(first posted 2/2/2018) The case of the missing Simca is solved. Last week, when we took a look at Road Test‘s extensive comparison of 1968 economy imports, it was clear that the magazine didn’t actually drive a Simca for the comparison, despite including it as part of the article. Turns out, they did in fact drive it the prior year as part of the magazine’s review of Economy Imports in the February 1967 issue. So, for your extended reading pleasure, here is that comparison test. There are different cars covered, an obsession with how the cars’ jacks worked, and still more mysterious omissions. Like last time, this post is a long one (61 pages) so take your time and enjoy!
It’s interesting to see Road Test post information on the drivers participating in the comparison test, including their age, height and weight, which is actually helpful to consider when reading the comments about comfort and access to the back seat of the cars. The group included a mix of Road Test employees as well as some local Southern California businessmen.
Sorry Ford Anglia fans, this is about all you will see concerning that car in the test. Likewise, the Fiat 1100 also vanishes, while the diminutive Fiat 600 only gets minimal coverage. The main cars tested for 1967 were the Datsun 410, Fiat 124, Ford Cortina, MG 1100, Opel Kadett, Renault 10, Simca 1000, Toyota Corona and Volkswagen Beetle.
Road Test certainly provided extensive coverage on the cars’ interiors, including ingress/egress, seat comfort, control operation and interior storage. But then the magazine ventured into unusual territory with extensive coverage on the operation of the cars’ jacks, including a rather comical mishap.
I cannot think of another car magazine that devoted so much coverage to trunk tools and jacks. It’s also interesting to note that Road Test removed both tires on the elevated side of the car–surely not a normal occurrence, even then when people were more likely to need to change one tire every now and then.
Given that the Fiat 124 was all-new at this point, it’s no surprise that it was able to inch into the top three “hottest” cars. In reality, none of the cars were quick–their mission was economy, not performance.
The front-wheel-drive MG was a very new beast in the context of 1967. Road Test liked it, but found that it required some “getting used to.” The conventional front-engine rear-drive cars were likely the easiest to drive for the typical American driver, while the rear-engine rear-drive cars exhibited the handling quirks expected from that layout.
Safety was gaining in importance for buyers in 1967, though additional new Federal safety requirements wouldn’t be imposed until 1968. Road Test paid attention to seat belts and interior door handles that were harder to inadvertently unlatch as examples of smarter safety features.
Not surprisingly, in the braking tests, the Fiat 124 and Renault 1o–both equipped with disc brakes–performed the best. This was a laudable safety feature that domestic makers were painfully slow to adopt, even on their high-performance and luxury lines, never mind their low-cost entry-level products.
VW simply dominated the segment when it came to resale value. The combination of high quality, clever marketing, extensive dealer body (at 909 dealers, VW’s network was by far the largest of the economy imports) and low service costs also kept Volkswagen as the undisputed leader in small car sales, with 454,801 finding U.S. homes for 1967. This was over 200,000 more units than the rest of the economy imports combined!
Pricing and equipment in the segment was pretty competitive. The cheapest base price belonged to the smallest car: the Fiat 600 sold for a minuscule $1,267 ($9,494 adjusted). The most expensive of the cars listed was the Ford Cortina 4-door at $1,966 ($14,731 adjusted), which was still quite affordable and showcased the value these entry-level products provided.
Another interesting tidbit for 1967 was the consideration of bumper performance and alignment. Bumper protection was certainly an issue, though it typically received scant coverage in a market still more obsessed with style. That said, I have to admit that seeing the top photograph of the Cadillac Eldorado bumpers versus the economy imports just makes me love Bill Mitchell’s styling even more. Look at those sharply pointed daggers aimed right at those meek little cars! Cadillac certainly made a statement, front or back!
