CC Cohort Blue387 found a car on the streets in Brooklyn that has so far eluded me: the final Dodge Monaco, a badge engineered Eagle Premier. Derived from the Renault 25 platform, the Premier and Monaco were roomy, but just didn’t take off. Speaking of, I’m taking off to go hiking, so I’ll leave it to you fill us in on all of the Monaco’s details.
Weird. Looks like GC Mazda 626 on each end with HC 929/Luce in the middle.
You’re right I never noticed how much Mazda was in the styling of these. Then again they only sold 2 or 3 of them, and they were not exactly long lasting, so it’s not like they were seen on the road very often.
Yes, back in the day I and several of my friends commented on a definite resemblance to the 929 of the same era, particularly the Eagle version. But I’m sure it was just a coincidence, as both came out at about the same time.
There were so few sold, it’s hard to know…but my guess is it suffered from the same problems as did the Renault Appliance and variants. In those last days AMC was all but disappearing under the weight of incompetent home-office Renault engineering. Chrysler, up until its infusion with the Franco-American team
(amazing! as incomptent as Renault was for durable engineering, they had bold, enlightened and workable ideas in product line and streamlined development)
was overcome with Iacocca-stasis. In buying Jeep, they inherited the unwanted Renault Premier. What to do with the damn thing? Why not, just slap a badge on it off the Eagle line, and call it the Eagle Premier?
That went over like a turd in the punch bowl. Here…Chrysler, in one of its downturns, was stuck with an ultramodern plant all tooled up to build a new model…that nobody wanted; holding a brand name that had exactly 35 minutes’ worth of development.
So, probably the same brainiac says: Hey! Let’s slap a DODGE nameplate on it! Call it the Monaco…hey, the rubes in Podunk, they’ll never know.
Except they did. Good or bad, that was one car that had everything but buyers.
The reason for the Dodge variant was that when Chrysler bought AMC, part of the deal was that because AMC/Renault had spent so much on development (or possibly because of contracts for purchase of the PRV V6s) there was a specific minimum of these that needed to be built, or else Chrysler would have to pay Renault a penalty for each unit under the specified minimum.
Because the Eagle version was selling so poorly, it was decided to stuff the miserable unwanted things into an additional dealer network to move enough metal that the thing could finally be killed.
They did pay a big penalty in the end. Chrysler was to use so many engines; so many transmissions…and they couldn’t find a way to use any of them. IIRC, they tried to meet their obligation partly by using Renault transmissions in the original Jeep Wrangler…they gave that up as the transmissions kept grenading almost immediately; switched to Asain transmissions (which weren’t exactly on the level of Muncies).
Paying the penalty was not only the easiest money Régie Nationale des Usines Renault ever made; it was also probably the happiest sale they were part of. Paying them to take their inferior wares and go away…you can’t find a way to make both parties happier than that.
The PRV engine was junk; you’d be lucky to get 140,000 km from one.
This car was based on the Renault 25 and was the basis for the LH cars.
Remember that the ultramodern plant Chrysler was “stuck” with was, besides Jeep, one of the reasons for buying AMC.
The LH cars (spiritual descendants of the Premier), and now the Charger, 300, and Challenger are all built there.
Not really.
They bought AMC for the Jeep line and trademarks. They obviously saw value in the Bramlea plant; but not in the product it was newly tooled-up to produce.
That is what I was referring to them being “stuck with.” They didn’t WANT the remains of the passenger-car business that AMC had; they tried in negotiations to separate that from the Jeep purchase. But Renault’s whole reason for talking was that they were losing money with blinding speed and wanted OUT.
And they spent millions retooling that plant to produce the LH cars.
Then when Daimler tried selling the mess that was Chrylser they originally wanted to keep Jeep and Dodge trucks and sell the rest as that was what they wanted out of the original purchase. Of course no one wanted the car lines and they eventually had to let Jeep go to dump the whole lot and stop loosing so much money.
“That went over like a turd in the punch bowl.”
You, Sir, just made my lunch time reading. Line of the week!
Imagine the poor bastard with a fedora who traded in his 72 Monaco on one of these.
The guy who had the 72 Monaco probably had a R-body Fifth Avenue or a Miranda in his driveway by now.
Wouldn’t have Miranda been happier if she was in the house instead of out in the driveway?
Miranda was probably working the corner for the guy in the fedora…
Yes, but does Miranda know her rights?
