(first posted 6/1/2015) BMC’s attempts to maintain a significant presence in the Australian market were fascinating. Until I spotted this 1800 Utility in Brisbane a couple of years back, I had no idea they engineered a ute for the Aussie market. I’ll leave the detailed ADO17 story to our man in the UK, Roger Carr, but let’s take a look at this distinctly Australian offshoot.
BMC’s new ADO17, launched here in 1965 as the Austin 1800, had earned high praise from the motoring media for its balanced handling, high-speed stability, compliant ride and excellent packaging. Of course, it was a modern FWD product with challenging styling doing battle with three very conservative and conventional RWD six-cylinder/V8 sedans, so it didn’t storm to the top of the sales charts.
BMC’s Australian operations tooled up a ute version to compete with the ute offerings from Ford and Holden, as well as the new 1965 Chrysler Valiant Wayfarer ute. The light pickup market was a space BMC had not been involved in, and 70% of the market was dominated by Ford and Holden in 1964. The 1800 Utility was launched in 1968 into this growing market, at a time when the Japanese utes were steadily increasing their market share. Although FWD utes were a rare breed, and remain so to this day, the ADO17 platform actually lent itself well to the ute treatment. The lack of a live rear axle allowed a large, flat cargo bay: you could fit a 48” sheet of plywood between the wheel arches. The ute body also looked much more conventional than the frumpy “Landcrab” sedan, and the advanced Hydrolastic suspension ensured a more pleasant ride than the jittery Japanese utes.
1968 marked not only the launch of the ute, but also the arrival of an automatic transmission. Sales hit 12,665 units for the entire 1800 range, its best year, but only 5% (639) of those were utes. Ute sales would experience a slight uptick for 1969, but they still didn’t account for a significant volume of 1800 sales. All up, over five years of sale the Austin 1800 range sold 56,918 units. A total of 2,331 of those were utes.
Although the 1800 series had been a modest success for BMC, the company realized that if they wanted to go for Ford and Holden’s jugulars, they needed to offer a more conventional-looking sedan. Accordingly, the 1800 was replaced by the Kimberley/Tasman series. These were 1800s with boxier styling and a six-cylinder engine, as well as evocative Australian names. Although the basic platform remained much the same, BMC didn’t bother to introduce a ute version of their new family sedan. It was a shame, as the 1800 Utility was definitely an interesting alternative to the conventional offerings.
Cool write-up on the Landcrabmino! Learning about vehicles I’ve never heard of before is another reason I love this site.
Crabamino. I like it!
This always seemed a good use of the 1800 platform with its long, roomy and low bed. Clever use of the Mk.1 horizontal tailights in the vertical position too! They almost look like they were designed to be fitted that way up.
Sharp eyes on the rear lights!
I’ve been building a 4mm model of one (something I must finish) so I sort of found it out when I was looking at the profile shape of the rear!
It is amazing what a manufacturer will spend so it does not have to admit to itself it has failed in a market. I can imagine the executives sitting around in UK. “How many of these could we possibly sell?” … “Well I don’t know but we can be taken seriously in Australia without one.” ….”Approved”.
On the car itself, I wonder what the payload was like with the Hydrolastic suspension. I bet exceeding that payload would be an expensive mistake. Thanks William for the informative write up.
Payload was 1200lb (544kg).
Nate, I’m not sure how many people actually hate the 1800 compared with people who just have a low opinion of it. I can’t say I’ve met many, but then there are fewer and fewer people who have had direct experience with them at this point.
Looks nice .
I wonder how well it actually worked given how much hatred the Land Crab still generates decades later .
-Nate
In addition to the above comment (timed out for editing), the people who have 1800 utes now love them!
Thanx John ;
It looks good to me but one never knows .
I’m a bit of a BMC Fanboi .
-Nate
That is a typical comment from someone who never owned one or has any engineering knowledge. The blind Ford Holden Brigade has all the perception of people who watch Neighbours. Crass always wins over class when you are dealing with morons.
Apologies Arnold ;
I never owned one but I was there when Land Crabs came to America to die , as I have said many times before (if you ever bothered to read before attacking me directly) : I am a die hard BMC Fanboi and I love my also unloved BMC made Metropolitan Nash FHC .
Every time an article comes here about the Land Crab it gets hate and vitriol in detailed explanations of it’s supposedly poor engineering ~ I don’t know, I’m just a Journeyman Mechanic who fixes old cars when others give up .
I was just asking, not condemning .
