We started our CC Toyota Week with an FJ40, and we shall end it the same way (unless, of course, someone follows up with another finale). Paul Niedermeyer gave us his usual excellent treatment of the FJ40’s history with his piece on one of the early versions (CC here). This FJ is one of the final versions, and will give you a different focus.
Carmakers are a lot like people. But you knew that. Why is it that some can have the idea first, but not run with it the way they should. Others seem to have it all together, yet make a botch of things and drift into irrelevance. Some are born with a silver spoon in their mouths, but never venture beyond their own neighborhood. And others start with very, very little, and through hard work and determination, parlay a modest start into complete domination.
Take the Willys Jeep. By the end of World War II, Jeeps were on almost every continent, either as surplus or as active military vehicles. In 1945, who was positioned better than Willys to take the gospel of lightweight, durable all wheel drive out to the less developed places in the world to become the Model T of the postwar era all across the globe?
True, Willys was a small company that was not any too overcapitalized. However, its 1954 merger with Kaiser could have changed that. Particularly with Henry Kaiser’s deep pockets and his company’s significant presence in Argentina and South America. The American Jeep should have slowly grown, inching out across the less developed world. It was basic and hardy. And, if the open-air CJ proved a little too basic, the postwar all-steel station wagon should have proved just the thing. But alas, the civilian Jeep was not victorious as its military ancester had been. So far as I am aware, the Jeep steel wagon (cancelled in the U.S. in 1965) was never built overseas. Why not? Good question.
Infrastructure and good supply lines were instrumental in helping to win a world war, but these things would be in short supply in terms of the Jeep organization getting a dominant foothold outside of the US. The defining four-wheel-drive vehicle of the postwar years? Yes – in the USA. But elsewhere, Jeep was more hit and miss.
Then there was the Land Rover. Others here are more knowledgeable about the Land Rover than am I, but it would seem that the Land Rover also had a good start following the war. Add in the fact that it was built by a country that still had some claim (albeit a shrinking one) to being a worldwide empire. Into the 1950s, there were still British subjects worldwide and British infrastructure (both governmental and commercial) to support them.
Unfortunately, as capable as the Land Rover was and as far-flung as its organization was found, it would not become the dominant force that it should have become. Whether it was quality woes, or the lack of capital, or that it took its world leadership position for granted, I cannot say. What I can say is that while the Land Rover still maintains some presence in remote outposts the world over, it is not the indispensable player that it was in the 1950s and 1960s.
I must throw in here the case of the International Scout. International Harvester is such a fascinating company. Before and during the Second World War, it was one of the largest, most vertically integrated manufacturing companies in the world. After the war, it certainly had resources aplenty to throw at its truck unit, and did so when it introduced the Scout in 1960. International certainly had no shortage of experience in building trucks, having done so since at least 1907. But was there ever a company with “International” as a part of its name that had so much of a focus on its domestic market?
The Scout was certainly a latecomer (though not compared to the Toyota), introduced as a 1961 model. It was certainly a capable vehicle, and both simple and durable – two qualities absolutely necessary for a world vehicle. However, the International Scout was really the American domestic Scout that, like many residents of its Fort Wayne, Indiana birthplace (including your author), seldom if ever ventured outside of the U.S. While the original Scout might have been quite suitable for Africa, South America or the Austrailian outback, it never became much of a presence there, certainly in comparison to the other players in this tale. Then, by 1980, the biggest company of them all was on hard times. The big truck lines were saved to live another day, but the Scout line (and all consumer-grade vehicles) were history. I suppose International could not be blamed for picking the low-hanging fruit of the large American market, but that strategy carries risks as well, as International discovered.
Wait – isn’t this Toyota week? So it is, and now we come back to that little company that took a larger view. Was there a product less appealing to the Japanese domestic market than the original Land Cruiser? Japan is (and was) a small island nation that is quite densely populated. Toyota tried sending its best sedan, the Toyopet, to the U.S in the late 1950s, which produced one of the larger automotive sales flops of that decade. So, even though the Land Cruiser was not a big seller in Japan, this would be the vehicle to plant Toyota’s flag elsewhere in the world.
