From: Rad Davis Date: Thu, 27 Oct 94 01:44:00 UTC To: corvair@shadow.mitre.org Subject: re: FC question (long) Ken Rolt wrote: >Hi Present and former F/C owners. You may have seen >the following posting by me recently, and hopefully >you are presently crafting a thorough and detailed >answer (I suspect Rad is, much like his other posts to >the group). What me crafting, thorough and detailed? Well, you asked specifically for it this time... >OK folks, I'm contemplating an F/C purchase. When I >say F/C I either mean a >* 61-67 Ford Falcon club wagon (ohv 6: 170, 200, 240 >or 300 cid), >* 64-67 Chevy/GMC sport van (ohv 6: 194, 230, 250, >292 cid), >* 64-67 D-P Tradesman? van (ohv 6: 170 or 225 cid >slant, or onh v8 273 cid), >* 61-65 Chevy Greenbrier. >All of the above are window-model vans, and yes, >technically they are all F/Cs (forward control). I >know many of you will shudder at my posting a >water-pumper along with a Corvair, but let's face it, >there's no substitute for cubic inches and the other >three have much more torque with a stock engine >(and many engines will fit as listed above) than >*any* Corvair engine, modified or otherwise. No argument. But if torque is the issue, why don't you get about a'68- 78 ford van with the 351M (400 CI) engine, or a Chevy van with a big block or a 350? Obviously you're trying to strike some sort of tradeoff here. And the tradeoff favors none of the above (your mentions or mine). If you want to tow a lot and get decent light-load economy, buy an Astro van or an Aerostar. Both are RWD, have the engine stuck pretty far out in front, so it doesn't invade the passenger compartment much (my biggest beef with the other FC's you listed), and come with all the torque you'll need without hurting you too much in the light-load fuel economy department. Unfortunately, only the Greenbrier has a low load- height floor (not trivial, as you'd find when you're trying to get that prize into the van) with rear wheel drive. >The question is: how do F/C owners feel about the >getup-and-go, and/or towing ability of their Corvair >trucks (Corvan and Greenbrier especially since they >have more wgt in the back), versus these water-pumper >comparison vehicles ? Getup-and-go and towing ability are not the same thing, I'm afraid. Vehicles optimized for towing always get lousy fuel economy--stump puller gearing, you know. Yes, they're quick to, say, 40 MPH without the trailer, but they're real dogs for highway cruise at 65-70, because the engine is windmilling up around (or above) its horsepower peak, sucking gas, and making lots of noise. The solution is a 4-speed automatic or 5-speed manual with top gear as an overdrive. Unfortunately, none of your mentioned choices was available with this sort of gearing. I use my '65 Greenbrier for both light towing (the occaisional car, or a pop-up camp trailer) and highway cruise. It was not always so. After consulting some with Spence Shepard (who owns an original '64 'brier with which he also tows and travels--and exhibted good performance at both), I discovered why his 'brier was an adequate tow truck and a good highway performer, and mine seemed to be an uncomfortable, noisy dog that could pull down a house. My father had assembled a "bitsa" powertrain for my 'brier. He has a '61 rampside, in which he had a 140, a 3.55:1 rearend, and the original 4.26:1 first gear '61 FC 4-speed. He assumed that the heavier brier would exhibit lackluster performance with the "weaker" 110, and so put in a '63 car 4- speed and a 3.89:1 rearend with a nice, reduced compression 110. He failed to take the radically different torque curves of the two engines into account: the 110 is actually a much better FC engine than the 140 because of its superb low-end torque--and the importance of the proper transmission gearing. It was not a happy marriage. The engine was at 3000 rpm at 56 mph, which made 65 mph cruise a noisy experience with poor fuel economy. The first gear was adequate, but the other ratios weren't stepped right. I have since put a 3.27:1 rearend in it, and have tried (initially) a '64 car transmission and a real '64-65 FC transmission after the '63 car transmission's synchros finally retired after well over 100,000 miles. The road gearing with 205-70-15 tires was just right in fourth for econo-cruise in the power