Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Obama is over-taxed says his telepromter hypno-disk
Chief Egalitarian wrote:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...-word-res.html Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed' Probably a planted question to enable him to take up all the alloted time without answering any difficult questions. ...lew... |
#2
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Obama is over-taxed says his telepromter hypno-disk
On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 07:47:47 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick
scrawled the following: Chief Egalitarian wrote: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...-word-res.html Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed' Probably a planted question to enable him to take up all the alloted time without answering any difficult questions. ...lew... He used a Shrubism, too. "Misapprehensions". -- In order that people may be happy in their work, these three things are needed: They must be fit for it. They must not do too much of it. And they must have a sense of success in it. -- John Ruskin, Pre-Raphaelitism, 1850 |
#3
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Obama is over-taxed says his telepromter hypno-disk
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message ... On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 07:47:47 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: Chief Egalitarian wrote: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...-word-res.html Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed' Probably a planted question to enable him to take up all the alloted time without answering any difficult questions. ...lew... He used a Shrubism, too. "Misapprehensions". Of course. The most he could ever aspire to is to be like Bush. We had hope, oh well. |
#4
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too
AP / Carolyn Kaster Apr 5, 2010 By Chris Hedges Ralph Nader's descent from being one of the most respected and powerful men in the country to being a pariah illustrates the totality of the corporate coup. Nader's marginalization was not accidental. It was orchestrated to thwart the legislation that Nader and his allies-who once consisted of many in the Democratic Party-enacted to prevent corporate abuse, fraud and control. He was targeted to be destroyed. And by the time he was shut out of the political process with the election of Ronald Reagan, the government was in the hands of corporations. Nader's fate mirrors our own. "The press discovered citizen investigators around the mid-1960s," Nader told me when we spoke a few days ago. "I was one of them. I would go down with the press releases, the findings, the story suggestions and the internal documents and give it to a variety of reporters. I would go to Congress and generate hearings. Oftentimes I would be the lead witness. What was interesting was the novelty; the press gravitates to novelty. They achieved great things. There was collaboration. We provided the newsworthy material. They covered it. The legislation passed. Regulations were issued. Lives were saved. Other civic movements began to flower." Nader was singled out for destruction, as Henriette Mantel and Stephen Skrovan point out in their engaging documentary movie on Nader, "An Unreasonable Man." General Motors had him followed in an attempt to blackmail him. It sent an attractive woman to his neighborhood Safeway supermarket in a bid to meet him while he was shopping and then seduce him; the attempt failed, and GM, when exposed, had to issue a public apology. But far from ending their effort to destroy Nader, corporations unleashed a much more sophisticated and well-funded attack. In 1971, the corporate lawyer and future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell wrote an eight-page memo, titled "Attack on American Free Enterprise System," in which he named Nader as the chief nemesis of corporations. It became the blueprint for corporate resurgence. Powell's memo led to the establishment of the Business Roundtable, which amassed enough money and power to direct government policy and mold public opinion. The Powell memo outlined ways corporations could shut out those who, in "the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals," were hostile to corporate interests. Powell called for the establishment of lavishly funded think tanks and conservative institutes to churn out ideological tracts that attacked government regulation and environmental protection. His memo led to the successful effort to place corporate-friendly academics and economists in universities and on the airwaves, as well as drive out those in the public sphere who questioned the rise of unchecked corporate power and deregulation. It saw the establishment of organizations to monitor and pressure the media to report favorably on issues that furthered corporate interests. And it led to the building of legal organizations to promote corporate interests in the courts and appointment of sympathetic judges to the bench. "It was off to the races," Nader said. "You could hardly keep count of the number of right-wing corporate-funded think tanks. These think tanks specialized, especially against the tort system. We struggled through the Nixon and early Ford years, when inflation was a big issue. Nixon did things that horrified conservatives. He signed into law OSHA, the Environmental Protection Agency and air and water pollution acts because he was afraid of the people from the rumble that came out of the 1960s. He was the last Republican president to be afraid of liberals." The corporations carefully studied and emulated the tactics of the consumer advocate they wanted to destroy. "Ralph Nader came along and did serious journalism; that is what his early stuff was, such as 'Unsafe at Any Speed, " the investigative journalist David Cay Johnston told me. "The big books they [Nader and associates] put out were serious, first-rate journalism. Corporate America was terrified by this. They went to school on Nader. They said, 'We see how you do this.' You gather material, you get people who are articulate, you hone how you present this and the corporations copy-catted him with one big difference-they had no regard for the truth. Nader may have had a consumer ideology, but he was not trying to sell you a product. He is trying to tell the truth as best as he can determine it. It does not mean it is the truth. It means it is the truth as best as he and his people can determine the truth. And he told you where he was coming from." The Congress, between 1966 and 1973, passed 25 pieces of consumer legislation, nearly all of which Nader had a hand in authoring. The auto and highway safety laws, the meat and poultry inspection laws, the oil pipeline safety laws, the product safety laws, the update on flammable fabric laws, the air pollution control act, the water pollution control act, the EPA, OSHA and the Environmental Council in the White House transformed the political landscape. Nader by 1973 was named the fourth most influential person in the country after Richard Nixon, Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren and the labor leader George Meany. "Then something very interesting happened," Nader said. "The pressure of these meetings by the corporations like General Motors, the oil companies and the drug companies with the editorial people, and probably with the publishers, coincided with the emergence of the most destructive force to the citizen movement-Abe Rosenthal, the editor of The New York Times. Rosenthal was a right-winger from Canada who hated communism, came here and hated progressivism. The Times was not doing that well at the time. Rosenthal was commissioned to expand his suburban sections, which required a lot of advertising. He was very receptive to the entreaties of corporations, and he did not like me. I would give material to Jack Morris in the Washington bureau and it would not get in the paper." Rosenthal, who banned social critics such as Noam Chomsky from being quoted in the paper and met frequently for lunch with conservative icon William F. Buckley, demanded that no story built around Nader's research could be published unless there was a corporate response. Corporations, informed of Rosenthal's dictate, refused to comment on Nader's research. This tactic meant the stories were never published. The authority of the Times set the agenda for national news coverage. Once Nader disappeared from the Times, other major papers and the networks did not feel compelled to report on his investigations. It was harder and harder to be heard. "There was, before we were silenced, a brief, golden age of journalism," Nader lamented. "We worked with the press to expose corporate abuse on behalf of the public. We saved lives. This is what journalism should be about; it should be about making the world a better and safer place for our families and our children, but then it ended and we were shut out." "We were thrown on the defensive, and once we were on the defensive it was difficult to recover," Nader said. "The break came in 1979 when they deregulated natural gas. Our last national stand was for the Consumer Protection Agency. We put everything we had on that. We would pass it during the 1970s in the House on one year, then the Senate during the next session, then the