Maybe they did better on your local roads, roads that are supposedly much worse than average American rods according to your Countrymen ? .
-Nate
EDIT: Paul, please don’t ban Arnold for attacking me far worse than I ever did anyone .
Nate,
Sorry if I offended you. The knockers have always condemned the !800 because that’s what knockers do, follow the crowd. In the 7 years that I owned my first 1800 sedan I took it places that only 4WDs with lift kits would tackle today. As well as performing miracles off road it was an extremely comfortable and stable car on the road, either gravel or sealed. It was not unreliable if you gave it proper attention. The east-west FWD concept of Sir Alec was condemned at the time but has now been adopted my most manufacturers, even American car builders.
You are right in your comments on Australian roads. I have been to the USA 9 times and have driven about 20,000 miles on your roads. Even out the back of nowhere in states like Utah your roads are better than our main highways. Our population is about 22 million compared with your 330 million so there is not anywhere near as much money to spend on roads per capita. Our population is largely urban so outside the cities the roads get low priority. Did you know that Sydney has a larger population that Los Angeles?
The 1800 performed well in Australia where we had many corrugated roads and the American designed cars of the time with primitive leaf spring suspension were painful as they skittered and axle tramped very badly while the 1800 floated through.
The 1800 wasn’t powerful but it didn’t need to be. The six cylinder mindset of the time has now died, as 2 litre 4 cylinder engines are producing more power than 4 litre gas guzzlers of the 60s, 70s and 80s.
As with many pioneers, the 1800 was treated badly and its demise was sealed by the British inability to follow up and poor management, just like the US industry has collapsed.
Without seeming to attack you I would suggest that comments should be restricted to subjects that you are familiar with.
Arnold
Oddly enough, I do know what we’re talking about here as Land Crabs were around and I rode in them a bit and thought the clever use of space was pretty good .
Sadly, very few BMC dealers in America back in the day, seemed to care about giving good service or even a ready parts supply .
Although I _am_ (obviously) a moron, it’s impolite to point it out on a public forum ~ knowhutimean ? =8-) .
Sure you do .
As I have said many times before : I’m a GMC and BMC fanboi because IMO they both used clever engineering, I have no troubles running my BMC products hard, far and wide, I took the time to sort out the issues and think they’re great .(I ass-U-me that’s my primary moronic fault but who knows ?) .
FWIW, I’m sad to see the inline 6 cylinder engines go, they were buttery smooth and some (NOT Ford!) could easily be peaked and tweaked to go faster than most ever realized .
-Nate
Ive driven a Tasman automatic too fast on corrugated sand ‘roads’ in the Pilliga scrub it did ok a few things fell off but it was an old (12 years) rust bucket by then chronic unreliability was those things biggest problem from new the 1800s developed problems over time Kimberlys and Tasmans had them installed at the assembly plant.
but I was there when Land Crabs came to America to die.
I looked over the fence to see an Austin America 1800 sitting in some weeds,
Nate, the Land Crabs (Austin/Morris 1800) were never sold in America. The Austin America was a smaller car, a version of the Austin 1100/1300. I think you’re mixing up the two.
Oh crap .
Not again .
I just looked at the photo and it looks pretty similar to me….
Sorry guys .
-Nate
However they were sold in Canada. My first car was a 1965 Austin 1800 which I bought used in 1968 at the Austin dealership on Church Street near Yonge in Toronto. Overall it was a pretty good car for me, but it just disintegrated with severe rust. It was incredibly roomy and fantastic in snow. It wasn’t until I got an AWD that anything matched it for winter driving. Contrary to expectations, it started consistently in very cold weather, once you learned the exact amount of choke to give it. It also gave me my first opportunity to do a valve job (and the second one which I did correctly).
The 1800 was sold in Canada. My dad had two of ’em. I liked them. But I didn’t have to maintain them, though I don’t know if they were any worse than anything else. Sturdy, though, dad endoed one onto it’s roof. Once it was towed out, it got an oil fill and the roof popped back out, and away it went, only slightly worse for wear.
The 1800 was an engineering led BMC (British Motor Corporation) product designed by Alex Issigonis of Mini fame. Whilst the car was praised in the UK by the press, and in many ways was a good car, it was, as a product, an indication of all that was going wrong at the company. Styling was gawky, fuel consumption high, driving position bus-like, steering heavy and interiors as austere as a monk’s cell. To top this reliability was patchy – and adding all these factors together led to a poor seller that failed in the marketplace, when the company needed to generate cash from an executive class car.
