Businesses growing, through mergers and acquisitions, and cars growing, through engineering developments such as larger and more powerful engines, longer wheelbases and body variants are not new phenomena. They have been apparent for as long as anyone can remember. From William Morris adding a larger engine to his Cowley to make an Oxford or the body variations on Henry Ford’s Model T, from Billy Rootes making a major player by aggregating smaller ones or Walter Chrysler’s exploits in the 1920s, there is nothing new under the sun.
This is. The Simca 1307 and 1308 (1.3 litre 7 or 8cv, or horsepower in the eyes of the French tax man), and known as the Chrysler Alpine in Anglophone markets and its close relative, the Talbot Solara, was an example of both these transformations, and adds a third one.
But first, some history for context. Chrysler had spent the 1960s collecting businesses in Europe to build Chrysler Europe, an uneven three legged stool consisting of Simca in France, Rootes Group in the UK and Barreiros in Spain, collectively building a wider mish-mash of products than just about any other business, before or since. Simca had the 1000 rear engine small car, the front wheel drive hatchback 1100 (1204 in North America) which was more like a Golf Mk 1 than anything else that preceded the Golf, and the conservative rear wheel drive 1301 and 1501 four door saloons. Key to this tale is that the 1100 range was the market leader in France in the early 1970s; the first 1967 car arguably played a key role in defining the European family hatchback – transverse engine, end on gearbox, three or five door hatchback; In 1973, almost 300,000 were built; the 1974 1100Ti has a claim on being the first hot hatch; the 1977 Matra Rancho derivative maybe started the compact SUV/crossover format.
Rootes had the small rear engine Hillman Imp, the mid size Hillman Avenger, the slightly larger Hillman Hunter (the Sunbeam Arrow family) and the 1950’s hangovers that were the large Humbers, and a range of commercial vehicles, sold under the Commer and later Dodge brands. Barreiros assembled Dodge Darts and built diesel engines and trucks for the protected Spanish market. This was all brought together and under Chrysler control by 1969, with various vehicles showing Chrysler influence from the late 1960s inwards. In the UK, the 1970 Hillman Avenger was Chrysler funded, as was the sales dud that was the French built but Franco-British designed Chrysler 180.
From this summary, we can see that there was a conflict in the centre of the market, based around the front wheel drive Simca and the conventional Avenger, and a need to replace the next larger car from both parties, as both the 1301/1501 and Hunter/Arrow were starting to age, and it was beginning to show. In the UK, BMC’s front wheel drive cars were making the Hunter look like an old solution whilst the Vauxhall Victor FD and Ford Cortina Mk3 made it look like a conservative one, with a dated interpretation of the conventional format. OHV engines and leaf springs were not the way to go any more. In France, the rear drive saloon format of the Simca contrasted strongly with the contemporary Renault 12 and 16 and Peugeot 304, never mind the Citroen GS. The Peugeot 404 was closer conceptually, but sold in a higher spot in the market.
As happened with the 180 project, both the British and French engineering teams were tasked with generating ideas for the solution to this. The UK solution was based on the Hillman Avenger estate, clothed in a hatchback body fitted with the engine the UK had proposed to develop for the Chrysler 180, in 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 sizes. The Avenger was more modern than the Hunter, with rack and pinion steering and a coil sprung rear axle, but was also a fairly style led product in the Rootes tradition.
Photos from aronline.co.uk
Simca proposed a rear drive hatchback using the Chrysler 160/180/2 litre engines with front wheel drive. Both arguments had merits, and significant costs. But the Simca and Rootes organisations now found out that Chrysler’s pockets, whilst deep, were not that deep. Neither were the likely timelines deemed acceptable.
In 1972, Chrysler US defined the preferred solution – an extension of the Simca 1100. The logic makes perfect sense – the 1100 was a successful, respected and capable car, and the monocoque was pretty light by contemporary standards. There was room to stretch the nominally 1100cc engine, ultimately to 1592cc, the idea of a hatchback Simca was fully accepted in the major market (France, and also the Benelux areas) and was seen as the coming standard across Europe and even the British market was considered receptive to a hatchback. We had the Austin Maxi, the Renault 16 was doing steady if unspectacular business, and was a respected product as well. A look through the archives at BLMC and Vauxhall will show many examples of similar thinking being applied – indeed the early 1970s Vauxhall Viva and Victor estates could be considered hatchbacks, the press criticised the Austin Allegro and Princess (ADO71) for not having hatchbacks, and there was a hatchback Rover in the works and you’d suspect Chrysler knew about it in the incestuous environment of the Coventry motor industry.