Toyota would start with a top quality vehicle that contained the best features of the Jeep, the Land Rover and even the Scout. But, Toyota would go farther, with a level of quality in design, parts and assembly that would be unmatched elsewhere. And fortunately, Studebaker had abandoned the use of the Land Cruiser name after 1954. Add in an attentive dealer and parts presence that went most places where the little Land Cruiser went, and the result is now everywhere for all to see. Once the Land Cruiser blazed the trail, more civilized models would follow all over the world.
This particular Land Cruiser is one of the later ones, 1979 or later (Wiki says that 1979 was the first year for air conditioning). I am picking 1980 just to make a point. By that year, AMC, International Harvester and British Leyland were all foundering in the United States (and elsewhere, for that matter). For the American companies, that lazy reliance on the huge American market would have a downside when the bottom fell out of the American economy. Toyota, on the other hand, was flourishing as never before. When the first purchaser of this yellow Land Cruiser brought it home, it was certainly the oldest design of any of the top four wheel drive vehicles offered for sale. It was also likely one of the most expensive. Yet out of all the others (and the Bronco, and the Blazer, and the Ramcharger) this was the one chosen, just like all of those other yellow Land Cruisers offloaded from ships in ports on every continent. This one is still with us, a bit rusty perhaps, but still providing all weather transportation to a college student a generation (or two) removed from the earlier purchasers of these machines.
I guess the car business can be like a sports team. Some teams have the recruiting, or the raw talent, or the benefit of a favorable schedule. But the ones that win the championships tend to be the teams that focus on the fundamentals, and do the little things thoroughly and well. In 1960, who could have imagined that within twenty years, Jeep, Land Rover and International would become also-rans in the worldwide market for tough, back-country transportation? Each of those three companies had a much easier path to domination of this market, yet it was Toyota that took control of the game.
As people here (and elsewhere) got richer and fatter, the Land Cruiser has grown in size, comfort, performance and expense. Sadly, the world seemed to be outgrowing the FJ40 by the 1980s (though it stayed in production in Brazil until 2001. Jeep – that could have been you!) There are some who wonder if the modern versions have lost some of their edge, but the Land Cruiser remains at the top of the pecking order almost everywhere. Personally, I like these old, basic models. But as rugged as these are, in a certain way, these were always one of the most civilized outdoorsmen of them all. Certainly the most successful. And a fitting end to Toyota Week.
I remember an old Land Cruiser magazine ad from the mid ’70s. Headline: Read it and weep, Jeep!
Nice overview. But I think you may have shortchanged the poor Jeep just a bit in terms of its international presence.
IKA (Kaiser’s Argentian ops) built Jeeps until 1978(CJs and the Jeep Wagon, called Estanciera, and the Gladiator ) for decades there, and was clearly a dominant player there, and developed many variations on them, including some rather unique ones. That would be worthy of an in-depth story of its own. ironically, IKA was sold to Renault in 1970, which then inherited the Jeep business there. This was of course a few years before it would buy into AMC’s Jeep business in the states.
Willys Jeeps were also built and/or assembled in a host of countries around the world: Australia, Brazil, Burma, Colombia, France (Hotchkiss built licensed Jeeps starting in 1954), India (Mahindra; Jeep still being built IIRC), Iran, Italy, Japan (Mitsubishi got its post-war start largely by its license-built Jeep), Mexico (VAM Jeeps), Netherlands (Nederlands Kaiser), Philippines (famous Jeepneys developed from license built CJs), Portugal (Bravia), Spain (VIASA), Turkey, and Venezuela.
It would take some doing to analyze exactly why Kaiser-Jeeps extensive local production, exports, and license-built Jeeps didn’t continue to dominate the global market. It would seem that in certain countries with high import barriers (Brazil, Argentina, Mexico and others), the reasons were pretty obvious why its older technology managed to hold off the competition from Toyota for quite a long while.
