I'm not sure if this came up yet, but eventually you'll do the suspension. The Corvair had a high trunk load rating, but of course nobody puts that much in the trunk so the cars tend to sit high in the front. With the heavier back end of the car the rear springs have usually sagged and need replacing. KEEP IN MIND THE 64 HAD THE ONE YEAR ONLY REAR SPRINGS. So if you replace them make sure you get the correct springs. Why different rear springs in 64? GM finally got around to revising the rear swing axle suspension with a lateral leaf spring. IT IS NOT A CAMBER COMPENSATOR like the aftermarket bolt on units. It works far better and actually reduced the rear roll center for better stability. This change required a different rear coil spring rating. It's accepted that the 64 cars were the best handling, and riding, of the EM cars.
Some just leave the old rear springs in and cut the front springs for a lowered look. I prefer a little higher car at stock height and you have better wheel travel distance so I keep the old front springs and install new rear springs. Usually this gives an even stance. Also move the spare tire from the engine compartment to the trunk (this was done on A/C cars). Moving weight from the rear to the front is good in a Corvair.
Good luck with the car!
1964 four door automatic project by remote
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
Excellent post.66vairguy wrote: ↑Tue Apr 04, 2017 9:00 am I'm not sure if this came up yet, but eventually you'll do the suspension. The Corvair had a high trunk load rating, but of course nobody puts that much in the trunk so the cars tend to sit high in the front. With the heavier back end of the car the rear springs have usually sagged and need replacing. KEEP IN MIND THE 64 HAD THE ONE YEAR ONLY REAR SPRINGS. So if you replace them make sure you get the correct springs. Why different rear springs in 64? GM finally got around to revising the rear swing axle suspension with a lateral leaf spring. IT IS NOT A CAMBER COMPENSATOR like the aftermarket bolt on units. It works far better and actually reduced the rear roll center for better stability. This change required a different rear coil spring rating. It's accepted that the 64 cars were the best handling, and riding, of the EM cars.
Some just leave the old rear springs in and cut the front springs for a lowered look. I prefer a little higher car at stock height and you have better wheel travel distance so I keep the old front springs and install new rear springs. Usually this gives an even stance. Also move the spare tire from the engine compartment to the trunk (this was done on A/C cars). Moving weight from the rear to the front is good in a Corvair.
Good luck with the car!
Been considering the best course for now and a bit later for mods.
I was looking for an EM four door auto. I bought this '64 in part for the updated suspension and the larger displacement engine.
Well taken that the back springs have sagged. Still, the front end sitting high is not doing it for me. So your other thought of cutting the front springs is also a good call.
Depending on how bad the suspension and steering are worn, may have to start replacing ball joints and tie rod ends now. But I don't like opening stuff up without doing obvious/necessary updates. In addition to making the suspension and steering serviceable I was thinking of upgrading the bushings to a slightly harder compound. In other older cars I've had this has made quite a big difference. However I don't have any baseline to compare with the Corvair.
The bushings themselves are quite pricey when compared to the stock stuff. I'd like to extend the positive characteristics of the car without damaging it's inherently good ride quality. Any thoughts on upgrading the bushings while doing the suspension and steering?
About the '64 suspension. Agreed that the transverse spring is not simply a camber compensator. But, at least in part, it does seem to be designed to keep the inside wheel from rolling under too much in a severe maneuver. It also adds to the total rear springs rate.
That said I suspect that GM dialed in even more total understeer than previous years with the '64. There is an article on this forum about a '64 Sprint where they added increased rate rear springs and actually removed the front sway bar. This is anecdotal evidence for sure but seems to point to the '64 responding well to reduced understeer to improve 'sportier' handing.
Assuming this is the case what about the following. Adding heavier springs to the rear. Probably just standard EM rear springs assuming '64 rear springs have a lower rate. Standard, but new, EM springs up front. But instead of removing the front sway bar adding bigger front and rear sway bars. Addco lists both front and rear bars for the EM.
Better shocks, a slightly quicker steering and Bob's your uncle.
A stock appearing 14" or 15" steel wheel with good tires wold also help.
Thoughts?
1964 Corvair 900 (969) four door with powerglide - new project
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
I just had a suspension talk with another Vair buddy who is building a autocross car.
FIRST AND FOREMOST - How do you want to use the car? I've been through the "tinkering' stages of car ownership and yes a stiffer suspension makes a car handle nice and flat on a smooth course, but daily driving becomes rather unpleasant, especially for passengers. One gets tired of hearing "Why does this car ride so bad" and of course it beats up the car body on rough city streets (common now) and squeaks and rattles develop.
Decades ago I was introduced to the old Audi and other European cars with lots of wheel travel. You'd think these car would roll over in a turn, yet the did NOT and actually put in some fast lap times and handled rough tracks easily and the rode NICE. That taught me a car can handle AND ride well. The older Jaguars certainly prove this.
As for "hard" bushings, HD springs, and stiff shocks - I do not like them when driving on daily "rough" roads, but that's just me. Some folks like it "rough". The other issue is Corvair the has an old steering system. It WILL NEVER FEEL LIKE a modern rack and pinion system. That said, plenty of folks raced Corvairs successfully with the "old" suspension. Yes you have to work a little harder vs. modern cars that are almost easy to push around a track, but to me that is the fun part.