House later on. It ping-ponged. Each time we would lose ground. We lost it because Carter, although he campaigned on it, did not lift a finger compared to what he did to deregulate natural gas. We lost it by 20 votes in the House, although we had a two-thirds majority in the Senate waiting for it. That was the real beginning of the decline. Then Reagan was elected. We tried to be the watchdog. We put out investigative reports. They would not be covered." "The press in the 1980s would say 'why should we cover you?' " Nader went on. " 'Who is your base in Congress?' I used to be known as someone who could trigger a congressional hearing pretty fast in the House and Senate. They started looking towards the neoliberals and neocons and the deregulation mania. We put out two reports on the benefits of regulation and they too disappeared. They did not get covered at all. This was about the same the time that [former U.S. Rep.] Tony Coelho taught the Democrats, starting in 1979 when he was head of the House Campaign Finance Committee, to start raising big-time money from corporate interests. And they did. It had a magical influence. It is the best example I have of the impact of money. The more money they raised the less interested they were in any of these popular issues. They made more money when they screwed up the tax system. There were a few little gains here and there; we got the Freedom of Information law through in 1974. And even in the 1980s we would get some things done, GSA, buying air bag-equipped cars, the drive for standardized air bags. We would defeat some things here and there, block a tax loophole and defeat a deregulatory move. We were successful in staunching some of the deregulatory efforts." Nader, locked out of the legislative process, decided to send a message to the Democrats. He went to New Hampshire and Massachusetts during the 1992 primaries and ran as "none of the above." In 1996 he allowed the Green Party to put his name on the ballot before running hard in 2000 in an effort that spooked the Democratic Party. The Democrats, fearful of his grass-roots campaign, blamed him for the election of George W. Bush, an absurdity that found fertile ground among those who had abandoned rational inquiry for the thought-terminating clichs of television. Nader's status as a pariah corresponded with an unchecked assault by corporations on the working class. The long-term unemployment rate, which in reality is close to 20 percent, the millions of foreclosures, the crippling personal debts that plague households, the personal bankruptcies, Wall Street's looting of the U.S. Treasury, the evaporation of savings and retirement accounts and the crumbling of the country's vital infrastructure are taking place as billions in taxpayer subsidies, obscene profits, bonuses and compensation are enjoyed by the corporate overlords. We will soon be forced to buy the defective products of the government-subsidized drug and health insurance companies, which will remain free to raise co-payments and premiums, especially if policyholders get seriously ill. The oil, gas, coal and nuclear power companies have made a mockery of Barack Obama's promises to promote clean, renewal energy. And we are rapidly becoming a third-world country, cannibalized by corporations, with two-thirds of the population facing financial difficulty and poverty. The system is broken. And the consumer advocate who represented the best of our democracy was broken with it. As Nader pointed out after he published "Unsafe at Any Speed" in 1965, it took nine months to federally regulate the auto industry for safety and fuel efficiency. Two years after the collapse of Bear Stearns there is still no financial reform. The large hedge funds and banks are using billions in taxpayer subsidies to once again engage in the speculative games that triggered the first financial crisis and will almost certainly trigger a second. The corporate press, which abets our vast historical amnesia, does nothing to remind us how we got here. It speaks in the hollow and empty slogans handed to it by public relations firms, its corporate paymasters and the sound-bite society. "If you organize 1 percent of the people in this country along progressive lines you can turn the country around, as long as you give them infrastructure," Nader said. "They represent a large percentage of the population. Take all the conservatives who work in Wal-Mart: How many would be against a living wage? Take all the conservatives who have pre-existing conditions: How many would be for single-payer not-for-profit health insurance? When you get down to the concrete, when you have an active movement that is visible and media-savvy, when you have a community, a lot of people will join. And lots more will support it. The problem is that most liberals are estranged from the working class. They largely have the good jobs. They are not hurting." "The real tragedy is that citizens' movements should not have to rely on the commercial media, and public television and radio are disgraceful-if anything they are worse," Nader said. "In 30-some years [Bill] Moyers has had me on [only] twice. We can't rely on the public media. We do what we can with Amy [Goodman] on "Democracy Now!" and Pacifica stations. When I go to local areas I get very good press, TV and newspapers, but that doesn't have the impact, even locally. The national press has enormous impact on the issues. It is not pleasant having to say this. You don't want to telegraph that you have been blacked out, but on the other hand you can't keep it quiet. The right wing has won through intimidation." |
#5
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 22:50:58 -0500, "William Wixon"
wrote: Ralph Nader's descent from being one of the most respected and powerful men in the country to being a pariah illustrates the totality of the corporate coup. Nader was/is a loon. It wasnt the corps that determined that..it was the voters. Gunner "First Law of Leftist Debate The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot, homophobe approaches infinity. This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to the subject." Grey Ghost |
#6
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar
is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. ...lew... |
#7
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick
scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. -- Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop away from you like the leaves of Autumn. -- John Muir |
#8
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Apr 8, 12:58*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 22:50:58 -0500, "William Wixon" wrote: Ralph Nader's descent from being one of the most respected and powerful men in the country to being a pariah illustrates the totality of the corporate coup. Nader was/is a loon. It wasnt the corps that determined that..it was the voters. Gunner "First Law of Leftist Debate The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot, homophobe approaches infinity. This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to the subject." *Grey Ghost Maybe, or maybe not, but in regards to the corporatization of America and corporate control of the gov't, it's pretty accurate. Dave |
#9
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 07:45:50 -0700 (PDT), Dave__67
wrote: On Apr 8, 12:58*am, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 22:50:58 -0500, "William Wixon" wrote: Ralph Nader's descent from being one of the most respected and powerful men in the country to being a pariah illustrates the totality of the corporate coup. Nader was/is a loon. It wasnt the corps that determined that..it was the voters. Gunner "First Law of Leftist Debate The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot, homophobe approaches infinity. This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to the subject." *Grey Ghost Maybe, or maybe not, but in regards to the corporatization of America and corporate control of the gov't, it's pretty accurate. But the part about them turning the loon into a pariah was a lie. And that was the gest of the article. Gunner Dave "First Law of Leftist Debate The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot, homophobe approaches infinity. This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to the subject." Grey Ghost |
#10
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Obama is over-taxed says his telepromter hypno-disk
On Apr 4, 5:18*pm, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 07:47:47 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: Chief Egalitarian wrote: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...inute-2500-wor.... Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed' Probably a planted question to enable him to take up all the alloted time without answering any difficult questions. * *...lew... He used a Shrubism, too. *"Misapprehensions". Perhaps one of the cases where Bush spoke over your head. It's a perfectly acceptable word. mis·ap·pre·hend (m*s-āp'r*-hěnd') tr.v. mis·ap·pre·hend·ed, mis·ap·pre·hend·ing, mis·ap·pre·hends To apprehend incorrectly; misunderstand. mis·ap'pre·hen'sion (-hěn'shən) n. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition |
#11
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Obama is over-taxed says his telepromter hypno-disk