But essentially that’s what the issue was, in a nut shell: these globally-built Jeeps were heavily based on the original Jeep technology, and didn’t evolve much, the exception being perhaps with the Mitsubishi and a few others.
Many of these local operations were stuck building the same thing, with some minor variations on body styles. By the 1960s, Toyota clearly saw an opening, and with its aggressive export-oriented push (by the companies and government) and helped by a cheap currency, found the traction to make serious inroads.
It would make a fascinating book….how the Land Cruiser came to dominate its class in so many key areas like Africa and such. And how the Jeep evolved to be almost an exclusively American vehicle.
Very good points. Wiki indicates quite a few overseas operations, though apparently with very little product overlap and very loose association with the “mother ship.” I suppose that my main point was that the folks at Willys, Kaiser and later AMC did not do a great job of making a coordinated effort to grow a cohesive worldwide organization. Instead, it was a hodgepodge of local operations that made a wide assortment of vehicles, some of which had very little to do with what Jeep was selling in other countries.
That said, one of my hopes in writing this was that we would hear from our world-wide audience with firsthand experience in how successful (or not) these four companies were in their local markets.
From what I have seen over the past couple of years, it seems that some of our overseas commenters have reported very few Scouts, a smattering of Jeeps, a decent number of Land Rovers, but Toyota Land Cruisers (and HiLux pickups) are everywhere (and in relatively large numbers).
The hodgepodge of local efforts is the crucial point, and one I didn’t emphasize enough. That created stagnant little pockets, due to protectionism and such, but you’re absolutely right that the lack of a vital, central, export-driven push is what doomed the Jeep globally, and made Toyota’s success.
The world was changing rapidly, and obviously Jeep’s inconsistent ownership, management, and strategies left it behind. Meanwhile, Toyota was on a mission…
It seems that in a lot of cases when an agreement had run its course that who ever was in charge of Jeep at the time more or less left them to their own devices to do what they wanted which led to the great divergence. Also the fact that they were often sold by the assembler under their own brand name in their own dealer network didn’t help.
As Paul mentioned, protective markets such as Argentina had many years of IKA-Jeep dominance in off-road vehicles, but the technological stagnation (the Jeep was available with a FLATHEAD until 1978!!!), and the chaotic US-mother relations (e.g. IKA-Renault: a first romance?) didn’t really help. Our case in Chile, as probably in many other small developing countries without industry and much protectionism in the sixties (South America, Caribbean, Africa, Asia): Why should I buy a flathead from my neighbour, from a very small dealer w/o service outside the main city when I can get a Land Cruiser? Jeep, mostly selling argentinian IKAs, was not interested in offering us the “original” one, the same as Land Rover (selling spanish Santanas). Scouts might have been the exception, but they were really rare, and were probably sold only for a few years from a single dealer. All these brands were selling a single, quite outdated models, with very few dealers, and a miserable aftermarket. I can imagine the same history in Peru, the Caribbean, and many small african countries…
Toyota was selling, besides the LC, lots of Celicas and Corollas, opening dealerships in every region, and showing how customer service and parts availability should look like. It was not just the product! The same niche was found later by the other japanese carmakers (Nissan Patrol, Suzuki LJ, Daihatsu LF/Wildcat), which followed Toyota by the end of the 70’s. That niche could have also been an interesting possibility for the Bronco from its beginnings, if they would have been more reliable, and if the second and subsequent generations would have been less luxurious (and less expensive). I think Ford just didn’t identify that niche, and they made the same mistakes than Jeep with their subsidiaries in Argentina and Brazil. Well, as far as I know, they didn’t even produce the Bronco there…
Nice to see you and Paul cover these so well JPC, a fitting end to Toyota week. A narc at our high school had one in red and white, one of the last ones built. I was fascinated by it and he liked my Cadillac so we became friends despite the raised eyebrows. Though he never confessed to being a narc he also never fully explained why he came to our school as a senior with no parents and had a brand new expensive car.