I would NOT go with a rear sway bar. Please do not underestimate how well the GM engineers sorted out the final EM suspension. With a rear heavy car you DO NOT want to unload the inner rear wheel via a sway bar in a turn. You DO want a front sway bar to unload the inner FRONT tire in a turn (look at old 911 pictures and you see the inner front wheel OFF the ground in a tight race in a turn) to promote understeer and prevent the rear end from snapping around. This give the driver plenty of controlled warning when he pushes too hard into a turn. This stuff is in books and articles online. Suspension geometry and load shifting is rather complex and ALWAYS a compromise. When the 63 Vette IRS came out a lot of magazine "bench" racers bad mouthed it for being too "simple", yet history has proved it was one of the better, and very durable, IRS systems of it's time. Yes the GM engineers could get it right when allowed to.
I like the Corvair for what it is.
FIRST AND FOREMOST - How do you want to use the car? I've been through the "tinkering' stages of car ownership and yes a stiffer suspension makes a car handle nice and flat on a smooth course, but daily driving becomes rather unpleasant, especially for passengers. One gets tired of hearing "Why does this car ride so bad" and of course it beats up the car body on rough city streets (common now) and squeaks and rattles develop.
Decades ago I was introduced to the old Audi and other European cars with lots of wheel travel. You'd think these car would roll over in a turn, yet the did NOT and actually put in some fast lap times and handled rough tracks easily and the rode NICE. That taught me a car can handle AND ride well. The older Jaguars certainly prove this.
As for "hard" bushings, HD springs, and stiff shocks - I do not like them when driving on daily "rough" roads, but that's just me. Some folks like it "rough". The other issue is Corvair the has an old steering system. It WILL NEVER FEEL LIKE a modern rack and pinion system. That said, plenty of folks raced Corvairs successfully with the "old" suspension. Yes you have to work a little harder vs. modern cars that are almost easy to push around a track, but to me that is the fun part.
I would NOT go with a rear sway bar. Please do not underestimate how well the GM engineers sorted out the final EM suspension. With a rear heavy car you DO NOT want to unload the inner rear wheel via a sway bar in a turn. You DO want a front sway bar to unload the inner FRONT tire in a turn (look at old 911 pictures and you see the inner front wheel OFF the ground in a tight race in a turn) to promote understeer and prevent the rear end from snapping around. This give the driver plenty of controlled warning when he pushes too hard into a turn. This stuff is in books and articles online. Suspension geometry and load shifting is rather complex and ALWAYS a compromise. When the 63 Vette IRS came out a lot of magazine "bench" racers bad mouthed it for being too "simple", yet history has proved it was one of the better, and very durable, IRS systems of it's time. Yes the GM engineers could get it right when allowed to.
I like the Corvair for what it is.
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
All well taken.
Especially your comments about the 911 handling characteristics and how they may relate to the Corvair.
Completely agreed on not changing the 'good ride' characteristics of the original design. True HD springs would likely be more harsh than I would want. And even middle hardness bushings may also make the ride too harsh. Stock bushings are cheap and will probably be fine. Same with shocks. Although a modest upgrade in shocks would probably have benefits that would outweigh any decrease in ride quality. I already have stock type replacement shocks so that will do for now.
I have read a fair amount about performance suspension design and mods. Admittedly almost nothing about the 911 or Corvair.
Your thoughts about not adding sway bars are at a minimum reasonable. To that end I'll hold off on that mod. However, as the rear springs will need to be replaced anyway I will try a set of standard rate '60-'63 rear springs. This small mod will by itself increase the rear roll couple and reduce understeer a bit. Being the standard and not HD EM springs the ride should remain acceptable. I'll leave the front sway bar in place with new bushings.
I can always add front and rear sway bars later if the car appears it would benefit from that mod.
I agree that GM could and can 'get it right'. But there is the story of them resisting even the lateral spring on the EM cars. It doesn't seem crazy to speculate that GM dialed in a fair amount of understeer, especially by the time of the '64 model.
Your first question is most relevant; the primary use of the car is a street car and an intention to keep, or improve on, the car's inherent positive characteristics. However, as parts fail and need replacement upgrading the part to mitigate a negative characteristic, like too much understeer, is something that interests me. But I would avoid changing the basic characteristic of the car like introducing harsh ride quality.
Most everyone accepted the fact that radial tire had an enormous impact on how cars handled, but most of the impact was positive. I think its possible to do small but effective mods that improve on the car's inherent positive qualities and still maintain the heart of what the car is.
BTW is there a 14 or 15" stock type steel wheel that will work on an EM Corvair?
Especially your comments about the 911 handling characteristics and how they may relate to the Corvair.
Completely agreed on not changing the 'good ride' characteristics of the original design. True HD springs would likely be more harsh than I would want. And even middle hardness bushings may also make the ride too harsh. Stock bushings are cheap and will probably be fine. Same with shocks. Although a modest upgrade in shocks would probably have benefits that would outweigh any decrease in ride quality. I already have stock type replacement shocks so that will do for now.
