View another rally car profile? Use the right hand drop-down.
This rally car is a fantastic example how things can go wrong when a rally project is not done in house and the manufacturer takes things too easy or not serious enough. It was embarrassment and a wasted opportunity.
But first to explain this model for younger or non-British fans. For model frame, I don't need an "A" or whatever generation tag for this Vauxhall/Opel, as the Chevette name only lasted 1 generation. Yet it became a classic, maybe also for this, 'there is only one Chevette'! The Chevette was Vauxhall's UK equivalent to the Opel Kadett C, but versions were slightly different, especially since for a long time the Kadett C was not available as a short, light hatchback. The Chevette was not available as a Coupé. The frame is interesting, as the Chevette was the successor of the Vauxhall Viva and the predecessor of the Vauxhall Astra. Curios here, the Viva predecessor was not simply Vauxhall's version of the Kadett B as there were design similarities with the Kadett C too and the Viva was sold alongside the Chevette for some time. Only the Viva had a proper front grill instead of the classic aerodynamic Vauxhall front as known from Chevette, Cavalier, etc..
But now the rally car:
This car (not the only time for a GM rally project) could be a perfect example for the 2 different ways of running a competition team. The French manufacturers and - more importantly for the Vauxhall Chevette - Ford at that time believe in running their sport programs in house. The competitions department can be stronger with the forceful support of the road car research and development department, in return the road car research and development can learn and profit from discoveries in tough competition. The easier way however is to hand the project to an outside independant tuner, so there is a fixed budget and no further worries and considerations. But this can be at a price with a lack of communication or even bother between inhouse departments and independant tuner, less bother for the manufacturer but also less feed back for the road product, etc..
The Vauxhall Chevette HS/HSR is a classic example of exactly these potential disadvantages of running your motorsport program through an independent tuner rather than by yourself. The basic ingredients to the car were fantastic. If it was meant to compete with the likes of Ford Escort RS and Opel Kadett (C) GT/E, it shared the same platform with the Kadett (C) GT/E but was a hatchback version of it, hence smaller and lighter. Further, while its declared opposition was running 2.0 engines, Vauxhall found a 2.3.
It still wasn't serious competition to Escort RS, Kadett GT/E and the likes. The problem was that the car was designed and run by an independent tuner, Bill Blydenstein. Nothing wrong with Bill Blydenstein, he kept his part of the job straight and designed a car that from its first rallies was promising in performance and reliability. But Vauxhall itself didn't take things overly serious it seems, or at least there was a severe commnication problem or lack of in-house expertise. Vauxhall relied on the independent preparation business and somehow, as required by every homologation, Vauxhall never built the correct according road cars. This means for Blydenstein to go ahead turning a 2.3 litre Chevette into a rally car, there had to be a minimum number of (in group4) 400 Chevette 2.3 road cars and these Vauxhall had never turned into reality. As far as Vauxhall was concerned, they handed the project to someone else and are done with it. For Bill Blydenstein it seemed obvious a small, independant tuner like him could not be responsible to built 400 road cars for Vauxhall, while the road version Vauxhall eventually turned out was not including base components that Blydenstein used on the rally car. On top of this the road car was delayed for all these misunderstandings, which for Bill Blydenstein helped to lift the blame off his shoulders by some degree. Well, the rally car was finished first, maybe he could have asked more first what was realistic for big Vauxhall. Still, it was a massive communication mess.
However the car got its homologation in the first place would be a very clever question. Fact is that at a time the Chevette should have been raking in the wins, the opposition kept complaining, event organisers kept disqualifying it, the FIA (or according institution of the time) came to re-inspect and eventually the homologation was withdrawn.
This of course was the Chevette HS. So now Blydenstein and Vauxhall came out with an evolution version, the HSR, this time with a correct homologation. The HSR is easily identified from the troubled HS by the addition of a huge glassfibre body kit. But over 2 years were basically wasted and by now the opposition caught up again. In other words, for politicals the Chevette never became the success story it so easily could have been.
Pentti Airikkala won the BRC 1979 with the Chevette, but the properly homologated HSR version only debuted in 1980. Then it appeared more regularly at WRC level too, but 1980 clearly times had moved on. Still, it is easy to see that the basic idea has been brilliant. And it was often said that the Chevette, and not an Opel model, was the spiritual mother to the Ascona/Manta 400 projects, which also combined a big displacement 4-cylinder to a RWD car.
|
Model & Evo. (Activity) |
BHP@ RPM |
Torque (Nm)@ RPM |
Length Width Height |
Weight (Kg/BPM Ratio) |
Trans. (W'base) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Chevette HS (76-79) |
240/8200 | 249/6000 | 3940.1571.1371 | 1000 (4.2) | RWD (2395) |
|
Chevette HSR (80-83) |
246/8400 | 263/5500 | 3969.1673.1362 | 980 (4) | RWD (2395) |
Click here to view all photos of this car model.
Sorry, there are no photos.
This is an unofficial Car Results list and may be incomplete.
This is an unofficial Car Model Retirements list and may be incomplete.
Citroen
Fiat
Ford
Mitsubishi
Peugeot
Skoda
Subaru
