In a recent foray into the wilds of El Cerrito, I spotted this fantastic 1972 Ford Country Sedan, and a few days later came across a quite different interpretation of the same theme – a vehicle to drive across the country and find post-Corona America.
It’s a Mitsubishi Fuso FG 4×4 “Canter”, conveniently parked in our favorite post-apocalyptical supply store. I talked to the owners, they nominally live in California, but are “traveling constantly”. I mentioned “Montana”, and they said “Yes”.
Plenty of storage for tools on this side. The owners told me what year it was, I cannot quite remember but I think 2015. This model is unique to the United States, and was produced until 2017, though there are rumors that Mitsubishi Fuso may bring it back. The owners told me that “you used to be able to buy them pretty cheaply, but then they became popular”. Mitsubishi Fuso is majority-owned by Daimler Trucks, so the FG is in some sense is in competition with versions of the Unimog, though the Unimog is no longer sold in North America.
This Mitsubishi has been outfitted with a custom body specifically designed for rugged travel in the harshest conditions, even bringing some bicycles along in case the trail gets too narrow for the Mitsu.
The owner said his primary modification apart from the body was substitution of these special 4×4 tires and wheels (he called them “super-singles”) for the stock setup. He said the equation was pretty simple – 5 wheels/tires (including the spare), $5000. Sorry this photo is a bit cropped, I was dealing with a really bright sun that made it almost impossible for me to take pictures and look at the screen at the same time.
Plenty of room for fuel on this side.
These Mitsus have an integrated transmission/transfer case, consisting of a 6-speed dual-clutch automated-manual transmission (AMT) and single-speed transfer case. The driveline-mounted parking brake is an interesting choice. The newest versions of these (though as mentioned, the 4×4 is not currently available) have the same basic powertrain but have upgraded to dual-caliper vacuum/hydraulic disc brakes. I wonder, perhaps the disc brakes had been available in other markets for a while, and the driveline-mounted parking brake was a simple solution that covered both brake options?
It’s pretty compact down there.
The front axle looks to have Rzeppa-style (“CV”) joints, the largest I have seen, and drum brakes.
I wonder how easy these are to service? It’s been my impression that tilt-cabs often provide a lot of easy access to components, making up at least partially for the inconvenience of having to tilt the cab. Looks pretty jam-packed up in there, to me.
I found the spec sheet for the 2017 version of this truck, which confirms the drum brakes and locking hubs, but also implies the hub locks as well as the front axle engagement are push-button, in particular for the transmission “electro-vacuum operated”. It has a 3.0 L, 4-stroke, intercooled, 4-cylinder turbocharged diesel making 161 hp and 295 lb-ft of torque. Our intrepid explorers may be able to go anywhere, but they will not be going anywhere very fast.
Our friends in the Ford Country Sedan might not be going anywhere quickly either, but they definitely have a willing travel companion.
According to the owner, who was actively waiting in line at the El Cerrito Burger King and so couldn’t talk for long, it’s a “Country Sedan”, not the more familiar “Country Squire“, which would have come with the fake wood appliques. He was a very happy fellow, he and his dog, awaiting his (their?) burgers, ready to go anywhere. Maybe not quite as “anywhere” as in the Mitsu, but definitely with quite a bit more style.
Neither of these two vehicles is currently available brand-new, though from reading various enthusiast sites, there exist a number of outfitters which will create one of these Mitsus from a 4×2 model, at a price, of course. I don’t know how hard it would be to find a cherry 1972 Ford Country Sedan, but perhaps a Squire would do in a pinch. Which one would you choose?
The roof top tent on that Ford is certainly going to be easier to access than the lifted SUVs you usually see them on.
No contest. The Ford is in fantastic condition…one look takes me back to that wonderful floaty Ford ride and non existent steering feel! Shame about the bland color…would have been perfect brown or green. That said, upgrade the hubcaps, add whitewalls, and lose the iffy side moulding and I’m all in.
Here in Santa Cruz, home of Tepui which is a major brand of rooftop tent, I have seen RTT’s on everything from massive expedition rigs to stock Mini Coopers and Golfs. But never on a Country Sedan!
That side molding is “iffy” in terms of how much protection it offered (considering the horizontal sheetmetal strakes right above it), but nonetheless it was very common on 1971-72 Fords when they were new.
If I remember correctly, there were 4 models of F/S Ford for ’72, probably because there were 4 lines of F/S Chevy that year. The Country Sedan was 2nd from the top, equivalent to the Galaxie 500.
