(originally posted 1/16/2015) Like most of our readers, I have been keeping a wary eye on the comings and goings at the various auto shows being held around the country since the new year began. It looks (for the moment) like we are going to miss out on another “every man’s car” again this year. Most of the offerings these days seem to be going in the opposite direction, toward more gee-whiz gadgetry and ever more complicated command and control systems. Those of us that admire the simple honesty of a Model A or early Ford Falcon are dismayed that capitalism demands that even bottom feeder, entry level cars come with a level of technical complication far beyond what is strictly necessary to get from point A to point B.
Of course, this has not always been the case as it pertains to the first rung on the automotive ladder. Even as the money men demanded ever more chrome spattered, gadget laden, fad following , entry level autos, there have been plenty of honest cars that bucked the “bigger, better, flashier” coda and just delivered the basics for less money than any other four wheel competitor.
Remember, we’re talking about “four wheel” competition. In many countries in the past (and in southeast Asia to this day), the purchase and maintenance of a car is a major economic decision for its erstwhile owners. The best selling motor vehicle in the history of man is the Honda Super Cub (above, doing the work of an F-150). It’s the step up from the lower class of society to the middle strata of the economy and entails greater responsibility and financial wherewithal than the move from walking to riding a motorcycle. For well more than a billion of our fellow humans, a two wheel, single cylinder motorcycle is their entree to motor transport. They are still waiting for someone like Ferdinand Porsche or a modern day Henry Ford to design a car that even they can afford to buy.
From the beginning, owning a car has been intertwined with politics. Woodrow Wilson opined (in 1906) that mass ownership of automobiles would result in a move toward socialism because they were thought to be the “picture of the arrogance of wealth” . Wilson, by the way,was a Pierce-Arrow man. P-A being the American equivalent of a Rolls Royce in its day. Wilson was way off the mark, but he could hardly foresee a day when just about every driver could afford some type of basic car. That day would come faster than anyone thought possible.
To a large degree, whenever a government gets involved in the manufacture and sale of an automobile,the results are generally not pretty. Cars designed by bureaucrats in some central ministry rarely resemble cars that people want to buy and own. There are exceptions, of course. The VW Beetle was a very good car, but it took the utter destruction of its government patron to make the car a worldwide success.
But just across a political border, its evil twin communist counterpart, the Trabant, literally couldn’t be given away when its country of origin collapsed. Generalizing, it’s only when private enterprise decides to build a universal car that it finds real, lasting success. The product can be updated to attract new buyers and lives a natural life cycle that puts economic decisions in the hands of people that don’t have to face voters or politburos. In short, capitalist people’s cars generally are just that-people’s cars.
Our list here can’t be all inclusive. There are just too many shades of gray to cover every mass market model that captured a nation’s imagination. But I hope that the narrative gets the discussion going and you add your comments below.
Model T- Ford Motor Company 1909 -1926
This was the prototype of the founder/inventor/tycoon model for auto manufacture. Looking backward a century,the Model T was a crude, unreliable, unsafe and not all that attractive car. But it was the seminal influence in the early days of mass motoring. Not well remembered today is that the T had to bridge the gap between unpaved roads of appalling quality and the first real motorways that resemble what we know today. With a starting price in strong 1908 dollars of $850, the car saw its list price fall dramatically as Henry Ford perfected his methods of assembly , sales and marketing. By the time the fifteen millionth copy rolled off the line in 1927, Ford could sell the car for less than $300, and book a profit.
The Model T also had a brush with “socialism”, but not as we now understand the term. When Henry Ford introduced the $5 day for assembly workers in 1914, he was thought to be an insane utopian socialist by no small number of industrialists worldwide. But the move was as shrewd as it was utopian – the near doubling of wages pulled legions of factory workers into the middle class, where their first affluent purchase often was…a Model T.
VW Beetle – 1938 -2003
Even though he never got a formal driver’s license, Adolf Hitler had a thing for cars. The evil genius understood that he could tighten his grip on power by appealing to the material aspirations of his countrymen after wild inflation and crushing depression ruined Germany’s economy in the late 20’s/early 30’s. What we now know as the VW Beetle was the result of the marriage between government policy and private know how in the person of Ferdinand Porsche.
The VW Type I was in many ways a throwback to the Model T to which it was often compared. The early models were spare and functional, with no creature comforts save a rock solid dependability that still amazes owners some 74 years after it was first produced. The Bug went on to outsell the Model T and stayed in production until 2003 in Mexico. It set a record that will most likely never be matched.
The Beetle was the exception to the “people’s car” formula that involves government involvement. It was only after the car was divorced from its Nazi past that the company that built it truly prospered and conquered the worlds car markets. The Beetle was the foundation for a worldwide empire that on any given day counts Volkswagen as either the second or third largest car maker on the planet.The Nazi government it should be noted, sold the KDF Wagen on a layaway scheme that was the polar opposite of buying on credit (which GMAC had been doing for years). Purchasers paid in installments and received a car after all the payments were made.
Renault 4CV – 1947-1961
Like most things French,the 4CV doesn’t lend itself to absolutes. The product of Gallic collaboration with the Nazi occupiers or transcendent car that brought égalité and fraternité after the war? Depends on who’s doing the asking and who’s doing the telling. We do know that the little 4 CV had design work done underneath the noses of the Wehrmacht between 1941 and the liberation of France in 1944. With a 750cc powerplant and 17HP, the car’s (possible) connection to the Vichy/Nazi regime was soon forgotten, and by 1949, it was the top seller in France. Testament to the car’s basic value was a production run that only ended in 1961. Over a million 4 CVs were built before the car was essentially replaced by the Dauphine. It’s probably no great stretch to say that the 4CV helped save Renault after its founder and guiding hand, Louis Renault, died while awaiting trial for collaborating with the Germans.
BMC Mini 1959- 1968
A very British take on the “People’s Car” leitmotif. And another worldwide success done without “help” from any government. The Mini was the first really practical transverse engine front wheel drive car. The overall package of sturdy build quality and space efficient layout made the Mini a Beetle beater in commonwealth markets around the world. In one form or another, the car sold over five million units in an incredible run that started over a half century ago. The Mini also accomplished something that the Bug perfected – it made an emotional connection with it’s owners that bordered on romance.
