[The discussion jpcavanaugh started with his suggestion that GM should never have taken the B-Body Caddy out of production reminded me of this piece I wrote back in 2008. Before you flip your wig at one (or more) of my suggestions, keep in mind that taking me too seriously (ever) is the ultimate CC Deadly Sin]
For the third time (this is 2008), a dramatic oil price spike has thrown the auto industry a curve ball. And once again, after years of supersizing, manufacturers are lacking the right-sized, economical products for which the market is desperate. Instead of spending three to five years developing new cars from scratch, it’s time to dust off the best from the past and put them back into production. An air bag here and some updated engines and technology there, and these seven classics are ready to save the day in each of the major categories:
SUV/CUV: Gen1 xB. When a “compact” CUV weighs 4200lbs (Saturn Vue) a radical gastric bypass is the only solution for this whole bloated category. The classic xB equals or exceeds the front and rear leg/headroom of the Tahoe, weighs half as much, and gets almost three times the mileage. It will happily carry four oversized Americans on their rounds. Towing? The ski boat got repossessed (along with the Tahoe and the house), and it cost too much to run anyway. Throw in the 128hp 1.8-liter engine from the xD, and freeway ramps won’t seem quite so intimidating, especially when the occupants haven’t had their bypasses yet.
Pickup Truck: Toyota T-100. In this new era, pickups will be for serious but economical work only. The original T-100 long-bed with the torquey 2.7-liter four and five-speed stick is still in great demand with professionals who make an honest living with their trucks: landscapers, carpenters, farmers, and other sober folks who never bought into the Mega-truck fad. It can haul a load of gravel, and hit 25mpg. It’s the spiritual successor to the rugged, simple six-cylinder pickups of yore, and what I would replace my Ford F-100 with, if I had to (or could find one).
Sporty two-seater: Honda CRX-Insight. The CRX was a category buster. It created its own new genre of fast, economical and cheap fun. The Insight was Honda’s not-so hot too-small hybrid. But it was absurdly light (1850lbs) with extensive use of aluminum and magnesium and had super aerodynamics. Drop in a Civic Si engine with 197hp, and you’re looking at a wicked power-to-weight ratio, better than an STI. And mid-40mpg fuel economy to boot, if you can stay away from that 8,000rpm redline. The prototype has already been built.
Upscale Sedan: W-124 Mercedes. The 300E/W-124 from 1985 through 1995 was the last Mercedes to be “over-engineered.” The streets are still full of them, the last standard bearers of Mercedes’ one-hundred year tradition of ultra-solid, reliable and economical transportation. It has the potential to restore MB’s tarnished image. And with a little updating under the hood, it can be leading-edge economical too. Drop in MB’s latest 1.8-liter direct-injection Kompressor gasoline four or latest turbo-diesels, and combined with the W-124’s almost Prius-like aero cD of .28, superb mileage and excellent performance is unvermeidbar.
4 X 4: Suzuki Samurai. The Suzuki LJ and SJ series were/are the Jeep Wrangler for the rest of the world, where gas was never that cheap. The little Suzukis gained a cult following with their serious off-road capability, reliability and efficiency. A Samurai holds the Guinness world record for highest elevation (21,942 feet). In the US, the Samurai was vilified by Consumer Reports for its tippy tendencies through the slalom. Slap on ESC (with an off switch), an updated 1.6-liter engine, and it’s ready take on the Rubicon at twice the mileage of that pig Wrangler.
Minivan: Chevrolet Lumina (aka “dustbuster”). OK, you can get up off the floor now. Seriously, the Lumina was just a decade behind, or ahead of the times, depending on your perspective. It was aerodynamic, low, light, and its looks were…controversial. Just like the Prius. And therein is its redemption: the first hybrid aerodynamic van. Drop in the two-mode hybrid transmission from the upcoming Saturn Vue, team it up with the 1.4-liter turbo Eco-Tec, and the future is… on GM’s shelves, waiting to be assembled (lovingly, we can hope). Bob Lutz, this is your last chance to “leave our well-thought-of Asian competitors in the dust(buster)” [Update: Volt-tec instead?]
