I guess there’s more than one of these Nissan vans left in the US that didn’t actually get bought back by Nissan in one of the biggest and most expensive buy-backs ($200 million) of its kind. TheProfessor posted this one at the Cohort, and I found one in Eugene a while back. I wrote up the full story on these here, but here’s the capsule version:
During the great minivan wave of the mid eighties, the Japanese manufacturers obviously wanted to play too. So they adapted their existing old-school little vans for the US market, which actually took some doing. In the case of Nissan, the larger 2.4 L four was shoehorned in, and along with smog controls, A/C, etc., the engine compartment temperature became uncontrollable, and fires erupted way too often. Nissan had four recaalls, before they threw in the towel, and offered to buy back all the vans, for a healthy price ($7000). But obviously, not everyone took Nissan up on their offer.
Ironically, the similar Toyota van has developed a rep as being about as un-killable as it gets. They’re everywhere still here.
If a manufacturer wants to buy back all examples of one of their car lines,
what insurance company would be willing to insure these vans?
I thought the Toyota van was the best looking Japanese van at the time.
It was certainly never going to be a match for the T-115 Magic Wagons.
But I could see where people on the US coasts would appreciate the Toyota.
This Nissan certainly ‘sampled’ a lot in terms of styling/design from the Toyota.
This one has a “United Nations” fleet quality to it.
Strange that the owner would let the rust on the right of the hood, progress that far.
Like they didn’t bother with the body’s care. Rain is what appears to wash it.
I do have a strong appreciation for the crisp, angular styling of 80s vehicles in general.
KInda looks like Tammy Fae with running mascara after a good cry…
+1
I think the recall would also make it more difficult to resell the vehicle. I have to assume that selling a vehicle that even the manufacturer has decided is potentially unsafe — especially if you don’t disclose that to the buyer — leaves you open to all kinds of ugly liability issues.
In Japan, each of the automakers had at least one van along these lines. There were three general size classes, which I suspect were dictated by tax or licensing rules. Some manufacturers offered several different sizes; Toyota actually had four, ranging from just under 4 meters to just over 4.6 meters in length. All of them looked very similar, differing mainly in details like windshield angle, glass area, and window shape.
I am surprised such a vehicle could be registered, given that the manufacturer is indicating to regulators that they don’t feel it is safe to drive.
I would have thought this was the one that would allow Paul and CC to call it a day, and now there are two.
Daniel’s insurance comment is very interesting.
My house stereo receiver has more ventilated openings than the front of this van. Ya think that might have contributed to the overheating?
Looks like a terrible design from a crashworthiness standpoint.
I believe that front ‘grill’ is where you could insert the VHS tapes.
Lol 😀
+1
That, and the “UN quality feel” and Tammy Fae comments.
A Rodney Dangerfield of vans… It don’t get no respect! 🙂
The Toyota mid-engined vans also have this problem, although not to the same degree (ooh, er, um, sorry!). They cook everything in the engine compartment – hoses, wires, and watch out for the plastic electrical connector shells – look at them the wrong way and they will turn into dust.
Keep this in mind if you’re thinking of getting one (besides the fact that you must first buy a vehicle lift in order to work on it).
It’s interesting that these were so problematic in the US, when they were sold in Japan with the CA18T and LD20T turbo engines, which I would’ve though would be far more problematic from a heat point of view…..
From my understanding the US versions engine is significantly larger limiting the the amount of air flow, the state of tune and emissions controls, AC and refrigeration compounded things.
Also most of the JDM models would have been scrapped at an early age-mostly cars are only kept for two or three years until road worthy tests get too expensive. So a lot of problems with new or highly stressed engineering don’t show up on JDM cars- they are gone before wear and age catches up with them!
I think the older JDM models aren’t scrapped, but exported overseas – to places like New Zealand, or the Russian Far East.
True, and then they are no longer a problem for the manufacturer once they are sold overseas as grey market imports.
We didn’t get a great deal of these Vanettes for some reason. I mean, sure, they did come in as used JDM imports, but not many of them. The Toyota Townace/Masterace (aka Toyota Van in North America) pretty much ruled that segment of the used JDM market.
Like I posted on the full CC, I wonder why Nissan didn’t sell the Vanette’s (as they were called here) bigger sibling, the Caravan/Urvan/Homy in North America instead? It was factory available with the 300ZX’s 3.0 V6 in it. The V6 ones could really move, although there was always a strong sense the engine was going to tear free of the body and accelerate into the distance…
It was? I’m looking at a 1987 Japanese-market buyer’s guide that lists the Caravan/Homy’s top engine option as a 1,952cc four with all of 91 PS, so I’m assuming Nissan decided a V-6 version was probably too expensive for the home market. That might have been the same reason for not sending it to the U.S., since at that point the value of the yen relative to the dollar was skyrocketing. I imagine there wouldn’t have been a lot of takers at $30,000+.
Indeed ’twas AUWM. Could barely believe it when I saw my first one about 10 years ago. I got to ride in one in around 2002 – it was the loosest-feeling van I’d been in, seriously quick, but felt like it was dramatically over-engined…! The Toyota Hiace was available with the 4.0L Lexus V8 from the factory too, for the ambulance spec models. The V6 Caravans I’ve seen have all been 2-tone blue, and were all badged “GT-Cruise”. A quick check on our trademe auction site has found just one, a white “GL-L”: http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=658769279
The V6 is also listed on the excellent auto.vl.ru site over the years. VG30E, 114kw, 245Nm. The GT Cruise is shown in the 1995 model year, and here’s the “GT Limousine”: http://english.auto.vl.ru/catalog/nissan/caravan/1988_10/20309/
Unexpected engine choice – although several Nissan Caravans and Toyota Hiaces have been converted locally to Ford/GM V8 power, so clearly there’s a market, albeit probably tiny!
