Talk:Chevrolet Chevette

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Cars Portal This article is within the scope of Wikipedia Project Automobiles, a collective approach to creating a comprehensive guide to the world of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you are encouraged to visit the project page, where you can contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

I removed the brackets on Pontiac t-1000, as that is currently a redirect back to this article. Joyous 01:26, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Locking torque converter?

I've ridden in many Chevettes and Acadians over the past 20some years, and I don't recall any of them having a locking torque converter.

On early Chevettes (through 1978), a lock-up torque converter was on the "Turbo-Hydramatic 200" transmission. This was later replaced with a similiar 180-C model in 1979. They are somewhat rare as they were available as an option. That probably explains why you have not come across one. But it is true that a chevette/acadian can have said converter. ThePaper 07:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverts, 27 July

• Citation 1 ~ The link to the edmunds.com article clearly states "...it was no surprise that Chevrolet would introduce a front-drive machine in the empty spot in its lineup left when the Vega and Monza disappeared, just above the decrepit Chevette."
• Citation 2 ~ Sorry, what? http://sev2maryann.severnschool.com? Is this a student or teacher's personal website? Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources
• Citation 3 ~ Car Guide Magazine calls both the Cavalier and Chevette "compacts", but the Chevette was a subcompact car. Its wheelbase was...what? Five inches shorter than a Cavalier? See also Updating the Vehicle Class Categories, SAE 960897, Siddall & Day, which puts the Chevette in Class 1 and the Cavalier in Class 2.
• Citation 4 ~ The whole quote from Internet Auto Guide states "The Cobalt LT is not the address of driving excitement, however. It's not made for that, but rather for delivering four people comfortably, five only in a pinch, on a minimal outlay for fuel and monthly payments, a transportation appliance in the longtime Chevrolet mold of the Corvair, the Vega, the Chevette, the Monza, and most recently the Cavalier." It's merely stating that the Chevette and Cavalier were both low-cost four-seaters, not that one replaced the other.
• You stuck three references in a single citation. Please read WP:FOOT for instructions on how to properly format your references.
• The {{neutrality}} tag has been removed because no-one is biased for or against either the Cavalier or Chevette. The appropriate tag would be {{Disputed}}
• As already clarified at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page, the European Cavalier absolutely did not "replace" the Chevette. The Chevette was 1975-83, the Cavalier was 1976-94, and the two were concurrent models in different classes.
• Please stop using your edit summaries to attack other users. As per WP:ES#Use of edit summaries in disputes, "Avoid using edit summaries to carry on debates or negotiation over the content or to express opinions of the other users involved."

Article reverted to previous version by User:ApolloBoy. -- DeLarge 14:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, you can't just massive revert and dismiss several valid citation, and restore it with a POV that was unverified and uncited. Or least I won't let you do that even if your friends will. Gawd, all all the WP car people like that? If you are correct, it should be very simple to produce a citation of somebody , anybody who will say the Cavalier did not replace the Chevette. But I can't, and if all articles that have anything to say confirm that successor was Cavalir, if even one said otherwise, it would then be disputed, but if none can be found (I'm still waiting for one), that would mean.... you're wrong and I'm right?? --matador300 16:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

"General Motors has never achieved much success at the subcompact level, perhaps due to a lack of continuity in its product offerings. Since the demise of the Chevette in the mid-80's, that market slot has been filled at different times by such nameplates as Sprint, Metro, Optima, LeMans, Firefly, and the never-to-be-forgotten Asüna."

Source: http://caen.shipping.autos.moonport.com/vip/jedlicka.aspx?modelid=10721&src=vip

There you go. A good source, a very clear-cut citation that says Chevette -> Sprint -> Metro -> Aveo. --93JC 18:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

That's all very fine for the low end, and I don't dispute. Unlike you, I did not remove references to other successors, which removes significant information, which is vandalism if not done in good faith, though it didn't say what it is if it was just dumb rather than mean. But none of those forgettable cars replaced the slot with success such as the Cavalier, which which GM achieved a lot of success, in dollars if not respect from reviewers. Did you notice that every one of those articles names the Vega, Chevette, Cavalier sequence, but none include any of those smaller cars. Similar problem with the Spirit, somebody is going down market when the bulk of sales went upmarket. Your source does not contradict the Cavalier, it simply adds a different set and definition of successor. The Cavalier was the next successful Vega-descedent after the Cavalier, that much is pretty much a fact, now why 6 six different WP amateur editors are fighting to the death to not permit the WP saying what every other professional auto editor says just boggles my mind.