RWD Ponycar: Mustang SVO. GM may be dropping hints about a forced-induction four in the new Camaro, but Ford has already plowed that field. After the 1981 oil shock, Ford set out to create a new paradigm for the traditional V8 ponycar. Starting with a light-weight (3,000 lbs.) Fox-body Mustang shell, it bestowed the SVO with state of the art components: ventilated four-wheel discs, Koni adjustable suspension, 16” wheels, and an intercooled turbo four that cranked out 200hp. It was ahead of the times, yet behind too. By the time it saw the light of day in 1984, gas was cheap again, and so was the 5.0-liter liter V8 Mustang GT. Drop in a twin-turbo 330hp four, and say goodbye to turbo lag and hello to the perfect drifter, with a near perfect 50/50 weight distribution.
Any other nominations (four cylinders or less)?
[Update: these Classics were all picked for being available in four cylinder versions. The Chevy Caprice? Why not with with a turbo four? It worked for the Eco-Boost Edsel. And I argued very strongly that it should never have been put out of production in my CC of it]
Good list. What about a reintroduced/improved/reengineered GM A-body with the only engine being the 2.4ltr 155hp ecotec and your choice of manual or automatic transmission. Bring back the orginal Celebrity grill design which was nearly “grille-less” like the orginal areo Ford Panthers. Likely the best space utilization of any GM sedan in the last 30 years. The sucker sat four adults comfortably and would car four sets of golf clubs no problem.
add the all wheel drive from the ’88-90 Pontiac 6000…and probably the 3.6 high feature V6 and I’m game!
My parents had an 89 6000 STE/AWD that I drove quite a bit while I was in high school….I really really miss that car!
I think about this every time I look at a first-gen Insight.
Paul, when your Xb gets old I demand that you not sell it, but get creative with pop-out sections and structural reinforcement to create a 21st-century Westfalia-van-style camper. (Yes, yes, the Honda Element did this, but it weighs too much)
If only you could read my mind! Well, actually, you have, and similar ideas pop up all the time.
I’ll weigh in on two of these:
1) Toyota T-100. not many people are aware that Toyo farmed out their first full sizer to Hino (Of medium and heavy duty fame) and what they got was a masterpiece. These trucks are well known for racking up 300,000+ miles with uncanny reliability. Need proof ? Just go on Craigslist and Ebay and try to find one with low miles . Its hard to do. When you see them for sale, anything under 150,000 miles brings big money. The 2.7 is as close to bulletproof as you will ever see and believe it or not,the 3.4 V6 is even better. I have driven mine for 11 years and its been in the shop TWICE , both for elective surgery. It runs as new and just asks for regular oil and coolant changes. I am at 253,000 miles and it could go another quarter mil,easy.
2) Mercedes W-124. Here’s a tip from a former owner. Look for a 260E instead of the 300. The performance is almost the same and the MPG’s are better. The 260 is a bargain because they are almost forgotten today. A LOT of older folks bought them for low speed tooling around in Sun City. That means that there are a fair number that have had regular dealer maintenance,garage storage and best of all, low miles. They turn up at estate sales all the time. Parts are a breeze (the 2.6 was also installed in the 190E and made that car go like a rocket). I agree that these cars were “no cost spared” in the engineering department. We called ours The Panzer. An ideal first car for HS kids.
Wow; you have two of my favorites. Yes; I actually looked for a T-100 a while back, but gave up. People just don’t get rid of them.
That was my experience too. I ended up with an f350 diesel. I can get close to 20mpg, AND haul a ton and a half of gravel (although not at the same time).
I’ll agree on the Toyota T-100. Certainly (hindsight, here, mind you) ill-advised Toyota may have goofed on marketing (or hinting at) this as a (somewhat-almost-full-sizer), if at all.
At the time, I really don’t remember seeing any advertising for it. I remeber seeing one at the Honolulu new car show in ’97 – bare bones workhorse with the big four-cylinder and five speed.
More like a competitor to a Dakota . ..