I have read a fair amount about performance suspension design and mods. Admittedly almost nothing about the 911 or Corvair.
Your thoughts about not adding sway bars are at a minimum reasonable. To that end I'll hold off on that mod. However, as the rear springs will need to be replaced anyway I will try a set of standard rate '60-'63 rear springs. This small mod will by itself increase the rear roll couple and reduce understeer a bit. Being the standard and not HD EM springs the ride should remain acceptable. I'll leave the front sway bar in place with new bushings.
I can always add front and rear sway bars later if the car appears it would benefit from that mod.
I agree that GM could and can 'get it right'. But there is the story of them resisting even the lateral spring on the EM cars. It doesn't seem crazy to speculate that GM dialed in a fair amount of understeer, especially by the time of the '64 model.
Your first question is most relevant; the primary use of the car is a street car and an intention to keep, or improve on, the car's inherent positive characteristics. However, as parts fail and need replacement upgrading the part to mitigate a negative characteristic, like too much understeer, is something that interests me. But I would avoid changing the basic characteristic of the car like introducing harsh ride quality.
Most everyone accepted the fact that radial tire had an enormous impact on how cars handled, but most of the impact was positive. I think its possible to do small but effective mods that improve on the car's inherent positive qualities and still maintain the heart of what the car is.
BTW is there a 14 or 15" stock type steel wheel that will work on an EM Corvair?
1964 Corvair 900 (969) four door with powerglide - new project
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
You said " I will try a set of standard rate '60-'63 rear springs. " I'm not sure why you would want to use 60-63 rear springs when the 64 Corvair has a specific 64 model ONLY rear spring to work with the leaf spring. The 60-63 rear spring would result in the rear end sitting too high with improper camber.
You're over thinking the "understeer". If you want more oversteer, simply increase the front tire pressure (typically 10-15lbs less than rear tires to promote understeer per GM manual).
There are 14" rims that folks have used, just make sure the rim backspace is adequate to keep the steering geometry the same and clear the fender lip area. You might search the other forum for ideas.
You're over thinking the "understeer". If you want more oversteer, simply increase the front tire pressure (typically 10-15lbs less than rear tires to promote understeer per GM manual).
There are 14" rims that folks have used, just make sure the rim backspace is adequate to keep the steering geometry the same and clear the fender lip area. You might search the other forum for ideas.
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
I would not characterize an open discussion about the relative merits of modifying the Corvair as 'over thinking'. I actually enjoy what might be called 'bench racing' especially with forum members that have extensive knowledge and experience with these cars.
Your suggestion of searching other forums is well taken. I have read as much as I could find on forums, the internet in general and have watched many Youtube videos. I have found this forum to be very interesting and helpful.
The rate of the '64 rear springs was chosen to produce a certain total spring rate with the transverse springs installed. Apparently with the addition of the transverse spring the desired total rear spring rate required a unique lower rate coil spring. Additionally a front sway bar was made standard to achieve a certain amount of understeer.
These suspension targets are based on many factors such as average 1960s US driver skill, comfort, safety and a number of other factors that would apply to a specific driver/car use in varying degrees.
The article on this forum of the '64 Sprint shows that even in then it was clear that the GM factory suspension targets were but one of a number of legitimate paths to make the car more suited to specific uses. In the article they actually replaced the rear springs with HD springs and removed the front sway bar.
As my springs are almost certainly sagging, which is probably at least as harmful as having the rear of the car too high, choosing to replace them with standard rate EM springs instead of the 'unique' '64 springs is a reasonable step toward modestly improving the car's handling characteristics.
Your comment about the tire pressure is well noted. Understeer and oversteer are limited descriptions of handling dynamics. Many factors like, spring rate, sway bar rate, shock compression and tire pressure all effect total front and rear roll couple. Things like alignment and tires also massively affect handing.
While I do intend to keep as much of the character of the car as possible, I think making small modest improvements, based on my tastes, are legitimate and would certainly add to the experience. This is especially true when parts that need replacing; like my rear springs.
I would guess that most of the forum members use radial tires on their cars. And that those that use bias ply probably drive their cars less. A reasonable upgrade that is clearly accepted.
I also intend on updating the points to an electronic gizmo. I had a '68 Eldorado and the swap worked very well.
Your suggestion of searching other forums is well taken. I have read as much as I could find on forums, the internet in general and have watched many Youtube videos. I have found this forum to be very interesting and helpful.
The rate of the '64 rear springs was chosen to produce a certain total spring rate with the transverse springs installed. Apparently with the addition of the transverse spring the desired total rear spring rate required a unique lower rate coil spring. Additionally a front sway bar was made standard to achieve a certain amount of understeer.
These suspension targets are based on many factors such as average 1960s US driver skill, comfort, safety and a number of other factors that would apply to a specific driver/car use in varying degrees.
The article on this forum of the '64 Sprint shows that even in then it was clear that the GM factory suspension targets were but one of a number of legitimate paths to make the car more suited to specific uses. In the article they actually replaced the rear springs with HD springs and removed the front sway bar.