"rangerssuck" wrote in message ... On Apr 4, 5:18 pm, Larry Jaques wrote: On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 07:47:47 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: Chief Egalitarian wrote: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...inute-2500-wor... Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed' Probably a planted question to enable him to take up all the alloted time without answering any difficult questions. ...lew... He used a Shrubism, too. "Misapprehensions". Perhaps one of the cases where Bush spoke over your head. It's a perfectly acceptable word. mis·ap·pre·hend (m*s-āp'r*-hěnd') tr.v. mis·ap·pre·hend·ed, mis·ap·pre·hend·ing, mis·ap·pre·hends To apprehend incorrectly; misunderstand. mis·ap'pre·hen'sion (-hěn'shən) n. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition No doubt just one of many cases. |
#12
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
Larry Jaques wrote in
: On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. Yahbut he hadn't bought his Momma a VW! He'd bought her a Corvair and refused to abide by the tire pressure requirements as specified in the Owner's Manual. This resulted in poor control of the vehicle since the "30 Pounds All Around" didn't work with the '60-'64 'Vairs. |
#13
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Obama is over-taxed says his telepromter hypno-disk
Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 07:47:47 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: Chief Egalitarian wrote: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...-word-res.html Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed' Probably a planted question to enable him to take up all the alloted time without answering any difficult questions. ...lew... He used a Shrubism, too. "Misapprehensions". The "Shrubism" was "missunderesimate". "Misapprehensions" is a word. -- John R. Carroll |
#14
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"RAM" writes:
Larry Jaques wrote in : On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. Yahbut he hadn't bought his Momma a VW! He'd bought her a Corvair and refused to abide by the tire pressure requirements as specified in the Owner's Manual. This resulted in poor control of the vehicle since the "30 Pounds All Around" didn't work with the '60-'64 'Vairs. He also wrote "Small -- On Safety", an equally ridiculous indictment of the Beetle. -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin) |
#15
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
Joe Pfeiffer wrote in
: He also wrote "Small -- On Safety", an equally ridiculous indictment of the Beetle. Having written him off as a cheap shyster for his defamation of the 'Vair, forever after I've been unable to understand why anyone would ever give him any credence whatsoever. In fact, he's continued to lower himself in my estimation. |
#16
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Lewis Hartswick" wrote in message ... I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. ...lew... Did you ever read it, Lew? Or did you read *about* it? -- Ed Huntress |
#17
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:29:27 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote: On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. No that is not correct. Nader wrote Unsafe at any Speed, which was pretty much a hatchet job to the extent that totally incorrect statements were made and even a sketch of how a swing axle works was deliberately drawn showing the outside wheel in a turn tipping inward at the bottom, "tuck under" as Nader preferred to it when in fact it does exactly the opposite, although if you do not understand how the suspension works it might appear to be correct. Although his engineering was wrong and Corvairs were fairly competitive in SCCA racing, (apparently on the track the suspension worked perfectly well :-) the public bought the book and the Corvair was a dead duck. Nader then wrote a book about the Volkswagen Bug using much the same tactics that had been so successful in the first book. However, this time Road and Track, and probably other main line car magazines wrote rebuttals. I read the Road and Tack article and it demonstrated that Nader's engineering was faulty, his many quotes, mainly taken from N.Y. State Police reports, were either taken out of context, cherry picked for effect or partially quoted, and in fact little in his book was accurate of true. In short they did to Nader what Nader did to the Corvair. Since then I haven't heard much about Nader, but of course I haven't been looking to :-) Cheers, John D. (jdslocombatgmail) |
#18
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"John" wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:29:27 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. No that is not correct. Nader wrote Unsafe at any Speed, which was pretty much a hatchet job to the extent that totally incorrect statements were made and even a sketch of how a swing axle works was deliberately drawn showing the outside wheel in a turn tipping inward at the bottom, "tuck under" as Nader preferred to it when in fact it does exactly the opposite, although if you do not understand how the suspension works it might appear to be correct. Ah, John, no. I hesitate to interfere with your trashing of Nader g, but he was correct. It was commonly called "jacking" among the sports car fraternity. Anyone who drove an early VW, Corvair, Triumph Spitfire, or box-stock Porsche 356 (including the original Speedster) will be glad to relate some horror stories about it for you. d8-) Some older chassis books can explain and illustrate the same thing. If you were actively driving sports cars around, say, 1965, you were very familiar with it. Although his engineering was wrong and Corvairs were fairly competitive in SCCA racing, (apparently on the track the suspension worked perfectly well :-) the public bought the book and the Corvair was a dead duck. Um, the early Corvair was not really competitive. I drove my '63 Monza with full John Fitch conversion in my first SCCA driver's school, at Lime Rock Park, in '69. I quickly switched to my other car -- an Alfa Romeo. You may be thinking of the Yenko Stinger, which was a highly modified *later* Corvair, which did not have the swing axles. Nader then wrote a book about the Volkswagen Bug using much the same tactics that had been so successful in the first book. However, this time Road and Track, and probably other main line car magazines wrote rebuttals. I read the Road and Tack article and it demonstrated that Nader's engineering was faulty, his many quotes, mainly taken from N.Y. State Police reports, were either taken out of context, cherry picked for effect or partially quoted, and in fact little in his book was accurate of true. In short they did to Nader what Nader did to the Corvair. Since then I haven't heard much about Nader, but of course I haven't been looking to :-) Cheers, John D. (jdslocombatgmail) |
#19
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote: "John" wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:29:27 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. No that is not correct. Nader wrote Unsafe at any Speed, which was pretty much a hatchet job to the extent that totally incorrect statements were made and even a sketch of how a swing axle works was deliberately drawn showing the outside wheel in a turn tipping inward at the bottom, "tuck under" as Nader preferred to it when in fact it does exactly the opposite, although if you do not understand how the suspension works it might appear to be correct. That's correct. I had an auto-mechanic friend in the 1970s who loved Corvairs, and he had experienced the tuck-under phenomena. The solution was to install the standard "sports package", which cost a few hundred dollars and included some kind of torsion or stabilizer bar between the front wheels. He was of mixed mind on Unsafe at Any Speed. On the one hand, he considered the book to be wrong. On the other hand, it drove the cost of Corvairs down, allowing him to buy more than one. Ah, John, no. I hesitate to interfere with your trashing of Nader g, but he was correct. It was commonly called "jacking" among the sports car fraternity. Anyone who drove an early VW, Corvair, Triumph Spitfire, or box-stock Porsche 356 (including the original Speedster) will be glad to relate some horror stories about it for you. d8-) Some older chassis books can explain and illustrate the same thing. If you were actively driving sports cars around, say, 1965, you were very familiar with it. I recall reading these explanations, but no longer recall the details. I don't recall that it was called "jacking", though. My friend didn't call it that, if I recall. Joe Gwinn |
#20
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 18:20:40 +0700, the infamous John