The ute is an example of how, laudably, the company chased niche markets (there was a Wolseley version too) whilst failing to address core problems with the basic car.
The landcrab was given a makeover resulting in the wedge shaped Princess but the same faults remained with poor build quality.There was a hatchback Ambassador for a couple of years but there were few takers as the slightly better(by BL standards) Maestro was due in a year or so.I think that maybe a Kimberley/Tasman ute would have sold a bit better with a 6 cylinder engine.
Dont confuse how a Cresta or Zodiac 6 goes like with a 6 cylinder Kimberly chalk and cheese think Austin 1800 that will wheelspin, same bus like driving position same or worse heavy steering awful cars, an ex GF had one a Tasman automatic I drove it and hated it, she used to borrow my Falcon van in preference.
Arguably those defects apart from fuel consumption were less important in a commercial vehicle. Eg an austere interior was a cheap interior!
I wonder what they were smoking in BMC Marketing (Australia)?
“How the hell are we going to sell this dog of a vehicle?”
“How about we call it “The Car of the Century?”
“With an aspirational photo in front of the Opera House – you got it!”
Of course, it’s possible that the family in the picture has left the handbrake off and is hoping their Landcrab will just quietly roll back into the harbour…
“Austin 1800 – Not properly finished, just like the Opera House.”
My first car was a new Mk1 Austin 1800. The derogatory comments are obviously made by knockers with no real knowledge. The Austin had to compete with the Aussie six cylinder Ford/Holden where people and their offspring were rigid in brand loyalty regardless of anything else.
I had my Austin for 7 years and had very little trouble. I now have a 1968 Austin 1800 ute. In terms of fuel economy, on a trip I averaged 32 miles per gallon, much better than a Holden or Ford. Don’t believe everything you read, especially when written by a misinformed bigot
Arnold
Worked in a Leyland garage in Randwick NSW, bought a cheap Austin 1800 for $235, sold that & bought a $35 English assembled one that I did a bit of work on ie replace damaged R/F guard and ended driving it to Darwin, never missed a beat. When I returned to NZ, searched & finally found a 1800 ute that I took a lot of funny places hunting. Would buy another one if I could find one, lots of fun
The 1800 sedan has a “little limo” look to it due to the six window styling. IMHO a little length added to the trunk (boot) would have altered the look and may have made it ,dare I say attractive.
You can’t polish a turd though BL and AL tried their best.Another dud though if the faults had been ironed out and build quality improved it could have been a different story.
The Austin 3-litre has the same centre section with an extended boot, and – whatever other faults it had – I always thought the profile looked quite handsome.
It looks very staid next to a Vauxhall Cresta or Ford Zodiac which were the main competition.Sales were dismal and it was quietly killed off
Nice catch and write-up. Needless to say, the idea of these was about 30-40 years too soon, as FWD small utes are very common around the globe, except in NA. And Australia, I presume.
The love for old-school RWD trucks (and cars) in Australia was grossly underestimated by BMC, one assumes.
The Subaru Brumby (aka Brat) was quite successful and going back further the Datsun 1200 ute did well too, which is comparable as it was built on the standard car of the day which would now be fwd.
In more recent years the Jumbuck ute was the best-selling model for Proton (something like 5000-5500 sold in 7 years), even though it was hindered by being quite old (based on a 1991 Mitsubishi) and had a 1-star safety rating. In the motoring section of the local paper somebody wrote in to ask if they were still available.
I’m sure if Fiat or even GM brought over the Brazilian fwd utes they would sell, especially as the remaining midsize pickups have gotten larger over the years.
I’ve had a ‘courtesy’ ride in a Jumbuck from the Suzuki/Proton dealer when I needed a lift to work. All I can say is that person who wanted one had obviously never been in one. Unbelievably crude and rough.
Not really BMC AU had already tried a range of RWD cars mostly rebadging or reskinning UK models they did build a six out of the B1622 four by adding tywo cylinders but released it before they solved the oil leaks after the Tasman Kimberly BMC came up with the P76 a large RWD sedan but most buyers were wary and stayed away, build quality was the usual poor quality survivors are prized and loved the P76 stayed in assembly in NZ after the doors closed in OZ mostly because far too many CKD kits had been ordered and building and slowly selling them seemed to be the answer BMC NZ did the same with Triumph 2.5s getting leftover CKD kits from OZ and they sold well.
I love it! Somehow looks like a Rolls pickup.
If BMC had sent these to America in ’68, the small pickup boom could have been British instead of Japanese!