Anyway I remember asking him “why not a Jeep” and he went into a litany of reasons why, mainly having to do with the narrowness of the FJ?? He said he was a hunter and it was perfect. The inline-6 had a distinctive sound that Paul mentioned in his review. I remember going to lunch and it was fast in a short-geared torquey sort of way. Bouncy too. Wish I could say how cool I felt but, riding around with a narc was about as uncool as it got back then.
I thought about his FJ this week when I saw the pics of the new Land Cruiser Prado and its Lexus sister. I think they could use a narc over in the Lexus design studio.
I’d have to disagree that International did not have an international presence. There are International trucks all over the world and they did set up factories for either full production like they did in Australia where the vehicles did end up diverging from their US counter parts and gaining an A prefix to the model designation. Scouts were fairly popular there too but the fact that they were about $5000 more than a Land Cruiser thanks to tariffs meant the didn’t sell as well, but they outsold the Rover because it was another $5000 more. In some countries they avoided import tariffs and restrictions by shipping incomplete vehicles that had locally produced beds installed as was done in South Africa or a cowl and chassis and fitting a cab later as was done in Belguim. There were even a few countries where they shipped CKDs.
True Scouts were only assembled in North America but they are found around the world and we have frequent visitors to the IH forum looking for help. Scouts were particularly popular in Germany, so much so that there is an annual Scout and IH show there that attracts owners from around Europe. They were so popular there that there were three vehicles based on the SII built there. The Felber Oasis, Monteverdi Safari and Sahara. They also sold quite a few Scouts in the Philippines and South Africa .
All in all the fact that the US dollar was fairly strong for so much of the era while the Japanese Yen was so weak it likely what allowed Toyota to gain the upper hand in many countries like it did in Australia. Near the end the Scout was not a cheap vehicle in the US, if you wanted to you could spend more on a Scout than on many new Cadillacs.
The popularity of the Scout around the world was one of the points the Scout Business Unit made when fighting to keep it in production as they saw as a predecessor vehicle for developing nations, that in turn would want to purchase larger trucks, construction and AG equipment as they became more developed.
As far as Jeep goes they did ship CKD kits to various countries around the world, Mahindra got its start as the contract assembler of CJ CKD kits in India.
As I replied to PN, these are the kind of comments I was hoping to see. I knew that you would be our Scout resource. It remains, though, that over the 20 years from 1960-80, the Scout never developed the kind of cohesive overseas presence that the Toyota did. Had this happened, and had the Scout and Scout II been selling in decent numbers in other parts of the world, the line (along with pickups) could have survived in the US market, even if in small numbers (and even if imported back here from other countries).
The Scout did have good overseas presence during it’s lifetime, particularly the Scout II. As I mentioned price was a huge factor in limiting its popularity. Hard to compete succussfully in areas that aren’t exactly rich when your vehicle costs 50% or 100% more.
As far as the death of the Scout it was never really about the Scout. It was all about the other divisions hemorrhaging money, particularly the AG business and having to meet CAFE, EPA and NHSTA standards. So the decision was made to jettison the AG and Scout business and focus on the MD and HD trucks since it wasn’t so far gone like the AG business and was for the most part free of the CAFE, EPA and NHSTA regulators.
I almost forgot the Ramirez Rural 750 a vehicle assembled in Mexico from IKDs. They were even available with a diesel engine.
One other point is that if the Canadians had purchased enough of the Scout 80 then IH wouldn’t have stopped making them there and they in turn could have shipped them into Australia with much lower tariffs, lessening the huge price advantage the Land Cruiser had.
Sorry, even though looks like a International Scout, it is certainly a different story developed and manufactured independently by a local company, Trailers de Monterrey, with hundred percent of Mexican pieces.
Like it’s one piece body with hard metal top, and it’s Perkins engine on the diesel option.
Regarding you point, later on the 70’s DINA manufactured some licensed International Trucks.
I don’t have statistics to either support or counter some of your positions, but from my experience in avidly following the German off-roader boom in the seventies through auto-motor-und-sport, as well as some trips there, I would say your comment may tend to overstate the Scout’s popularity there.