scrawled the following: On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:29:27 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. No that is not correct. Nader wrote Unsafe at any Speed, which was pretty much a hatchet job to the extent that totally incorrect statements were made and even a sketch of how a swing axle works was deliberately drawn showing the outside wheel in a turn tipping inward at the bottom, "tuck under" as Nader preferred to it when in fact it does exactly the opposite, although if you do not understand how the suspension works it might appear to be correct. Although his engineering was wrong and Corvairs were fairly competitive in SCCA racing, (apparently on the track the suspension worked perfectly well :-) the public bought the book and the Corvair was a dead duck. But corvairs did tend to toggle from understeer to oversteer without warning, and my friend proved it to me (after fifteen "SLOW DOWN" warnings) while I necked in the back seat with sweet Carmen. He spun us a full 360 and sent my convertible into a 50 degree tip against a small bank directly in line with a telephone pole. If he'd been going just a few miles per hour faster, it probably would have killed all 4 of us. (Phil Dumbucks, you were a jerk!) Needless to say, he never drove my vehicles again. I continued to haul ass in my 'Vair, but I knew her limits. I had glasspacks on the first one (bright red) and would drive up to within 30' of friends and pedestrians, shut the key off, then turn the inition key ON when I got next to them. All the raw gas going into the cylinder and out into the exhause would cause an explosion within the mufflers which would scare the hell out of 'em. The Corvair M-80. I bought it from a CHP officer who had put 100lbs of sand in the trunk to stabilize it and had really kept her up. She was quieter on the freeway at 90mph than Mom's '63 Lincoln Continental, though I preferred borrowing the Lincoln for the drive-in movies. You could put the front seat all the way back and put your feet up on the dash (for warmups), and it was wide enough to lay all the way down in. 4 kids could horizontally bop in one. Ah, to be 19 again... Nader then wrote a book about the Volkswagen Bug using much the same tactics that had been so successful in the first book. However, this time Road and Track, and probably other main line car magazines wrote rebuttals. I read the Road and Tack article and it demonstrated that Nader's engineering was faulty, his many quotes, mainly taken from N.Y. State Police reports, were either taken out of context, cherry picked for effect or partially quoted, and in fact little in his book was accurate of true. In short they did to Nader what Nader did to the Corvair. g I hadn't heard about the VW book. Since then I haven't heard much about Nader, but of course I haven't been looking to :-) You don't read the ballot sheets, eh? He ran for the POTUS position. -- Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop away from you like the leaves of Autumn. -- John Muir |
#21
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
John writes:
Nader then wrote a book about the Volkswagen Bug using much the same tactics that had been so successful in the first book. However, this time Road and Track, and probably other main line car magazines wrote rebuttals. I read the Road and Tack article and it demonstrated that Nader's engineering was faulty, his many quotes, mainly taken from N.Y. State Police reports, were either taken out of context, cherry picked for effect or partially quoted, and in fact little in his book was accurate of true. In short they did to Nader what Nader did to the Corvair. Not quite -- the rebuttals were well-reasoned and factual. -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin) |
#22
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
Joseph Gwinn wrote:
In article , "Ed Huntress" wrote: "John" wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:29:27 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. No that is not correct. Nader wrote Unsafe at any Speed, which was pretty much a hatchet job to the extent that totally incorrect statements were made and even a sketch of how a swing axle works was deliberately drawn showing the outside wheel in a turn tipping inward at the bottom, "tuck under" as Nader preferred to it when in fact it does exactly the opposite, although if you do not understand how the suspension works it might appear to be correct. That's correct. I had an auto-mechanic friend in the 1970s who loved Corvairs, and he had experienced the tuck-under phenomena. The solution was to install the standard "sports package", which cost a few hundred dollars and included some kind of torsion or stabilizer bar between the front wheels. Camber Compensator at the back limited the droop of the rear wheels He was of mixed mind on Unsafe at Any Speed. On the one hand, he considered the book to be wrong. On the other hand, it drove the cost of Corvairs down, allowing him to buy more than one. the other big problem, according to the book, was the steering column and steering box extended far in front of the front axle. In a frontal crash, the column drove the steering wheel back and up into the driver's chest. |
#23
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message ... In article , "Ed Huntress" wrote: "John" wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:29:27 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:20:07 -0600, the infamous Lewis Hartswick scrawled the following: I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. Yeah, he castrated GM while allowing the VW to go unpunished, despite the fact that they had more problems than the Corvair, including the extreme tendency for several to set themselves on fire almost as an almost daily practice. No that is not correct. Nader wrote Unsafe at any Speed, which was pretty much a hatchet job to the extent that totally incorrect statements were made and even a sketch of how a swing axle works was deliberately drawn showing the outside wheel in a turn tipping inward at the bottom, "tuck under" as Nader preferred to it when in fact it does exactly the opposite, although if you do not understand how the suspension works it might appear to be correct. That's correct. I had an auto-mechanic friend in the 1970s who loved Corvairs, and he had experienced the tuck-under phenomena. The solution was to install the standard "sports package", which cost a few hundred dollars and included some kind of torsion or stabilizer bar between the front wheels. The front stabilizer would limit oversteer (by inducing understeer), but it didn't prevent jacking. For that, you needed the rear stabilizer bar, and/or shorter rear springs to decamber the rear end. I conquered it on my '63 with a combination of a stiff rear stabilizer and the John Fitch decambering springs (negative 2-1/2 degrees.; it ate a set of tires in a month or two, no kidding). But the stiff rear bar induced oversteer. It was a tradeoff: I knew the rear end was coming around, but the trade was that I could predict *when* it was coming around. When a swing-axle car jacks, it's a violent transition, often with little warning. He was of mixed mind on Unsafe at Any Speed. On the one hand, he considered the book to be wrong. On the other hand, it drove the cost of Corvairs down, allowing him to buy more than one. Ah, John, no. I hesitate to interfere with your trashing of Nader g, but he was correct. It was commonly called "jacking" among the sports car fraternity. Anyone who drove an early VW, Corvair, Triumph Spitfire, or box-stock Porsche 356 (including the original Speedster) will be glad to relate some horror stories about it for you. d8-) Some older chassis books can explain and illustrate the same thing. If you were actively driving sports cars around, say, 1965, you were very familiar with it. I recall reading these explanations, but no longer recall the details. I don't recall that it was called "jacking", though. My friend didn't call it that, if I recall. Joe Gwinn There's a force couple which, all by itself, would make the outside wheel tuck under into positive camber, every time you went around a corner. It's partly offset by body roll, which makes the outer spring compress and induces negative camber. The transition from one to the other can occur suddenly and it can be severe. The better your tires, the worse the problem. Radial tires killed swing axles; with Michelins on a stock-suspension Corvair, you could jack the ass-end of the car up in the air with the greatest of ease. -- Ed Huntress |
#24
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Lewis Hartswick" wrote in message ... I didn't read the whole tirade but Ralph Nadar is/was an IDIOT. He lost all credibility when he wrote " Unsafe at any Speed". What a load of BS. ...lew... Did you ever read it, Lew? Or did you read *about* it? I read some of it. Couldn't stand to do the rest. ...lew... |
#25
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
Lewis Hartswick wrote:
Did you ever read it, Lew? Or did you read *about* it? I read some of it. Couldn't stand to do the rest. ...lew... I read it, the latter Corvairs were safer, too late to save the brand. Compared to today, the 60's cars are death traps for the most part. Wes |
#26