Below that were the Custom 500 Ranch Wagon and the Custom Ranch Wagon.
And I’ve never read a truly believable version as to why Ford called certain variants of their wagons “Sedan”, but plenty of people mock modern day German sedans for being called “Coupe”.
I was also going to note the inappropriateness of “Country Sedan” for a car that is not a sedan and is most likely to be found in the suburbs… I guess “Suburban” was already taken.
Holden used to call their wagons “Station Sedan” back in the fifties. Even said so on the side.
Which would make no sense at all America, where it would in any case be a Ranch Sedan.
Which, being a wagon, still makes no sense.
(For the one or two US readers here, “Station” is the Australian formal name for very large outback ranches: to this day, they are called “XY Station”)
In mid model year 1973, Ford did come out with the LTD wagon. Basically the Country Squire without the fake Wood. A friend of mine’s parents bought the 1st one I ever saw.
Bob
A relative of mine who has more money than sense and enjoys buying the most extreme versions of anything bought one of these Mitsu 4×4 adventure RVs. He loves it, and it’s remarkably robust and self contained. Its full of expensive gear like a mini water treatment plant that can make any old puddle or swamp produce potable water. Satellite communications, solar cells, generators etc mean it can provide comfortable living quarters in the most extreme situations. BIL never actually uses these capabilities, his luxurious downtown lifestyle precludes that, but the notion that he could if he wanted is what prompted him to spend CAD $200k on his machine.
BTW, I love the Country Sedan. It looks much nicer than the ubiquitous Country Squire woody wagons I knew as a kid.
Love the Ford wagon!!
Drive line parking brakes were the norm for class 4/5 trucks for a very long time, and many of them use the unit. Scroll down and click on the vehicle fitment tab. https://www.autozone.com/brakes-and-traction-control/parking-brake-shoe/duralast-parking-brake-shoe-647/37621_359536_0
There are a couple of reasons, the primary one is that the rear axle provides torque multiplication meaning the holding force is multiplied be the rear axle ratio. The other reason is that it just needs a single cable with a single part number. With parking brakes at the wheel you have at least 3 cables in the system with a different part numbers for different wheel bases. Because they are so long they are much harder to keep properly adjusted as the stretch per ft is multiplied by the length of the cable. They are also much more vulnerable.
The one big downside to a driveline brake is that it doesn’t work in slippery conditions as the differential will allow that wheel on the slippery stuff to spin backwards while the one with traction rolls along.
As far as which one to take across country that is easy, the Ford. That is not because I’m a Ford guy either. It is because I’ve put enough time behind the wheel of class 4/5 cab overs and an hour behind the wheel is torture enough for me. The older Fuso is the worst for getting in and out of with minimal distance for your leg to get between the steering column and seat.
Not a great choice on the wheels on that Fuso. The steering geometry is now off with a ton of scrub and improperly loaded wheel bearings.
The Isuzu NPR and NRR cab-over trucks are much better. I’ve logged plenty of time in them and long distance trips of up to 800 km /day are relatively pleasant. The 327 4-cyl turbo diesel keeps up with traffic, its fairly comfortable and an easy drive, for its size.
I have the most wheel time in recent Isuzus and I agree the ingress and egress are much much better than the Fuso. The Isuzu is also a relative rocket for the class, once you get the turbo spooled. However the brakes SUCK and an hour in one of them and I’m done.
Ford, all day long and twice on Sundays. Able to effortlessly cruise at current highway speeds, would be more comfortable, and having to work on it would be much easier.
I would like to give that Fuso (rolling under the flag of Ma Daimler these days) a try!
An inline-four, turbocharged + intercooled 3.0 liter diesel engine seems to be the general consensus among Japanese truck makers in this segment of light tilt-cab trucks.
Others with such a power unit (that I know of) are the Nissan Cabstar and Isuzu’s N-series. Another one I remember is the Toyota Dyna, when it was still available here.
In Europe, the comparable Iveco Daily follows the same path, although it does have a short sloping nose with a hood, instead of a tilt-cab.
Iveco doesnt have a Japanese shift program for the AMT, Fascinating comments about brakes on these puddle jumper size trucks they have an exhaust brake the service brakes arent something I use much, prefer to keep those for emergencies and use the exhaust brake and correct gear to brush off excess speed,
ZF transmissions in the Iveco Daily, either a 6-speed manual or an 8-speed automatic. Engines come from FPT Industrial.