And is this the kind of Dodge that Miranda can wear a hat in?
As problematic and unpopular as these cars might have been, let’s not forget that certain elements of their design (in particular the FWD + longitudinal engine setup) helped to provide inspiration for what would ultimately become the ground-shaking LH cars. That this Monaco gave a little of its DNA to help make the Intrepid and Concorde — and to save ChryCo in the process — absolves it a little for me.
Right on! The primary motive behind the AMC purchase may have been to acquire Jeep, but the very useful throw-in was the Brampton plant that eventually built the LH cars.
Another throw in was Francois Castaing, AMC’s VP of product engineering and development, who was brought in from Renault. Chrysler kept him on in an equivalent position. The transfer of know-how from Renault to Chrysler should therefore come as no surprise.
What does surprise me at least is how Chrysler then proceeded to dump all that engineering in favor the rear-drive Mercedes-based LX cars.
The LX does not represent a dumping of the LH, most of it is carryover and was ready for final approval before Daimler got in the mix. The only thing Daimler added to the deal was forcing the use of the Daimler transmissions and differential instead of the designs Chrysler had ready to go. It is all detailed by the engineers that lived through it over at Allpar
I’ve seen the pieces, the schematics, the cars. The RWD LX uses Mercedes W220 front suspension and W211 rear suspension. Claims to the contrary are close to shameless. The AWD versions of the LX have a front suspension that differs from the RWD W220s, but I haven’t done a side by side comparison with Mercedes’ various all-matic models to determine if it is really unique to Chrysler or not. Sadly, the engineers making differing claims have succumbed to whatever drove Rover engineers to claim that the Mini Cooper wasn’t really a small BMW. As if they’d invented Z-link rear suspension in some parallel universe…
The thought that this miserable piece had any significant influence on the miserable LH is a myth. The LH development was well past the concept stager before the AMC purchase. From the get go the LH was intended to be able to be produced as a FWD, AWD and for police RWD. That was the reason for the longitudinal engine arrangement. Chrysler got cold feet and never tooled up for the AWD and RWD versions but the designs were done and filed away until it came time to refresh the platform and call it the LX. Of course by then Daimler had taken over so they had to do some redesign to accept a Mercedes differential instead of the design they had to save tooling costs and prove that synergy they claimed was to come from the buy out.
Chrysler used the Monaco/Premier as Engineering mules for the LH platform early on. I think people read that and think that the LH was based on the Premier.
.
Ford used the Celebrity as an engineering mule for the Taurus drivetrain so does that mean the Taurus was based on the Celebrity? The Celebrity was also used as a engineering mule for the Saturn drivetrain too.
I’m not arguing, I just think that a lot of people believed the two platforms were derivatives because they found out about the Premier mules.
Didn’t mean to imply that you were arguing showing how a totally unrelated vehicle sometimes gets used as a test mule just because it is convenient.
Eric, I beg to differ, and so does Allpar: http://www.allpar.com/model/lh2/index.html
There has been some debate on whether the LH cars were based on the Eagle Premier, a Renault design modified by AMC engineers. Dan Minick noted that there were some interchangeable parts between the two designs; but Bob Sheaves and Dan Minick both wrote that, when François Castaing took over as VP of Engineering, the existing large-car design (which apparently owed a lot to the K-cars) was dropped. This vehicle, spearheaded by Hal Sperlich, had a transverse engine and was styled like a Dynasty, but 6.5 inches wider, with a 13 inch longer wheelbase.
Castaing suggested using the Premier/R25 chassis as a starting point for a new big car. Most everything was changed, but engineering-wise they started with the Premier; Hal Sperlich’s big transverse-engine car was abandoned.
Bob Sheaves noted that “the geometry is exactly the same for the suspension, and the packaging was derived from the Eagle Premiere. All of the suspension and drivetrain mules were Premiers also… The rear suspension is as described in the link provided, but with one addition…AMC recieved 2 patents on the torsion bar design. Chrysler developed longitudinal torsion bars into a high science, but the transverse bars of the M-body (when used in police service) had an annoying tendency to allow the front suspension to lose alignment whenever a curb was hit. The same engineer responsible for the M-body design corrected the problems on the Premier, in that the bars were “folded” together into a single, more compact design that was more rigid in bending and smoother riding, due to lower rate and greater travel.”