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Wes" wrote in message ... Lewis Hartswick wrote: Did you ever read it, Lew? Or did you read *about* it? I read some of it. Couldn't stand to do the rest. ...lew... I read it, the latter Corvairs were safer, too late to save the brand. Compared to today, the 60's cars are death traps for the most part. Wes The pre-'65s were the ones with the swing axles, and a frame that had serious weaknesses in the central bay. The swing axle was just fine for moderate driving. But, pressed hard, the car was a wild thing that took some experience to handle. On the racetrack it absolutely needed heavy modifications. (I spun mine at Old Bridge Speedway in NJ, even with a bunch of modifications, because, en extremis, the rearward weight bias took over and that was all she wrote). In '64, there was a factory-installed transverse spring that had the same effect as a stabilizer bar -- it reduced the tendency for the suspension to jack. Starting in '65, the car had a better unibody and they went to a four-link rear suspension that was functionally the same as double wishbones. At the time, it was the most advanced suspension on any US-built car, along with the Corvette. But GM screwed the pooch by putting up so much resistance to Nader's assault, particularly by trying to entrap him with a prostitute and some other underhanded things. I think the Corvair could have weathered it all, but trust in the company was shot to hell. -- Ed Huntress |
#27
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... "Wes" wrote in message ... Lewis Hartswick wrote: Did you ever read it, Lew? Or did you read *about* it? I read some of it. Couldn't stand to do the rest. ...lew... I read it, the latter Corvairs were safer, too late to save the brand. Compared to today, the 60's cars are death traps for the most part. Wes The pre-'65s were the ones with the swing axles, and a frame that had serious weaknesses in the central bay. The swing axle was just fine for moderate driving. But, pressed hard, the car was a wild thing that took some experience to handle. On the racetrack it absolutely needed heavy modifications. (I spun mine at Old Bridge Speedway in NJ, even with a bunch of modifications, because, en extremis, the rearward weight bias took over and that was all she wrote). In '64, there was a factory-installed transverse spring that had the same effect as a stabilizer bar -- it reduced the tendency for the suspension to jack. Starting in '65, the car had a better unibody and they went to a four-link rear suspension that was functionally the same as double wishbones. At the time, it was the most advanced suspension on any US-built car, along with the Corvette. But GM screwed the pooch by putting up so much resistance to Nader's assault, particularly by trying to entrap him with a prostitute and some other underhanded things. I think the Corvair could have weathered it all, but trust in the company was shot to hell. -- Ed Huntress Corvair was never going to survive "unsafe at any speed". Nader found an easy target and hit a bull's-eye. Same suspension on the original VW bug. And the Bug was top heavy. But the bug was loved, and Nader would have shot himself writing the same book about the VW. VW and Corvair finally added the same thing Empi had been furnishing for years. The Camber Compensator. Don Yenco and the Corvair Stinger did very well at speed. But by then there was the 4 wheel indepent suspension similar to the Corvette. Corvair was always going to oversteer. Nature of the rear engine, just like a front engine car will always understeer. At least without judicious power application. As to spinning on a race track. Only way to prevent that is not to push a cars limits. My B Production Vette did a few spins over the years. Mostly my trying to go 5 mph faster than physics allowed. :) |
#28
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Obama is over-taxed says his telepromter hypno-disk
On 4/4/2010 6:47 AM, Lewis Hartswick wrote:
Chief Egalitarian wrote: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/...-word-res.html Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed' Probably a planted question to enable him to take up all the alloted time without answering any difficult questions. ...lew... I doubt it. That's a trick Bush would have done but Obama doesn't need to pull that kind of stunt because he's got the answers to the questions. What he should have done when presented with such a simplistic and ignorant question is just said no, Americans aren't overtaxed. Anyone who has seen a list of where countries rank in regard to taxation would already know that the U.S. is on of the least taxed countries in the industrial world. I happened to be watching that event and heard the whole thing myself. What really happened was that Obama just used that woman's question as a springboard to go into a mini speech about a subject that he wanted to present to the audience. He went into great detail about a number of different issues besides whether we are taxed too much or not. If you had seen it in person it wasn't like he was taking 17 minutes to answer that simple question. He just took that question and went into detail in a number of different directions. But if all you are doing islooking for a way to criticize Obama and you didn't see it yourself, then I guess this was a good opportunity for you. Hawke |
#29
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Ed Huntress" wrote:
I read it, the latter Corvairs were safer, too late to save the brand. Compared to today, the 60's cars are death traps for the most part. Wes The pre-'65s were the ones with the swing axles, and a frame that had serious weaknesses in the central bay. The swing axle was just fine for moderate driving. But, pressed hard, the car was a wild thing that took some experience to handle. On the racetrack it absolutely needed heavy modifications. (I spun mine at Old Bridge Speedway in NJ, even with a bunch of modifications, because, en extremis, the rearward weight bias took over and that was all she wrote). In '64, there was a factory-installed transverse spring that had the same effect as a stabilizer bar -- it reduced the tendency for the suspension to jack. Okay, going for a rewrite on this reply, you will never see my first attempt Racing tends to uncover handling qualities that Joe Blow only learns about when something on the roadway causes him to explore the limits of his vehicle with no prior experience. I *still* haven't got used to driving a front wheel drive though mentally I can force myself to perform the counter intuitive 'right' response when I find myself at the edges of the envelope. I *DON'T* like it though. Starting in '65, the car had a better unibody and they went to a four-link rear suspension that was functionally the same as double wishbones. At the time, it was the most advanced suspension on any US-built car, along with the Corvette. GM did get it right at the end. I still like the looks of that car. A VeeDub on steroids But GM screwed the pooch by putting up so much resistance to Nader's assault, particularly by trying to entrap him with a prostitute and some other underhanded things. I think the Corvair could have weathered it all, but trust in the company was shot to hell. Company or the car? I don't care much for GM vehicles, I know, I drive a Saturn but that was from the Spring Hill days. Everyone that my family has owned for an extended period of time has had brake lines rust out and burst. How hard is that to correct? Sir would you like to pay 5 bucks more for decent plating? Nader isn't my cup of tea though when he gets a shot on the news programs, I'll give him a listen. He seems to have a bit of corporate hatred while having invested his income streams in the market and doing okay. Ralph isn't poor. Sometimes I think him a bit hypocritical but that is my opinion. Wes |
#30
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On 4/9/2010 7:33 AM, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
writes: Nader then wrote a book about the Volkswagen Bug using much the same tactics that had been so successful in the first book. However, this time Road and Track, and probably other main line car magazines wrote rebuttals. I read the Road and Tack article and it demonstrated that Nader's engineering was faulty, his many quotes, mainly taken from N.Y. State Police reports, were either taken out of context, cherry picked for effect or partially quoted, and in fact little in his book was accurate of true. In short they did to Nader what Nader did to the Corvair. Not quite -- the rebuttals were well-reasoned and factual. This is the same thing that has gone on for decades. You criticize business at your own peril. They play for keeps. Nader's criticisms of American car makers were right on the button. They made unsafe cars and couldn't care less. They wouldn't even put seat belts in cars until the government made them. You go up against the business world and they will destroy you. Ask the guy who blew the whistle on the tobacco industry. Now they've gotten rid of the number one consumer protector. It's just like with this coal mine disaster. The company running it has been violating safety rules left and right and now 29 guys are dead. I heard a mine safety expert today explain that in the last few years about fifty miners have been killed in 5 different coal mine accidents. But guess what? All the mines where the deaths happened were nonunionized mines. Try going up against them and see what happens to you. Nothing has changed. Businesses have been getting workers killed and maimed for years and if you try to get in their way like Nader did, or anyone else tries to do, they will get you. The mine expert also said that coal mining was not dangerous anymore, at least in union mines, and that the year before was the safest on record...if your company had a union. If not, fifty dead in five years. Those non union coal companies really look out for their workers, don't they? Just like the auto companies really cared about drivers' safety? Yeah, like not at all. Hawke |