Just as in the 1968 Economy Import comparison test we saw last week, the Road Test Renault love-fest for ’67 was quite apparent. However, the harsh reality in 1967 was that Renault still suffered from a severely tarnished reputation due to the extensive issues associated with the earlier Renault Dauphine, which rightfully soured Americans on the brand. Even the highly praised features of the new Renault 10 (seat comfort, brakes) couldn’t offset buyer’s distrust, and brand sales in the U.S. remained relatively small at 21,219 for 1967. Likewise, the all-new Fiat 124, though quite modern, also had an uphill battle given the brand’s distribution, service and quality challenges. Total Fiat sales were just 15,933 for the year. MG was in that same boat as well, plus the 1100 had the added challenges of “unique” looks and the “untested” front-wheel-drive layout. MG sales for the year barely budged despite the new arrival, climbing a mere 3% to 22,387.
Other cars in the test would be significantly updated or replaced for 1968, including the Datsun, Ford, Opel and Simca. The Standard Catalog of Imported Cars doesn’t list 1967 sales data for Simca, but results for the other brands are as follows: Datsun – 45,496 (up 55%!), Ford – 16,193 and Opel – 51,693. Though the mainstay Corona was mostly unchanged for 1967, the Toyota brand still posted a nice sales increase, climbing 82% to 38,073. It seems that Toyota’s high-quality reputation in the U.S. was taking root.
So now once again, it’s time for your pick of the Economy Imports. As noted last week, for 1968, my choice would have been the new Datsun 510, but for 1967 I’m not sure I would have gone with the Datsun 410. I think my pick would have been the Fiat 124. Road Test found a lot to like about the car, and its clean, modern styling would have seemed very fresh in 1967. So that’s my choice of the Economy Imports for 1967, what’s yours?
In mid-late 60s rural Pennsylvania the VW might have been my choice, especially after I got the chance to drive a few examples. BUT, the Opel was the only one of all these with “local” sales AND service….the local Buick dealer selling Opel for several years by the time this test took place.
Yet, being a dyed in the wool Ford fan, I suppose I would have considered the Cortina, but not bought one as no Ford dealer within 50 miles knew what a Cortina was.
BTW, didn’t all the car magazines in the 60s think the 124/125 Fiats were the best small imported cars.
Motor Trend reviews of this vintage would fairly often mention spare tire accessibility, but usually only in individual road tests, not comparison tests — probably for space reasons.
I know it’s not the most sensible choice but the car out of this lot that appeals to me the most is the MG 1100. It’s the best-looking, it’s well-packaged and it handles well.
Just don’t buy one with the self-destructing 4-speed automatic transmission! (I’m surprised Road Test didn’t mention this option as it was unique among cars of this class at the time.)
I had the 4 speed automatic in a 1968 model which I bought in 1974. I only had it for a couple of years but it never gave me any trouble.
On balance, I’d probably go for the Cortina. The Fiat would be more fun, but probably more of a headache, and the 410 Bluebird wasn’t quite there yet in terms of desirability.
Oddly enough, from anecdotal evidence over the years here and from how quickly they disappeared from the streets, I’d say the Cortina/Model C was no more robust than the 124. If not even less so.
With some bigger radials, the 124 would have been my choice. It was really well-designed car; one could say something of the ultimate small RWD sedan, in terms of space utilization and other qualities.
None of these cars were sold here new on radial tyres, the simple act of upgrading to radials transforms things like Anglias and Cortinas into quite capable handlers the Cortina was very light for its size and did not perform well when crashed Disc brakes were available on Cortinas and were standard on some trim levels, by 67 it was mostly a standard fitment on most British cars here to have front discs.
Well, in the case of my father’s Renault R10, and as mentioned in the article, it came with Michelin X tires, and I do remember this as being the first car he bought that came with radial tires. My Dad was a big fan of radials ….until he got them on our new 1973 Country sedan and the Firestone 500 tires delaminated with less than 1000 miles on them.
Car manufacturers back then used to make a deal about “radial tuned suspensions”…I wonder if there really was a difference in suspension design that would need to follow from transition from bias ply/bias belted tires to radials?