As my springs are almost certainly sagging, which is probably at least as harmful as having the rear of the car too high, choosing to replace them with standard rate EM springs instead of the 'unique' '64 springs is a reasonable step toward modestly improving the car's handling characteristics.
Your comment about the tire pressure is well noted. Understeer and oversteer are limited descriptions of handling dynamics. Many factors like, spring rate, sway bar rate, shock compression and tire pressure all effect total front and rear roll couple. Things like alignment and tires also massively affect handing.
While I do intend to keep as much of the character of the car as possible, I think making small modest improvements, based on my tastes, are legitimate and would certainly add to the experience. This is especially true when parts that need replacing; like my rear springs.
I would guess that most of the forum members use radial tires on their cars. And that those that use bias ply probably drive their cars less. A reasonable upgrade that is clearly accepted.
I also intend on updating the points to an electronic gizmo. I had a '68 Eldorado and the swap worked very well.
1964 Corvair 900 (969) four door with powerglide - new project
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
Just my 2 cents, I would suggest getting a feel for the car with stock springs before delving into making changes. I agree completely that you can easily play with balance by simply adjusting front tire pressure. Also, just putting the spare in the trunk can make a difference. Pretty amazing actually how much you can change it. Keep pressure the same all around and you have an oversteer machine when pushed past the limit. Hold it at the limit, and you can bring the rear end back in line with your left foot on the brake. What fun!
Swing axle Corvairs drive great, no doubt about it. They have a feel to them that is unlike anything else on the road, and it is good. But they are different, and if you're not used to them, there is a learning curve. The older I get, the more I realize those engineers at GM got it right in so many ways.
Swing axle Corvairs drive great, no doubt about it. They have a feel to them that is unlike anything else on the road, and it is good. But they are different, and if you're not used to them, there is a learning curve. The older I get, the more I realize those engineers at GM got it right in so many ways.
Phil
64 Spyder convertible
64 Spyder convertible
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
Sorry, just one more comment because I got such a kick out of this. Having gone beyond the limit multiple times in my '64 convertible, I have some experience here. Now a 4 door PG might well behave differently. That being said, at its worst, my car went around a curve like a hammer on a string. When the back end turned loose, the world went sideways in a blink. It would start one way, then grab, and violently swing back the other. I well remember the day when I tried to figure out how to explain to someone that yes, I really did smash the passenger door on my car by going around a right hand curve.Ecklund wrote: That said I suspect that GM dialed in even more total understeer than previous years with the '64. There is an article on this forum about a '64 Sprint where they added increased rate rear springs and actually removed the front sway bar. This is anecdotal evidence for sure but seems to point to the '64 responding well to reduced understeer to improve 'sportier' handing.
Thoughts?
Why would you want to reduce understeer even further? 
There is a reason that just about everyone who races a Corvair uses a LM. Want ultimate handling? Put good tires and shocks on one of those, and you'll run out of nerve long before you run out of grip. One modification I did do to mine that made a great difference was to simply install a smaller diameter steering wheel. Did a lot to improve steering feel. But I also reluctantly came to the conclusion that a '64 will not handle as well as a '65.
That being said, '64's have a character to them that is unmatched in my opinion. Just an overall feel that is unique. So what if it doesn't have the same limit characteristics as a LM? It's the price you pay, and to me, it's worth it.
Do what you want with yours, but remember what is most important: have fun, and enjoy the ride.
Phil
64 Spyder convertible
64 Spyder convertible
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
The LMs are nice cars in their own right. I just like the EM cars. A coupe or convertible would have been fine but was looking for a four door as I have two young daughters and hope to use the car as a more regular driver at some point. When I found the '64 with its slightly larger engine and updated suspension stock suspension it was just a bonus.
Nope, not looking for ultimate handling. Certainly not looking to race anything. Even though Porsche has been able to do a lot to limit the inherent limitation of having the engine hang out over the rear wheels, a car designed in the 1950s would not be the best choice as a basis for 'ultimate handling' car.
Some have Corvairs to compete in stock OEM car shows. I do admire the guys that want the 'original' form of a car. It seems quite an exacting pursuit. Its just not my thing.
Radial tires would of course be right out for the stock only people. Even though they are superior to ancient bars ply tires in most every way and have a dramatic effect on handing, radial tires are just not 'stock'.
Most car companies dial in quite a bit of understeer in almost all stock cars. This understeer is more about a concern with an average driver and liability than with any engineering goal.
I have only recently bought a Corvair but I have owned older cars for a number of years. Your final line about 'enjoying the ride' is very well taken. For me I have found that making small but significant changes have made the cars much more enjoyable. A slightly more neutral handing car makes its use significantly better - for me.
I suspect that understeer may delay the 'snap' of a rear engine car but also probably makes it snap much harder when it does break loose.
Your addition of the steering wheel is an excellent example. There is no way I'm giving up that cool stock steering wheel front eh '64. But adding a quicker steering arm or if the box is worn a quicker ratio steering box would make the car more enjoyable. Well, at least for you and me.
Adding front and rear sway bars to the '64 would only enhance the positive characteristics of the car and mitigate some of its negative characteristics.
