(first posted 1/19/2018) From 1960 to 1980, the Renault Estafette and the Citroën HY (a.k.a “Type H” or “Tub”) were straight up rivals in the small world of FWD vans. The Renault’s smaller engine was compensated by its newer approach, being about 20 years younger than the HY. But the pioneering Citroën did have the capacity to haul greater loads, and look good while doing it. Which one would you have picked back in the day?
Let’s look at each contender in turn. Age before beauty: we begin with the Estafette. Renault launched this little van – their first-ever FWD vehicle – in late 1959, using the Dauphine’s 850cc engine mated to a specific 4-speed all-synchromesh gearbox. Soon, the R8’s 1100cc became available, followed in 1968 by the R10’s 1300cc providing 43 hp (gross). That’s pretty much as good as it would get, engine-wise.
The Estafette was originally rated for 500-600kg of cargo, though the platform could handle well over 1000kg in its latest iteration. Campervan, food and ice cream truck, police and military transport, pick-up, ambulance – the Estafette could fit every purpose. Though it was never a quick mode of transport, it was perfect for limited-range urban or country use, especially for small businesses and local authorities.
Renault tried to sell their new van in the US in 1960, when the Dauphine was selling well, renaming it the “Petit Panel” (or “Hi-Boy” with the tall roof). According to French sources, US Federal authorities never gave the green light, so Renault eventually gave up, though it seems a few did make it across the pond.
The main competition on the European market was of course the VW Transporter, which was the van Renault took their inspiration from. Crucially though, Renault determined that the rear engine layout, though it was close to their heart, was impractical for a useful minivan. Front-wheel-drive was becoming almost obligatory, as Alfa Romeo also found out in the ‘50s, to lower the floor, keep it flat and make full use of cargo space. The curbside rear sliding door, pioneered by Citroën, was also included.
When the FWD Estafette came out, Renault’s main car output was small rear-engined cars (the 4CV and the Dauphine), but also the Frégate saloon and the Dauphinoise wagon, which were front-engined RWD. Renault was the first automaker to have all three basic car/engine layouts in production at the same time, in 1959-60. So this van is highly significant as Renault’s first-ever of a long, uninterrupted line of FWD vehicles.
The aesthetics of this Renault van are not my personal cup of tea, but then that wasn’t the brief. In 1969, the bumper was beefed up and extended to include the step. A new, better-defined grille was a welcomed development in 1972. The last change was the new Renault logo designed by Vasarely in 1974.
The one I found was obviously an old Gendarmerie van – that colour is a pretty obvious clue. These are becoming hard to find in France, after decades of them being everywhere. Over half a million were made in 21 years, but it seems most have worked themselves to the salvage yard by now. In the late ‘60s / early ‘70s, Renault usually sold over 20,000 in France and exported around 10,000 per year.
Bit tricky to get a shot of the inside. It’s all very period Renault, with buttons and dials from the contemporary R 6, R 8 or/and R 16. What cannot be seen is the gear lever, which is mounted behind the driver’s seat and must be operated by feel, though there is a diagram on the dashboard, just like on the Citroën.
Our Estafette does not have the sliding front driver’s door, but many did. One up on Citroën, whose H van was structurally incapable of that. The rear door arrangement was straight-up Citroën though, as this three-door configuration was, consumer surveys showed, a huge plus. If you can’t beat ‘em…
So on to the Type H already, then. I’m not sure how to date this one precisely, as the seat belts (which are correct HY seat belts, as fitted from 1975) can and are retrofitted to older vans. It’s certainly the last series, with the single-piece windshield (since 1964), the revised grille (1965) and the squared-off rear wings that came for model year 1970.
Much like the 2CV, Citroën’s original FWD van, the 1939-41 TUB (Traction Utilitaire Basse), acted as a final draft before the company re-examined the brief and aced it when the TUB was reborn as the Type H in 1947 (production started in mid-1948). The idea was to create a practical, low FWD van, using as much of the Traction Avant’s technology as possible. That’s exactly what they did.
I mean, just look inside this thing. The original Traction-sourced speed gauge was replaced with an Ami-inspired atrocity in the ‘60s, but they sure kept the Traction Avant’s streeting wheel and lights stalk. The switchgear, wipers, pedals and other bits are a mish-mash of DS, Ami and Traction parts as well.