Interesting idea, but wrong market. I wonder if it was ever offered in Japan, a country that bought a lot of BL/BMC products over the years.
I wonder how buyers rationalized the purchase of a small truck like this in a market dominated by vehicles so much larger? Diehard Austin fans?
I realize I’m a tiny minority (of 1?) but I’d buy a Fiesta or Focus “ute” if Ford offered one now/here.
These came in Austin Morris and Wolseley flavours my Morris Minor driving Nana had several lawn bowls cronies that she would pick up for weekly games whose FWD BMC cars were constantly in the shop for repairs, it was a reputation gained early with Minis and 1100s that never went away.
Interesting how that Austin 1800 light pickup integrates the cargo bed with the rest of the body like the Chevy El Camino, Ford Ranchero and the 1962 Ford F-100 Styleside.
Also interesting that it was a FWD (predates 1980s vintage VW Rabbit pickup) and able to carry 4′ wide plyboard flat between the wheelwell. How long was the box?
Occam24 makes an interesting comment that had BMC sent the truck to America in 1968 (or earlier), would the small pickup market go to BMC instead of Datsun and would it have given the El Camino/Ranchero competition?
Was the Austin 1800 pickup as rugged and reliable as the early Datsun and Toyota small pickups? Nicely styled light pickup though.
Integrated bed is the hallmark of a Ute and the main didderence to a US style pickup, Some of these Landcrab utes are still around I shot one for the cohort a couple of years ago locally, BMC AU even built some totally galvanised utes in an attempt to solve their rusting problems those will be somewhere about though probably not in going order, FWD is only just being accepted in Aussie now people like being able to tow with their cars and FWD is considered inferior for that.
A bit late, but in reply to Halwick the bed was 48½” wide between the arches, 56″ wide between the lined walls, 82¼” long at 22¼” from ground level. All that in a vehicle just 66¾” wide and 173.6″ long.
Regarding the suspension, reading from the brochure, there was a torsion bar that supported the hydrolastic suspension.
This is really cool, and I’m especially fascinated by the Kimberly/Tasman. If BMC had used a more formal filled rear quarter like this on the 3-Litre, they might well have done better. Still would have had to something about the front end…
I photographed a Tasman recently; article coming to CC soon.
I personally find the Landcrab much more attractive than the Tasman. The Landcrab is unconventional, but has a distinct personality–that Tasman just ends up looking boxy. The nose styling sort of reminds me of the Bristol 411, but tha’s not really a good thing as I think the nose treatment was the 411’s least successful aspect!
What always gets me about these utes is that BMC never did an estate version of the Landcrab, anywhere.
Sometimes, you couldn’t make it up.
It would be just as bad as the saloon,rushed into production before it’s faults were sorted,badly made and unreliable and in a range of drab colours. BL gave in in similar fashion with the lash up Ambassador hatchback (a car 6 or 7 years too late) by not even bothering to make it in LHD!
You’re right Roger you couldn’t make it up.
Didn’t they obsess about the Maxi being the hatchback, and therefore the Landcrab and Princess couldn’t be hatched? I don’t know why BMC/BL/AR NEVER competed directly with Ford’s Cortina/Sierra/Mondeo, but always tried to compete obliquely, with cars that were a bit smaller, or a bit more expensive, or a bit less attractive… and always a bit wrong.
They made the Maxi the hatchback and didn’t want any others competing with it yet would have similar cars slugging it out in the showroom.One of BL’s many deadly sins.
They did directly compete in the Victor Cortina market with the Farina styled A60 series but they got sidetracked by Issigonis obsession with horrible cars that he liked instead of improving the existing good selling lines they went FWD with a terrible gearbox in sump design.
Farina A55/A60s were a generation older than the first Cortina; bigger, more old-fashioned and probably (I haven’t checked this) more expensive. Think of a Lotus Cortina, or a Cortina 1600E (the halo models) and imagine applying that thinking to a late 50s Austin Cambridge.
BMC/BL/AR always had an oblique alternative to the Cortina class (“rather than a run-of-the-mill family saloon, would you consider a ‘five-of-everything’ Maxi?” “No, I’d like a run-of-the-mill family saloon please.”)
A55/60, Maxi, Marina, Montego – always an unsatisfying alternative, never a competitor.
No the A60 was in production until 1971, and dont think of the GT models as being the popular model that was the dreary gutless 1200/1300 Cortinas that could barely get out of their own way with their Anglia engines, Victors fared only slightly better until the FD model when OHC engines were fitted and of course the 3.3 6cylinder versions NZ had.