This is not a new idea. There is an article on the '64 Sprint on this forum. Fitch added not just standard rear springs but HD rear springs along with entirely removing the front sway bar. This would not be my preferred method for reducing inherent understeer but they probably didn't have Addco back then either.
Probably going to swap out the points at some point for an electronic gizmo on the '64 too. And also add a big chunk of displacement when the engine gets a rebuild. Will probably look for a 3.08 rear gear during the rebuild too.
We all do mods and upgrades. We change the character of the cars. To you radial tires are an acceptable mod. Others would cry sacrilege.
Adding slightly bigger wheels that are stock appearing, IMHO, is just extending the characteristics that drew me to these cars in the first place. Even though V8 conversions have been around for a long time and have place in the Corvair history, for me the V8 cars change that simple character too much.
A modest reduction of the inherent understeer of the '64 so that it is more of neutral handling car would make the car much more enjoyable - for me.
Nope, not looking for ultimate handling. Certainly not looking to race anything. Even though Porsche has been able to do a lot to limit the inherent limitation of having the engine hang out over the rear wheels, a car designed in the 1950s would not be the best choice as a basis for 'ultimate handling' car.
Some have Corvairs to compete in stock OEM car shows. I do admire the guys that want the 'original' form of a car. It seems quite an exacting pursuit. Its just not my thing.
Radial tires would of course be right out for the stock only people. Even though they are superior to ancient bars ply tires in most every way and have a dramatic effect on handing, radial tires are just not 'stock'.
Most car companies dial in quite a bit of understeer in almost all stock cars. This understeer is more about a concern with an average driver and liability than with any engineering goal.
I have only recently bought a Corvair but I have owned older cars for a number of years. Your final line about 'enjoying the ride' is very well taken. For me I have found that making small but significant changes have made the cars much more enjoyable. A slightly more neutral handing car makes its use significantly better - for me.
I suspect that understeer may delay the 'snap' of a rear engine car but also probably makes it snap much harder when it does break loose.
Your addition of the steering wheel is an excellent example. There is no way I'm giving up that cool stock steering wheel front eh '64. But adding a quicker steering arm or if the box is worn a quicker ratio steering box would make the car more enjoyable. Well, at least for you and me.
Adding front and rear sway bars to the '64 would only enhance the positive characteristics of the car and mitigate some of its negative characteristics.
This is not a new idea. There is an article on the '64 Sprint on this forum. Fitch added not just standard rear springs but HD rear springs along with entirely removing the front sway bar. This would not be my preferred method for reducing inherent understeer but they probably didn't have Addco back then either.
Probably going to swap out the points at some point for an electronic gizmo on the '64 too. And also add a big chunk of displacement when the engine gets a rebuild. Will probably look for a 3.08 rear gear during the rebuild too.
We all do mods and upgrades. We change the character of the cars. To you radial tires are an acceptable mod. Others would cry sacrilege.
Adding slightly bigger wheels that are stock appearing, IMHO, is just extending the characteristics that drew me to these cars in the first place. Even though V8 conversions have been around for a long time and have place in the Corvair history, for me the V8 cars change that simple character too much.
A modest reduction of the inherent understeer of the '64 so that it is more of neutral handling car would make the car much more enjoyable - for me.
1964 Corvair 900 (969) four door with powerglide - new project
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
Yeah, I hear you on some modifications to personalize the car. First thing I did with mine was put radial tires on it. Then, added a quick shift kit to cut down on the long throw of the shifter on the 4 speed. Later mods included a smaller diameter, walnut steering wheel, and later on, some things I highly recommend to anyone who plans to drive the car much: an alternator with built in regulator, electronic ignition, and for me an electric fuel pump did wonders for starting the turbo. And of course, you must remember upgrade number 1: Viton O-Rings! The originals were Buna, and only lasted 30K miles. I well remember the old days where it was common to see a Corvair with the back end covered with oil. It was a simple thing to do, because if the Viton material had been around when the Corvair was made, GM certainly would have used it.
Now lots of these mods not only work better, but solve the problem of not being able to find good parts as easily as before. Others are done just for personal preference. I have seen many modifications over the years, and there are very few I object to.
Not sure what I would say about rear ratios, but I would let how I used the car dictate that. If a lot of freeway use, a 3:27. the 3:55 works well, but the engine gets busy at speed. Larger tires would help, but you have to be careful here because there are clearance issues with the 64's, especially on the front.
But oh yeah, I like me a '64. Had a sedan once waiting its turn, it got stolen.
So if you are new to Corvairs, there is a lot to learn. (For example, the 64's have larger brakes in the rear!) But these cars are great, and pretty easy to work on. Love to see yours when its done, so keep us posted with your progress!
Now lots of these mods not only work better, but solve the problem of not being able to find good parts as easily as before. Others are done just for personal preference. I have seen many modifications over the years, and there are very few I object to.
Not sure what I would say about rear ratios, but I would let how I used the car dictate that. If a lot of freeway use, a 3:27. the 3:55 works well, but the engine gets busy at speed. Larger tires would help, but you have to be careful here because there are clearance issues with the 64's, especially on the front.
But oh yeah, I like me a '64. Had a sedan once waiting its turn, it got stolen.