#31
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:06:42 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote: snip Corvair was never going to survive "unsafe at any speed". Nader found an easy target and hit a bull's-eye. Same suspension on the original VW bug. And the Bug was top heavy. But the bug was loved, and Nader would have shot himself writing the same book about the VW. snip ======= True, but the VW was never sold as a sport scar or with a factory installed turbo. Corvair Engine power ranged from 80 to 180 HP, while VW ranged from 25 to 54. In hindsight, it was a corporate cost cutting move to save 6.00$ by eliminating the front anti-roll bar that doomed the Corvair, although its marketing as some sort of inexpensive performance/sportscar, ala Porsche and its targeted sale to younger first time [more sporty] drivers was also a considerable contributing factor. A major Corvair design flaw was the factory inclusion of far too powerful an engine for the chassis, suspension and brakes, compounded with skimping on materials such as heat resistant engine o-rings. While GMC may have saved a few up-front dollars, this cost the new Corvair owners dearly, and ultimately trashed what had the potential to be a long running money maker. It appears that even at this early date [c. 1962-64], internal sabotage was rife at GM, and absolutely nothing was learned about "penny wise, pound foolish" cost savings from the Corvair debacle. The Vega [*NOT* designed by Chevrolet] is an example of this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Vega snip Chevrolet and Pontiac divisions were working separately on small cars in the early and mid '60s. Ed Cole, who was GM executive vice-president of operating staffs, was working on his own small-car project using the corporate engineering and design staffs. He presented the program to GM's president in 1967. When the corporation started seriously talking about a mini-car, Cole's version was chosen with the proposals from Chevy and Pontiac rejected, and Cole's new mini-car was given to Chevrolet to sell. Not only did corporate management make the decision to enter the mini-car market, it also decided to develop the car itself. It was a corporate car, not a divisional one. snip Opel was commissioned to tool up a new 3-speed derivative of their production 4-speed manual transmission. Opel had a 4-speed available that was in high-volume production, but the GM finance department insisted that the base transmission be a low-cost 3-speed, with the traditional profit-generating 4-speed as an extra-cost option. Opel did just that, and tooled up a new 3-speed from scratch, just for the Vega application, whose actual cost was higher than the optional 4-speed due to the tooling investment and low production volume. Both transmissions came by ship from Germany 100 transmissions to a crate, and arrived in shipments of thousands of transmissions at a time.[14] snip Although the optional L-11 engine with 2-barrel Weber carburetor became a mainstream part of the program in December, 1968 (and ran at a 75% level in production), the Chevrolet engine group had an intense dislike for the tall iron cylinder head with its unusual tappet arrangement and side-flow Heron combustion chamber design that had been thrust on them from engineering staff, and set out to design their own. The design evolved rapidly as a crossflow aluminum head with a single centrally-mounted overhead camshaft and roller rocker arms operating intake valves on one side and exhaust valves on the other, remarkably similar to the Ferrari V-12 cylinder head design of that period; it was almost 4 lower than the production head, was a lot lighter, had true hemi chambers with big valves, and made excellent power. Numerous prototypes were built, and manufacturing tooling was started in anticipation of approval for production. The real story never came out, but some combination of corporate politics (You dont need another cylinder head mine will work just fine) and additional program investment killed the program. Had it gone to production, it would not have had the differential expansion head gasket problems that plagued the iron-head engine, and would have provided significantly higher performance than the optional L-11 engine.[14] snip Jerry L Brockstein, assistant to Henry Haga, head of the Camaro/Corvette studio where the Vega prototype was restyled, recalls finalizing the Vega bodies: "Chevrolet was trying to build this car as cheaply as possible and wanted us to take a lot of money out of it. At first the metal was so thin on the Kammback wagon that in the test facilty it kept buckling under its own weight, as Fisher Body had to come back and put stiffening ribs in the roof." The prototype wagon body being less rigid than the coupes.[94] John DeLorean stated: N.B. =="The first prototype was sent to the GM proving grounds for durability testing. After only eight miles on the Belgian blocks, it broke in two.== {emphasis added} http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair snip The base 95 hp (71 kW) and optional 110 hp (82 kW) engines were carried forward from 1964. The previous 150 hp (112 kW) Spyder engine was replaced by the normally-aspirated 140 hp (104 kW) for the new Corsa. The engine was unusual in offering four single-throat carburetors, to which were added larger valves and a dual exhaust system; The 180 hp (134 kW) turbocharged engine was optional on the Corsa, which offered either standard three-speed or optional (US$92) four-speed manual transmissions.[12] The 140 hp (104 kW) engine was optional on 500 and Monza models with manual or Powerglide transmissions. snip Although the Corvair was a competent handling vehicle as delivered from the factory, "the average buyer more accustomed to front-engined cars, did not take [into] account the car's different handling characteristics."[18] Due to the swing axle design the rear tires would undergo large camber changes during fast cornering. These characteristics were quite similar to many imported cars, such as Mercedes and Volkswagen, which also used swing axle rear suspensions with similar handling attributes. The criticism of the 1960-'63 Corvair handling was not entirely groundless as some cost-cutting was applied to these early Corvair models, specifically, in the lack of an anti-roll bar. Chevrolet had considered adding a front anti-roll bar for the original 1960 car, which would have shifted a significant part of the weight transfer to the front outboard tire and reduced the rear slip angles considerably in severe cornering. N.B. ==Unfortunately, Chevrolet decided that the extra cost ($6 per car is often cited), with the confidence in tire pressures adequately compensating for the inclination for oversteer- led them to delete the front antiroll bar from production models.== {emphasis added} They used different recommended low front and high rear tire pressures to combat the oversteer. As the Corvair was designed to avoid terminal oversteer by using very low air pressure in the front tires, typically 15 to 19 pounds per square inch (100 to 130 kPa), so that they would begin to understeer (increase slip angles faster than the rear) before the swing axle oversteer would come into play, this pressure was quite adequate for the very light-weight Corvair front end on the relatively wide (6.50-13) tires. However owners and mechanics, either through ignorance of the necessity for this pressure differential between front and rear or thinking that the pressure was too low for the front, would frequently inflate the front tires to current "average" pressures. If this pressure difference was not maintained, in very hard cornering, the rear slip angles would exceed the front slip angles, and could lead to oversteer at high speeds. The antiroll bar did become available as an option in 1962, and was finally made standard in 1964. 1964 swing axle with transverse leaf spring & 1965 four link fully-independent suspension Although much is said about jacking (tendency for swing axle suspensions to go into very severe positive camber in extreme corners), the bias ply tires used at the time were very insensitive to camber and did not significantly reduce cornering grip (unlike radial tires).Although Nader arguably overstated the severity of these handling problems, as was later claimed by U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigators. Part of Naders evidence against the Corvair was a promotional film created by Ford Motor Company, in which a Ford test driver purposely turned the Corvair in a way to make it appear unstable. snip Compare and contrast with the VW Beatle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Beetle "Its success owed much to its extremely high build quality, and innovative, eye-catching advertising. " snip The car was designed to be as simple as possible mechanically, so that there was less to go wrong; the aircooled 25 hp (19 kW) 995 cc (60.7 cu in)[12] motors proved especially effective in actions of the German Afrika Korps in Africa's desert heat. snip The Volkswagen Beetle underwent significant changes for the 1967 model. While the car appeared similar to earlier models, much of the drivetrain was noticeably upgraded. Some of the changes to the Beetle included a bigger engine for the second year in a row. Horsepower had been increased to 37 kW (50 hp) the previous year, and for 1967 it was increased even more, to 40 kW (54 hp). snip ----------- It should be apparent that while Ralph N. may have shot GM in the butt, it was GM itself that put one in both of their feet, and ultimately put one in their own head [with the taxpayers on the hook for life support]. Unka George (George McDuffee) ............................... The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there. L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author. The Go-Between, Prologue (1953). |