Read it again, Artie. The only source referring directly to the matter at hand and written by a professional auto editor, my source, says Chevette -> Sprint -> Metro -> Aveo. Again, it says:

"General Motors has never achieved much success at the subcompact level, perhaps due to a lack of continuity in its product offerings. Since the demise of the Chevette in the mid-80's, that market slot has been filled at different times by such nameplates as Sprint, Metro, Optima, LeMans, Firefly, and the never-to-be-forgotten Asüna."

No Cavalier. Cavalier didn't replace Chevette. It expressedly says "that market slot has been filled at different times by such nameplates as Sprint, Metro, Optima, LeMans, Firefly, and the never-to-be-forgotten Asüna." To the expressed exclusion of Cavalier. Cavalier never replaced Chevette. How many times and how many people will have to tell you over and over and over and over again before you get it? --93JC 20:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I've already pointed out your logical fallacy on the Cavalier talk page, but I'll reiterate it here:

"If you are correct, it should be very simple to produce a citation of somebody , anybody who will say the Cavalier did not replace the Chevette."

Find me a citation that says the Chevrolet Corvette did not replace the Chevette, and this time try to avoid references of the quality of Mr Yostl's cars on Mary Ann's Severn School webpage. Having trouble? Just because no-one has explicitly denied something doesn't automatically make it true.

Further (and this is very important), read WP:ES#Use of edit summaries in disputes and stop using your summaries to attack other editors or their work. Limit your comments to what you're doing, not why you're doing it. You're going to end up fulfilling the predictions of the mediator at your previous RfC at this rate. -- DeLarge 07:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You are both right, in a way. The Chevette was the international T-body, slotted below the Vega "J-body" in price and size (they were sold concurrently, and yes, I owned one of each, a '72 VEGA and an '81 Diesel Chevette). The Cavalier was the offficial "successor" to the Vega and was called within GM the J-body as well. The Cavalier and Chevette were also sold concurrently. So the Cavalier was technically the successor to the Vega, which had morphed into what John Delorean called the "Italian Vega" or Chevrolet Monza by the time the Cavalier was introduced (circa 1982?). See, e.g., "On a Clear Day, You Can See General Motors" (DeLorean) (Vega chapter).

As for "success" all of these cars made money for GM. The Cavaliar J-body was morphed several times and is now sold as the "Chevrolet Cobalt" largely unchanged underneath from its early 1980's introduction. Timkin bearings got the contract for the front wheel spindles (tapered roller pack bearings)on the J-car, while we (New Departure Hyatt) got the bid for the ball bearing "integrated spindles" on the X-body Citation et al. Unfortunatly, these spindles failed at around 70K miles, along with the brakes and struts, leaving Citation oweners with huge repair bills at that time. The Cavalier, on the other hand, could be counted on to go 150,000 miles before any major problems were ecountered. As "success" goes, the Cavalier was a sucess for its buyers as well.

The Chevette was not a bad design, and with RWD and a dual wishone suspension, it would handle reasonably well. The diesel model produced 55 mpg with regularity, something that still seems amazing 25 years later. As they tended to rust a lot less than the infamous Vega. Some have speculated that the Vega (and moreover any 73-74 model year GM car) tended to rust a lot as a result of the GM strike in '72. The folklore is that GM skimped on steel quality and/or rustproofing in order to recoup losses from the strike. Whether or not this is true is hard to quantify. The later built Vegas and particularly the Monzas did not tend to rust nearly as much as the earlier cars, though. FWIW. --RPB.

And yes, my Vega blew its engine at 40,000 miles, like most of them did. And rusted like boy howdy.

[edit] Fuel leak

On my 1978 Chevette, which I drove from 1980 to 1985, I was always having to retighten the worm clamps holding the filler hose to the gas tank -- if I did not, there would come a time when filling the car would just dump gas on my feet! And yet, one never heard of this problem; only about the Ford Pinto. Anyone had this experience?