The scene was set therefore for a collaborative Franco-British product. French engineering, with a British designed body, to be built in France, to directly replace the Simca 1301/1501, and to supplement, with a view to replacing, the Arrow in the UK.
The engineering was a logical development of the 1100. There was a three inch longer wheelbase, an increase in track and width and the rear torsion bar suspension was replaced by trailing arms and coil springs. The front suspension stayed with torsion bars, and the engine and gearbox were carried over.
The base engine was the 1294cc version of the 1961 Simca Poissy overhead valve four cylinder engine, first seen in the Simca 1000 rear engine saloon and then familiar in 1118cc in the 1100, which was first evolved for the 1972 100 Special and then the 1974 1100Ti. There was also a new 1442cc version available, giving 85bhp, which was more powerful and torquey than any of the Ford, Vauxhall, BL, VW or Renault 1.6 litre competitors, in a car that weighed no more either. Straight line performance, particularly from the larger engine cars, was fully competitive.
One thing that never changed in the car was engine’s propensity for rattly tappets. Whoever, however, whenever they were adjusted, within a few thousand miles the distinctive loud tappet rattle would be back. And it’s not as if the rest of the car was particularly quiet either – even discounting the tappets, this was always a pretty noisy and unrefined engine.
The style of the car was all new, with no link to the older Simca or Rootes products. It was styled in the UK at the old Rootes facility in Coventry under the direction of Roy Axe and, while not original or ground breaking, a pretty decent looking car resulted. It achieved the trick of looking new whilst not frightening the horses but, particularly after the 1980 facelift, started to show its age relatively early. If you can see hints of Lancia Beta and early VW Passat in there, you are probably not alone. Renault 5 style resin bumpers were a novelty in the class. To me, the early cars have aged well.
The interior of the car was up to the standard of the exterior style – it was undoubtedly up to the minute in style and features. Compared with the preceding Rootes and Simca cars, or the competitors, it was also arguably more attractive than most, and competitively spacious. There was the usual folding rear seat and the suspension was configured to contemporary French (that is soft, long travel) standards, although the seats on the initial cars were much firmer than many, and gave an unusual but comfortable combination of a soft ride with fairly significant roll whilst firmly positioned in the seat. And, yes, the gearlever was always that long.
The feature orange car is a UK built 1977 Alpine 1.3GL, which was the outright winner of the 2018 Festival of the Unexceptional, a celebration of what it says. A deserved winner – I haven’t seen an Alpine look like that, since well, Dad bought one in 1979. His first of three.
The Simca was first shown in public at the Paris motor show in October 1975 and then the Chrysler Alpine, using an old Rootes name, at the London show at the end of the month. Reaction was positive at both. Production started in September; sales in France started immediately and in the UK from January 1976, with slightly contrasting fortunes.
In France, where it replaced the Simca 1301 and 1501 range, the car was a sales success with demand creating supply issues. By May, over 1,000 a day were being built and 250,000 were built in just over a year. In the UK, sales ran at a few thousand a month. To France, this car was a logical progression front the well loved, best selling 1100, and was initially sold with Simca, not Chrysler, badging deliberately. In the UK, where it did not replace anything (except the Simcas imported in low volumes) but was expected to complement the Avenger and Hunter, it was seen as front wheel drive, a hatchback, French and with a small engine, which were all features which limited the commercially vital fleet market’s acceptance of it. The Ford Cortina was the best seller back then, and solidly so, the Morris Marina was still doing good volume and the underdog first generation Vauxhall Cavalier was getting a good reception. There were many others too – VW Passat, Fiat 131, Renault 16, Citroen GS, Datsun Bluebird, Toyota Carina…it was a competitive part of the market. The leading hatchback on the market was the Austin Maxi, which was always a distinctive or courageous choice, depending on your viewpoint.
Initially, much marketing effort was put into making a virtue of these differences, showing the Alpine and the hatchback concept as the “The Seven Day a Week Car”. Or, selling the idea of a hatchback and then this hatchback.