During this fad/boom, all sorts of 4x4s experienced a sudden upsurge of interest, and since the boom started in the US, it was natural that US vehicles got some love and attention as part of that, similar to the earlier/on-going love for big and hi-po American cars there and in other parts of mostly Northern Europe.
And although that following for the Scout and Jeep undoubtedly was passionate, I can’t see it as having been of any significant actual size. The sales numbers must have been quite modest overall. And once the Germans came out with the drastically more superior Mercedes-Steyr G-Wagen, the Scout’s impact was short lived.
Also, during the seventies, the dollar got quite weak, making US imports more affordable. That changed dramatically in the eighties, and would likely have killed off any further interest in US 4x4s, even if the Scout had been available.
The Swiss Scout-based specials existed mostly for lack of alternatives; they saw a profitable niche in offering a Range Rover competitor, but there was essentially no alternative in its size class at the time. And those vehicles were very small volume affairs, probably a few hundred or so, I suspect.
Once the eighties hit, there were more local alternatives, and the Scout’s crude underpinnings couldn’t have cut it for any significant length of time. The G-Wagen and Range Rover’s suspension was a world apart, and the difference was becoming obvious, even to the oil sheiks that might have fallen for the Felber and Montiverdi. They soon were all over the G-Wagen….
In reference to Scouts in Germany my point was that in all of Europe Germany was their biggest market and enough were sold there that there are still Scout shows held there that are quite well attended.
The Felber and Montiverdi were niche vehicles with outrageous pricing so of course they never sold in huge numbers. The did seem to be most popular again in Germany as all the brochures I’ve seen have been in German or German/English.
The Montiverdi was imported back into the US for awhile but with a base price of $27,000 in the late 70’s very few were sold. Apparently there was enough interest in them that one of the Scout Business Units proposals was to make their own version with leather, power windows and locks and market at least some versions as luxury SUVs though they certainly would have needed to work on things like an integrated HVAC system and a suspension with a better ride than the 75-up XLC (1-ton) versions they started making to dodge the need for a catalytic converter.
I would second Paul’s comment. I have never, ever seen a Scout in Germany (which is too bad, I always get a kick out of spotting one on trips to the US). Like Paul says, where rugged 4x4s are concerned, there’s the Mercedes G, which you can see quite often despite its horrendous price. And the Land Rover Defender still has a loyal follwing, even though new-vehicle sales are decidedly modest. And of course, the Land Cruiser is popular in Germany too, in all its iterations; although the HZJ “Troop Carrier” variant is no longer offered (probably the FJ’s legitimate successor) – as usual, due to emissions regulations -, you see a few of those around, too.
Well then you just aren’t looking in the right places.
Maybe you can read these, I sure cant and they have stopped updating their English version site.
http://www.ihc-scout.de/index.html
http://www.ihc-scout.de/scouttermine2013.htm
http://www.rostkur.de/content/1-home
Well, ok, I’m not saying you couldn’t find them if you tried hard enough; but even wtihout trying, you regularly run across Chevy Blazers of all vintages (the ex-Army ones seem popular) and even the occasional Ramcharger among all the Toyotas, Land/Range Rovers and Benzes. Those Scout websites are cool, and they do attest to a cult following in Germany, too; but apparently, their numbers are too small for the Scout to be a truck you’d ever see on the road. So it’s hard to imagine they ever were a serious contender for the Toyota offroaders on our market.
On an unrelated note, I always dreamt of getting a Land Cruiser HZJ78 and turning it into a pop-up camper; eminently capable on- and off-road, easy to fix, more reliable than a Land Rover and cheaper and roomier than the Mercedes. Anyawy, we got three kids instead. Well, maybe in twenty years or so…
70 & 80 series are the FJ natural successors work trucks not soft roaders, 70 series competed along with many others for Australian army business and failed, the immensely more capable and adaptable Landrover got the contract army engineers even produced a 6×6 version.
I think you like these. Original Dutch ads from the sixties, Englebert had an International truck plant in the Netherlands, basically the assembly of CKD kits.
The ads highlight the fact that International had its own diesel engines.