The engine, front torsion bar suspension, gearbox and brakes are also from the Traction Avant, though the 1991cc did go through a fair amount of substantial changes. In the HY, the old Citroën 4-cyl. was definitely not geared for performance like it was on contemporary DSs. It produced a mellow 56 hp (gross) and was still mated to the Traction’s 3-speed manual gearbox. Though there’s a good chance this oil-crisis-era van has the Indénor 1.8 Diesel: only 50 hp (gross) to push 2 tons of van plus 1.5 tons of cargo…
But then the Type H is a hauling machine if there ever was one. The Citroën 4-cyl. is a notoriously able workhorse and, like the Estafette, the Type H was used for all sorts of activities. The HY’s larger engines enabled it to pull anywhere from 1000 to 1800kg. Some folks even upgraded the HY with hydropneumatic suspension.
The door handles are also unmistakably from the ‘30s Traction. The HY’s suicide front doors were part of the design and a very popular feature. In the ‘70s, some European governments mandated that suicide doors, perhaps a victim of their name, were to be outlawed on new vehicles. That is why late model Dutch- and Belgian-market HY vans have reversed front door hinges. In France, the old doors carried on all the way till the end of production in late 1981.
Early model Type H
Though produced over three decades (two for the Estafette), The Citroën H van was made in about 475,000 units – not as high as the Renault, but in the same ballpark. It was certainly better than its predecessor, the TUB, which sold fewer than 2000 units. That’s what you get for being launched in the summer of 1939.
The Type H only traded trafficators for turn signals in 1961. Not part of the vanguard in all respects…
The TUB had shown the way, but the Type H was a reinvention of it on a larger scale. The man behind the H was Pierre Franchiset, head of Citroën’s body development unit. The H did not require an engineer, it required a monocoque. The TUB had gone with a chassis, but weight-saving was a great concern. This also explains the corrugated panels, straight out of a Junkers aircraft. The same thing was done on the contemporary 2CV, though limited to the hood only.
Fortunately, Citroën preserved one prototype at least of the mini-me Type G.
Citroën considered a 2CV-based “Type G” van for a while. This tiny vehicle (under 6’ high) would have used a 475cc version of the flat-twin to enable it to carry 500kg of cargo. The front suspension was 2CV-based (though toned down), but the rear had torsion bars like the Type H. In the end, a cheaper, smaller capacity saloon-based van was preferred.
In 1947, Chenard traded their two-stroke for Peugeot engines. Sales improved and Peugeot noticed.
The 2-cyl. FWD van did exist: Ailing automaker Chenard-Walcker made a 1-litre twin-powered mini version of the TUB in 1941. Chenard updated their design after the war and started using Peugeot engines, which were quite bigger, giving them a “pig nose” look. The operation was bought by Peugeot in 1950, ending the Chenard-Walcker marque by 1951. The Peugeot D3 (D4 from 1955, with the bigger 403 engine) was in the class just below the 2-litre Type H. Renault then opted for a smaller and cheaper Estafette to box in the 1-litre category against the VW van. It was like a cartel, each of the Big Trois splitting the FWD van market into slices like that, but it worked out well enough for everyone except Peugeot. The D3/D4 sold in fewer numbers than the HY or the Estafette, perhaps due to pricing and the age of the design, which did not have a sliding side door.
Peugeot launched the J7 in 1965, a much more competent competitor and contemporary of our two CCs. Peugeot’s ultimate ace in the hole was their proficiency in Diesel engines, which soon proved to be very popular. The redesigned J9 replaced the J7 in 1980, keeping the cab-over-engine design through to 1991 in France – though the van is apparently still in production in Turkey as the Karsan J11. By contrast, both Renault and Citroën quit making CoE vans after 1980 and 1981, respectively. A new generation of transverse FWD layouts took over. They were much easier to deal with – cheaper to make, easier to operate. But they lacked a certain identity.
Surely the Citroën HY is the demonstration of how iconic a CoE one-box van can be. Vans don’t need to be boring, though many are. And these “icons” are clearly still hard at work. Our Type H has had some restoration work done, but it’s back in the game – in this case, carrying crates of freshly-picked olives to the oil mill.
The Estafette is less appealing to me because of its looks, but this relatively well-preserved 45-year-old is also hard at work, building a house. The Renault engines in these are still pretty common, so mechanically, it could run for a long time yet. It all depends how much rust lies beneath that patina.
Yes, I would take the Type H in a heartbeat. But I’m not unmoved by the Renault. They are having their time in the shade these days, but the early ones do have a definite period charm. But just like I’d pick the 2CV over the Renault 4, there’s something in a Citroën’s uncompromising style that never fails to appeal.