I vaguely remember an advert where two guys hop in their “tough Tacoma truck” and T-100, respectively, to save their “broken down buddy, Lou” in his Chevy. Lou could have a had a bigger payload, more power and savings, too, but, instead, his truck is dead and he has the lack of value blues. Simply the best (that’s one rock alright!) better than all the rest. Toyota screen card. End Commercial.
I like the T100 too. There was one for sale in my neighborhood a few years ago, very nice, reasonably low mileage, for $5500. Unfortunately I was unemployed at the time, so had to pass. I now have a ’99 Ranger (and a job), so I don’t feel too deprived.
One thing about the T100–wasn’t it the truck that got a one-star crash rating? Not that I worry about such things–but one star? My toes curl a little bit. Perhaps someone with better knowledge will pipe up.
What about the first generation Rx-7? Lovely styling with maybe only an interior refresh needed and a slightly bigger tire size to bring it up to date. Caveman simple mechanically but very easy to work on and without any turbo nonsense quite reliable. Mazda sold a bought load of this with a reasonable price tag and decent (not outstanding) performance. Fuel economy isn’t as bad as one would expect either. Surely there is room in the market for a sporty, rear drive hatchback.
Jeeeze, Paul. Trying to work, here. But ok.
2 words: Plymouth Valiant. Say, 1970. A little rustproofing and some safety updates, and you have a really nice mid-size sedan that will run forever.
On the minivan, I would move to replace the dustbuster with either the first generation 95-98 Honda Odyssey or the original Grand Voyager/Grand Caravan (but with that new 8 speed automatic that is coming bolted to a Chrysler 3.3. Either would run forever and were great vehicles.
If we must have a Mercedes on the list, I am more of a W108 guy. Diesel & stick shift.
For big families, the Ford E-150 Club Wagon. Oh, wait . . .
Finally, the USA needs to have a real luxury car. I nominate the 64 Continental, both in sedan and 4 door convertible form.
Some of those would need some serious work to bring up to current standards. But why not? It is the day after a long holiday!
I happened to have just watched Get Shorty this weekend, which prominently features an Oldmobile Silhouette… “The Cadillac of minivans”… complete with magical automatic sliding doors. Gotta go with the Olds over the downgraded Chevy.
Second the SIlhouette. I have a low mileage 2002 as my daily driver and it is a joy to take anywhere.
In fact, maybe I ought to do a CC on my Silhouette. Paul? Too soon for a 9 year old minivan?
No. We’re a big tent here. Bring it on.
A close friend has a 1996 Pontiac Trans Sport dustbuster van. Bright red, gray interior. 200K miles, runs great. The only drawback? You sit too close to the floor in back – uncomfortable after 30 mins.
The rest of the list? Except for the Chevy at the top and Educator Dan’s Celebrity recommendation, plus the original Chrysler minivans, nothing else on the official list floats my boat.
I’d have to nominate the 1st gen Lumina. Euro Sport, red/orange, please. Also Plymouth Acclaim.
Zackman, you may be the only person in the U.S who actually remembers the Plymouth Acclaim.
@Zackman,
Ditto on the plain jane Plymouth Acclaim. I know of five guys about your age who had them (okay, there are a few Spirits in there, too!). They swear that it was the best car they ever had. No, it wasn’t much to look at but it was dead reliable and just the right size.
Oh my God do I feel awkward. My daily driver/beater is a 95 Spirit, black cherry with tan interior and the “gold package” ooo lala.
haha….it replace a 97 Saturn SL last March because the a/c in the Satty stopped working and I wanted an automatic for a while.
Great interior room, slow as a snail…only gets about 27mpg.
Unfortunately it seems to have a terminal case of unibody cancer that will probably put it out of commision next inspection time.
It keeps the Firehawk and GXP clean and dry for perfect days…and keeps the 100 mile daily grind interesting…
I loved those cars! I never had one, but I always wanted one…
Ha ha ha! We bought our 1990 Plymouth Acclaim brand new in March 1991 and owned it for 10+1/2 years! I – we absolutely loved that car until my daughter wrecked it once too often (see TTAC entry a little while ago). It was dark quartz (gray) with gray interior (of course), 2.5L, auto, PS, PN, tilt, cruise, A/C, am/fm cassette.