So if you are new to Corvairs, there is a lot to learn. (For example, the 64's have larger brakes in the rear!) But these cars are great, and pretty easy to work on. Love to see yours when its done, so keep us posted with your progress!
Phil
64 Spyder convertible
64 Spyder convertible
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
Good suggested mods and all well taken.Swngaxl wrote: ↑Fri Apr 14, 2017 10:50 pm Yeah, I hear you on some modifications to personalize the car. First thing I did with mine was put radial tires on it. Then, added a quick shift kit to cut down on the long throw of the shifter on the 4 speed. Later mods included a smaller diameter, walnut steering wheel, and later on, some things I highly recommend to anyone who plans to drive the car much: an alternator with built in regulator, electronic ignition, and for me an electric fuel pump did wonders for starting the turbo. And of course, you must remember upgrade number 1: Viton O-Rings! The originals were Buna, and only lasted 30K miles. I well remember the old days where it was common to see a Corvair with the back end covered with oil. It was a simple thing to do, because if the Viton material had been around when the Corvair was made, GM certainly would have used it.
Now lots of these mods not only work better, but solve the problem of not being able to find good parts as easily as before. Others are done just for personal preference. I have seen many modifications over the years, and there are very few I object to.
Not sure what I would say about rear ratios, but I would let how I used the car dictate that. If a lot of freeway use, a 3:27. the 3:55 works well, but the engine gets busy at speed. Larger tires would help, but you have to be careful here because there are clearance issues with the 64's, especially on the front.
But oh yeah, I like me a '64. Had a sedan once waiting its turn, it got stolen.
So if you are new to Corvairs, there is a lot to learn. (For example, the 64's have larger brakes in the rear!) But these cars are great, and pretty easy to work on. Love to see yours when its done, so keep us posted with your progress!
I did the Petronix swap on a '68 Eldorado and it worked well. Having points changed on the '64 but will do the electronic swap along with their hotter coil later.
Will leave the generator for now. But when it dies an alternator sounds right.
The guy working on my '64 has a thing for electric fuel pumps and as the old stock one is probably shot an electric pump it is.
Very unlikely that the engine was ever converted to the Viton seals. Its likely the engine will need a rebuild sometime soon and I'll swap out the O-rings then.
The '64 very likely has the 3.27 gear which is fine. Was thinking as GM offered the 3.08 gear it would be a good match with an engine that had an increase in displacement; in the 3.1/3 range.
Larger diameter tires are another way to drop the RPM but have other problems as you mention. Not least is finding the right speedo gear. I have seen alternate speedo gears for specific rear end ratios but not for the 3.08 or for non-stock tire diameters. However, the power glide has been used in a lot of applications over the years and there may well be a speedo gear that would work.
Man, that is just tragic. I know the coupes are considered sportier but I actually like the visual balance of the sedans. And to have one stolen. Ouch!
You are right that there is a lot to learn about these cars. Pretty interesting stuff.
I had seen that the rear brakes on the '64 had a kind of finned drum, I did not know that they were any larger.
Will try and send as pics when I pick up the '63 and on both cars as I go along.
1964 Corvair 900 (969) four door with powerglide - new project
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
Make sure the person working on your car installs the proper pressure electric fuel pump. The Corvair carburetors were designed for 4-5PSI - NO MORE. Folks read the fuel pump specification sheets and see two pressures and figure they have to go with the lower number. That is incorrect. The lower number in the range is for MAXIMUM flow which will NEVER happen with the Corvair. You pick the pump by the higher number in the spec. range as that is what the pump delivers under normal operation. Don't assume a Corvair vendor will get it right as I've seen the wrong pump on a Corvair from a Corvair vendor that was delivering 9.O PSI and causing mixture and flooding issues.
Two electric pumps that have a good reputation are: AirTex E8016S (2.5-4.5 PSI), and the Faucet 40105 (3.0-4.5 PSI). These pumps will deliver 4.5 PSI even when a Corvair is WOT (wide open throttle).
Two electric pumps that have a good reputation are: AirTex E8016S (2.5-4.5 PSI), and the Faucet 40105 (3.0-4.5 PSI). These pumps will deliver 4.5 PSI even when a Corvair is WOT (wide open throttle).
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
Thanks for the tip.66vairguy wrote: ↑Sat Apr 15, 2017 8:54 am Make sure the person working on your car installs the proper pressure electric fuel pump. The Corvair carburetors were designed for 4-5PSI - NO MORE. Folks read the fuel pump specification sheets and see two pressures and figure they have to go with the lower number. That is incorrect. The lower number in the range is for MAXIMUM flow which will NEVER happen with the Corvair. You pick the pump by the higher number in the spec. range as that is what the pump delivers under normal operation. Don't assume a Corvair vendor will get it right as I've seen the wrong pump on a Corvair from a Corvair vendor that was delivering 9.O PSI and causing mixture and flooding issues.
Two electric pumps that have a good reputation are: AirTex E8016S (2.5-4.5 PSI), and the Faucet 40105 (3.0-4.5 PSI). These pumps will deliver 4.5 PSI even when a Corvair is WOT (wide open throttle).