Also, from wikipedia:
The LH platform was based on the AMC-developed and Renault-derived Eagle Premier. According to Bob Lutz, “[t]he Premier had an excellent chassis and drove so dammed well that it served as a benchmark for the LH … the spiritual father, the genetic antecedent of the LH is the Premier.”[1] Like the Premier, the LH-cars featured a longitudinally-mounted engine with a front-wheel drive drivetrain, unusual in most American front-wheel drive cars, but a hallmark of Renault’s designs.[2]
In essence, while Chrysler (Sperlich) had been working on a future larger fwd car with an east-west engine orientation (essentially an enlarged K-car platform, natch), it was abandoned at the behest of Castaing, and the Renault Premier was used as the new starting point. It’s all too obvious, given the LH’s north-south engine orientation and other similarities to the Premier. I don’t understand why you argue so vociferously against what is rather apparent, both by examining these cars, their general layout, as well as an abundance of historical record that supports that the Premier was the basis for the LH.
This brief paragraph from the same Allpar article is somewhat cryptic: When the original LH was being designed, there was an LX platform that was configurable as AWD, FWD and RWD by swapping components around. Three LX prototypes with V8 engines and ZF AWD transaxles were remade as “Premier” police cars, and crashed on the TV series “Viper.”
As I read it, “original LH” more likely refers to the Chrysler large car Sperlich was designing (and was abandoned), but it’s not clear. I find it a bit hard to believe the real LH could be readily built as rwd car, given the enormous changes doing so would require. I’d like to see more clarification on that before I can accept that it applies to the actual LH cars as built. And why is it mixing LX prototypes into the equation?
When Chrysler annouced the end of the the DIppy they publicly annouced that it wouldn’t be for long and started telling the magazines that it’s replacement would be available in FWD AWD and RWD versions and they “were already working on it” I saw it in more than one magazine back in the day before the purchase of AMC.
For what ever reason I can’t find the stuff on allpar right now where one of the engineers says the LH was designed for AWD and RWD from the get go and with the modular design they could have introduced the RWD version at any time. It is unfortunate how difficult allpar is to navigate. If and when I find it I’ll add it here.
Next time you see a LH take a look at that huge center tunnel, larger than you’ll find in any other FWD car. Also here is a picture of the LH’s FWD rear suspension and it’s simple subframe set up that would have allowed a driven IRS quite easily.
Here is a rebutial from an allpar reader to the parts of the article you quoted. “I currently own a 1997 Eagle Vision TSi and my last car was an 1991 Eagle Premier ES Limited. The Premier has a solid axle, torsion bar rear suspension with leading shock absorbers. The LH cars have an independent rear suspension with 2 lateral links, a trailing arm and a MacPherson strut per side. In the front, the Premier has a MacPherson strut with a lower A-frame control arm and the caster and camber are fixed and unadjustable. The LH is a single lower control arm with a leading tensioning strut and MacPherson struts. Caster and camber are fully adjustable.” Showing just how different the chassis design really is.
I forgot to mention the easiest way to visulize just how easy it is to design a car from scratch that could be built as either a FWD or AWD is to look a your Subaru which follows the design that dates back to the days when you could get a Subaru with only FWD. The Toyota Tercel 4wd wagon provides an even better visualization since it’s front differential is housed in a separate casting. Once you’ve visualized that just visualize deleting the components for the front drive section. Both designs that predate the LH cars and in the case of the Subaru the Premier too.
Sure, one could build a rwd Subaru or Audi, but they never have, for one good reason: having the engine in front of the front axle centerline makes for crappy weight distribution. FWIW, VW could have built a fwd version of the Beetle too. But why? Just because you can doesn’t mean it makes any sense.
Front-engine RWD cars (almost without fail) have their engine pushed as far back in the engine compartment to help with the weight distribution.
Having said that, folks say lots of stuff about their upcoming cars. Maybe Chrysler meant it. Maybe someone got confused or optimistic. I wasn’t there. The bottom line is it doesn’t seem very logical, and they never did build it. But what do I know?
The other thing is just to look under the rear of a LH and you’ll see lots of wasted space where that rear differential could have resided above that subframe I posted the picture of. Also the way the LH is designed the engine is not in front of the FA center line it’s rear cyls are behind it, similar to the way GM did the Eldo and Toyota did the Tercel.