Related posts:
Curbside Classique: Renault Estafette 1000 – Could Even Its Mother Love That Face?, by Jim Klein
Food Truck Outtake: Citroën H-Van – A Long Way From Chartres, by Jim Klein
Cohort Sighting: Citroen HY Truck – My Latest Heartthrob, by PN
Le Curbside Classic: Citroen H Van – The French Tin Goose, by PN
QOTD: How Do You Prefer Your Citroen H Van?, by Roger Carr
Cohort Outtake: Peugeot D4 Van – The Pig Nosed Pug, by PN
CC Outtake: Peugeot J7 — And Now For Something Completely Différent, by Robert Kim
Comments were disabled for some reason. I opened it up…
I think my pick would be the Citroen, although I don’t think it was considered attractive back in the day when I used to see them as a little boy. Utilitarian maybe…Only with age and hindsight is the overwhelming charm evident. Then again, all the hindsight in the world isn’t helping the looks of the Estafette. As I mentioned in my own article, it’s a look only mother Regie could love…
That’s strange about the comments — I don’t even know how to disable them!
Renault styling is much more of an acquired taste than Citroen, in my view. Citroen’s only real stinker was the Ami 6. But from the Dauphine in the mid-’50s to the R14 of the late ’70s, some of the world’s oddest-looking vehicles were made by Renault, the Estafette among them.
The low floor was not just better than the Microbus, it was lower than regular RWD vans. No need to clear the differential.
Renault could have advertised the point more strongly with simple paired rear doors instead of the odd T-shaped combination, which would always require an unnecessary extra action. (In other words, they should have used French doors.)
That low floor is precisely why I preferred the modern Ram Promaster over the Ford Transit when I rented them both at U-Haul. (Not to even mention the Savana). It’s so much easier to deal with when loading or having to enter the van cargo area repeatedly.
And it’s a main reason why I picked the Promaster (aka Fiat Ducato, like the blue one behind the Citroen in a couple of the pictures). And a simple modification to shorten its exhaust and have it terminate on the driver’s side opens up a lot of real estate for underfloor tanks and such.
The fun part is that the blue van behind the Citroën is also a Citroën…a Jumper (never mind its name), as it says on its door.
In the end it is of course the same van as your ProMaster (Fiat Ducato-Peugeot Boxer-Citroën Jumper-Ram ProMaster, all one and the same).
Of course it’s a moot point anyway. Renault’s lack of service and parts would have been an instant deal-breaker for the small businesses that use vans. They couldn’t wait months for the correct part to be shipped, and they couldn’t fit shade-tree mechanics into their accounting.
Where? In the US back then when the Estafette was sold here, Renault was battling it out with VW at the top of the imports, and had lots of dealers, all over the country. Much more so than Citroen.
I prefer the Cit.
Besides Citroën and Tupolev, Henry Bushnell Stout also imitated Junkers construction in his aircraft designs, most famously the Ford Trimotor (Ford bought out Stout’s firm). They were slow, but so durable, some are even in use today.
It was the TWA 599 Fokker crash which discredited wooden planes in American commercial aviation.
HY is superb utilitarian aesthetic at its most ascetic, but I do have a thing for that tourist Estafette. I saw something I never knew existed drive right by me and was so shocked I couldn’t get my camera out in time. An extended and heightened H, the only H I’ve seen in Melbourne. Like this one…
There’s a blue Citroen H that sometimes parks around the corner from me, and occasionally I hear it chug by our house. My wife heard it one day and looked out the window .. “What was that?!! Did you see that?!!” Of course, I had first been aware of it several years ago and she only noticed it when it was moving and making unusual sounds. It also took her a few years to notice the DS that lives around the corner in the other direction from us. I think there are more Citroens in my neighborhood now, than there ever were when they were actively imported to the US. Oh, I prefer the Estafette, if only for its name.
Terrific comparison. The H Van for me; it’s one of the all-time most original and enduring designs. A triumph of function of styling, the result being iconic.
It seems to me that the folks @ Toyota, shall we say appreciate the Citroen’s style
Interesting how the Renault sliding door isn’t flush with the body like every other sliding-door van I’ve seen, with a hinge at the back that pulls the door in when closed, but rather is always clear of the bodywork and simply slides back and forth like a closet door.
The Citroen door handle looks exactly like the ones on several of my house doors.