The press reaction was pretty strong, though not overwhelming. Autocar’s first major test was pretty warm, but did mention, in that slightly coy way of the old motoring press, the noise. Sometimes, you had to read between the lines – I suspect this was code for “it makes a heck of a racket”. This was an issue for the entire run, though later cars were improved by more sound deadening and higher top gears.
CAR rated the Alpine ahead of the Renault 16 and the VW Passat (B1), albeit by a short head and with observations on the driving position and refinement.
But, despite the positive reviews, it was still a tough wicket for Chrysler UK, with a car that did not fit every preconception. Not easy for a business, Chrysler UK, that was teetering on the edge financially.
Not that it showed in the dealer training material.
In January 1976, after much negotiation, the UK government and Chrysler came to an agreement around the future of the business. Essentially, in return for a bail out, Chrysler agreed to various actions, one of which was assembly of the Alpine for the UK market in Coventry. From August 1976, Alpines were being assembled in Coventry, from kits shipped in from France, a model of production that would last until 2006, latterly for a series of Peugeots.
Also in 1976, the car won the European Car of the Year award, perhaps to the surprise of some, depending, of course, on the validity you apply to such awards. Still, over 250,000 were built in 1977, claiming over 7% of the French market and additional versions with luxury trim packs and automatic transmissions were becoming available, and from 1979, an option of a 1.6 litre version of the Poissy engine. Sales had peaked though – 1978 saw 160,000 built and 1979 just 112,000, partly as buyers opted for the newer Horizon, the European take on the Omnirizon and another Simca 1100 derivative.
1978 saw the end of Chrysler in Europe as well, as Peugeot bought the entire business and Chrysler left Europe.
A year later, the Chrysler and Simca badges were gone, replaced by the revived Talbot nameplate.
The major event thereafter was the only significant facelift of the car, in late 1979 for 1980 models – the distinctive reverse rake front clip was replaced by a more familiar profile, accompanied by bigger bumpers and rear lights. There were also trim and minor interior changes, a reshuffle of the range and an extension of the availability of the 1.6 litre engine. Power steering, then unusual in the class, became standard on much of the range, to counter the heavy (zero offset) and low geared steering and slightly awkward driving position and steering actions dictated by the relatively low profile.
The most significant change in 1980, with the arrival of the saloon derivative, marketed as the Talbot Solara. This was a typical hatch to saloon evolution, using the same doors and interior.
It was sold above the Alpine, with a new top model labelled SX in the UK, with all the mod cons Talbot could offer, including a trip computer as the unique showroom novelty. Finally, the Hillman Hunter was formally retired, although its sales had been minimal for some years.
Aggregate production in the early 1980s was around 100,000 a year across the two models. In the UK there was a series of efforts to ginger up sales, with versions named Arrow, picking up on the Hunter family name, and, ultimately the Rootes names Vogue, Sceptre, Minx and Rapier all took their turn on the cars.
The market reality was harsher though – the competition did nothing but get tougher. The Vauxhall Cavalier went from strength to strength, especially with the Mk2 (J car) from 1981; the Ford Sierra from 1982 made it look even older, the VW Passat, Golf and Jetta were doing ever stronger business in the UK and from the PSA family the Citroen BX in some ways matched the concept of the early hatchback cars, and the Peugeot 305 saloon was typically rated more highly than the Solara.
The second feature car is a 1985 Solara Minx 1.3. Minx denoted the lower trim level, with Rapier being the higher level, but this example was a specially decontented Minx, intended to be a dealer plinth car. By decontenting the car, deleting features such as the power steering, various interior trim features and fitting cheaper wheel trims and bump strips, obviously a lower price could be achieved. Put the car on a plinth and in come the customers. The salesman then either declares that car sold or talks them into a more expensive model with the missing features back in. The intention was for each dealer to have one, and then for Talbot to recall them for sale or lease to a fleet customer, or to employee schemes or similar. This one reportedly never went back but was sold to a retail customer.
By 1983, French production had stopped, with all production being in the UK and in Spain, for left hand drive only, where the Solara had some traction as a taxi. UK and Spanish production ended in 1985.
Production was also completed by Valmet in Finland for the local market, which utilised some SAAB interior components, which is why this car appears to have SAAB 900 seats and badge. There was some assembly also in Colombia as the Dodge Alpine, though numbers were very limited.