My impression in retrospect was that Renault was trying hard to atone for its poor prior attempts at selling cars like the Dauphine by presenting a very compelling car for a very good price, realizing at this point that VW had taken over the market (I think at one short point Renault was selling better back in the 50’s but it didn’t last) and they wanted back in. They put more emphasis on the car, which was very good at the time (might have been better if they had front wheel drive, but this was still early enough that it wasn’t clearly the way cars would go for the next half century and beyond). Maybe instead they should have emphasized their dealers, since that was where VW was superior and I think ultimately caused their demise (in less than 10 years). I think the British cars were similar, they didn’t back them well, and they needed better support than they offered. On the other hand, the Japanese cars didn’t necessarily have more or better dealers (worse, probably, in truth) but they did the continuous improvement thing that took a car like the pretty unimpressive vehicle in this article and eventually turned it into the car admired for its reliability that we know now. But you clearly have to have a mix of things, I don’t think reliability alone would have been enough (the VW was pretty reliable for its time, but it was also spartan, which eventually people wanted more features … it was a primitive vehicle but most were at the time).
Too bad Renault didn’t catch on….the demise was pretty quick, except for their deal with AMC, within another 10 years or so they were pretty much gone as a distinct marque offered in the US (even before Peugeot, Fiat, and Alfa Romeo stopped selling cars here (for a long time)).
It’s kind of surprising in retrospect that Renault bothered with the R8 and especially the R10 rather than pushing the Renault 6 (a reskinned, fancier 4) forward and offering both a yet-plusher version of it and a stripped “Biscayne/Custom/Fury I” version of the R16 on the French market to squeeze out the rear engines.
Fiat for the win.
Egads. I’d be terrified to drive any of those cars on American roads for fear of getting into a serious accident. I’ve seen lots of them and it didn’t usually end well for those little cars. I would still try my hardest to come up with another couple of hundred dollars and use my best negotiating skills to get a Valiant or a Nova, or maybe a used Satellite or Cutlass.
What were the “regional only” manufacturers whose cars were not included in this test because they were sold only in parts of the U.S.? Honda maybe?
Honda didn’t sell the N600 here until the 1970 model year. Malcolm Bricklin imported the Subaru 360 here in 1968 for $1,297. Suzuki was thinking about importing the Fronte’ 360, as evidenced by a brochure with a mph speedo but most likely didn’t.
Gentlemen, $2,000 in February 1967 is $15,000 in February, 2018. Keep that in mind as you read 🙂
Great Point,Since I Live 10k Miles Away from USA,What Can You Buy New With 15K Today?
A Nissan Versa.
Just a thought, but back in 1967 there were two better answers, neither of which was covered because they exceeded the $2000 price limit.
VW 1600 Squareback- $2295
and what was then THE automotive bargain,
Volvo 122S $2655
No one (except C&D magazine) knew Volvo was selling forever cars back then for the price of a domestic compact.
What a steal!
“Road Test” and “Road & Track” often recommended fragile foreign cars that looked great on paper, cars that might be marginally acceptable driving 5K a year in the benign climate of southern California…..but not so great choices for 12 to 15K miles a year 4 season driving in the rest of the USA, by American drivers used to robust Detroit cars that could thrive on minimal/no maintenance or “fussing with”.
“Car & Driver” was somewhat more “Real World” realistic with their picks and choices.
C&D was based in New York City of all places until they moved to Michigan sometime around 1980.
True, but their road tests and driving impressions were often created away from NYC.
The particular Cortina tested is a strange choice as it is a first generation model. Leftover ’66? I say this because the second generation came in 1967, and in theory, should have been the model tested here instead.
Interesting question, and I wondered the same thing. I think it boiled down to timing: Road Test would have wanted to include the English Ford products, and the ones available in late 1966 (when the test was likely conducted to make it into the February 1967 issue) were the “old” Cortina (and even older Anglia). The Standard Catalog of Imported Cars is rather vague on exactly when the new Cortina arrived stateside, but apparently it was a mid-year 1967 introduction at the earliest.