Trabant – 1957- 1991
The first time I ever laid eyes on a Trabant, (In Ukraine) I thought that it was a Revell model kit blown up to full size. I wasn’t too far off the mark. The car used a resin/paper/cotton body made of “Duroplast” that made the little Trabi unique in its day. With a two stroke 600 CC engine that smoked like a Burger King grease fire, and a crude, imprecise shifter that made gear changes just another indignity to be suffered by its hapless owners, the Trabant was socialism distilled to its essence.
The Trabant was a direct response by the East German “People’s Republic” to the Beetle that was fast becoming the default entry level car around the world in the late fifties. The Trabant was frequently nursed along as a lifetime possesion because the waiting list was unofficially 8 years and subject to official corruption. The little two banger could belt out only 18HP at full throttle,which made the car dangerously sluggish,underpowered and loud. But it was easy for the amateur mechanics behind the iron curtain to maintain because the engine only used five moving parts.
Of course, when that same iron curtain came down in 1991, cars like the Trabant had no future against modern designs that were fully fifty years ahead of the technology in the Trabant. Given a choice, many Trabi owners drove their antique mounts into West Germany and simply abandoned them when they found a decent car that they could afford. The very last models used a VW one litre four built under license, but by then, too few people cared. The last Trabants were built in the spring of 1991. Over three million Trabants were produced.
Proton Saga 1985–Present
This was a government sponsored and backed project from Malaysia that was basically an old Mitsubishi Lancer face lifted just enough to claim that it was a different product. The Saga was the result of prime minister Mahathir bin Mohamed’s vision for a “national car” that would employ locals in its manufacture. The Saga came to market in September, 1985 and immediately zoomed to number one on the sales charts for Malaysia by virtue of being the lowest priced car(by far) on the market. The Saga has fulfilled two missions for its government patron: It has put a couple of million Malaysians in a real car for the first time and has nurtured a domestic design and engineering center that can now design a car from the ground up. The first generation car came within an eyelash of being exported to the U.S. by automotive wheeler-dealer Malcom Bricklin in 1986 as he cast about for an encore to his Yugo adventure.
Tata Nano–2009-?
It’s fun to watch history being made. That’s exactly what we are doing as we watch the evolution of the Nano,being built by Tata motors in India. Although often compared with the Volkswagen, the Nano is closer to the Model T idiom than the Beetle. With a 38 HP twin driving the 12 inchers,the Nano will be the car that hundreds of millions of Indians will remember fondly in thirty years. If it doesn’t incinerate them. The car had barely hit the market when engine fires sent the company into full panic mode to pinpoint the cause.It would appear that a faulty switch can turn the car into a mobile hibachi with little or no warning.
No matter. The Nano,warts and all, will be the first four wheel conveyance that India’s expanding middle class can buy new. The car’s $2900 (U.S. equivalent) price puts it within reach of a large slice of the country’s working classes and that means that it won’t be long before its early adopters will like driving a car so much that they will want to trade up. It’s not hard to see an entire industry being built to service the needs of India’s newest elite-Nano owners.
Did I miss your favorite “people’s car”? That’s what the comments below are for, so I’d love to see everyone weigh in on their favorite car for the masses.
The latest info on the Nano as I understood it was that it is not even coming close to meeting sales expectations, as much because the market has changed as the flame-broiled character.
Yes, it appears Indians would rather pay a bit more and have a “real” car, like the Maruti.The Nano may well go down as a minor failure. And prove convincingly that folks everywhere equate cars with social prestige.
In fact, that may be the key underlying reason why genuine minimalistic “people’s cars” are not really so relevant anymore, at least in societies where that aspect is deeply ingrained, like India.
The Model T was in a one-time class/situation of its own, because there were no viable alternatives anywhere near its price/performance, until the mid-late twenties when Chevrolet redefined the entry-level car, with plenty of style and prestige.
No one has ever tried to sell a true “people’s car” in the US since, at least successfully. The VW’s success here was more as a protest against the “insolent chariots” than out of necessity. Most VW drivers could easily afford an entry-level Big Three car, but they were making a statement.
And the same applies to the Citroen 2CV from the mid-late sixties on. It too became a symbol of anti-prestige. But those were different times. Today, that’s a hopelessly out-dated concept, except maybe in a few pockets of the US and Europe.
Ah, yes, the “revolution of rising expectations”. When what people want and can increasingly afford leaps ahead of the basics they’ve been promised.
VW and 2CV in the US is what you’re saying, Paul, agreed. As each nation moves from two wheels to four, their particular people’s car can be that one-time vehicle of change. Once four-wheeled, the people have their cars and now want bigger/faster/flashier. Here in the USA what had been other people’s people’s cars (VW, 2CV) became back-to-basics reactions to our own big/fast/flashy.
In other words, the history of people’s cars is the history of the car becoming mass transportation in one country or region after another. You could say it’s the ultimate car story.
What will the African people’s car look like?
Mike, by the late sixities, the 2CV was playing the same/similar role in Europe as the VW was in the states: as a rolling statement, largely by the youth/political progressives. Incomes rose very dramatically in Western Europe during the sixties, and most French didn’t need to be buying a 2CV for reasons of affordability anymore. The role of a true entry-level car was taken over in large part by the more comfortable and less rustic R4.
The Beetle was never adopted in Europe much as a “protest mobile”, because it was so “Establishment”. So many of the German/European kids coming of age in the late grew up in VWs, so it was seen as a conservative, old-folks’ car. Very unlike in the US.
Cars truly are rolling billboards for our persona, and that has always had a big impact on cars like these. And that explains the problem of the Nano today. Better to save for a Maruti, or buy a used one – image wise.
The African car? a used Corolla, or such. Where do you think all our used cell-phones go to?
Don’t forget used medial instruments. My company exports them to Africa by the ton. It is cheaper to toss a set of forceps than to clean them for reuse.
Yes, the Beetle was just a car, not a statement. And by the early seventies it was hopelessly outdated, just like all Volkswagens; till their Golf changed everything.
I’d say there were many “People’s Cars” back then in Europe. Small, basic, affordable, fuel efficient, practical, and just big enough to haul a (young) family around. In most cases the very first car that people bought, after the proud ownership of, well…bicycles and mopeds. And riding the bus.
Cars like the Opel Kadett C, Simca 1100, Renault 4, Renault 5 and of course this little legend; the Fiat 127 (introduced in 1971).