#32
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 10:07:57 -0400, the infamous Joseph Gwinn
scrawled the following: I recall reading these explanations, but no longer recall the details. I don't recall that it was called "jacking", though. My friend didn't call it that, if I recall. I dare you to find it when googling "car jacking". -- Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop away from you like the leaves of Autumn. -- John Muir |
#33
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:06:42 -0700, the infamous "Bill McKee"
scrawled the following: Corvair was never going to survive "unsafe at any speed". Nader found an easy target and hit a bull's-eye. Same suspension on the original VW bug. Bzzzzzzzzt! The easy target you mention was the Corvair only when owned by idiots who couldn't drive (they could barely _steer_ a car) AND who never checked their air pressure AND who allowed the tire pressure to become far too low, increasing any tendency for the car to swap ends. My buddy swapped ends on mine even though I optimized air pressure and had the f/r weights balanced. And the Bug was top heavy. But the bug was loved, Ptui! Gawdawful whistling old bitches. My B Production Vette did a few spins over the years. Mostly my trying to go 5 mph faster than physics allowed. :) A truly honorable employment, sir. Curves are made for fun, whether on a woman or a road. I drive a pickup now (miss that Javelin and the 2 Corvair convertibles I had) and can't believe how much better the new '07 Tundra handles compared to the old '90 F-150; night and day. The Tundra reminds me more of the Javelin than a pickemup. -- Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop away from you like the leaves of Autumn. -- John Muir |
#34
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... "Wes" wrote in message ... Lewis Hartswick wrote: Did you ever read it, Lew? Or did you read *about* it? I read some of it. Couldn't stand to do the rest. ...lew... I read it, the latter Corvairs were safer, too late to save the brand. Compared to today, the 60's cars are death traps for the most part. Wes The pre-'65s were the ones with the swing axles, and a frame that had serious weaknesses in the central bay. The swing axle was just fine for moderate driving. But, pressed hard, the car was a wild thing that took some experience to handle. On the racetrack it absolutely needed heavy modifications. (I spun mine at Old Bridge Speedway in NJ, even with a bunch of modifications, because, en extremis, the rearward weight bias took over and that was all she wrote). In '64, there was a factory-installed transverse spring that had the same effect as a stabilizer bar -- it reduced the tendency for the suspension to jack. Starting in '65, the car had a better unibody and they went to a four-link rear suspension that was functionally the same as double wishbones. At the time, it was the most advanced suspension on any US-built car, along with the Corvette. But GM screwed the pooch by putting up so much resistance to Nader's assault, particularly by trying to entrap him with a prostitute and some other underhanded things. I think the Corvair could have weathered it all, but trust in the company was shot to hell. -- Ed Huntress Corvair was never going to survive "unsafe at any speed". Nader found an easy target and hit a bull's-eye. Same suspension on the original VW bug. Well, they were about the same at the rear. The VW bug had trailing-arm front suspension. So did the Porsche 356. The Corvair was double-wishbone at the front. And the Bug was top heavy. But the bug was loved, and Nader would have shot himself writing the same book about the VW. How do you know what he was thinking, Bill? I owned both cars (a '63 Corvair and a '64 Beetle), and you could have picked either one to illustrate obsolete safety engineering. As a Corvair lover at the time, I despised what Nader was saying, and I felt the same way as you about why he chose the Corvair to attack, rather than the VW. But years later I realized he was attacking the safety-be-damned mindset at the Big Three (then four) and he would have had no point in attacking a 30-year-old import design that was known to be a ludicrous anachronism. VW and Corvair finally added the same thing Empi had been furnishing for years. The Camber Compensator. Don Yenco and the Corvair Stinger did very well at speed. Bill, the Yenko Stinger was based on a '65 and after Corvair. It did not have swing-axle rear suspension, even as it came from the factory. It was A-arm and single-link, effectively the same as a double-wishbone suspension, in terms of geometry. And physically it was very similar to the Stingray and later Corvettes. The different suspension produced an entirely different car. The post-'64 Corvair's suspension was advanced and very capable of good handling. But by then there was the 4 wheel indepent suspension similar to the Corvette. Corvair was always going to oversteer. Nature of the rear engine, just like a front engine car will always understeer. Yes and no. We don't want to get into this one. g At least without judicious power application. As to spinning on a race track. Only way to prevent that is not to push a cars limits. My B Production Vette did a few spins over the years. Mostly my trying to go 5 mph faster than physics allowed. :) If you drove a B production Corvette (I assume a pre-'63), then you know what anachronisms are all about. d8-) -- Ed Huntress |
#35
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Wes" wrote in message ... "Ed Huntress" wrote: I read it, the latter Corvairs were safer, too late to save the brand. Compared to today, the 60's cars are death traps for the most part. Wes The pre-'65s were the ones with the swing axles, and a frame that had serious weaknesses in the central bay. The swing axle was just fine for moderate driving. But, pressed hard, the car was a wild thing that took some experience to handle. On the racetrack it absolutely needed heavy modifications. (I spun mine at Old Bridge Speedway in NJ, even with a bunch of modifications, because, en extremis, the rearward weight bias took over and that was all she wrote). In '64, there was a factory-installed transverse spring that had the same effect as a stabilizer bar -- it reduced the tendency for the suspension to jack. Okay, going for a rewrite on this reply, you will never see my first attempt Racing tends to uncover handling qualities that Joe Blow only learns about when something on the roadway causes him to explore the limits of his vehicle with no prior experience. Sure. Or coming into an exit ramp off a highway that's far tighter than he realized, or couldn't see. That's probably what put most Corvairs off the road. I *still* haven't got used to driving a front wheel drive though mentally I can force myself to perform the counter intuitive 'right' response when I find myself at the edges of the envelope. I *DON'T* like it though. Starting in '65, the car had a better unibody and they went to a four-link rear suspension that was functionally the same as double wishbones. At the time, it was the most advanced suspension on any US-built car, along with the Corvette. GM did get it right at the end. I still like the looks of that car. A VeeDub on steroids But GM screwed the pooch by putting up so much resistance to Nader's assault, particularly by trying to entrap him with a prostitute and some other underhanded things. I think the Corvair could have weathered it all, but trust in the company was shot to hell. Company or the car? Both. It was thoroughly screwed. I remember it well. People began to ask why I drove that "death trap." It made me furious. But it was a good question, actually. I don't care much for GM vehicles, I know, I drive a Saturn but that was from the Spring Hill days. Everyone that my family has owned for an extended period of time has had brake lines rust out and burst. How hard is that to correct? Sir would you like to pay 5 bucks more for decent plating? Nader isn't my cup of tea though when he gets a shot on the news programs, I'll give him a listen. He seems to have a bit of corporate hatred while having invested his income streams in the market and doing okay. Ralph isn't poor. Sometimes I think him a bit hypocritical but that is my opinion. Wes Nader bought five pairs of shoes on sale after he graduated from college and wore them for over 20 years. For decades, all of his money went into his causes. We may disagree with his causes but he remains one of the few men involved in politics and policy who has genuine integrity. -- Ed Huntress |
#36