You are likely right. The Dagenham plant switched over to Mark II production in September 1966. I’m guessing import supplies likely came in large batches, and even though they sold in fair numbers, it probably took time to clear inventories.
There might have also been a small delay before the Federalised Mk.IIs were in production. The Anglia wasn’t replaced by the Escort until January ’68 so outlived the newer Mk.I Cortina.
I am still drawn to the quirky styling of that Renault. The most cushy seats of the bunch plus advanced 4-wheel disc brakes. If only their reliability had been better.
I was flummoxed by the driver in several pics who couldn’t even be bothered to throw away his cigarette for the duration of the test drives!
People smoked constantly in those days and in many road tests ashtrays were a frequently evaluated feature. Motor Trend complained about the inconvenient placement of the ashtray behind the power window controls in the left armrest of the new 61 Lincoln Continental requiring the driver “to hold the cigarette in his right hand and cross it over under his left arm to put out his smoke.” Although the Surgeon General’s report on smoking was issued in 1964, the ban on advertising did not take effect until 1970 (though the health warning on packaging appeared in 1965 IIRC). The whole anti-smoking campaign really took off in the 1970’s.
I’m curious. Have you or anyone else here ever were in a Renault R10? Those are seriously the most comfortable seats I EVER sat in. My uncle had a 1976 Buick Electra Limited with the “velour” seats, no match for the R10. Why our Detroit 3 never adopted them is way beyond me.
Bob
Those seats! Often the best feature of a Renault or Peugeot was there supremely comfortable front seats.
I have increased the ride comfort of several small Japanese pick up trucks of the 1970’s and 1980’s with the transplant of these Superior Seats.
“The domestic vehicle in this bracket is already extinct.” Umm, not necessarily so.
$2,090 would have bought you a new 4cyl Chevy II in 1967. $1839 would have delivered a straight six Rambler 220 to you.
$2025 for a new Valiant 100 2 Dr as well.
VW was indeed the only survivor from the first import boom. The poor sales and resale value of some others (Renault, Anglia) showed that customers had not forgotten bad cars from a few years earlier. My favorite part is the Chevrolitis which affected the Corona automatic. This is a condition I have tried hard to avoid. 🙂
The real competition here would have been in used cars. I would imagine that a 2 year old Chevy would have been in this price range. But used cars had more stigma then so there was a certain market for new cars at this price.
Me? I am salivating over the values on late model or unsold new Studebakers. A guy could have bought 2 or 3 for $2k, or so I would guess.
Fiat 124’s live on as Lada’s, in every one of those ‘Crazy Russian Drivers’ youtube vids.
The way those people drive…why would anyone ride a motorcycle there? Pedestrians are either suicidal or blind, too
?
Interesting article. One thing that the test glosses over is the fact that the MG manages 14 mph/1,000 rpm in top gear. That means the poor little thing is chewing its guts out at nearly 4,300 rpm when going 60 mph. Doesn’t sound like a recipe for longevity or pleasant highway cruising.
Our 1975 Honda Civic (with added tachometer) had about the same gearing: 4000rpm at 60mph, 5000 at 75, and 6000 flat-out at 90 indicated. Five-speed gearboxes were much appreciated when they came along.
Besides immediately falling apart and apparently crap ventilation, the lack of a highway gear was a major shortcoming of an amazing car. It’s a Mini that people and some stuff can fit in.
Probably perfect for dashing round twisty country lanes where the chuckability would be much more important than out and out speed.
If you can trust it to run, that is…
Famous scene from Fawlty Towers – mandatory viewing if you like a laugh:
https://youtu.be/aYR3N-5rPJQ
I remember when my Dad hired a Ford Anglia for a holiday trip (mid-60s) which was also reluctant to start. In the end he had the bonnet open, presumably fiddling around with the mechanicals, swore at it and it started!