Also on trademe, here’s one of the factory V8 Hiace vans: http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used-cars/toyota/hiace/auction-640688708.htm. A little bit of research reveals they were fitted new with the 1UZ-fe V8 by Toyota Technocraft (which TRD is part of). The Lexus digital instruments were included, but the Hiace version of the 1UZ differs from the Lexus version in having cast exhaust iron manifolds, different throttle body, relocated oil filter and rear sump. There you go, plenty of useless info on strangely large-engined JDM vans!
Is this one a fancy model or something? It looks low to the ground and all the same color.
I also like the rims on it. Looks sportier (faster?) than the Toyota one.
Definitely did not know about them. Wonder if I’ve seen them before and dismissed them as Toyota/Mitsubishi.
This style of van has slowly started growing on me.
I rode a bit on the Toyota one, back when I would get picked up from school.
Could they be 300ZX wheels?
A friend who drove all the Japanese vans in his job rated these the best, albeit in non-catching-on-fire form
“Ironically, the similar Toyota van has developed a rep as being about as un-killable as it gets.”
I disagree but only slightly. I LOVE 80s Toyota Vans, but compared to pretty much everything else they sold at the time, these were ones that required pretty regular upkeep to avoid radiator/heating/headgasket issues. Again I’m only comparing to other vans and other Toyotas. Most of them at the time could be ignored until the LOW OIL light came on, and even then some. I’d go years between fluid changes, but NOT in a Toyota van.
I’m drinking strong beer, also.
Had a Toyota Town Ace for three years while stationed in Okinawa and it was a great van, comfortable and as strong as any other Toyota I’ve had. Only concern was that you sat over the front axle and your only frontal protection was mere sheet metal……
Funny, I was recently looking at a 25 year old (Aug 1988 I think) Consumer Reports Magazine where they compared this to the Toyota as well as the Chrysler and Ford Aerostar. They didn’t seem to like the Toyota nor the Nissan, citing poor acceleration and the obvious problems servicing the engine (you had to lift the portion of the floor under the front passenger seat to get at the engine…they mentioned using “long neck funnels” for replacing fluids (wonder how fun an oil change would be…have to crawl way under to get at the oil pan I’d assume)). They mentioned some sort of “hot box” that they liked on them (guess you could use it for warming food?) that looked like it was built into the console near the shifter…they mentioned combining the “good” aspects of the 4 vans they’d like to see in an “ideal” model (and elimiating the bad ones).
I rode in one of these briefly in 1987, between Toronto and Hamilton On…one of they guys I was visiting on a business trip had one…I was interested in the van, but didn’t get to ask many questions as work talk intruded…but other than that, I never had other dealings with it. My father would have hated it, he didn’t like VW (aircooled) vans for the same reason, driver sat so far forward that in a crash, you probably didn’t stand much of a chance. My Aunt/Uncle had a VW Van that was destroyed in a fire in the early ’70’s (maybe 1973) and I remember my father remarking that it was probably a good thing, he thought that it was dangerous to sit so close to the front of the vehicle (but it undoubtedly made the vehicle much shorter, probably not much longer than some of the subcompacts of the day…good for tight parking spaces). Wonder how much shorter these were compared to today’s “mini” vans?
I’m sorry, but these vans were weak sauce here in the US. The Dodge Caravan/Plymouth Voyager really re-defined the whole people mover segment back then. All of the competing efforts (domestic and foreign) were just playing catch up until they could come out with something as unique as the Caravan/Voyager.
I think the forward control vans from the JDM market were the worst, much like USDM pickup trucks, they’re great in their native environment, but out of their box (so to speak), they suffered badly. While none of these vehicles were road burners by any stretch of the imagination, they all seemed overly-stressed to me, run the A/C and feel the power drain away. With mid engine designs and RWD, the only reason why they were modestly space efficient is because of the big box shape. They were a servicing nightmare, especially if you couldn’t access them from below.
The Astro and Aerostar were essentially just dressed up mini trucks and drove like them, too. Maybe the only advantage they had were their powerplants, the ‘Stro could get some serious GM truck engine by the end of it’s lifetime. But the Aerostar was plagued with all kinds of problems and the Astro/Safari were typical GM rattleboxes.
Not to say the Chrysler minivans were without their issues, either. The 2.2 versions were slow, too. The Mitsu powered ones were a little more like it, but those motors developed a reputation for smoking later in life. Once they got the V6 and the extended wheelbase versions, they were ready for primetime. But they did set the standard to which everyone uses today.
JDM vans: fail.
The JDM vans I’ve experienced in my life (’86 Toyota Townace, ’90 Nissan Caravan, ’94 Toyota Hiace, 2x 2000 Mazda E2000) were never bothersome from a servicing perspective. The passenger seats were easily removed, and they all had additional access hatches in the floor. In fact, driving them with the passenger seat out made it very easy to trace mechanical issues in real-world driving. It was easier servicing them than my 2004 Mitsubishi L400 van (front engine rear drive) where the rear of the engine was tightly tucked under the windscreen and dashboard. They were all extraordinarily space efficient and able, but I don’t miss any of them as I’m not in favour of being the frontal crush zone!