The adult in me likes the Fuso. A self-contained unit that can go anywhere on or off road would be great for exploring trails and backroads – just pack up my cameras, some food and other supplies, and my wife and I (or a few friends) would be off. The kid in me loves that big old Ford wagon. They were a common sight when I was a kid, and I always liked them, though it’s the last thing my parents would have bought. My wife would likely consider it way too big for the two of us, but she’s also more of a main roads kind of girl, so she’d enjoy a nice road trip in one of these.
The Ford for sure. Someone above mentioned the floaty ride and lack of steering feel; this was standard equipment on Fords of this era. To be honest most of the Ford’s contemporaries were the same, great for travel on smooth, straight roads but a handful in anything twisty. I had a Ford from this era as a company car back when it was fairly new. Mine was an LTD two door hardtop, big on the outside and not nearly as big as it could have been on the inside. The 400 CID V8 provided gobs o’ torque but at a cost, it averaged around 9-10 MPG in everyday driving. I didn’t have to pay for the gas so it wasn’t an issue, other than having to fill it up every other day or so.
The Ford. Smooth ride, effortless steering and timeless styling.
Doesn’t hurt that I am biased as a station wagon owner.
I would take the Ford wagon. A buddy had one when we were in college, spent many a pub night driving home with him in that car. Great times, great memories.
Outliers Overland on YouTube bought a ten year old Mitsu overlanding rig and IIRC they paid about $90,000 for it. It has a manual trans and they love driving it. They have super singles too.
Another guy took an old Isuzu NPR, put running gear from a Chevy 4X4 pickup under it and built a camper on back. I bet he got a pretty penny for it.
I’d take the fuzzbox but not with a AMT fitted full manual 6 speed syncro they come here with or I’ll have the Ford, the chances post apocolypse of finding a Mitsubishi dealer to sort the transmission out are slim and yes they do go wrong, The Ford I can probably fix.
Remote rugged road trips
In style, comfort and class
The 70s ford wagon will do.
I’m tempted to say the Fuzzo (which are often here as country fire trucks) for an outback trawl, and the Ford for boulevardiering.
But for years upon years, the population who wanted to go outback used the local equivalents of this Ford, and they all lived, cars and drivers alike. We’ve all got a bit carried away with the fairly recent idea that cars can’t handle miles of rough roads, but history proves that wrong. And when you think of the structural integrity of modern crash-safe stuff, modern cars are probably even better able to outlast a good long rattling.
Now, I don’t delude myself that the Country saloon wagon is going to ford every stream or climb every mountain – and for some unknown reason, I feel the urge to sing, but I’m digressing – but if you took a newbie SUV/CUV on a sensible enough path, it would get where you wanted it to. (I don’t mention sedans or wagons as there are none left, I’m told).
Having said that, the Country Sedan wagon estate Ford is not necessarily so much sweeter for that long trip as it seems. The same dynamic awfulness that gave them a waterbed ride for the freeways also gave them ‘orrid steering in need of constant correction as it bloused about. And the stylish but utterly unaerodynamic body also gave the traveller a lot of roary wind noise as soon as anything much above 50 was crested: the combination of those two wearing things gets elderly in a rush, as, then, does the driver.
And having said that, I doubt the Mitsu is a paragon in either area either, and there’s also the fact that one’s bottom is perched inches above a large and grumpy diesel, and so, on balance, I take the Ford for both purposes.
My parents went from a new 1969 Robin’s Egg Blue Ford Country Squire with a 2 barrel 429 (if I remember right) in it, to a Greenish Goldish 1972 Ford Country Sedan with not a 429 in it, right around when I reached driving age. It was my job to drive ten miles each way to pick up my 2 younger sibs from school each day, and looking back, it’s a damned disgrace the way I drove that FCSed wagon, and the roads I drove it on – “fast” and “awful” respectively. Mom would complain that I’d ruined her brakes almost every time I drove it, and I might have.
Iirc the difference between the Custom Ranch Wagon and the Custom 500 Ranch Wagon was the upscale version had chrome trim around all the side windows and the straight Custom did not. My dad had the “500” Ranch Wagon and near as I could tell that was the only difference. His came with dog dish hubcaps and a narrow stainless trim ring as wheel covers. I always kind of liked that as I never saw another just like it.
Not much social distancing with 2 adults and 6 kids! Lol
Surely not much of a choice – if you need the offroadiness of the Canter, then the Ford won’t be possible. If you don’t need it, then you are much better off without it!