I really missed that car, as it was the best car we ever owned until I bought my Impala and our CR-V.
Mom’s first brand-new car was an ’89 Dodge Spirit 2.5 turbo. It started having electrical issues at around 70k miles, but until then it was great, and I also agree it was the perfect size. It also had a great, comfortable back seat where the seatback was at a very lazy angle. It was relaxing.
My personal list of the 3 greatest back seats I’ve ever actually been in as far as how everything fits for comfort, if not for materials or creature comforts:
1. Volkswagen Phaeton
2. 1995 Camry
3. That Dodge Spirit
Yes, really.
We owned a 1999 Dodge Stratus. That was the one car we actually drove off the showroom floor! We owned a 1996 Intrepid 3.5L, but was having some unusual issues that I was fearful of – sometimes it just didn’t want to start – well, we traded it for the Stratus. A wonderful car that we owned for three years – it was intended to be a short-term buy. I sold it to a friend for his daughter, who proceeded to beat the daylights out of it, but had it for years.
Likewise my dad’s 1990 LeBaron (same car as Acclaim/Spirit) I just sold to a nice couple. Chrysler could have kept that trim AA platform up to date for very little expense. The cloud cars of ’95 that replaced them were great at the time, but dated quickly. Too bad, now it’s going to be Lancias.
PS: Ever see the Euro AA Chrysler Saratoga? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Saratoga#1989.E2.80.931995
Paul, it really is quite amazing to look back at what seem to be GM’s half-baked ideas which failed (such as the Lumina APV).
Compare some of GM’s more advanced (at the time) vehicles which failed, and then consider the vehicles popular today. GM created the idea, left the idea, and someone took 5-10 years to refine it and popularize it.
Now that we’ve passed the bad-press and feelings of the bailout (which I am certainly guilty of), we can start to better realize this, and that if GM wouldn’t have rushed new vehicles out so often they would have done quite well in the long-term.
Maybe the new GM has learned this lesson. Ford never quite figured it out, they just stay with the same thing (which isn’t always bad) and hinge on a few “gotta-have-it” features.
Great list!
I’d like to throw the Dodge Omni up for a nomination. I know plenty of Interneters claim to have had the worst automotive experience in a thousand lifetimes with them but plenty more didn’t (proven by the little thing living almost 4 years past it’s execution date). Spice it up with a turbo 2.4 and keep the weight down around 22-2500 lbs and you have a sweet little car!
Make it the 024/TC3 version with a 5 speed and I’m in!
The dustbuster looks quite modern to me bear in mind Ive never seen one in the wild, was it just intrduced at the wrong time? or did it have a stupid powertrain it doesnt look any worse than all the other people movers out there, Mustang ok but please put a decent engine in go for an Aussie turbo 6 from the Falcon great power huge torque light car gear it so it pulls hard not screams Wish we had T100 ute Ive driven a lot of Hino concrete trucks dull underpowered reliable as sunrise no wonder its a good ute You missed the 5 door hatch category Citroen Xsara/Peugeot 306 worlds best but get the diesel amazing milage and pace awesum corner carver and 50+mpg imp
Bryce,
When the dustbusters first came out they were “powered” by a transversely mounted 120-hp 3.1 V6 attached to Methuselah’s own 3 speed automatic. From 1992 on they had a 3.8 with a 4 speed optional and in 1996 just a 3.4 with a 4 speed. IIRC, it was bigger than a Caravan/Voyager on the outside but smaller on the inside due to the hand-held vacuum cleaner shape and the three foot (?) deep dashboard. The exterior panels were dent resistant, due to being made out of plastic (didn’t stop them from shattering on -0Fdays…)
The original concept (1986 Trans Sport) would be a great modern minivan. Integrated back-up camera, heads-up display, passenger side personal computer, range finder for judging distance between cars, and a non-moving steering hub, like on the newer Citroens, containing all the switches you might need to use.