band. It was a miserable beast for get up and go with the car transmission, but is really very pleasant with the correct FC transmission. It is adequate for in-town tows of something as heavy as a corvair car and it drags around my Fiats with ease, but the 3.27 rearend leaves too little spare torque for a 65 mph highway tow of a Corvair, unless you're in Texas with no headwind. The highway fuel economy is, however, superior to any other reports I have heard--in the neighborhood of 20-23 mpg @ 65 on the interstate loaded with two people, luggage and cargo (usually furniture or car parts being ferried between central NC and Western Kentucky, where my parents live. Mind we cross the Appalachians on this route). Habitual Greenbrier-owning car pullers report that a 3.55 rearend gives a good tow rig for a race corvair on street tires at highways speeds with a slight penalty in light-load fuel economy and noise. I'm sticking with the 3.27 because I like being able to go 75-85 (did on the way to work today, in fact) if I want without working the engine too hard. It's now better at cruise than my '65 Corsa. And you can't beat the trunk space, the visibility, or the driver comfort (this is a huge disadvantage of any non- air conditioned front-engine FC--I intensely dislike sharing the front seat with a noisy, hot engine--and so will you, if you take a trip in any of your non-corvair choices). The Greenbrier is always our first choice or road trips. I have been on a 400 mile round trip in a Corvan with 110/pg and 3.55:1 rearend (standard equipment gearing). I recommend it to nobody. Get a four-speed or don't bother. It was a lot noisier than my Greenbrier, and the engine wasn't happy. Any of the other FC's on your list have similar caveats. But I suspect that most of the others had a choice of 2-3 speed automatic or a 3 on the tree manual--that'll suck up a lot of the torque advantage you cite--or give you the windmilling engine problem. Another thing that "depowers" the other FC's is their weight penalty. Look at the curb weights of these FC's similarly equipped--the Greenbrier is far and away the lightest. I would also enjoin you to change the oil on each of these vehicles before you pick one out...Or tension the fanbelt. >BTW, I plan to primarily haul my family, groceries, >and stuff (trash day gems, lumber, antiques, and >Corvair parts and engines) but I would like to be able >to tow *other vehicles* later on (wink, wink). That's essentially what I do with my 'brier. For your purposes, I'd suggest a '61 brier deluxe with a van 4-speed and either a 95 or 110 (nicer, quieter, cheaper) if you want something old and odd. If you are voting practicality, the Aerostar or Astro are definitely the best choices in town. But you can't race dune buggies on the Blue Ridge Parkway very well with them, I'm afraid, like you can with a 'brier. And I've never seen any van but a brier autocrossed, either. >p.s. - is a Grateful Dead decal called for here, or >*must* one own a VW Transporter (Type 2) to use the >decal ;) I have seen Greenbriers with Dead stickers. But they're far outnumbered by type 2 vans and type 4 vans. Also consider that nearly any serious "dead" van will have a ratty paint job and hallucinogenic smoke pouring from the slightly open, darkly curtained windows... My favorite FC Corvair sticker is definitely the early seventies era waterbed salesmen's association sticker on the back of a window Corvan at the chickenhouse. Rad p.s.-- After Harry remarked about the noise level of his powerglide 'brier, I am compelled to respond: Yes, it's noisier than my car, counting wind and tire noise, but the largest sources of noise are 1) decayed window and door weatherstrips (especially the vent-window weatherstrips) and 2) the front tires (I got an all-season radial, and would recommend a normal passenger car radial for reduced noise). The engine is a pleasant, distant hum now that I have all the stock air cleaner, lid insulation, the 3.27 rearend and a 6-cylinder granada muffler installed. With luggage on the lid you almost can't hear the engine. p.p.s.-- I suppose I should mention that my wife also likes to drive our brier--she autocrossed it at Williamsburg and at our Fall Affair. She likes to drive it as much as our Corsa, and finds the controls lighter than on her beetle.