The Peugeot J7 could have a similar sliding door setup. The Morris J4 (below) had that too — perhaps before the Estafette, I don’t know. There must be others with this “closet door” system, I just don’t know my old vans that well…
1960, so more or less contemporary to the Estafette. The J4 had sliding or hinged door options.
Never saw a sliding door J4 Austin maybe only the hinged door was CKDed, Bedford CAs had sliding ftont doors I owned one of those, French vans took many years to find NZ now they are everywhere often badged Toyota HDI but all the flavours are out there.
None of those for me. I’ll have a 1965 onwards mk1 Ford Transit. Easy to work on, great to drive and unlike that lot, capable of 70 mph
A former house mate had a 67 Transit V4 engine 60mph was absolute top speed empty and it took a while to reach that, the CF Bedfords with their ohc fours went better and rusted just as fast.
Late-model HYs and Estafettes like the ones in the post are happy to cruise at 90kph (55mph) all day long in all weathers. Not sure how you could get a mk1 Transit up to 70mph, but sustaining that speed would be impossible on anything but a straight and sunny stretch of highway. The Citroen and the Renault’s superior handling would probably mean they would be as fast as the Ford in any other scenario.
According to French sources, US Federal authorities never gave the green light, so Renault eventually gave up
That surprised me because I had assumed that the US market was ‘anything goes’ until 1968 when the FMVSS entered into the force and California-mandated PCV-based emission control system in 1961. Of course, the only regulation prior to FMVSS to my knowledge is sealed-beam round headlamps as mandated by several states in 1940.
Oh, by the way, the chicken tax didn’t come along until 1963.
Can you perhaps find out more what compelled the American authorities to give Renault cold shoulders?
I don’t know where T87 got that from. There’s no doubt in my mind that the Estafette was sold in the US, and I said so in my post on it: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cohort-sighting-renault-estafette-it-was-sold-in-the-us-as-the-hi-boy/
The high roof version was called “Hi-Boy”. There are numerous ads for it in my article, and the one below is from a dealer in Kentucky, of all places.
As you said, it was very easy to sell imports in the US back then. The VW Transporter was very popular in the US at this time, and there’s no reason to think why Renault wouldn’t want to compete with it.
I got this from French Estafette websites — the Renault artwork and this advert show that the Estafette may have been up for sale, but were any actually bought? One French source says a few dozen may have made it to the US in 1961, but they cannot ascertain whether they ended up going back to France (as happened to a number of unsold Dauphines in those days) or were somehow registered in the US by Renault dealers.
I can assure that dealer in remote Kentucky, hardly an import stronghold, would not have spent his hard-earned money to place an ad for an Estafette if he didn’t have one on the lot to sell.
A quick Google found this US-spec Estafette for sale at Bring A Trailer: https://bringatrailer.com/2017/01/29/rare-us-spec-estafette-1960-renault-hi-boy-project/
Essentially the only requirement back then to sell a car in the US was sealed beam headlights. All manner of very obscure European cars were imported in the 50s. Zwickau; Goliatth, Tatra, etc…There was almost no reason not to. Gas stations were happy to be “dealers” and make a few bucks. Of course when the cars broke down, that was a different matter. It explains why import sales crashed by 50% in 1960.
Tell those Frenchies to correct their websites. 🙂
Perhaps this modern homage to HY in form of body kit is quite a clever idea.
The body kit…
Oh my; I need that for my Promaster! I wonder if they make it for the long wheelbase version? And I bet it’s not cheap. But it’s wonderful. Thanks for giving me something to obsess on.
When I was a kid I found them both utterly ugly. In hindsight they weren’t ugly of course, they just looked “unconventional” to the kid who was more familiar with the VW T2, Ford Transit and Hanomag-Henschel F20/25.
And now I like them both, meanwhile the FWD panel van with a low floor has become the norm in this segment.
In Israel the Peugeot seemed to beat the Citroen by a large margin – we also had a quite a few of the Renaults (as well as the bigger RWD Renaults). But the ultimate version of this early to late 50s “pig snout” styling was the below:
I’m surprised you didn’t mention the notorious origin story of the H van body.