1. Toyota AE86. Maybe Toyota can make a hatchback on the FT-86 platform?
2. Chevrolet Cosworth Vega. This would be a tough one because it would probably have to use the Alpha platform, which might be too heavy to work.
3. Alfa Romeo Giulia Sprint 1600 GTA I have no idea how it could be done, but I still want one.
I’m nearly certain that one of the Chinese manufacturers has the last Daihatsu Charmant platform – which was basically a four-door AE86 (both essentially rebodied, re-engined versions of the E70 Corolla).
1) SUV/CUV Plymouth Colt Vista/Eagle Summit or any of the other tall boy wagons (You could even say the Kia Rondo or Mazda5)
2) The Dustbusters were actually great (straightline) performers once you put the 3800 in them. I think they were the first Minivans to break the 10 second 0-60 barrier. I also remember them being less creaky compared to the Caravan/Voyager Vans. They weren’t “bad” (and given the amount of ‘proven’ A and W body bits that went into them how bad could they be?), just weird.
Have you seen a Multipla thats wierd, Dustbuster sounds like it had Commodore style running gear should have gone ok as for the looks hey I drive a french car and a 59 hillman which are styled differently to the norm. GM cars out here have a good name mostly but Ive never seen much good written about those vans.
I keep forgetting about those “micro-minivans”! I liked them and found them to be very practical, although I never owned one. Too bad they didn’t stay around very long.
I’d love to see modern interpretations of many Mazda models. The final 929 with a 2.3 DISI Turbo. The swoopy second-gen MX-6 with a 2.3 DISI Turbo. The 4wd MPV with the Skyactiv-D. The B-series with a 3.2L Duratorq and a six speed.
I’d like to try out the current Samurai/Jimny with the Renault 1.5L diesel.
1965 (“Late Model”) Corvair with a transverse FWD power module relocated to the back
Howabout Corvair with Porcshe 914powertrain
Subaru boxers would be cheaper and more reliable
I think Toyota/Lexus could still make the original ES300 or LS400 with minimal updates and sell them in respectable numbers. They were nearly perfect when new, and 20 years of practice screwing them together would probably make the best-built car the world will ever see. They’d just need a long-wheelbase version of the LS to keep the interior volume competitive with more modern tastes.
An original ES300 with the Prius’ hybrid powertrain would probably outsell the CT200h and HS250h combined, on looks alone! That is still a darn good looking car 20 years on.
The Samurai with a 1.6L engine? It was called the Sidekick. I owned one for nine years. I had an unfortunate meeting with ice that resulted in a new hood and quarter panel. Other than that, she ran like a charm except for the whole eating of belts.
She had about 115K when I sold her because the family grew from two to three.
The 26 mpg that I averaged throughout the 11 years was a sight better than my Element.
As to the T100, good call that I had forgotten. I would add a long bed version of the Courier/B1600 (1800?) to the list though.
What about the saturn SL series cars? They’ve become ultra cheap while still reliable, who knows, maybe if saturn had just stuck to ultra reliable econo boxes they’d still be around..
Model A Ford.
Following the 365 days of A blog I’m becoming convinced that all we really need for transportation is a Model A. The model range covers everything from passenger vehicles to sports cars to pickups and heavy trucks. Of course there are a few gaping holes in my arguement:
Safety – But if we were all limited to 45mph top speed that would help a lot right there
Fuel efficiency – I don’t think Jonothan’s topped 20mpg with his A yet, but I wonder what kind of mileage you’d get in a Model A with fuel management, or some sort of modern 40hp engine.
Construction: Model A production is labor intensive and the parts are well crafted, which would be expensive today.
Check it out and imagine a future with modern Model A’s. Quaint and practical solution for all, or Soviet style misery?
http://www.365daysofa.com
I sometimes wonder, If Henry (the first) had been allowed to continue developing the model T (or A) in whatever way he wished, how much cheaper would it have been to build today? Not to mention how light could it have been, and offcourse, Mpg and reliability? With his standards completely uncorrupted by the constant competition against Chevrolet (or if they really competed about building ‘the best car’, instead of ‘the most desirable car’) How good would these cars be today? I’ll tell you, they’d be really awesome, but I’m not sure anyone would buy them….