Todd in New Zealand also assembled a small number.
The Alpine is also reputed to be the template for the Moskvich Aleko 2141. Visually, there is a clear link, but there is little or no evidence of anything, other than copying, such as a proper Fiat-style partnership with Moskvich, and the drive train was very different, with a longitudinally mounted engine and MacPherson strut front suspension. Inspiration for a visual clone and body engineering techniques, but not much more, I suspect.
Ultimately, this car showed the effect of growing pains in various ways – building a bigger car based on the Simca 1100 and its engine was not actually as easy as it may have seemed; building a bigger business from Rootes, Simca and Barreiros was not straightforward, and blending that into Peugeot-Citroen whilst keeping its identity just as difficult. And taking on GM and Ford in Europe ultimately failed too.
Don’t particularly have found memories about the 1978 1307 S my dad got in 1980 … every trip longer than 1/2h ended with an empty stomach … hopefully he didn’t kept it long, 5 years later, he sold it to someone needing a car for stock-car racing … given how rusted the car was, that’s all he could expect. This car had some identity issues … on the hatch it sported the Simca badge, Talbot on the hood, and the Pentastar in the grille … guess there were some badges upgrades in some dealerships back then.
Nevertheless, a few years ago, I had the opportunity to buy a first-owned 1978 1307 GLS with very few rust spot … it had spent 25 years in the garage because the widow of the owner couldn’t decide her to sell it. It required some care, the coolant was long dried, every gaskets and rubbers were changed, and new tires of course … but overall nothing more than what was to be expected for such a long inactivity. Drove it a few years, setting my tappets every 6 months, but got tired of the 4 speed gear box … the car was quite confortable and the only time I got a trip on the back seat, I felt sick as when I was a child in the 1/2h … but any speed above 90km/h required ear plugs and I needed something more usable for long trips. It’s now in the hands of a young fellow whose grand-father had a 1307, and whose father was also sick on the back seat.
Great article, but I wonder if you are entirely right that the Solara is just a straightforward hatch to saloon conversion. Data I’ve seen suggests the Solara has a longer wheelbase, and one of the retro reviews on the Thames TV channel on YouTube seems to back that up.
Legend has it that Chrysler US product planners urged Lynn Townsend to build the Alpine in the US, but he rejected the idea out of hand. Only to approve the US Horizon a couple of years later. I wonder if the Solara could have come earlier with a US sibling, getting Chrysler a jump over the GM J cars by a few years.
No, the Solara did not have a longer wheelbase, it was just a reskin.
Maybe you’re thinking of the Tagora ?
How is it that we haven’t done this car before? I thought we had; but no.
Excellent exposition on the subject. These were really quite a decent car at the time, excepting the thrashy motor. I wonder if Chrysler ever gave serious consideration to importing it, or building it in the US. But the Horizon was undoubtedly a better choice.
It has appeared in the background in a few posts over the years, but never truly solo or centre stage.
One question to which I’ve haven’t found a complete answer is how much, if any, Simca 1100/Horizon/even Alpine is in the Chrysler K cars. Do you have any thoughts on this?
A lot and very little or none, depending on definitions and ones POV.
The K Cars were a direct development of the L Car (Horizon/Omni), but then the American Horizon was quite a bit different under the skin than the European Horizon. The American Horizon used a completely different suspension, a pragmatic strut/twist beam setup very similar to the Golf’s. And that’s what was used in the K Cars.
So what did the American and European Horizon share that made it into the K Cars? Little or nothing, really. What’s a “platform” without its suspension? A floor pan? That was changed.
But what Chrysler learned from developing and building the US Horizon was also huge, and very much facilitated the K Car’s development. It’s drastically easier to remodel a car/platform than start totally from scratch.
So yes, without the pan-Atlantic Horizon project, it’s hard to say what would have happened at Chrysler. They might well have gone bankrupt without it; almost certainly. So there’s some Simca 1100 DNA in the K cars, even if it can’t be visibly seen.
I didn’t realise they were building these in Coventry in 1976. My car was built late 1978, since I got it early 1979, and it had been with the dealer for a while as the colour (sweetcorn) was not popular. I had always assumed mine was one of the first UK built cars.The side rubbing strip had just been added in 1979 and I think the dealer was retro-fitting it to cars in his stock.