The African people’s car might be something out of South Africa (which has been making VWs, including Beetles, for decades). Or maybe from Egypt, which I think also has some assembly plants–I could see something like the Proton Saga eventually coming out of there.
I happened to be in Kenya for some time last summer. The people’s car was an ex-Japanese-market pickup or van. In contrast to the US, very few cars/light trucks were carrying only their drivers – every seat was filled, or over-filled. A car there is more of a capital good, earning its keep by hauling produce or firewood or other people – more Henry I’s vision than Alfred P. Sloan’s.
Africans love old jap iron. They buy all the old Japanese pickups and vans that are no longer road legal in Norway too, it’s almost impossible to find an old decent Hi-Ace or Hi-Lux by now. They don’t seem to care much about stuff like ruined paint rust or dodgy electrics, it just has to start and run, and haul loads of stuff or people. It seems they have cleaned up many of the 504 and 505 Peugeots too, especially the diesel models. They are only looking for reliability, durability and practicality, and they’ve found it. 🙂
I was going to add Peugeot 404/504’s, around 15 years ago there used to be people who would buy every car advertised, and ship them to Africa or Egypt (yes I know, but it is much different to countries further south like Kenya), even cutting the roofs off to fit more into a container.
Like the Renault 4, those cars were a clear reflection of the French African colonies – later model cars just don’t have the same ground clearance and suspension travel (that also made the Peugeots good endurance rally cars)
In the ’60s I saw a lot of VWs, Falcons, Novas, etc. as second cars for two income families. The other car was typical large US car.
In that use, they didn’t seem to be typical people’s cars.
Good point. Sort of an echo after the first people’s cars.
That’s the problem with Tata Nano, it is pretty much designed to appeal to first time car owners, it has zero appeal as a second car for people who already own a ‘real’ car. Of course it won’t matter if it successfully appeal to its original target audience. Unfortunately, it didn’t.
My first thought upon reading this was that the little Maruti Suzuki 800 is a better choice for India’s people’s car than the Nano. A crapload of them were built over the course of 20+ years (which is unlikely to ever be true of the Nano). They’re pretty basic transportation. With a full load of passengers, the little 800 cc three-pot has to be opened all the way up to get the slightest increase in velocity; making the throttle the sort of an on/off switch. Like the Model T, it needs to be able to navigate muddy trails along with paved roads. They’re durable and easy to fix. Sounds like People’s Car to me.
The other thing about the Maruti 800 is that in its’ early days it did attract buyers who could afford something bigger – in the ’80s it was the only reasonably modern car on the market in India, “something bigger” meant a holdover from the ’50s.
The 1964/5 Mustang was almost a people’s car. Not usually thought of that way of course, but consider: The 1964 VW bug cost about $1,650, and the base Mustang cost $2,368. Not a major difference in price, but a major difference in image. Production of the VW bug was about 948,000, and the Mustang was about 680,000. It was a great disguise of a sort of people’s car.
Or, in slightly different context, brand matters. Who wants to be associated with any bottom of the market product when one’s neighbor has xyz?
Great article, but I think that Henry Ford paid his workers more per hour in order to limit turnover in his factories.
Henry Ford didnt hand $5 per day to any bum off the street you had to work your way up to that wage. The mini wasnt the equivalent of the Model T in putting Britain on wheels the little Austin 7 was in the 20s the first Minis were badged Austin mini 7 to hearken back to those cars.The beetle beater was more the Morris Minor 1948_1971 and still popular today.
I agree the Austin 7 needs to be on the list, as mentioned below it was also built under licence in other countries. The car was designed (sized) to transport a family of four, the very definition of a people’s car
Seems like the Fiat 500 (the original one, not the modern imitation) should be on this list. It’s also interesting that no Japanese car made the cut. Japan more than any other country made an institution out of people’s cars by creating the Kei classification. But which Kei would you pick? Subaru 360?
Datsun started by building Austin 7s without a licence so began the Japanese peoples car BMW built the same car but under licence.
I agree. The 500 was on my list, but I had to stop somewhere. You are entirely correct.
Really interesting take on history, lots of jumping-off points. Plus I didn’t know much about the Renault 4CV or that it had been so popular.
Why not include the Citroen 2CV? Almost 9 million 2CVs and variants sold between 1948 and 1990.
Model T prices in today’s money, 1908: $20K, 1927: $3K.
I’ve always thought the Nazi KdF-Wagen “layaway plan” was really a scam to raise money for the war. Nobody ever actually got a car.
Thanks, Jeff!
Definitely the 2CV. And why not the Civic? (Too many revisions that wandered too far from its original concept?)
Actually, Volkswagen/Wolfsburg settled up with all those stamp buyers, and I’ve read that anyone who still had their stamp books saved after the war got a new Beetle. They finally settled the last claim in the early 1960’s.
They didn’t get free Beetles in the settlement, but they did get a choice of a 600 mark discount toward purchase of a new VW, or 100 marks in cash. There is a pretty detailed discussion of the savings plan in the older VW history “Small Wonder.” According to that book, the money deposited by the stamp savers (equivalent to $67 million) was still on the books of a bank as of the end of the war, and the assets of that bank were seized by the Soviets. The suit presented interesting legal questions about whether the reconstituted Volkswagenwerk was liable for contractual obligations of either the Nazi government or the Nazi Party, itself a potentially significant distinction as the West German government had agreed to honor certain civil contracts of the Nazi regime.
Fascinating, good for them!
I’ll agree about the scam aspect. Never could figure out why Germany needed a people’s car anyway. They already had DKW churning out small FWD cars with 2 stroke engines. The Beetle seems a bit redundant in that environment and meant more for show and politics than anything else.
And the fact it converted easily for military use
Mike, I also had the 2CV (Deux Chevaux) on my list, and I agree that it was a “people’s car” in the sense that it put a lot of people on wheels for cheap.I was hoping for what has indeed happened- You guys are expanding and filling in the gaps in this narrative.
We could also put the Holden from OZ on this list.
Henry Ford was very much AGAINST making finsncing available to buyers. In his view, it was very foolish for consumers to go in debt for a car. The man had a point.
I don’t think one can credit the vw enough for the people it put on the road with a dependable car that they could afford. I can certainly think of one young sailor who took the plunge in 1966 and then went on a trip that his previous junkheaps would never have completed.
Unfair comparison in that many countries do not provide the means for mass populi to purchase cars.