The bigger question is why if the LH cars were derived from the Premier/Monaco and the fact that Chrysler was still under contract to buy another 100,000 copies of the PRV V6 why did they choose to pay the penalty and not just put that in at least as the base engine?
AWD was the hot thing then, and I certainly imagine that Chrysler wanted to have that capability in the LH. That they indicated, and makes gobs of sense. Kind of surprised they didn’t, actually.
Maybe Chrysler was considering a rwd version; I can’t prove it one way or another. The bigger question is why? AWD would have been a much better choice, easier, and much more obvious. Why would they want to even consider a rwd version?
If you’ve done the AWD with the longitudinal mounting then RWD would have been easy. The intitial press was that the RWD was only going to be for police versions and I can see police not wanting the added expense and complexity of the AWD and certainly not wanting FWD. So by slipping in an old school RWD trans they could have made the RWD version cheaply and easily and on the same line as indicated by the article on allpar that I just can’t locate now.
The Tercel 4wd shows how simple it could be done, those cars are just a RWD 3TC transmission away from being a RWD car after removing the front differential and axle shafts. The FWD and 4WD trans look a lot like the RWD trans used in the earlier Corolla except for the wart underneath to drive the front diff.
I agree that they probably dumped the PRV based on its early teething problems that they expected to cause high warranty costs.
Forgot to add the picture
And a shot of the engine compartment, the FWD cars looked just the same.
I recall reading somewhere (Automotive News?) that Chrysler’s effort to create a super-modular platform with FWD, AWD and RWD variants was running into problems. I imagine that they key issue was the cost.
Remember that this was an automaker which tended to have trouble transcending badge engineering. Offering a FWD and RWD variant would have cost a lot more than slapping on a different hood and taillights and calling it an Eagle.
Regarding the PRV question: That has nothing to do with what car it was derived from. I’m sure the PRV would have fit quite handily in the LH, if they’d wanted to. They were committed to new engines for the LH for the long haul anyway. I can see the logic of walking away from that engine. Maybe warranty claims were high? Lots of possible reasons, but it has no real bearing on the issue.
The discussion that the 77 B/C models were based on the 73-77A brought this back to mind so I did a little more googling and came up with this “quote from allpar” at another site.
The original LH (Intrepid, Concorde, Vision) series was designed to be either front or rear drive, but strong sales meant that the company never had to actually make any rear wheel drive versions. Then sales flagged while market research showed executives that people were leaving cars for SUVs in droves, in search of V8s, rear wheel drive, a high riding position, and lots of extra steel between them and “those other people on the road.”
The LX was reportedly in full development swing when Chrysler was bought by Daimler-Benz in exchange for…well, it was reportedly in full swing, but the process was stopped to reengineer the LX to make use of Mercedes components and technologies. Chrysler devoted one of its parts plants to making five-speed automatics based on a Mercedes design, and the electronics architecture was switched to take advantage of Mercedes’ experienced with stability control. Eventually, the LX would use a Mercedes-style rear suspension, transmission, steering system, and seats, sharing 20% of its parts with Mercedes. It would also be priced well above the original vehicles, and come out much later.
In 1997, the plan was to have an Intrepid and Concorde replacement, each front wheel drive, as well as a 300N (5 meters), full size rear wheel drive, and either a Charger or 300 convertible. The LH platform was designed for either front or rear wheel drive and could have gone RWD at any time. Third-generation LH models with front, rear, and all wheel drive, which could all have been built together, were built as prototypes, and it would have taken less than ten minutes to switch the line from rear to front drive. Chances are if the takeover had not taken place, the LX series would have appeared in 2002.
Googeling that did not direct me to where it was on allpar in the forums but that is what I remember reading there posted by a person who claimed to be one of the engineers.
The major problem being that the LH wasn’t a much better car than the Monaco, with the huge exception of the motors. The 3.3 was especially good.
The rest of the car was a disaster. As a former Chrysler Service Advisor, I could write a book about them.
Bob Lutz wrote about the purchase of AMC by Chrysler in his book Guts. As I recall, he said there were three things they got. One, Jeep. Two, the Bramalea plant. Three, the type of engineering organization adopted by AMC (as set up by Renault engineering manager Castaing). Automobile development was very “balkanized” up to that time. There was a myriad of departments – door locks, transmissions, taillights, etc that were difficult to coordinate. Chrysler adopted the AMC organization by product line which resulted in streamlining the development – shorter time – less cost.