(no diesel equals no truck sales)
http://www.conam.info/importeurs-bedrijfsauto-s-beschrijvingen/international-us-h-englebert-n-v-voorschoten-1961
-Excellent quality.
-Parts, service and knowledge are everywhere, all over the world, in bush and outback.
-Its mother is a HUGE global auto- and truckmaker.
-From very basic to a fully loaded SUV, a pick-up included, whatever you want.
-Wide range of gasoline AND diesel engines. I mean BIG diesel engines, many years
ago there was the 4.2 ltr. inline 6 diesel. No competitor could offer equal machinery.
(Just look at the pathetic Land Rover diesels)
A guy I worked with brought back a Scout from the Philippines – he never said whether he’d initially imported it from the US. The cool thing about that particular Scout is that he had had some rust repair done on it at a body shop in the Philippines, and it ended up with rear wheel cutouts that were shaped more like 57 Chevy cutouts than the original full cutouts of the Scout. It was also painted some kind of a weird tan or brown color that I’d never seen on a Scout.
So I guess that’s my big comment for Toyota week…such is life. Toyotas are all around us but I have very little personal experience with them, except for one ride in a FJ40 back in the 1970’s, a rental Corona in 1967, and a rental Camry about five years ago. Oh wait, I did own that red 1972 Celica – how could I have forgotten that??! It was better in every way than the 1971 Opel 1900 Sport Coupe it replaced except that the Opel handled better.
They were officially imported to the Philippines and quite a few survive there. On the IH forum I’m active on there are a couple of people from there and one posted a picture of a mini IH wrecking yard with 5 or 6 Scout IIs and a handful of other Scouts he has seen on the road or in people driveways/yards.
Many of them do have some interesting repairs/modifications. I’ve seen one that was converted into a sort of super cab pickup with roof parts from who knows exactly what small pickup. It certainly did not use all IH parts like the super cab versions that I’ve seen made in the US.
the 4.2 diesel both turbo and naturally aspirated is what made Landcruisers they run forever with only basic maintenance and can be overloaded and worked really hard with no ill effects and wil get 20mpg while doing so
All tin Jeep wagons were sold over here but couldnt compete with Landrovers either on price or capability Jeeps are not a good hillside vehicle neither is a Toyota but the Toyota excells in other areas like reliability of components and good parts backup when it does break and towing with a Cruiser off road will not break half shafts like Landrovers do.
Cornbinders in pickup form were popular but the Scout ran into stiff competition from Rover and Toyota and offered no real advantages over either except its ability to rust so those are quite rare and now sought after, Ive seen Scouts sell for stupid money at online auction in very poor condition so there is some love for them.
And as a slightly different finale of Toyota week NZ just won the louis Vuttion cup sponsored by TOYOTA and others but Toymota brought me the coverage.
Owning Land Rovers, Scouts and Jeeps (CJ and Wrangler) is a passion, a way of life.
Owning a Land Cruiser means you need it to make a living, for your profession.
That means pulling trailers (up to 20,000 lbs) or off-roading. (Maybe both)
Without breaking down and yet with a decent fuel economy, which means diesel.
If a Land Cruiser isn’t heavy duty enough I suggest a Unimog.
Evidently Toyota still makes a basic 4X4 SUV for global markets, in 4-door, shortie 2-door and truck configurations:
http://www.toyota-global.com/showroom/vehicle_gallery/all/#/land_cruiser70/gallery/22/
Too bad that isn’t available in the US!
These are great rigs. A couple of months back, I test drove a ’78 BJ40 (that’s the 3 litre 4cyl diesel) that spent its entire life in Spain. The best way to compare this to a Defender or to a Jeep is to say the BJ40 is like a F350 Super Duty to a F150 Jeep/Defender. Everything on the BJ was built to commercial vehicle standards. Switches were chunky and like you’d find on a semi-truck. The frame and bumper were twice the thickness of the land rover. That 3 litre engine was more at home in a combine-harvester than a jeep- a rough and tough old thing.
I had to pass on it though, as at £8000 I just couldn’t justify something that clearly had a blown head gasket and possibly other engine issues. However, the body on this one was amazing.