Likewise discussion of a ‘people’s car’ in first world markets is not really relevant any more, the used market fills that need. In countries that are being put on wheels there isn’t a ready supply of used cars – native ones at least, the ‘people’s car’ is often a used import from somewhere like Japan or the US that has a huge turnover of vehicles and serviceable cars available very cheaply.
I bought a 2011 Ford Fiesta S with the only option being the auto (auto-manual) trans. for about 13,500 about a year ago. I think you can still pick one up for about $14,000 now. I went into the dealer and picked the cheapest new car with an auto trans. on the lot and made the deal. If they had the same model in a manual it would have been a 1000 less. So what’s my point?
Cheap decent cars are still available whether it’s the base entry model Ford, Honda, Kia, etc. And these cars are pretty darn reliable, much more comfortable, much safer and will get you from point A to B in an economical fashion. So for 13,000 to 14,000 in inflated 2012 dollars , you can get a peoples’ car that really beats the heck out of the peoples’ cars of old.
But here’s the rub. Nobody wants them. Dealers stock very few because there’s less profit in them and they sit longer than the loaded models. But they can be found as most dealers will have one or two. So I would suggest that there are no more peoples’ cars because there aren’t enough people (at least in the USA) who want them.
Me, I love mine. I’m old enough to remember that the items that are standard on mine were once options. Things like power steering, power brakes, air conditioning, an am/ fm radio. As for complicated electronics, no thanks, and my two daughters love the crank down windows because they are such a novelty to them.
So I think peoples cars are still alive and well. It’s the peoples that disappeared.
Well said.
The first new car my wife and I purchased after we got married was a Saturn SL1 with crank windows, manual transmission, cloth seats and a radio with a tape deck. At the time, it was a great car to me because it was new. I was also 26, in grad school and able to afford it only because my grandfather had given me some money that went toward a down payment.
Fast forward to 2010, and I rent a Chevy Aveo, trying to be frugal for my employer. Crank windows, cloth seats, radio with a CD player, no remote entry key fob. After a week of that, I decided that was being too frugal, and went up a class in my rental choices, where I at least got power windows, remote entry, and occasionally leather seats and satellite radio, if I chose well. I guess the difference was that in the 15 intervening years, the standard of what I was willing to accept changed, and I became one of the “peoples” who disappeared!
I may have owned my last car with crank windows, unless I wind up owning a vintage vehicle of some kind. I’ve almost certainly owned my last new car with crank windows.
Exactly right. I’ve come to believe that simplicity is a virtue, but that’s by no means a widespread sentiment. If you need any proof of that, go to a cellphone store and ask someone to show you a phone.
Sadly, you can’t get a bare-bones pickup truck any more… Only tarted-up fru-fru machines.
Amen, well, WELL said. That’s why my 1995 Toyota T100 (5 Speed, roll up windows,cloth seats) has 268,000 miles. I simply can’t find anything like it today.
You could still get a plain-Jane Ford Ranger with steel wheels, crank windows, non-CD radio and manual locks, at least until a couple months ago.
My brother-in-law (lets call him Grover) just bought a new
Toyota PU. The small one. Crank windows manual door
locks, manual trans. Bare enough?
I on the other hand bought a 2015 FIT EX that has more
crap in the cabin than a new commercial airplane.
Shiny stuff that blinds me. Things making noise, lots and
lots of noise. Put the electronics under the hood and give
me analog interfaces everywhere I interact with my hoopty.
Sounds like my first new car purchase: A base-model Mazda 323 sedan that cost almost exactly $8,000 in 1988 dollars. Only options were air-conditioning (an essential in Virginia) and a right-side mirror (still optional in those days). Arguably the trunk was optional, but the base model hatchback had only a 4-speed (manual) transmission, which made the car wail like a wounded dog at highway speeds. The sedan added an overdrive fifth gear that made the car much more tolerable for Interstate highway travel.
The car never left me stranded, and I never got less than 30 mpg.
Congratulations on your wise purchase. Your frugality will serve you well.
Extended term auto loans have driven this trend. Buyers only look at the monthly payment, not total dollars. Just a few short years ago, most auto loans were 24 or 36 months. Now most loans are 72 or 60 months. “Those leather seats are just an extra $20/month….why not?”
Negative equity is the norm on such loans.
Not to mention that every car that’s offered as low-priced, reliable, basic transportation (like the Mitsubishi Mirage) gets ragged all over by the press and bloggers, who need to prove to the world that they’re way too sophisticated for a car that basic, ignoring the fact that the Mirage is exactly the kind of car, at a bargain price, that a lot of people need.
I feel exactly the same way you do about my ’09 Accent. No complicated electronics for me either. I bought it used, so I couldn’t really choose the options, but if I could have gotten crank windows instead of power windows, I would have.
The difference between cheap cars in the 1980s (when I started driving) and today is nothing short of miraculous. In performance and features, my lowly Accent matches up very well with a GTI or low-level Audi of the 1980s, and is a thousand times more reliable and safer. Hyundai was selling these for $10K to $12K in 2009, just a few dollars more than the Golf my parents bought 21 years earlier in 1988. Unbelievable.
Great writeup! Starting to drive in the ’60’s with little to spend, my choices were limited..mostly ’40’s and ’50’s era well worn GM/Ford/Chryslers. I was fortunate to have a network of friends who helped each other patch our beauties together on weekends, cruising junkyards for spare parts. My point is the simplicity of these machines allowed us to actually work on them without needing specialized equipment except for wrenches, timing lights, and gap guages (also shared).
Although I appreciate the creature comforts of my current ride, when I pop the hood I can’t see the ground, and I admit I would be hard-pressed to use my toolbox on it, which is the same one from the ’60’s.
I’ve ridden in a Proton Saga. At the time, I thought I was in an old Honda Civic from the late 80’s. It was on a trip to Malaysia a couple of years ago, and the car, like most Proton Sagas I saw rumbling down the streets of KL, was a taxi. I asked the driver what he thought of it and he seemed to want something better but was still proud that the car he drove everyday was built in his country. There’s tons of them still around.
Protons were exported there are some here in NZ basicly just an old Mitsu Mirage/Lancer there are still some getting around its the same car Hyundai used to make as the Excel. Like the Austin 7 50 years before the Mitsi begat 2 other car companies.
So no love for the base Nissan Versa?
I guess not. Is it because the base model doesn’t have A/C? I can pass on most modern “must haves”, but even I want A/C now. Otherwise I’d consider a base Versa.