The production of this Dodge was to fulfill a contract (agreed to by AMC). Chrysler learned a lot about this product and used the lessons in fulfilling the LH and LH2 products. Chrysler was pretty profitable in the late 90’s when Diamler came around…and we know how that story ended.
You say Dodge Monaco i think Blues Brothers a 440 powered tank not one of these Renault based things.
There were some brave attempts at bringing in larger European sedans around that time with the Renault Medallion, Merkur Scorpio and the Sterling 825. VW even brought back the Passat.
I had one of the Renacos as a rental for a few weeks. It was a big, soft riding car that didn’t handle compared to my usual German fare at the time. The minor controls were mounted on wings that were attached to the steering column so they tilted as a unit with the wheel. It actually had an authentically French ride, in that it floated up and down and only gripped the road when compared to something with swing axles. Some people like that, but they’re probably not in a hurry.
Back in the day I knew a couple of people who owned these cars (not necessarily the Dodge version though). They did look very modern and efficient for the time. But what pieces o’ $hit they were! Did Renault subcontract out the electrical systems to Lucas in England? My God, these things had the worst wiring gremlins I have ever seen. Every time one headache was fixed it was replaced by two more. Each attempt to start the car was a roll of the (loaded) dice. Will it start? Will it smoke? Will the lights/radio/horn/hvac/power window/door lock/turn signal work? Who knew? Like playing Russian Roulette with a Gatling gun. Every one a winner! A new day was a new adventure! Or maybe the production line was built over an old Indian burial ground and these things were just cursed.
Did these have the same engine as the Delorean?
More or less; the PRV V6, made in a variety of versions.
I remember seeing one of the first Monaco ads. Really cheesy and low grade. Chrysler clearly wasn’t committed to making this a high-volume car. In a way that’s too bad, because the Monaco was a lot more interesting than its sister, the Diplomat. Of course, it was also less reliable. . . .
I still don’t get why Chrysler bothered to create the Eagle. Lutz apparently thought he could turn the Eagle into an import-intender brand. Didn’t work any better than his first bite at the apple, Ford’s Merkur.
Wonder why. The Eagle quickly ended up being a badge-engineered brand from A to Z. Chrysler could have saved itself a lot of hassle by folding the Jeep into the Chrysler-Plymouth dealer network right after the AMC purchase. As it turned out, the 300 would become the corporation’s top sporty sedan during the 1990s anyway.
There was this little matter of all those AMC (passenger car) franchises. Being an AMC dealer didn’t automatically mean you had Jeeps in the building, too, Just cut them dead, and you’re facing lawsuits, state franchise laws (car dealers are notorious for being big political contributors on the state level), and a lot of unemployment. So Chrysler had to do something to keep these guys in business even in the short term as they ramped them down.
So they take the name of the longest surviving AMC model and turn it into a brand name.
By that late date I’d bet that all AMC dealers carried Jeeps — they sold well and were one of the highest profit vehicles in the land. If Chrysler wanted to phase out the AMC they presumably could have done so with a few badge-engineered afterthoughts. Or they could have bought out those AMC dealers that didn’t want to integrate with a Chrysler dealer.
Alas, Lutz had bigger dreams.
I believe you’re right on that.
AMC stopped making 2wd passenger cars in 1983; and most of their sales that year were to government motor pools. Renault cars, although present in AMC dealers since 1979, hadn’t really broken through.
The only reason, THE only reason, to keep an AMC franchise, with for the Jeep line. I’d seen this locally with a small dealer near our home…family business, selling Nashes since 1920.
First…no changes. AMC took up Jeep and put their cars in Jeep dealers’ showrooms; but AMC dealers weren’t similarly pressured. Probably it would cost them additional $$$ to get a Jeep franchise.
Then…1974…this dealer got ONE Jeep…a J-20 pickup with a plow, for gofer duties and snow removal. That was all.
In 1975, Jeep launched the Renegade and Levis packages on a push on the CJ jeeps…and alluva sudden, that lot was filled with CJ-5s. I never saw so many in one place before…remember, the CJ’s cult-car status was still a few years ahead.
Soon, the Jeeps replaced most of the AMC automobile inventory. It was a Jeep outlet, that might sell a few cars.