And that leads me to the main- and only- failing of the Land Cruiser. Rust. Okay, Defenders do rust. But they bolt together and can be repaired easily. As those pics show, LC’s rust in difficult places- the spot welded seam between the wheelarch and outer wing, and the lower body brace under the rear doors. Repairing these is not really possible unless you are a skilled body fabricator. The bits that rust tend to rust so completely that you don’t have any reference point on the adjoining panel to weld to. Thus, its really easy to make a muck up if you’re not careful. Parts for these things are also eye-wateringly expensive- in Europe at least much worse than G-wagen spares.
If you really want one, get one from a dry place- Spain and Portugal seem to have lots, and their desert climate mean that they won’t be rotten. Also, ones made before 1978 have better metal in a thicker gauge and with a different style of welding that didn’t attract rust as badly.
I like the comparison ! That’s exactly how it is. (and what I tried to say)
The “average” new Land Cruiser still has a 3.0 ltr. 4 cylinder diesel.
Of course it’s now a completely up-to-date turbo-intercooling diesel engine.
BJ40 was installed into many JDM G wagon Landcruisers we have many in NZ imported used good engines.
I’m going to try and answer JPC’s question above:
“Willys, Kaiser and later AMC did not do a great job of making a coordinated effort to grow a cohesive worldwide organization. Instead, it was a hodgepodge of local operations that made a wide assortment of vehicles, some of which had very little to do with what Jeep was selling in other countries.”
Although the FJ and predecessors were fighting for the same turf as the postwar Jeep company…the two were worlds apart. Literally.
Jeep was built by a very-small, very-undercapitalized outfit, constantly on the edge of oblivion. Willys initially offered Jeeps to the civilian market, not because it thought it was a good idea, but because it had nothing else. The “basket-weave” wagon was made as it was, because Willys couldn’t afford a panel-stamper that would make panels with deeper than one-inch stamps (as recounted by David Halberstam).
In 1953, WIllys Jeep was essentially bankrupt and was rescued by Kaiser, who himself was struggling in the car market. Kaiser saw a different way of easing into the passenger-car market again – and it was out of that purchase that came the carlike Wagoneer.
So Jeep was small; directionless, but from a very, very rich nation. And Jeeps were NOT trouble-free in operation. In the military, low-quality equipment is, or used to be, an accepted fact of life. In civilian life in America, dotted as it is with NAPA outlets, it was something that could be dealt with. The utility of the Jeep, to working users, made it worth the trouble.
Not so in third-world markets. When something broke in the outback, it had better be repairable with what was available.
And that is where Toyota entered into it. From the diametric OPPOSITE – a destitute company in a broken land, and they were DRIVEN. They were GOING to succeed – they wanted to, so badly. They found the best parts for their product, the best design…and put it together. And then never rested – continuous quality improvement.
As early as the 1970s, extraction industries swore by the FJ. They ran on rotgut gas, they kept running…they pulled their weight. UNLIKE the Jeep, with its Tornado OHC engine…real slick on paper, and real fragile in the field.
By the time AMC ironed out the quality-control questions, they were – worldwide – asterisks in a market dominated by Toyota. Reputations are hard to overcome; and Jeep never had the organized worldwide support network. Nor coherent uses of parts…Jeeps were a hodgepodge of AMC, GM, and Chrysler parts. What engine or transmission was used depended on what year, which was determined by the health of the operation and the depth and breadth of AMC’s credit pool.
The market should have been Jeep’s; but Henry Kaiser, the nearest Jeep had to a savior, just plain didn’t understand the automotive business.
a friend from namibia once said that when asked by a bunch of jeepers why he drove a land cruiser, he responded ‘because the land cruiser was made to get you there and back, the jeep was made to be dropped out of a plane, get you as far as it could and be left. that’s why you find so many flatfenders around the world, they broke down during wartime and got left.’
i always thought that was amusing, but after wanting a jeep soooo bad until another friend talked me into land cruisers, i’ve found their durability can survive decades of me, where the jeep would not have.
good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think about buy one of this splendid car.