Interesting test, but two obsolete models from Ford UK both the MK1 Cortina and the Anglebox were replaced in late 67 by the larger boxier MK2 Cortina and the MK1 Escort, other than that having different size segment cars tested against each other seems odd, Cortinas sold very well here as did Anglias both were popular on race tracks the Cortina running gear bolts into the smaller lighter Anglia and makes them perform quite well, the Cortina also came with a 1200cc engine on the base model,
I guess it shows the different market conditions here too Ford dealers were common as were BMC agents while VW agents were not so widespread, Even the small town where I came from had a Simca, Hillman and GM dealer, Japanese cars though sold here were not common lots of long memories among those with enough cash meant lots of buyer resistance to Japanese brands.
I think, Bryce, that the odd comparison of segments is because of the arbitrary price ceiling in this article. In Aus (and NZ?) there was quite a noticeable price difference between the Corona-sized, 1.5+ litre car and an Anglebox-sized, 1.0 litre one. That is, a buyer just wouldn’t be cross-shopping in the other segment. Also, ofcourse, the segmentation was very distorted in Aus and NZ by tariffs and local-assembly issues.
Bill Bourke from Ford Aus as late as about ’63 said that there’ll never be a Japanese car in an RSL (Returned Service League) carpark. Within 10 or so years of his statement, he was shown to be dead wrong, proving either that consumers will always buy the better quality product or that humanity can be very forgiving of past hatreds – or probably both.
The Japanese issue was a strange one. I knew several returned men back in the nineties who had Japanese cars, one an ex-POW. If anyone had reason to hate the Japanese it would have been Len, yet he’d just bought his second Mazda, from a dealer 130km away. For anything smaller than an Aussie Six, Japanese cars were just the intelligent choice back then.
Conversely I knew of several people who would never buy Japanese – yet drove Ford Lasers…..
I spent a good chunk of the mid-60s trying to convince my dad to buy an MG 1100 to replace his ’58 Chevy. We had a local MG/Austin/Lotus dealer, a good decade before Toyota and Datsun stores opened in the area, and the car was so different from the Detroit iron of the era.
Re the Simca 1000, I briefly had a 1965 Simca Bertone coupe in the mid-70s, of which something like 150 were exported to the US. If memory serves, Fiat used Simca as a development operation: the Simca 947cc engine had a 5-main crank, somewhat overkill for a 50-ish hp output; for the Fiat 850, they opted for a 3-bearing crank to cut cost. I got most of the engine rebuilt but proved my woeful lack of mechanical skills in never actually getting it to run or the car on the road.
I spent a lot of the summer of 1967, between junior/senior years of high school, driving or riding in my friend’s new 67 Beetle. Her dad and uncle had opened a new VW dealership and the car was a loaner, nicely equipped with a sunroof we kept open all summer. At that point I’d owned a 60 Beetle and driven 56 and 61 models so the 67 was a big step up. At the time I thought the 53 horsepower engine was a revelation and made the car a lot more fun (and safer!) to drive. Also, the new 12-volt electrical system and stand-up headlamps provided a much better view of the road at night. All in all, a greatly improved, more modern car than the VW’s I’d previously driven. I also got to take a friend’s new 67 Fastback on a road trip that summer and it too was a greatly refined VW.
While these testers may not have been impressed with VW, the majority of “foreign” car buyers were at that time. And in the Midwest, VW had a dealer network that none of the other cars could offer.
The VW pedal position was definitely a problem. It was even worse in the Type 3s. (I was thinking about it just this morning for some unknown reason!)
Those trunk diagrams are a nice use of graphics. They would definitely help the buyer decide without having to load up real suitcases.
I hated the way the pedals were hinged at the floor and the windshield was an inch from your face. Super Beatles were far better, plus luggage space and much better ride. Don’t know if they had the horrible pedals.