It’s funny how they kept the A60 in production for so long when you think how often they changed A40/A50/A55 body styles in the fifties. The A60 needed a new body by 1963, and was looking thoroughly obsolete by 1965.
There was a pick-up and van in the A60 range, but these actually used the body style that had originated with the A50 in 1954 with the mechanical updates of the A60 and minor styling differences. I assumed that this had been available in Australia. It lasted until 1972 in the UK, replaced by the Marina van and pick-up.
The van and pickup versions of the A60 were very popular in NZ but this successful commercial didnt go to Aussie BMC AU knew better what Aussies wanted
Don’t see how hydrolastic would work for a Ute. You put something in the back and the back goes down. When the back goes down the front is jacked up. I spent a few years driving Landcrabs and never carried anyone in the back seats.
Never had an issue with fuel consumption either.
In normal use they werent bad on gas, not great but no worse than a A60.
Nice article. New thing for me about BMC/Austin in Australia at all. There’s always something new to learn… I’d be happy to read sometime about the Morris Marina / Panel Van and Sedan likewise about the Morris ITAL too. Hopefully some of the BMC experts shall create an enjoyable article. In addition here is a pic of my 2 fave British panel vans next to each other, a Morris Ital Van and a Bedford/Vauxhall Astravan Mk 2.
I have an unhealthy interest in the Australian Marina 6 cylinder despite Bryce’s warnings of how dire it was.(I’m smart enough never to buy one though)
A fellow Humber/Hillman club member had one and found despite its rarity he couldnt sell it easily eventually it went but it spent an eon listed on trademe before a taker emerged.
Probably everyone who wants one already has one!
There are a couple of Marina utes in use locally check my photo stream on the cohort.
Hi szilard, you’re in luck, I wrote a piece on the Marina van in January – https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/curbside-classic-1980-morris-marina-van-almost-big-enough-to-carry-a-piano/
Great find, William. One of my high school teachers had one of these, probably doing his bit in bridging his love for the mother country with his home in the colony.
These cars arent for me, I could never get the styling,
and thought the engineering strange.
One positive, was a reputation for a very strongly built body.
This was one of the cars I learnt to drive in. Dad had one for a few years in the early-mid 1970s.
Here she is at home, circa 1974. The one featured may well be Dad’s, the ‘QLD’ on the number (licence) plate is my and our ute’s home state.
Thanks for the memory reboot!
Hello Nate,
I will have to show remorse and apologise for the “moron” comment again.
I have a 1968 Austin 1800 ute which I use regularly with Historic registration. Like all cars of its vintage it does not have the comfort, quietness and reliability of modern cars but it has a special charm.
I am considered strange because I also have a 1959 Morris Minor which was fitted with a Nissan engine before I got it. My outback vehicle which I have not quite finished fitting out is a 6×6 Landrover “Perentie” (which is the largest goanna in Australia). It is ex army with full camouflage and is classed as a light truck.
I also have a small collection of motorcycles including a 1971 Suzuki Hustler (T250), a 1971 Honda 50 Cub in original condition, a 1974 MZ TS250 for Eastern Germany and a few more modern vehicles which include a BMW F650, a Skoda Yeti, a 1993 Mazda MX5 (Miata in your country).
To show that I am not biased against American vehicles I have just sold my Buell motorcycle and ordered a new Indian Scout.
I am a retired electrical engineer but enjoy restoring and repairing all sorts of things including all my vehicles.
That’s it
Arnold
Sounds good to me Arnold ! .
I’m lucky in that I now live Way Out West where rust is little concern (except in Vegas of course !) so I’m able to indulge my self with ancient vehicles for daily drivers .
I’d give an Austin 1800 Ute a go except I cannot see the bed being large enough to carry any Moto (I have vintage Honda Tiddlers along with Russian Ural Solos and others) .
As is said in The Auto Trade : “there’s a bum for every seat” .
A few years ago a kid was trying to dump his 1937 Chrysler four door on me and I looked over the fence to see an Austin America 1800 sitting in some weeds, kids had danced on the roof and bonnet, I was told I could have it free (no thanx), it took me about six months to find someone who’d tow it off, hopefully to make road worthy again…..
If you saw me doing road rallies in my BMC Sports Coupe (pic) you’d call me a moron too and you’d be right .
I don’t care ~ you don’t have to ride in it unless you want to… =8-) .
-Nate
The Argentinien made Riley pickup was even more bizarre than this Australian Austin , which looks pretty decent . See the 1964 or so Siam Di Tella Argenta , a faithful Riley 4/72 in mini pickup mode .
