair, and they ship out usually on the same day you order. They also reproduce their own trim, upholstery and most other parts. Prices are much lower than for other cars too.

I agree that the Corvair has some issues such as oil leaks, but they can be fixed with modern seals. Since this is a hobby, I think the Corvair would be a much better choice solely based on the fun factor. But the only way you will be able to decide is to drive them both.

Corvairs and Valiants truly are like apples and oranges. I miss my Corvairs. I've owned almost every style, and my favorite was the '64. It's the last of the early style, and there were many mechanical improvements, both to the powertrain and the suspension. 1965 and later is a totally different animal, and was improved in many ways, but the earlier cars have a strong appeal. In my humble opinion.

[Steve Braverman]

I've never owned a Valiant, but I've had 12 Corvairs. The argument that parts are more available for the Valiant is totally bunk. Clark's Corvair Parts in Mass. has just about every nut, bolt, finnigan pin and frammis for the Corvair, and they ship out usually on the same day you order. They also reproduce their own trim, upholstery and most other parts. Prices are much lower than for other cars too.

I agree that the Corvair has some issues such as oil leaks, but they can be fixed with modern seals. Since this is a hobby, I think the Corvair would be a much better choice solely based on the fun factor. But the only way you will be able to decide is to drive them both.

Corvairs and Valiants truly are like apples and oranges. I miss my Corvairs. I've owned almost every style, and my favorite was the '64. It's the last of the early style, and there were many mechanical improvements, both to the powertrain and the suspension. 1965 and later is a totally different animal, and was improved in many ways, but the earlier cars have a strong appeal. In my humble opinion.

[Guest Leonard Shepherd]

Studebaker produced a comparison brochure. Of course, it was biased!

[Guest Leonard Shepherd]

Studebaker produced a comparison brochure. Of course, it was biased!

[Guest cardinal905]

I have a 62 Corvair Monza, it is a very fun car that gets you a lot of looks. Your right you dont see many if any out there. I have the automatic (so my wife can drive it) and the shift would be a better bet. I bought the car in the Ozarks and it was not too good on hills a little underpowered but was amazed that I get thumbs up from the Harley set, and the rear engine sounds cool and is fun to wind up---and they run much better would up. No problems with mine yet, knock on wood.

[Guest cardinal905]

I have a 62 Corvair Monza, it is a very fun car that gets you a lot of looks. Your right you dont see many if any out there. I have the automatic (so my wife can drive it) and the shift would be a better bet. I bought the car in the Ozarks and it was not too good on hills a little underpowered but was amazed that I get thumbs up from the Harley set, and the rear engine sounds cool and is fun to wind up---and they run much better would up. No problems with mine yet, knock on wood.

[Guest bkazmer]

This is exactly the brain-stirring I was looking for. Parts for most of these are a breeze by comparison to my pre-war independent, although I'm sure there are some trim pieces for the lower volume models that are difficult. You have broadened my ideas on this, and drawn the original distinction more clearly.

[Guest bkazmer]

This is exactly the brain-stirring I was looking for. Parts for most of these are a breeze by comparison to my pre-war independent, although I'm sure there are some trim pieces for the lower volume models that are difficult. You have broadened my ideas on this, and drawn the original distinction more clearly.