So…unless the dealers carried two franchise agreements on paper (Jeep Corporation was an on-paper separate corporation up until the Chrysler takeover) and one of them wanted to make a stink about no more Appliances or LeCrashes to sell…there wouldn’t have been any legal problems.
Me, I think it was just that the whole Premier package was dropped in the Chrysler marketing boys’ laps – and they didn’t have a clue what to do with it.
“Alas, Lutz had bigger dreams.”
I’m not sure what to think of that man. He may be the Perfect Teflon Manager.
“Often wrong but seldom in doubt”
There’s no doubt that he’s a Marine.
I never knew such a beast existed. I’ve never seen one in Canada, at any rate.
Oh , we had them. Just not for long.
I’m pretty certain I spotted one of these sometime in the past year, it could’ve been the Eagle Premier, In fact, I think it WAS the Premier, somewhere here in Puget Sound Country, possibly in and around the Seattle area.
It was the first I’ve seen in a long while though.
The Monaco was the “record breaker” of the largest number of days’ inventory on the dealer’s lots. I remember seeing that there was a 370+ day supply at the high (low?) point.
Florissant Dodge had a few of these Monacos and one day while wifey and I were walking the dog, we walked up to the dealership and a nice red Monaco was left unlocked – on a Sunday, they were closed.
We were impressed with how it was appointed and its comfort – at least on the lot. Of course, it was out of our price range, but this was before we bought our next car, our Acclaim.
Eagle had an odd duck version, one with a seemingly longer rear door with a one-piece glass. I have never seen one on the road, just at an Eagle dealership near where I worked at the time. It must have been a Premier.
Too bad these apparently weren’t good cars, as I rarely saw a Monaco on the road, but always a few at the dealer’s…until they, too, disappeared into history.
I remember our family rented one for a week. We had the V6 version. Pluses: Very smooth engine and transmisson with excellent power. I remember the seats were one the best I’ve ever sat in, combined with a very smooth ride (French influence I guess). Jensen AM/FM radio was hilarious, cheaply lit like their aftermarket radios, but sounded very good. Minuses: Dangerously small acclerator pedal, afraid your foot would slip off and hit the brakes at anytime . Giant gaps in the fenders and body, I swore, you could fit a thin magazine thru them. Hazard light located up on the headliner, another French influence? At the end of the rental period all four corners of the bumpers where scratched for some reason and the engine started making a terrible squealing noise. Someone at the rental agency came to pick up the car in a Ford Festiva, driving the Monaco and towing the Festiva back.
Our local Dodge dealer had a lot full of these when I was shopping for a new car in early 1991.
I had pretty much decided on a Taurus/Sable and was aggressively shopping for a program car or ex-rental. But the full page ads in the Philadelphia Inquirer offering BRAND NEW MONACOS!!!! with AIR!!! DELUXE STEREO!!! and POWER EVERYTHING!!! for only $9900!!! convinced me to at least take a test drive, lest I miss out on the deal of the century.
The maroon Monaco I drove was a bucket of bolts that felt like a poorly assembled Revell model kit. The interior felt flimsy and cheaply slapped together, and the fit and finish was atrocious. Justinx is right, though…the seats were supremely comfortable and the ride was smooth and almost as floaty as my parents’ Crown Victoria.
As much as I really wanted to like the Monaco and Premier, the car was a disappointment. Between the overall flimsiness of the interior and the fact that it had motorized-mouse “passive belts” where the Taurii and Sables I was shopping had driver airbags I quickly determined my money was better spent on an ex-rental 1990 Sable with 15,000 miles that gave me almost nine years without a single major problem.
A neighbor of mine actually owned one of these…maybe still has it. It’s gray and looks like it stepped out of 1993. They moved from a few doors away to the far end of the road so I haven’t seen it lately.
There was a stand alone Jeep dealer in Chicago near Wrigley Field that got a new ‘Jeep’ sign with Pentastar logo after the buy out. But, no ‘Eagle’ on the sign, though. They then turned into simply a ‘Jeep Specialist’ repair shop, during early 90’s recession, and the Chrysler supplied Jeep sign was gone.
I used to travel alot from Sheboygan to Eau Claire WI, I would usually take Highway 33 through the state and this always meant a layover in Portage. I happened on 2 seperate occations to see one of these Franco-Monacos in the small downtown. I got the impression it was driven by a older man who was proud of it. Who else would hold onto one of these? I only knew what it was because I’d read his article about a week before the first sighting. The CC effect continues!