Not something I'd typically pick up from a casual internet search. Despite what seems to be our cultural norm, 'more' is not always better.
On a related topic, are the Corvair EOM style fuel pumps rebuildable? If so are rebuild kits still available?
1964 Corvair 900 (969) four door with powerglide - new project
-
bbodie52
- Corvair of the Month
- Posts: 11891
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:33 pm
- Location: Lake Chatuge Hayesville, NC
- Contact:
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
1962-69 FUEL PUMP REBUILD KITS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
I have found the Corvair mechanical fuel pumps to be very reliable (I have yet to have one fail, and I have been around Corvairs since 1961). Since they are unique in design for Corvairs only, keeping a spare mechanical fuel pump in the trunk might be wise, since they are unlikely to be in stock at most auto parts stores and having a spare on-hand can make a relatively simple roadside repair possible.
The Airtex and Facet electric fuel pumps previously mentioned are also of high quality and highly reliable. They are electromechanical in nature and can still fail. The installation of an electric fuel pump adds some complexity to your fuel system, and pressurizes the fuel line all the way from the fuel tank to the engine compartment (electric fuel pumps are generally designed to be installed close to the fuel source, and do not function very well if they are installed a long distance from the fuel tank). A safety switch should be included in the installation so that electrical power to the fuel pump will be cut if the engine dies (switch triggered by engine oil pressure). A fuel filter at the electric fuel pump inlet is also a good idea.
I have included a couple of mechanical fuel pump sources and electric fuel pump sources for comparison pricing, as shown below. An electric safety switch is also included…
http://www.corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog ... IN&page=65
Part number C3403: NON-GM FUEL PUMP-62-69 WILL FIT 60-61 IF ORDER C259 ROD
Weight: 2 lbs 4 oz
Catalog Pages(s): 65
Price:
1 - 1 $ 59.10
2+ $ 57.35
Part number C3403A: 62-69 FUEL PUMP REBUILD KITS ARE NOT AVAILABLE
Weight: 2 lbs 4 oz
Catalog Pages(s): 65
Price:
1 - 1 $ 71.00
2+ $ 67.45
Airtex Mechanical Fuel Pumps 4886
$39.97
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/atx- ... oC-lfw_wcB
Carter Mechanical Fuel Pumps M3988
$54.97
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/crt-m3988/overview/
Airtex External Electric Fuel Pumps E8016S
$27.44
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/atx-e8016s
Mr. Gasket Fuel Pump Safety Switches 7872
$20.98
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mrg-7872
ADAPT-A-BOLT: For your Corvair, this special bolt replaces the stock oil filter bolt and allows you to screw in an oil pressure switch, oil temperature, or oil pressure sender unit. It is ideal to allow for the installation of electric fuel pump safety switch.
http://www.corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog ... N&page=27D
Part number C7521: ADAPT-A-BOLT-STOCK FILTER* IF USING W/ OIL TEMP SENDER-NEED TO DRILL ADAPTOR DEEPER
Weight: 0 lbs 6 oz
Catalog Pages(s): 27D
Price: $ 24.90
Facet Cube Style 12 Volt Fuel Pump, 3 to 4.5 max psi
Part No: FAC-40105
$48.99
https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/produ ... oCJ_jw_wcB
I have found the Corvair mechanical fuel pumps to be very reliable (I have yet to have one fail, and I have been around Corvairs since 1961). Since they are unique in design for Corvairs only, keeping a spare mechanical fuel pump in the trunk might be wise, since they are unlikely to be in stock at most auto parts stores and having a spare on-hand can make a relatively simple roadside repair possible.
The Airtex and Facet electric fuel pumps previously mentioned are also of high quality and highly reliable. They are electromechanical in nature and can still fail. The installation of an electric fuel pump adds some complexity to your fuel system, and pressurizes the fuel line all the way from the fuel tank to the engine compartment (electric fuel pumps are generally designed to be installed close to the fuel source, and do not function very well if they are installed a long distance from the fuel tank). A safety switch should be included in the installation so that electrical power to the fuel pump will be cut if the engine dies (switch triggered by engine oil pressure). A fuel filter at the electric fuel pump inlet is also a good idea.
I have included a couple of mechanical fuel pump sources and electric fuel pump sources for comparison pricing, as shown below. An electric safety switch is also included…
http://www.corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog ... IN&page=65Part number C3403: NON-GM FUEL PUMP-62-69 WILL FIT 60-61 IF ORDER C259 ROD
Weight: 2 lbs 4 oz
Catalog Pages(s): 65
Price:
1 - 1 $ 59.10
2+ $ 57.35
Part number C3403A: 62-69 FUEL PUMP REBUILD KITS ARE NOT AVAILABLE
Weight: 2 lbs 4 oz
Catalog Pages(s): 65
Price:
1 - 1 $ 71.00
2+ $ 67.45
Airtex Mechanical Fuel Pumps 4886$39.97
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/atx- ... oC-lfw_wcB Carter Mechanical Fuel Pumps M3988$54.97
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/crt-m3988/overview/ Airtex External Electric Fuel Pumps E8016S$27.44
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/atx-e8016s Mr. Gasket Fuel Pump Safety Switches 7872$20.98
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mrg-7872ADAPT-A-BOLT: For your Corvair, this special bolt replaces the stock oil filter bolt and allows you to screw in an oil pressure switch, oil temperature, or oil pressure sender unit. It is ideal to allow for the installation of electric fuel pump safety switch.