What an interesting and very thorough article. Thank you for posting it.
When shopping for a car in this era, I would think the dealer network would be very important. Here in Canada, anyway, Renault and Fiat would give dealerships to pretty much anybody. My cousin once worked at a two bay gas station that was actually doubling as a Fiat dealership. No parts in stock and no trained techs. Cars of those days needed a fair amount of fiddling to make them run right, and the techs of the era usually didn’t have them for “foreign cars,” especially in gas stations.
In Canada this was a real factor and in many places still is. You could drive your Fiat in Vancouver, but if it broke down in Spuzzum, good luck getting it fixed. Thus, were I really looking for a cheap car in 1967, a Chevy II with Stovebolt and Powerglide was pretty hard to beat. I suppose that’s why there just loads of them on the road when I was child.
I got a laugh about the part where VW owners lie about how much work their Bugs needed. For a car that was so supposedly reliable as a Bug, I sure heard a lot of guys talking about fixing them!
I remember there being lots of Renaults in Quebec in those days. Like VW’s in the US. Probably a lot of Peugeots also.
That was when Quebec was trying to show their love for the mother country which traded them for a speck in the Caribbean.
There was actually a Renault factory in Quebec in the 1960’s. The problem was the cars couldn’t take the arctic cold winters and salty roads.
I suspect if your Fiat broke down in Spuzzum nowadays the CJDR dealer could help. They put that 1.5 turbo and 2.5 Multiair in just about everything that’s not a Hellcat…
Spuzzum? My inner 13-year-old laughed his (buttocks) off at that name!
I would have gone for the VW, $1,770 is now $13,260. I really would want a ’67 1600 Fastback. Twin carbs, dual port heads, front disc brakes, 2 trunks, faster, quieter, roomier. But at $2,148, the extra $378 is $2832, or $16,095, so quite a bit more then the Beetle. Guess I’d try to get a used ’66 Fastback for around $1,770 if I could.
Really enjoy reading these old road tests from back in the day!
The golden age (so to speak) of white-walls —
84% of these (10 out of 12) are on nifty, little 13-in. tighty-whities.
Only the MG & Renault are shown as black-walled.
Bring back the white-walls!
My dad’s answer in 1967 was a brace of matching white SAAB 96’s (the two-stroke 45 HP) for he and my mom. He had his first in 1960 and then one for mom; I think we ran through seven total, including on Monte Carlo version with the hot engine, between 1960 and 1968. I remember that in 1960 my school friend’s dad bought a Renault Dauphine and we argued about which one would win a drag race… kids!
The SAABs were good cars for us in snow country, and were very reliable. I also remember them as much more comfortable and sophisticated than my granddad’s 67 Beetle.
The Renault speaks to me the most – and it looks like the reviewers would agree.
For me, I cannot bear any car with bad steering, to this day. The Japanese only made vague horrors until the ’80’s, so not them. (Also a curious and irrelevant habit of making engines that sounded off too, flat, strained, uninteresting. I would add bad seats and bonkers suspension tunes, being stiff then undamped). Fiat somehow made non-rack cars with delightful tillers, so it has to rate highly. The MG too has proper steering, albeit on a cruise ship turning circle. (Albeit, too, weak performance, strange ride, screeching vague gearbag and wheezy reliability). But only La Regie has light, accurate steering. Throw in the best ride, a snicky gearchange, superb brakes, far n’ away best chairs, competitive room, economy and performance and I have to agree with Road Test. (Lucky styling wasn’t a factor; dead froggy last here, I’m afraid). Second, the 124, proof that basics can be fettled to excellence.
I didn’t know about Road Test mag till this site. I know that editing was a difficult task then (indeed, till the late ’80’s), physical, actual, typeset and so on, but holy moly, there’s a lot of incompetence here. And like lots of old mag articles, this presents ample proof of the value in good writing. Let’s just say that that value here rises and falls like a leaf in a breeze.