If I still lived in Montana, I wouldn’t get a/c in my car. You don’t need it except for those two or three weeks it gets above 90 degrees and it’s still so dry there that opening the window is all you need to do. Hell, the house I had built didn’t have a/c but it had the biggest heating system for a house I have ever seen.
Now that I’m living in Little Rock, I have to have A/C.
Last year in balmy Vancouver, I used the a/c in my Acura total of twice and then for a grand total of about five minutes. My Fit is a Canuckistan only model with no a/c and I’ve never missed it.
Given a choice between a Renault 4CV and a Citroen 2CV, I’d take the Citroen. Much more practical, better-engineered car.
That said, Renault’s real hit in the people’s car segment was the Renault 4, introduced along with the smaller-engined Renault 3 in 1961. Its hatchback made it even more versatile than the 2CV and it was aimed squarely at it, imitating its long-travel soft suspension and even its profile to a degree.
And that’s where I thought the Tata Nano failed. It can seat four people but has zero utility beyond that. Tata would have been better served to at least imitate the layout of the R4 and give their people’s car sufficient practicality to carry a few live pigs in back if necessary.
like the r4 but i love the dyane.
“Looking backward a century,the Model T was a crude, unreliable, unsafe and not all that attractive car.”
Ok, here’s where I start bitching again. The Model T was NOT crude, unreliable, unsafe and not all that attractive . . . . . . in 1908. Or 1910. Or 1914. Yeah, by the time WWI was over the car was definitely getting passed in all categories (except purchase price and ability to handle rural roads). But for it’s day, the Model T was state of the art, and if anything developed its reputation by being more reliable than it’s higher priced competition.
I really wish our contributors could refrain from judging an antique automobile by modern standards. Yeah, I can understand a twenty year or so leeway on the desirability and performance of the car, but attempting to put standards from much further out is unrealistic.
You and I were on the same wavelength at the same time on the Model T. The Model T was indeed a high quality car. Henry Ford insisted on top-quality steel alloys for the mechanical parts. The planetary transmission was his answer to “normal” transmissions that regularly stripped their gears because of poor quality metals then available. The T’s unique planetary setup was simple, but extremely rugged.
Also, in 1908, the car was considered a hot rod. 20 horsepower doesn’t sound like much now (or even in 1920) but in its early years, you had to spend a LOT more money for anything even approaching the T’s performance. The lightweight T was the original pocket rocket.
Henry was a great believer in light weight which coupled with decent torque give good performance horsepower is just burning fuel unneccessarily.
Could not agree more.
Use of vanadium steel was a huge leap forward, certainly nothing crude there. Fit, finish, and workmanship were right at the top for the era, especially at the Model T price level.
Unreliable – not really. They may have needed a lot of “tinkering” from time to time but they were indestructible if maintained.
Unsafe – certainly not by the standards of the day if driven responsibly.
You raise a great point. I had forgotten how huge vanadium steel was, and came across an exerpt of the book Ford: The Men and the Machine. I had forgottenthat Ford was behind the first use of it in the United States. The first vanadium steel put to use in Fords was nearly triple the tensile strength of what had been considered high quality armor plating.
Also, I was reminded of what a huge technological advance the Model T’s magneto electrical system had been over the dry cell batteries that had been the standard up to that time. Ditto the single casting for the engine block, with a separate bolt-on head at the top and oil pan at the bottom. Henry Ford really was a practical mechanical genius, and he and his skilled crew put out one heck of a car in 1908.
All of this said, however, Henry Ford really did set out to make the best car he could for the average guy. When he finally got the assembly line figured out and running, he hit the bulls eye. By the 1920s, roughly half of the cars in the world were Fords. Peoples’ car: Mission Accomplished.
Here’s more to chew on: When was the last time a car’s price dropped as the production run got further along? Like another poster pointed out, by the end of the run, it was the equivalent of $3K in today’s money.
I’d have no problem buying a “brand new” or “factory fresh” 1992 Chevy Cavalier or Ford Escort if I could get it for that kind of money. I could live with a car 20 years in the past, as I need the damned thing to start and run (and have a heater in W Michigan), kind of like the African car buyers…
We can’t leave the Model T thread without remarking how important the assembly line was. By implementing mass production so successfully Mr. Ford was able to bring many technical innovations to large markets at very attractive prices.
Another great Model T book: Ford Model T: The Car That Put the World on Wheels by Lindsey Brooke.
I look forward to the day that CC runs Model T week!
Not only that, but the same article lauds the Mini for its “sturdy build quality”…….
I think there is a bit of misinterpretation & that Jeff was not saying it was crude etc by the standards of the day – note the later comment about road (or lack of) conditions. Possibly a word or two extra could clarify the intent.
The other thing with the Model T specifically is that due to it’s long run, and the number that were kept in use for so long, that it is more often judged against later cars than other pre-WWI cars that weren’t around 20+ years later.
The Model T is unique in one respect: it came about in the automobile’s infancy. People forget that in 1908, the T was not a “cheap car”. It was actually a small and simple, but very good car that sold at a low price. The engineering was state of the art for a small car at the time. It was only after years of production efficiencies coupled with a rising standard of living (and increasing quality for the price of the competition) that made the T a “cheap car”.
It seems to me that every “people’s car” since the Model T (and arguably the VW) has been a significant downgrade from “state of the art” in the segment in an attempt to cut the price. The key to success seems to be to approach but not cross that barrier that separates a reasonable compromise for lower price from unacceptably crude. The Mini was on the right side of that barrier, and the Trabant was not. It also seems that the more time has passed, that barrier moves farther and farther from pure basic utility. So, where the Nano may have been a huge hit in 1975, it is much less so today.
Thanks, Jeff, for an interesting and thought-provoking article.
A “people’s car”…hmmm…what does that mean to me? I was never a VW Beetle fan – or Isetta fan or a fan of any penalty box. I went the other direction – full-size!
If I had to make a decision for a people’s car in the U.S. it would be either the Rambler American, Chevy II Nova, Ford Falcon or Dodge Dart/Plymouth Valiant. Corvair? No. Too off-the-wall, but some may consider it. As long as all these cars were just the no-frills, base models – standard tranny, four-or six cylinders, bench seats, no A/C, AM radio. No armrests in the back seat.
In the last sixty years, simple easy-to-buy-maintain “people’s car” ??