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message ... On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 10:07:57 -0400, the infamous Joseph Gwinn scrawled the following: I recall reading these explanations, but no longer recall the details. I don't recall that it was called "jacking", though. My friend didn't call it that, if I recall. I dare you to find it when googling "car jacking". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_axle http://www.corvaircorsa.com/wright.html http://wapedia.mobi/en/Chevrolet_Corvair?t=4. http://everything2.com/title/Chevrolet+Corvair Anyone involved with sports car racing in the '60s knew it as jacking. If you talk to someone who claims to have been there and who doesn't know immediately what you mean by "jacking," in reference to Corvairs, VW's, Porsches, Formula V's, Triumph Spitfires, or even pre-'64 Pontiac Tempests g, then he wasn't really there. -- Ed Huntress |
#37
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
In the summer of '68, I was a pump jockey at Wayne's Standard & U-Haul, right next to Ernie von Schleidorn's Buick & Pontiac dealership in Menomonee Falls, Wi. Our mechanic was Louie, a guy renowned locally as a Corvair whiz. We usually had 2-3 Corvairs or Corvans parked on the lot, usually with an oil puddle underneath. Louie knew them inside and out, how to make them run and how to make them run FAST. He was always careful driving them into the bays because he didn't know what he'd find when he had them in the air. The only ones he wouldn't drive were the convertibles. Too flexible and he didn't trust the suspension to keep the rubber down and the canvas up. THIS WAS IN THE STATION LOT WHERE WE NEVER GOT OVER 5 MPH. Damn. David |
#38
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"David R.Birch" wrote in message ... In the summer of '68, I was a pump jockey at Wayne's Standard & U-Haul, right next to Ernie von Schleidorn's Buick & Pontiac dealership in Menomonee Falls, Wi. Our mechanic was Louie, a guy renowned locally as a Corvair whiz. We usually had 2-3 Corvairs or Corvans parked on the lot, usually with an oil puddle underneath. Louie knew them inside and out, how to make them run and how to make them run FAST. He was always careful driving them into the bays because he didn't know what he'd find when he had them in the air. The only ones he wouldn't drive were the convertibles. Too flexible and he didn't trust the suspension to keep the rubber down and the canvas up. THIS WAS IN THE STATION LOT WHERE WE NEVER GOT OVER 5 MPH. Damn. David g He's right that the convertible was a flexible flyer. That's what I had. The passenger bay was inherently weak and the coupe did NOT provide enough stiffness to overcome it. The convertible was much worse -- it had reinforcement in the rocker area, but it wasn't enough. That's one reason I drove the car in only one SCCA drivers' school -- it was flaky as hell. But your friend overstated the case more than a little. I had my '63 Fitch Corvair up over 100 mph at Old Bridge and certainly higher at Lime Rock. It was vague, but no flakier than an out-of-the-box-stock Porsche Speedster. It was just a different kind of flakiness. With the Corvair, you would steer and wait for the car to respond. With the Porsche, you would steer and wait to see where the car really was going to go. d8-) -- Ed Huntress |
#39
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message ... On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:06:42 -0700, the infamous "Bill McKee" scrawled the following: Corvair was never going to survive "unsafe at any speed". Nader found an easy target and hit a bull's-eye. Same suspension on the original VW bug. Bzzzzzzzzt! The easy target you mention was the Corvair only when owned by idiots who couldn't drive (they could barely _steer_ a car) AND who never checked their air pressure AND who allowed the tire pressure to become far too low, increasing any tendency for the car to swap ends. My buddy swapped ends on mine even though I optimized air pressure and had the f/r weights balanced. And the Bug was top heavy. But the bug was loved, Ptui! Gawdawful whistling old bitches. My B Production Vette did a few spins over the years. Mostly my trying to go 5 mph faster than physics allowed. :) A truly honorable employment, sir. Curves are made for fun, whether on a woman or a road. I drive a pickup now (miss that Javelin and the 2 Corvair convertibles I had) and can't believe how much better the new '07 Tundra handles compared to the old '90 F-150; night and day. The Tundra reminds me more of the Javelin than a pickemup. -- Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop away from you like the leaves of Autumn. -- John Muir Actually early Corvairs handled bad for the reason that the wheels did tuck. And that was GM's fault for being to cheap to steal Empi's Camber Compensator design. Plus it was a pain to work on with all the sheet metal. Remember having to help a buddy change a leaking oil pressure sender. I drive a pickup now also. Diesel Chevy Crewcab. Handles well, not a race car, but tows the aluminum river jet boat with alacrity, while also carrying a slide in pop-up camper. And gets good milage. 19 on the highway at 80 mph. Wife's 2009 Venza only gets about 22.5 at same speed going to Los Angeles on I-5. But is a nice handling car. But it also has the 6 cyl, as I and she hate wimpy cars. I look at a performance car now and again, but I do not think I could afford the tickets these days. Wife got one for 16 over at night in a 25 zone. $351. |
#40
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT How the Corporations Broke Ralph Nader and America, Too.
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... "Wes" wrote in message ... Lewis Hartswick wrote: Did you ever read it, Lew? Or did you read *about* it? I read some of it. Couldn't stand to do the rest. ...lew... I read it, the latter Corvairs were safer, too late to save the brand. Compared to today, the 60's cars are death traps for the most part. Wes The pre-'65s were the ones with the swing axles, and a frame that had serious weaknesses in the central bay. The swing axle was just fine for moderate driving. But, pressed hard, the car was a wild thing that took some experience to handle. On the racetrack it absolutely needed heavy modifications. (I spun mine at Old Bridge Speedway in NJ, even with a bunch of modifications, because, en extremis, the rearward weight bias took over and that was all she wrote). In '64, there was a factory-installed transverse spring that had the same effect as a stabilizer bar -- it reduced the tendency for the suspension to jack. Starting in '65, the car had a better unibody and they went to a four-link rear suspension that was functionally the same as double wishbones. At the time, it was the most advanced suspension on any US-built car, along with the Corvette. But GM screwed the pooch by putting up so much resistance to Nader's assault, particularly by trying to entrap him with a prostitute and some other underhanded things. I think the Corvair could have weathered it all, but trust in the company was shot to hell. -- Ed Huntress Corvair was never going to survive "unsafe at any speed". Nader found an easy target and hit a bull's-eye. Same suspension on the original VW bug. Well, they were about the same at the rear. The VW bug had trailing-arm front suspension. So did the Porsche 356. The Corvair was double-wishbone at the front. And the Bug was top heavy. But the bug was loved, and Nader would have shot himself writing the same book about the VW. How do you know what he was thinking, Bill? I owned both cars (a '63 Corvair and a '64 Beetle), and you could have picked either one to illustrate obsolete safety engineering. As a Corvair lover at the time, I despised what Nader was saying, and I felt the same way as you about why he chose the Corvair to attack, rather than the VW. But years later I realized he was attacking the safety-be-damned mindset at the Big Three (then four) and he would have had no point in attacking a 30-year-old import design that was known to be a ludicrous anachronism. VW and Corvair finally added the same thing Empi had been furnishing for years. The Camber Compensator. Don Yenco and the Corvair Stinger did very well at speed. Bill, the Yenko Stinger was based on a '65 and after Corvair. It did not have swing-axle rear suspension, even as it came from the factory. It was A-arm and single-link, effectively the same as a double-wishbone suspension, in terms of geometry. And physically it was very similar to the Stingray and later Corvettes. The different suspension produced an entirely different car. The post-'64 Corvair's suspension was advanced and very capable of good handling. But by then there was the 4 wheel indepent suspension similar to the Corvette. Corvair was always going to oversteer. Nature of the rear engine, just like a front engine car will always understeer. Yes and no. We don't want to get into this one. g At least without judicious power application. As to spinning on a race track. Only way to prevent that is not to push a cars limits. My B Production Vette did a few spins over the years. Mostly my trying to go 5 mph faster than physics allowed. :) If you drove a B production Corvette (I assume a pre-'63), then you know what anachronisms are all about. d8-) -- Ed Huntress I drove a 1964 Coupe, Mouse Motor Corvette. Is the silver one getting a little sideways in the original Herbie movie during the Laguna Seca start. I would still love a 1962 Corvette. May still buy one. Understand they are only about $10k for a nice one. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|