Yes, I also recall the …disappointing…steering quality of Japanese cars in the 1970’s. (Not that the British cars were all that much better!)
I had a bad case of automotive lust for a ’72 Toyota Celica; but could not help but notice that it didn’t steer nearly as pleasurable and responsive as my Dad’s (soon to be stolen by my Mother) ’71 Opel 1900/Manta.
Steering only really got good when a car adopted rack and pinion. It’s a huge difference.
Agree!
https://www.buyautoparts.com/buynow/1973/BMW/2002/Manual_Steering_Gear_Box/82-70068_R?src=pl&msclkid=16f5d7b3a3491ff1a96188870c6c7148&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=(ROI)%20Shopping%20-%20All%20MAPs%20-%20Year%20Specific&utm_term=4582558315347360&utm_content=%5B82-7%5D%20Manual%20Steering%20Gear%20Box
Wow, so much data! I would love to see a contemporary magazine do a comparison like this. The sad thing is, it would be relatively easy (compared to what these guys were doing 50+ years ago) to gather this kind of data and do comparisons. However, advertiser pressures (We test 35 cars! They’re all winners!) and lack of readership (somewhere between useless COTY winners and the “I gets all of my information from the internetz” doofuses), all we get are car porn magazines…
My dad was a FIAT nut growing up. He has an X19 and a Lancia Beta and FIAT got the basics so so right. The details, not so much. The Italans can cast beautiful aluminum, but they can’t wire a lamp, much less a car. If you thought GM plastics were cheap and brittle, FIAT was on a whole other level. FIAT is the Da Vinci of cheap and brittle. FIAT is that friend who always throws the best parties, always makes you laugh till it hurts, and crashes on your couch “for a couple days” and always needs a ride. He’s your friend, but you still wanna pop him in the nose sometimes.
Well Written (and OH-so-true).
This is even better than the ’68 test from a week ago! So much love for the Renault 10, which left pretty much all French pundits cold at the time.
Interesting – what did the French car guys not like about the 10?
Interesting reading, good for a laugh, especially the comment “meaningless trim strip” on the Toyota.
Seems that European and Asian cars of that era were as unsuitable on American roads as Americans cars were in Europe and Asia
The Anglia was very old hat by 67 and Harry Potter was not around. So was the Cortina. The only cars of that bunch I have driven were my grandfathers Mk1 Cortina and Austin 1100 version which were a pleasant drive on our roads, and suitable for our fuel costs
This magazine really did some comprehensive tests on cars, and the “Design Analysis” was something Robert Cumberford did in Automobile Magazine many years later, but doing it as part of a comparison test was very interesting, as was the diversity of the cars tested. Didn’t know the Anglia 105E and the first two generations of Cortina were sold in the US.
Even taking into account that some of these cars, like the Mk1 Cortina, weren’t really 1967’s, comparing this to the 1968 test does show how the late Sixties, with safety and then emissions laws introduced, changed the import scene. In just a year, cars like the Fiat 600 and 1100 were gone, and were already seemingly from another era. Also the OHC and IRS Datsun 510 replacing the 410. My favorite here is probably the Fit 124, with the Cortina in second place. Or maybe the R10 gets the runner-up spot.
I can’t believe nobody has commented on the “Fuel Cost Projection”. The VW was ~$460 per year? The math was simple in those days, 30 cents a gallon and 30MPG equals one cent per mile in fuel. Equals $120 per year for 12,000 miles. Looks like they calc’d gallons and labeled it as dollars. A bargain today, but back then you could get gas for 25 or 30 cents a gallon. Oh well, good story regardless.
It’d have to be the 124 for me. Boring design superbly calculated.
I’ll put up with the spaghetti electrics & tinworm – if only people had realised and rustproofing were a thing in those days.
I’d overlooked how much better the R10 was than its dire appearance led one to believe. Then again, it would only be a couple more years before they welded the floor structure in the correct way round with the excellent (if uninteresting) R12.