BMC Au did have a go at building Austin Freeway utes with their six in them whether they made it to full production I dont know but there was one found in NZ that wasnt a hacked up sedan or wagon.
It’s funny. As an Aussie I always thought of the Austin as being in a little niche all of its own, rather than in competition with the big three. In my experience, owners tended toward the retired engineer/mechanic type who still tended to look toward Britain as Home. Dreams of the Empire, and all that. There were still quite a few of those kind of folk back in the sixties.
But in the sixties, the idea was that you needed six cylinders for a big country – conveniently ignoring the mighty Standard Vanguard which all throughout the fifties gave the Holden a run for its money with its mighty 2.1 litre four. Also ignoring the Austin A70 (2.2 litres, same size as Holden, but another big four) which was up there with them in the early fifties.
But Holden engines got bigger, primarily in response to competition from Ford and Chrysler, and the Aussie family car grew as well. By the time the 1800 came on the scene, it was in a kind of no-mans land market-wise. A seriously big car for a ‘four’, absolutely huge inside, yet smaller than the big three on the outside. And with all that advanced (but by now proven) Mini-style engineering, Thinking back to my father and his big-three-driving friends, I doubt any of them would have considered an 1800 as being a viable alternative.
That’s to their loss though.
I’ll side with your dad.
The 1800 was the best handling, riding, steering (once moving), roomiest and bodily toughest of any local car. A Holden couldn’t even be optioned with front discs till ’66, and even then not powered and dual circuit.
But there are “but”s, many of them bigger than JLo’s itself, which collectively make an ass of the car. So to speak.
Unless dad fervently believed there’ll always be an England and a Queen for God to Save, it would require an upper lip so stiff it had to be starched daily to drive about in a koala-bummed bedstead styled by a brilliant by but mad dictator (I believe the styling dept secretly called him “IssigoneYet”, and if not, should have).
Next, Mrs Dad – or dad himself if on the small side – had to try and steer the heavy and weirdly castorless bus wheel around a turning circle only just less than Her Maj’s royal yacht, and the wheels angle meant she/he couldn’t even reach the far side of the tiller and had to just shuffle and grunt. Even a starched upper would start to sweat and wilt doing that twice a day parking down at the Junction.
Next, the hugely strong car weighed about as much as a Holden, despite the lack of banjo or prop shaft, and yet the smallest GM engine then was 2.4 litres of smooth 1960’s-designed thin-wall six and this had 1.8 litres of somewhat grumpy ’40’s-derived B-series four: it was adequate, but ultimately over-burdened by comparison. Worse, the gearwand got reprimands for Vagueness On Duty from new, which helped the progress not.
Dad would also have noticed the great little 1100’s, and also that they broke a bit more than the other little cars, and remembered it. When the concept was inflated by 50%, he’d think the problems might also inflate, and he’d be not wrong. For despite many loyalist’s protestations, the old Herbert Landgrab1800 had a fail-prone clutch, it overheated to easily in a hot land, and even the water-and-gin suspension bags popped when overworked on nasty roads that abounded outside the cities. And yes, he’d have known it was harder to work on than the very simple US engineering under a Foldenaliant, and not loved by the greasy bits crowd for that. Dad was likely not rich – no one much was until the ’80’s-on, really – and he couldn’t afford their surcharge for unhappiness.
In short, great idea that it was, and for sure the most comfortable thing this side of a Citroen, it was incomplete for the tasks it faced in a huge, relatively poor and certainly conservative country.
Multiply those considerations many times over when thinking of a ute, for country buyers, and wonder at the triumph of optimism over reality. This also explains the tiny sales, even if it was by far the best-looking 1800 ever made.
It wasn’t his loss, Mr Wilding, but given your diminished chances of arrival at destination had he so purchased , it would have been yours!
Justy,one nitpick the optional discs on Holdens have always been powered. The first car I drove was an 1800 ute, so there’s a soft spot for them.
You’re dead right, it was Chrysler who demanded you pay for assistance, and into the ’70’s at that.
For my first driver, it was a ’70 HG Holden, and I too have a soft spot – but in a different part of me. I hated the thing then, and still
Mind, if it wasn’t the wheezebag186c.i. auto sedan my dad had got in about ’79 and instead the 253c.i. V8 4-speed HG wagon in the same yard – and damn, as a 12 y.o, I NEARLY got him there – my opinion might be quite different.
I commented to Peter, it flew off like a superharged 1800, can it be got back please.