Chevy Through The Ages

by Edward Niedermeyer

Published: June 10th, 2010

So, GM’s ban on use of the term “Chevy” hasn’t quite taken effect yet. Above is an image of the front page at Chevrolet.com, and clearly there are still a number of references to the old abbreviation. And no wonder: the term “Chevy” has been a mainstay of Chevrolet’s advertising from time immemorial… up until very recently, you could even catch Chevy ads that never used the whole word “Chevrolet.” We’ve assembled a few ads featuring the word “Chevy” throughout the years, and we present them now in memoriam of a convenient and iconic nickname.

#Advertising #Branding #Chevrolet #Chevy #GM #Heritage

Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments

Join the conversation

3 of 16 comments

Nevets248 on Jun 10, 2010

whole thing has the sour smell of "Hummer" Docherty attached to it...Oh, she got banished to the Pacific rim area-my bad!

Like Reply
BuzzDog on Jun 10, 2010

Speaking of the nickname for Chevrolet, I recently noticed something interesting while looking at online scans of Popular Science from the 1950s. As far as I can tell, PopSci spelled it "Chevvy" (that's right, two Vs) until the January 1956 issue, then adopted the spelling we're familiar with today ("Chevy") by the time the November 1956 "New Car Issue" rolled around. I've never seen that unusual spelling in any of Chevrolet's print ads. It also appears that the full, formal name ("Chevrolet") was ALWAYS used by PopSci prior to the February 1950 issue. I'm unwilling to draw a conclusion from one magazine's practices, but I'm sure people used the nickname in conversation long before the term was accepted by the print media. It would be interesting to see when the name was first acknowledged by GM, and if the company's public relations folks had anything to do with how and when the media (and its advertising agency) was first allowed to refer to the make as "Chev(v)y."

Like Reply
- Budda-Boom on Jun 10, 2010
  
  I, too, remember seeing "Chevvy" in magazines of the 50's. Strange.
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Jkross22 When I think about products that I buy that are of the highest quality or are of great value, I have no idea if they are made as a whole or in parts by unionized employees. As a customer, that's really all I care about. When I think about services I receive from unionized and non-unionized employees, it varies from C- to F levels of service. Will unionizing make the cars better or worse?
Namesakeone I think it's the age old conundrum: Every company (or industry) wants every other one to pay its workers well; well-paid workers make great customers. But nobody wants to pay their own workers well; that would eat into profits. So instead of what Henry Ford (the first) did over a century ago, we will have a lot of companies copying Nike in the 1980s: third-world employees (with a few highly-paid celebrity athlete endorsers) selling overpriced products to upper-middle-class Americans (with a few urban street youths willing to literally kill for that product), until there are no more upper-middle-class Americans left.
ToolGuy I was challenged by Tim's incisive opinion, but thankfully Jeff's multiple vanilla truisms have set me straight. Or something. 😉
ChristianWimmer The body kit modifications ruined it for me.
ToolGuy "I have my stance -- I won't prejudice the commentariat by sharing it."• Like Tim, I have my opinion and it is perfect and above reproach (as long as I keep it to myself). I would hate to share it with the world and risk having someone critique it. LOL.