I asked how reliable the cars were in service, and he said the gearbox was sometimes an issue, but mine was OK. The tappets didn’t bother me too much, I just kept the radio turned-up.
I did find the cargo capacity very useful, as the back seat cushion lowered when you folded the seat-back.
The Tagora would have better suited the US market, but its development wasn’t ended before the sale.
Back in 1990 I drove and x reg 1981 metallic green Solara LS . Fully equipped with the UV degraded seat trim and rattly engine. A rattly engineering was standard from about a year into ownership properly just after the warranty had ran out. Rattles due to cam wear from start up oil starvation because RHD models had to have the transverse engine fitted the other way around from LHD models perhaps to clear the steering rack .
These rattle cans were way ahead of the Cortina and the Marina in technical design ,suddenly it’s 1985 , but lacked build quality, just like its cousins over the Atlantic. Pity. Just checked the MOT history on the test model. No record of inspection. Did it not last 3 years or don’t the have records going back to 1975?.
Sorry, but no. They all had the engine fitted the usual way, with motor on the right and gearbox on the left, as you sit behind the wheel.
In 1976 I went to Britain with my mother and brother to meet with my aunt who was living in Germany. We spent a week in London, and the highlight was seeing Bing Crosby at the Palladium on the American Bicentennial. Even at his age he put on a wonderful show.
Following that we went to Scotland and spent a week touring the highlands. We were given a Chrysler Aline by the rental company, and I was the designated driver. I was hoping for an Austin Princess, as I had previously owned an Austin 1800 and I wanted to see how they would compare. I found the Alpine very pleasant and comfortable and I always like hatchbacks, but It did not make a strong impression. The driving was slow without any motorways, and in fact quite a few single lane roads with passing spots.
BMW’s first car was a rebadged 750cc sidevalve masterpiece, the AUSTIN SEVEN. Toyota sold it as a Toyota in the Land of the Rising Copycat.
Now when we have BMWs and Camaros with ten gears! ,it’s easy to forget how under geared cars of the 60-10s were. In this cars market it was a choice of only Fiat, Alfa Romeo or if you were a patriotic Brit a Austin Allegro to get a five speed gear box as standard. Then along came the Japanese…..
I was waiting for this review- thanks Roger. The Alpine/1307 was missing from your reviews of major 1960s-1970s UK market players you previously covered.
Thank you for this very necessary (and thorough) post, Rog.
I remember a teacher drove a Solara when I was at the lycée in the mid-90s. By that point in time, those (and their Simca-branded forbears) were already a very rare sight, and invariably falling apart if seen. Just like Peugeot 604s or Renault 14s… The difference being that the Simca 1307/08/09 / Solara was actually pretty successful, unlike the other two.
In the European market of the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, most of the smaller to midsize FWD models were designed without power steering, even as an option. With the skinny tyres of the period, plus the lighter construction of cars at that time, an acceptable tradeoff of steering effort usually be found
Back in the day, I did quite a few business miles in Alpine 1307/1308’s. They did the job OK, but, as mentioned by Roger, and in the Autocar test, thanks to inheriting its front suspension design (centre point / zero offset) from the 1100, it suffered the same slow geared steering that the 1100 always did. Apart from a few of the last 1307/1308’s, that finally benefited from PAS.
When its successor, the Horizon (the original Euro version) came out, and was borrowed for a test run .. lo and behold.. the exact same thing, so, endless wheel winding, and, no PAS available !
In fairness, the faithful old 1100 front end did track faultlessly, when these smooth – riding cars were blasted along on poorly surfaced, cambered roads, which was, and probably still is, part of the ‘use case’, for all good French car designs.
Great post, Sir Rog.
I really liked the original Passat (Dasher) that this rated above, but it was a bit of flim-flam for toughness, so this very similar-looking thing with some French beef (and ride squash) in its essentials has a lot of appeal. It was never sold in Oz.
Delicious possibility that there’s some ’67 junior Frog foreigner DNA hidden away in the ubiquitous US K-cars, maybe into the ’90’s and some Floridian’s tufted New Yorker. I wonder..