I believe Ford Falcon (1960), maybe the stripper Rambler American (1958 a “re-hashed Nash”).
How come you have the Mini’s dates as 1959-1968? While that was the last year of sliding windows the later roll down windows cars used the same basic shell and powertrain until 2000.
Yeah I noticed that too
There was never another car like the model-T, and there never will be again. All the other cars on the list, were copies or wannabies in some way (especially the beetle, even if it gained a similar fan-base in Europe. What really separates the T (apart from being the first) was it’s utilitarian multipurpose nature. The beetle or 2cv were never as practical or as diverse as the model-T, the mini could only do one thing well, and the Civics did it better :).One thing I really miss, especially when it comes to American cars, and to some degree their European branches, are cheap big cars. Everyone has adopted the European idea that a cheap car has to be small by now. I wish you could get the equivalent of a Biscayne or Mainlane today.
Just imagine a stripper Accord or Camry sized car, preferably a wagon, with cranked windows, two benches, manual transmission, unpainted bumpers, non-metallic paint, rubber floor mats, and a 1.6 four banger (or even a TDi) for the price of a Fit or a Fiesta.
I certainly understand why US automakers couldn’t make successful compacts in the 60’s…
They did make very successful compacts in the ’60s. A lot of Falcons, Valiants, Darts, and Chevy IIs were sold in those years. It wasn’t until the late ’70s that things went haywire.
Yeah, I know, us Europeans just don’t have the same opinion about what is a Compact 😛 (all those mentioned would be large mid- or even full-size in Europe, not to mention the huge straight 6 engines 😛 )
Straight Six? Oh my! Too big for me. Better give me a 800cc Suzuki 3-cyl. `Small Car Syndrome’ again. Born in Europe. Now in America (and India). So what if you only have 6 members in your family and one car. Two can sit on the roof!
Maybe this is a good place to comment on the cars I saw on a recent trip to Costa Rica. Iirc the only American car I saw was a 1964 or 65 Comet on a used car lot. 99% of the vehicles I saw were Japanese or Korean. I think the vehicle I saw the most of was the Toyota Hi-Ace van, used for tourist transportation. Virtually every vehicle I saw was manual-transmission, and there was a high percentage of diesel power, including in taxis that would make a Corolla look big. There were quite a few four-door pickups. Rich peoples’ cars? I saw a few Toyota Land Cruisers, a Honda CRV, and one VW convertible. My daughter and her new husband rented a Daihatsu Me-Go, a tiny SUV with power door locks but a five-speed transmission – this was the cheapest 4-wheel-drive vehicle they could rent, at $100/day. My point is that the idea of a people’s car depends to a large extent on which people one is talking about.
You have a good point about the local conditions.
My father was from Croatia, and some of the relatives who still lived there drove Zastavas. The Yugo that was imported here was one of the models that the Zastava plant made, known over there as the Florida.
During the time of Tito, the knock off Fiats were about the only thing that most average Yugoslavians could afford to drive. In their home country, they were tough, space and fuel efficient little beasts of burdens. But with familiarity comes contempt, and once the country broke apart and other manufacturer’s cars became more widely available, the little Florida wasn’t so well thought of.
I’m sure if you spoke to every people from every region, they’d have similar stories about their “people’s car”.
Australians loved their 48 215 Holdens and the subsequent FJ those cars had the whole market to themselves the the FE/FC right thru untill the Falcon and Valiant showed up only the Valiant was up to the task the Falcon couldnt compete it was too feeble The Valiant had been specced right with bigger 14 inch wheels and the 225 engine but it the Holden thats sold as Australias own
Being a Croatian, just a few corrections.
There was a Zastava Florida but it was a very different car somewhat based on Fiat Tipo. It was very modern in design back in the eighties, much much more practical than Yugo, probably first really modern eastern European design but unfortunately sharing the same terrible build quality.
Even though Zastava introduced stupid names for Yugo, for example Coral, everybody always called it Yugo (Jugo in the local spelling).
Their other famous car was Zastava 101, the five door version of the legendary Fiat 128.
Zastavas were good cars back then because you could find a mechanic at every corner and the parts were plentiful and dirt cheap. You could rebuild the engine for 100 Deutsche Marks.
On another note, I find the comments about socialism in the article too generalizing. The old Yugoslavia wasn’t a typical behind the iron curtain socialist country but it was genuinely socialist and in average there was enough money and people lived carefree, laid back, secure and fulfilled lives. As a whole, they were happy. Today’s capitalism in the succeeding countries is without exception hectic, full of strife, full of inequality and the general relentless pursuit of material wealth does not necessarily make people happy.
I sometimes wonder if the Nazi Party had taken a different tack in the 1930’s, and tried to win an economic war by exporting many of it’s products. Some German cars had quite the reputation in the US, Mercedes being one of them.
I can only imagine what would have happened if Germany had decided to invade the US car market in 1939, instead of Poland. It would have been interesting to see the comparisons between Studebakers and Volkswagens, or even DKWs and Bantams. Would they have managed to make inroads in the US market at that time, as the Japanese would 30 years later. Or would it have been a disaster, like the early Hyundais of the 1980’s?
Maybe the time wasn’t right.
The observation of government-funded or built “People’s Cars” is spot-on. There were other failed examples, aside from the Yugo and other Zastava products, which have been done to death here.
First, the Lada. The original, at least the first the Russians considered for export, was a Fiat 124 the Soviet government bought the tooling for. Car & Driver tested one, which was going on sale in Canada, and were impressed with the car for what it was – an “Aunt Maggie Special.”
Despite being in Canada frequently, for long trips…I have only seen three Ladas. One was for sale; the second, in pieces in a garage; and the third, dead in a rest area, with an electrical issue (it seemed) also found in Yugos.
(It would take too long to detail here)
The second…would be the whole of British Leyland/Leyland Motors. Why have a People’s Car when you can have the whole car company for the people! The British did it, in stages; and took the country from the European leader in automotive technology to a backwater with obsolete, unsatisfactory products. And, finally, as usually happens, private, in this case foreign, ownership and massive closures.
The third…taking a page from the British Labour Government handbook, we have Government Motors. With a People’s Car for an affluent, environmentally-aware people.
The Chevrolet Volt! It has it all…government support, government insistence, government ownership, government subsidies for buyers.
Even government purchases. All it lacks, is public acceptance. Stand by….the saga is unfolding, and the ending will not be pretty.
