The Chevette was not the only car GM attempted to shove a converted gasoline to diesel engine into. They tried that in many of their cars including a Pontiac station wagon with a V-8. As you said it, was a disaster because diesels run under vastly higher compression than gasoline engines can handle, so those engines gave out quickly.
Then there was the Cadillac 8-6-4, whereby as one was accelerating the engine would start on eight cylinders and then work down to 6 then 4 as it was cruising on the highway. This actually was not a bad idea and was an idea before its time. Honda now uses a similar technology in its new Accord V-6 engine. The problem with the Cadillac was, as usual, GM unleashed a technology way before the bugs were worked out so the ideas proved disastrous after a short time on the market.This also help fuel the perception that American cars were crap, and Japanese cars were better (they were). The Japanese tended to work out the bugs before selling new technology to the public, and still do. This was just a small description of the disaster American cars were during the 1980.
And I also remember the Pontiac Fiero. As it came out in the early 80’s, people kept calling it the Ferraro after Geraldine, Mondale’s VP pick.
--Actually, as I mentioned in my above post, ALL of this (the erroneous Chevette reference aside) relates to the pervading corporate culture of General Motors as a whole in this country.
GM's US operation has always reacted to its top heavy debt load from labor by chipping away at good designs to save a nickel here or there.
If you look at almost ANY "year one" GM model, with few exceptions you find that the first year model is full of bugs in any area where innovation plays a part. By the third or fourth model year those bugs are RELUCTANTLY FIXED.
By that point it's just a question of whether or not the model survives.
Here's another example...the Chevy Astro. Believe it or not there IS a very real need for a TRUCK BASED small van with gobs of towing power and heavy duty reliability.
But the Astro models from 1989 till 1991 were plagued with weak front end suspension pieces and a worthless slug of an engine for the most part. They also suffered from ghastly interior trim which fell apart almost from the first day of use and terrible driver's seat crampiness.
But by 1992 the engine choices had new life breathed into them with the introduction of the improved Vortec V-6 4.3 liter, which was basically a high performance GM truck type V-8 with "the two rear cylinders chopped off".
Everything else about it was a true high torque V-8.
The interior pieces were still ghastly, the electric window switches still stopped working within a year and the driver still had no room to put their feet if they were taller than
five eight or had big feet but at least it could pull a trailer
and it lasted about 250 thousand miles with normal maintenance.
By 1994 and the final redesign Chevy's Astro van was a comfortable workhorse that could fit in any small garage, haul large trailers and even go off road with the available four wheel drive option, and it even HANDLED decently...for a VAN.
But of course by that time enough people were pissed off at the prior year deficiencies that when other choices from other makers came out, they chose something else, and GM lost its share of the market, and Astro was retired.
Everything that rolls of a GM line is fixed IN THE MARKETPLACE.
With the exception of exotic sports coupes and the top end luxury vehicles, if it's GM, YOU are the test bed.
If it's a mundane people mover or anything else with four wheels, GM tests it IN the marketplace, always has and always will. This is a systemic problem with the GM culture and cannot be fixed unless someone surgically removes the pigheaded thinking that fosters it.