A question for our Learned Lot, why DID Chrysler tilt at the wackily-complex European windmill of carmaking in the mid-sixties, especially as it seems US home base was weak enough to be technically dead by ’79? Who there decided there was gold to be made in a hotching potch of small motors across many borders (not to mention the variation from damp Bolshies and aristocrat uppers in UK to fascists in Spain to actual Bolshies in France)? A decision borne of hubris because Ford and GM were there, or based on actual reasoned analysis?
At a guess because that’s what Ford and GM were doing, it made no sense without having a very clear streamlining program (as Peugeot had when they purchased the assets) but Chrysler could not implement this even in the US…
A decision borne of hubris because Ford and GM were there, or based on actual reasoned analysis?
Probably 80% of the former and 20% of the latter.
In the early-mid 60s, car sales in Europe were headed for a huge boom, as incomes grew rapidly. It was a growth business, so the logic was hardly faulty in that regard. Ford and GM were doing well in Europe, so it made sense.
And what else were they going to buy? Rootes and Simca were still respectably-sized companies at a time when the market was much more fragmented. Finding the synergies (oops; sorry) in them was the big challenge, as they soon found out.
And Chrysler didn’t exactly invest in making them leaders; they were left to stand on their own, mostly.
Once the energy crisis hit in ’74-’74, the car industry would never be quite the same, at least for Chrysler. It was all downhill from then on. But it must have seemed like a good idea back in the sunny early 60s.
Even with this excellent write-up and the pictures my first thought is concerning the bumpers on the early (pre-facelift) cars. To this American they cheapen the look of the car, like they came from a supplier based in a 3rd world country. One or two car colors, like white or silver/grey aren’t too bad looking, but any other color and the car just looks so cheap.
Chrysler sold Hillmans in the U.S. though I have no idea in what numbers, like others here I am mystified as to why this car was never imported. The only answer I can see is that the numbers projected to be sold were minimal for the investment and more importantly the imminent arrival of the Omnirizon.
Oh well, who can figure car company decisions?
Well given that stylistically the Alpine is a rip-off of Vignale’s Tatra 613 perhaps there is some poetic justice in Moskvich copying the Alpine.
I remember those from Israel, initially looking very advanced but soon overtaken by things like VW’s Passat; they did not last very long under local conditions. I then re-encountered them as cheap second hand cars during my time in the UK in the early 90s – again not very impressive with their boomy and thrashy engines, nicknamed “woodpeckers” in the motor trade. IMHO Chrysler made a big mistake in not offering more refined 1.6 and 2.0 L engines as well as 5sp boxes right from the start but, as Roger pointed out, Chrysler’s model policy was all over the place (to me at least as bewildering as British Leyland’s).
I know we often wonder why some brands are more successful than others. When my Alpine was new, the dealer took ages to fix the bits that didn’t work because Chrysler were on strike and he couldn’t get parts. Within a year he had dumped the Chrysler franchise and taken something else. No new Chryslers were sold locally after that.
I first saw these Chryslers during a family trip to Spain in 1982. It was like being in another dimension for a kid who grew up in the US to see a car badged as a Chrysler that I had never seen before. The 1307 was called the 150 in Spain, and I liked the design with straight lines and large headlamps. I’ve owned miniature Solido and Majorette versions of this car and have always wondered how they rode. Reading some of the comments, it looks like the ride was not as pleasant. The Talbot Solara was also commonly used as a taxi in Madrid, and there was a version called the Escorial with badging on the rear sides.
These cars were great sellers in the Netherlands in the late seventies. You would see them everywhere. I had a soft spot for them, and found them very modern with those wrap around bumpers instead of usual chromed. I always preferred the Simca looks over the more generic Talbot.
A few years later and they were known as rust traps. These must have been the most rust prone of the time and would only last up to ten years. The last one I saw on the road was probably at least 25 years ago.
I was wondering why there is pretty much always some talbots for sale here in Finland. I mean common opinion is that they were alfasud level notorious for rusting. So there should not be that many around anymore? None for sale in autoscout24 for instance.
Well, that period finnish ad explains it. It tells in detail how Talbot has painting process developed for Finnish climate. Apparently the shells were shipped to Uusikaupunki plant where they were zincfosfated and primed with reverse method. Also dipped in electroforesis bath. In addition special stone chip paint and polyester underseal were applied. Attention to detail.