It’s something that happens with almost every brand . When new ,they start out building something really basic and rugged, and (if they are to survive) really good quality. It happened to Ford, VW, Toyota, then Hyundai, all the worlds leading manufacturers started out the same way, and then somehow they got really afraid that people would think their cars were boring (which people tend to do) and started making faster, better looking cars with more accessories. Ineviteably ending up with a heavy bloated overdesigned gas guzzler with a lot of electrical problems. (OK, Toyota hasn’t still gotten quite as far as VW, who only got really bad itself in the late 90’s, but they are so close…)
My vote for the 4×4 goes to the 1986 Isuzu Trooper.
Well, the 1.9 liter TDI engine from late ’90s/early ’00s VWs has done well for me, averaging 45-ish or so (personal best of 55mpg), and is a hoot to drive.
Sadly, it’s also attached to an early ’00s Volkswagen and its attendant reliability issues… which has put me off ever buying another ‘Modern Era’ VW again.
I was just thinking on the way to work this morning that the power specs of the TDI are almost exactly the same as the straight six in my ’50 International L-170 truck. That guy with the EcoBoost Edsel really got me thinking…
Great list as always.
I would have opted for a revised version of the Previa.
Add a 4th door, lighter panels and components, optional all wheel drive, a towing package, and a hybrid option, and it would run long concentric circles around the dustbuster vans.
Keep in mind you couldn’t do this all at one time. But I’ve seen those vehicles do everything from taxi cabs, to light trailer hauling, to junkyard part running.
One more thing. Make it a bit more user friendly to service. That’s the only complaint that I have with the one I now use for renters.
There’s still a (declining) number of them doing taxi service here. Several of then have been replaced by gen2 Xb.
OK, here’s my list:
B-body GM, the original boxy 1977 version. An Impala body would do just fine. Build all of the body styles, but update them as much as possible before we get into ridiculous weight gains. LSx motor, six speed from the trucks, 4 wheel discs, F41 suspension only. Ride quality be damned. Minimum of electronic nannies.
Original GM J-body. I’ve given this a lot of thought (MM), only the hatchback coupe, the four door and the wagon. Again, the Chevy body is fine. Again updated to safety standards as much as possible, but with body shells that old, we’d be lucky to get two airbags. 1.8 Ecotec, 2.2 Ecotec (in wagon) and a Z-24 version with the Turbo 2.0 Ecotec. 4 speed autobox, 6 speed manuals. F41 suspension spec.
Chrysler H-body, Dodge Lancer is fine. 4-door hatchback from mid-80’s. Update it with the “world motor”, six speed trannies, auto and manual, 4 wheel discs. Again appropriate and possible safety updates. Use the 2.4 turbo motor from the SRT-4 Caliber for a killer sport version.
Fox bodies. Both 4-door sedan and wagon styles, Mustang body for 2-door coupes. No hatches, at least at outset. Maybe later. Since Mustangs were built well into the 90’s most safety updates would be fairy easy, I would imagine. Please revive the SVO motor, but update with current engine management systems. Also, the newer 3.0 OHC V6 and some variant of the Coyote 5.0 V8, ostensibly for hauling. Hauling @ss that is.
Why no one else has said this: the A1 VW Golf! Duh! and Scirocco! Double Duh!
Fiat Spider 2000. Triple Duh?
L-body (OmniRizon), but only the Shelby turbo versions. I could find a way to pay $30K for a ‘brand new’ 1987 Turbo Shelby Charger. It may have all of the refinement of a Sten gun, but wow, what a ride!
As an aside, when Carroll Shelby was reconstructing some 60’s Mustangs several years ago, it became known that the original manufacturer could manufacture “new” cars. As long as they complied with the laws that were in force during the original run of the cars, they could build cars that met those standards. I’ve often wondered if GM would tool up for a run of 10,000 “new” 1957 Chevys for example, a continuation of the original run. They could easily sell them for $100,000 each and still offer the original 1957 90-day warranty for that matter. Food for thought.
OK, I’ve wasted enough electrons with this bit of MM.