How about the Spanish made Siata (not sure about the spelling) made in the 60’s to 70’s era. About the size of a Citroen 2CV. Had a friend who ran one in Brooklyn.
Or how about the MG TB, originally designed for post WWII England and made popular by returning GI’s. Of course the TC and TD followed, as did the Triumph TR3.
Or the VW Thing, a knock off of the WWII jeep like wagon that never got made by Hitler. Vintage 70’s.
Or for that matter, the Willys Jeep circa 1950.
Nash Metropolitan, anyone? My grandfather made them, and other American Motors cars, after WWII.
Or the well-designed but ill-fated Tucker?
Best small car joke I ever heard. A popular car mag, I think it was Road and Track, ran an April Fool’s parody every year of the mythical Cyclops, a minicar with of course a single headlight. And R&T once published a Q&A that purported to say: “I have a Yugo. I want to get a car radio. Does this mean I need to buy a car first?”
And let us remember that the original 36hp VW could easily get around 50mpg and comfortably carry four. Decades later we are trying to get back to that mileage, at many times the price.
My father owned a Siata in about 1973. Very nice yellow roadster convertible.
Just to add a counter point, the Dacia Logan has done very, very well as an entry level car. It has appealed to those who could not afford the high content of western automobiles.
I realize the Logan is based on pre-existing Renault parts, but has been a hit in Eastern Europe and has stolen sales from existing models in western Europe. The car has also developed a following in Russia, India, and the middle East as well.
Its has addressed the needs of a large audience who consider it their first “new” car.
In China, the ubiquitous belt driven walk-behind tractor is the ultimate multipurpose vehicle. Unhitch the plow and attach a wheeled cart, and you have a pickup truck. Attach a flatbed with seats instead…an SUV.
Holy carp! At first I thought it was some kind of parade float, but that guy actually has a basking shark on top of that, doesn’t he?
Suzuki Swift?
No, do not start badmouthing that car! Cheap to buy, cheap to run, cheap and
easy to repair. You want a sport car to hoon? The little 3 cylinder with a turbo
would eat a lot of high dollar cars. Total race ready suspension was less than
$1000 if you turn your own wrench. Closer to $500 as I remember.
I saw a stock 4 door Swift that 5 200+ pound bubbas got out of. Talk about
hauling @ss.
I had a ’93 Geo Metro with the nonturbo 3, great for driving a slow car fast.
Revell spent a lot of effort into making a Trabant model and I think it’s the best one from Revell. The nice design can be seen from the manual ( http://manuals.hobbico.com/rvl/80-7070.pdf )
Revell of Germany’s been on fire lately between those, the new-tool VW Beetles and Golf I/Rabbits (the latter two are reboxed by Revell US).
The Chrysler K car could be considered the peoples car of the 1980s.
Like most of our readers, I have been keeping a wary eye on the comings and goings at the various auto shows being held around the country since the new year began. It looks (for the moment) like we are going to miss out on another “every man’s car” again this year. Most of the offerings these days seem to be going in the opposite direction, toward more gee-whiz gadgetry and ever more complicated command and control systems. Those of us that admire the simple honesty of a Model A or early Ford Falcon are dismayed that capitalism demands that even bottom feeder, entry level cars come with a level of technical complication far beyond what is strictly necessary to get from point A to point B.
Couldn’t have said it better.
“Small Wonder” is a fabulous read, over and over again.
And bring back the strippo mini truck already. Crank windows, four popper, manual transmission and all. There is still a market for them. I’d buy one over a Kia any day.
Eons ago, when you could still buy a Pinto or a Civic for under $2K new, Motor Trend ran an article about why there aren’t any $1,000 cars. They went into how a $1,000 car could be designed, for instance, use body panels that require minimum forming, and a minimum parts count, but the best answer was from a car dealer they quoted. words to the effect “we have $1,000 cars, the used car lots are full of them”.
That is probably the best answer to why we don’t see real penalty box cars in the US anymore: the market is flooded with cars. Leasing programs dump millions of used cars on the market every year, which drives down the price of used cars. You can get a nicely equipped certified used Chevy Cruze for the price of a new, tiny, Spark.
As others have suggested, people only look at the monthly payment, not the total price, so 72 month financing and leases have made creature comforts “affordable”
In the back of my mind is the idea to get a beater for next winter, rather than let the Jetta be encrusted with salt again. Found a candidate! Chevy Cobalt with crank up windows and mechanical locks….but the ‘balt appears to be almost as big a pile of steaming poo as the Cruze is…which is a shame because I really like the design of the Cruze.
Cobalt doesn’t come with 6 cylinders and the problem for a 4-cylinder car in winter is the slower heat up, as faster heat up improves the comfort quite a lot ( and blow off the fog quite faster )
problem for a 4-cylinder car in winter is the slower heat up,
I have been driving 4s for 35 years. The Jetta is a 5 and just as slow to warm up. Thing is, almost all my drives in the winter are only 5-6 miles, so I usually don’t bother with the heater. I run the defroster, maybe, but the best tactic is just don’t let my breath get close to the windshield.
Of course, these days the accessory everyone seems to want is remote start. They’ll cry a river if the car doesn’t get the estimated highway gas mileage, but they think nothing of having it run for 10 minutes or more morning and night, so it’s toasty warm when they get in.
“only 5-6 miles and don’t bother with the heater.”
Sigh* What a different world.
During the winter time, I go to the lessons in the morning and it is just cold outside, I struggle to wake up and get ready heading to my car ( it’s only few seconds putting coats on and 1 min brushing teeth, so remote start doesn’t have many advantages in this situation ) and by the time I drive on the main road, the car is not freezing cold anymore, one more minute it would be warm already. It is a 5 miles drive, and 3.5 miles of them is warm. It’s the benefit from a 6-cylinder and after two former 4-cylinder drivers ( VW CC, Ford Fusion ) taking a ride in my car, they switched to 6-cylinder cars afterwards.
I drive a 4-cylinder turbo Regal occasionally and despite the heated seats, remote start I still don’t feel warm enough in that car, on the other hand my 6-cylinder winter car has malfunction in climate control resulting in a steaming hot cabin on a -20°F day.
It seems to me as though we are confusing two very different interpretations of the the phrase “people’s car”.