http://www.corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog ... N&page=27DPart number C7521: ADAPT-A-BOLT-STOCK FILTER* IF USING W/ OIL TEMP SENDER-NEED TO DRILL ADAPTOR DEEPER
Weight: 0 lbs 6 oz
Catalog Pages(s): 27D
Price: $ 24.90
Facet Cube Style 12 Volt Fuel Pump, 3 to 4.5 max psiPart No: FAC-40105
$48.99
https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/produ ... oCJ_jw_wcBBrad Bodie
Lake Chatuge, North Carolina
1966 Corvair Corsa Convertible
Lake Chatuge, North Carolina
1966 Corvair Corsa ConvertibleRe: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
The original AC DELCO pumps have not been available for some time. A company bought the unique Corvair pump design rights and the first problem was a change from the AC DELCO aluminum casting to a zinc alloy (pot) metal. The new castings were not strong enough and failures resulted in a revised design (heavier). Eventually Air-Tex and Carter (possibly others) made Corvair replacement fuel pumps. The Air-Tex units were well regarded until they moved production to Mexico and quality issues (typically the check valves were not staked in place correctly and fell out) became an issue. The Corvair community worked with Air-Tex who decided to move the production back to the U.S.A. During the last couple of years it was found the spring pressure in the Air-Tex pumps was incorrect as the pumps were putting out about 9 PSI (instead of 4-5 PSI). At that point Air-Tex supposedly halted production of the Corvair pump, but it's been reported the pumps out at vendors were NOT recalled. So even today folks report they are buying Air-Tex pumps that have excessive fuel pressure (It can be fixed by dismantling the pump and cutting the spring and re-assembling). Not sure what the status is with Air-Tex now as I (and others) gave up and went to electric fuel pumps. It has been reported that Carter is also making a Corvair fuel pump, but I have no information about it.
If you replace the mechanical fuel pump with an electric you can buy a dummy plug from Clark's to install where the mechanical fuel pump was.
About electric fuel pumps. Be aware that Carter makes an electric fuel pump that looks identical to the Air-Tex electric unit, BUT it's LOUD in operation. I confirmed this myself.
If you replace the mechanical fuel pump with an electric you can buy a dummy plug from Clark's to install where the mechanical fuel pump was.
About electric fuel pumps. Be aware that Carter makes an electric fuel pump that looks identical to the Air-Tex electric unit, BUT it's LOUD in operation. I confirmed this myself.
-
bbodie52
- Corvair of the Month
- Posts: 11891
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:33 pm
- Location: Lake Chatuge Hayesville, NC
- Contact:
Re: 1964 four door automatic project by remote
I wonder if simply transferring the old spring from the original AC Delco pump to the new replacement mechanical pump would correct the excessive fuel pressure problem mentioned above. If the internal spring diameter is the same, the original spring might correct the problem. Alternatively, a fuel pressure regulator like the Holley unit below should ensure correct pressure feed to any Rochester H or Carter YH Corvair carburetor.Here is a link for ordering the recommended Holley fuel pressure regulator...
http://www.jegs.com/i/Holley/510/12-804 ... 1797507184Holley 12-804 - Holley Fuel Pressure Regulators — $30.41
Holley 510-12-804
Standard Pressure Regulator
Chrome Finish
For use with gasoline
Port Size: 3/8'' NPT Inlet/Outlet
1 to 4 PSI
Includes Mounting Bracket
The fuel pump plug already mentioned in the previous post leaves you with a plumbing problem when connecting an electric pump to a Corvair multi-carburetor setup. The more-expensive mechanical pump replacement plate provides both a mechanical pump seal an a fuel distribution block that makes use of the original carburetor steel tube fuel distribution plumbing.
http://www.corvair.com/user-cgi/catalog ... IN&page=66
Part number C5406: FUEL PUMP PLUG **COMES WITH C5607 REMOVE PUMP ROD FIRST
Weight: 0 lbs 4 oz
Catalog Pages(s): 66
Price: $15.10
[Part number C12879: FUEL PUMP BY PASS PLATE-STRAIGHT THROUGH WITH ELECTRIC PUMP
Weight: 0 lbs 8 oz
Catalog Pages(s): 66
Price: $47.25
Considering the cumulative cost of an electric pump, a safety switch, a mechanical pump by-pass plate, a fuel filter for the pump inlet, and other miscellaneous fuel line fittings and modifications, I still think it is cheaper and more efficient to stick with the original mechanical pump layout (and perhaps carry a new spare mechanical pump in the trunk).
Brad Bodie
Lake Chatuge, North Carolina
1966 Corvair Corsa Convertible
Lake Chatuge, North Carolina
1966 Corvair Corsa Convertible
Search CorvairForum
Calendar
Birthdays
Newest members
Corvair Vendors