The first is: the car that put a nation on wheels. That would be the Model T, Austin 7, Beetle, 2CV. These weren’t cars that were built down to a price; they weren’t necessarily the cheapest you could buy. What they offered was exceptional value for money, combined with the ability to meet the needs and aspirations of that people, at that time.
The fact that the Beetle went on to conquer America, or that the 2CV became a hip choice in its later life, is pure coincidence. These cars are people’s cars because they met the needs of the farmers, merchants and suburbanites who hadn’t had a car before. To my mind, you can only do this once in any market. There may yet be an opportunity for a people’s car in, say, India; but perhaps the Honda moped has already done that job.
The second type is the stripper – oh why oh why can’t I buy a car with wind-up windows, rubber mats etc? I guess the answer is two-fold: the manufacturers don’t want to build them, as the profit margins are lower and they want you to trade up; and, more importantly, there is a limitless supply of good, reliable second-hand cars on the market. We forget how reliability and eg rustproofing have hugely lengthened the life of a car today; assuming the electrics don’t become beyond repair (another issue altogether), there’s no reason why the average car can’t give at least 15 years service.
I might be in the market for a stripper myself – I spend a lot of time hauling loads of fancy goods from one retail outlet to another – but I’d much rather buy a 3-5 year old, well specced Volvo estate, on which someone else has borne the brunt of depreciation, than a brand new stripper.
I might even argue that it would be a bit of a pose to buy a stripper – something to go with that “backwoods-of-Shoreditch” beards and boots look. But maybe that would be going too far – and heaven forbid that manufacturers find an opportunity to sell de-contented cars at a premium to fashionistas!
I might even argue that it would be a bit of a pose to buy a stripper – something to go with that “backwoods-of-Shoreditch” beards and boots look.
I regard strippers, as used cars, preferable, because there is less on them to break. I do appear to be a cult of one however. When I put my 98 Civic up for sale, only one person showed. He was OK with the manual trans, but was not too crazy about the lack of A/C, or the crank up windows, or the lack of power locks.
When I put my Aunt’s 98 Civic on Autotrader, my phone rang off the hook. Car was sold in less than a day. Her’s was an LX 4 door sedan, automatic, A/C, cruise, power windows, power mirrors, power locks. Punched the VIN in on mycarfax. That 98 is out in Iowa now, still going, with 210,000 miles on the clock. It had 78,000 when I sold it in 2008.
I would too much rather buy a gently used loaded (or at least well equipped) vehicle than a brand new stripper.
Outside of a fleet or rental situation, it strikes me rather odd for an individual to buy a new stripper. What’s the point? You save a few dollars by eschewing the nice things that were once luxury but are now ubiquitous-and rarely give any major trouble any more. It might have made some sense, way back in the day, to take out an automatic transmission and put in a manual or go with a stripper because all that fancy stuff is just more to break but its really not the case any more. Is a power window really any more expensive or hard to fix than a manual one? Probably, but the last time a power window quit for me, I had well over 200K on the clock so I didn’t give a damn-the car had served its purpose and there were far more serious things going wrong with it such that it was just time for a new one.
It almost is just a “statement” any more to drive a stripper, just like driving around a loaded car is a “statement”.
I think there’s a certain amount of nostalgia involved. When I was a teenager, my parents had a Volkswagen Rabbit that was a near-total stripper, some kind of dealer loss-leader. It had cloth upholstery, thank god, and I think a rear defroster, but that was it — four on the floor, crank windows, no A/C, and no radio. It was not a bad car strictly from a driver’s standpoint, but driving alone with no radio quickly makes me realize why people go mad if they spend too much time in isolation. Also, despite the total lack of add-ons, it was not a particularly reliable car, suffering a maddening electrical gremlin that would randomly trigger the oil pressure warning buzzer and potentially drain the battery dry if the car was parked for more than about 15 minutes, plus some kind of recurrent fuel filter issue. I can’t say I had much affection for this car.
Nonetheless, I occasionally find myself having dreams involving that car, and in the dream, its total lack of amenities somehow has an attractive glow of simplicity. In real life, I would probably find it mildly nostalgic for 10 minutes and then get frustrated from the lack of radio…
Something else that should be on this list is the original Toyota Publica (UP10, 1961 through 1966). The Publica was a two-cylinder air-cooled rear-engined car; it was not a kei, but sort of in the same category as the contemporary BMW 700 or Fiat 600. It was Toyota’s answer to an RFP from MITI (the Ministry of International Trade and Industry), which was hoping to accelerate the development of the Japanese passenger car industry by creating a people’s car that could sell to people who didn’t have the money for something like a Corona or Bluebird. Toyota had serious discussions with Ford about jointly producing the Publica, but Ford finally opted out and Toyota went it alone.
As with some of the other examples, the Publica was not particularly successful. It was supposed to be ultra-cheap (the original target price was ¥360,000, equivalent to $1,000, although it didn’t quite make that), but Toyota ended up having to add deluxe and convertible versions to get people interested. I think it fell into a nebulous realm where it was still really too expensive for people whose budget ran more to scooters, but wasn’t desirable enough to tempt someone otherwise looking at a kei car (which was cheaper to run) or holding out for something a little nicer.
Ultimately, the Sunny and Corolla ended up tapping the market the Publica was supposed to hit, because rather than despite the fact that they were a bit bigger, fancier, and more expensive.
Another example is the Henry J. Henry Kaiser had been big on the people’s car idea even before Kaiser-Frazer, but I gather that Joe Frazer initially convinced him to start with standard cars. After Frazer was more or less out, Kaiser went to the federal Reconstruction Finance Corps for another major loan and started talking about the people’s car thing. According to Richard Langworth, the RFC really liked that and made it a loan condition, including in that the “under $1,200” price. Again, predictable outcome: Not cheap enough for people who were really broke, not particularly desirable to anyone who wasn’t.
How about the Volkswagen Gol in Brazil – which has been a big seller there and has put generations of Brazilians on wheels?
” Looking backward a century,the Model T was a crude, unreliable, unsafe and not all that attractive car.” Unreliable based on what standard? Name one car of that time that WAS reliable… bet you can’t.
Who put this list together?? The Citroën 2CV is missing, the Fiat Topolino and 500 are missing, not to mention where are the Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla the VW Gol and Lada whatever it was called? And one could argue that the Chevy II, The Ford Falcon and Plymouth Valiant were perhaps this country’s best attempts for a “people’s car” beyond the Model T.
A very incomplete story…