It requires its own CC really, but in brief terms, a Monsiuer Christophe Ule Moffitte was a Citroen executive, likely Franchisets boss, (of possibly shady past) who somehow ended up “advising” the British in the Far East as they advanced to former French territories when the Japanese retreated through 1944/5 (in other words, a spy for the English very likely, for post-war empire purposes). He got malaria, and ended up recuperating in hospital in Melbourne as many soldiers from the Far East did. Shortly before returning to France, he was billeted for active rehabilitation at the home of a Melbourne University professor when he saw (and seemed transfixed by) the gardening shed in their backyard. The professor, Gregory Arbage, who was a linguist, was very surprised when Moffitte not only asked for it to be urgently dismantled, but produced from nowhere a large sum of local cash as compensation.
The Prof wasn’t a practical man, had never been in the shed, and readily agreed, assuming the obsession was from the fever.
He was never aware that that classic little Aussie corrugated iron shed was released with wheels and a coffined engine stuck on where the back wall had been as the new Citroen van at Paris in 1947, but many years later, his son saw that Paris Show van on display in France and recognised the marks where his boyhood cricket bat used to be hooked.
Some, the French in particular, don’t believe this story even when shown the plaque where the shed stood at 42 Dogberry St in North Melbourne, and can’t accept what is pretty clear to everyone else; that the H-van was designed by someone who was an enemy of France and who had at least temporarily lost their mind.
They just say, “Pfft, C.U.Moffitte”.
What a fantastic story! This needs to be given wider exposure.
In addition to Don’s lengthened/raised H there is also a cream painted coffee van getting about. I’ve seen this stationary outside the Nicholas pavilion at the showgrounds and once on the move, if it could be called that, in peak hour traffic on the Monash Fwy as it crosses Punt Rd.
Any shortcomings in the H’s forward progress were entirely attributable to the usual traffic jam, because…well, it’s not possible to manage traffic flow in the first world city despite the huge public resources allocated to the task and having the process directed by the toll road companies. It never gets better.
Ugggh…Rant over.
I thought this was well known – as is the fact that in the early prototypes driver and passenger sat on a wooden plank with two holes in it, as proposed by the interior design head at Citroen, M. Dunnee. Although this saved valuable materials and meant that bathroom breaks could be carried out on the move, thus saving valuable time, it was dropped on environmental grounds.
The Estafette high roof was the first production van that had a roof made of glassfibre .
My best memories are of the J7 with the Indemor Diesel, I drove an extended version nicknamed the dachshund, the thing had nice light steering, a decent heater and a little chain when in summertime you drove it with the sliding door open. The Estafette lacked powerrr, the Citroën H drove like a tractor. The best one was Fiat’s 238 Van (well the Autobianchi Primula powerplant actually) the one I hated was the VW van, those were good at nothing except guzzling gas and annoy the driver.
The stupid bulge in the back so you could load nothing with a forklift, the gearchange that had the feel you were stirring porridge, in winter no heating and undriveble with crosswinds.
In later life owning my own company I always dismissed VW utility vehicles.
Ow, a Mercedes Benz 207 Diesel : Das panzer, half a million kilometers and sold it to a guy who exported it to Morocco, why not?
Today : Renault Trafic, Fiat Ducato and the all mighty Iveco Daily.
Hell Yes! The Mercedes-Benz 207 D, my dad’s employer bought a new one in the early eighties. A short wheelbase single cab panel van, standard (low) roof.
It was the most rock solid and durable van on the Euro-market back then, and by a very wide margin. Every competitor was degraded to Toys r Us level when it arrived at the scene.
Years later it was replaced by a new Ford Transit (first sloping front generation). Yes, the Ford had more power with its direct injected diesel engine and it looked more like a car inside. But it was also so…light…toy-ish…cheap, if you wish…as it was never meant to be a commercial vehicle in the first place.
Karsan I believe has now replaced the J-Series with the Hyundai H350.
http://en.karsan.com.tr/products/detail.aspx?SectionID=q3mgiCz2OFj0Re2fSQtflw%3d%3d&ContentID=xRDp4sbMKEpa%2biMeMKxOAw%3d%3d
I’ve seen a couple of the Citroen HY vans around Toronto pulling coffee duty, and I had the good fortune of talking to the owner of one when it was parked in our neighbourhood a few years ago. It was a 1975 that was in very good shape, and the owner was quite impressed that I knew what it was. I ended up taking a few photos and sending them to him for his website.
I have seen a few Citroen HY’s in the Bay Area, typically repurposed for use as a Food Truck or the like.
I have often wondered – even though Citroen had landmark vehicles from way back, the Traction Avant, the Hy, the 2CV, the DS, it always seems to have been running far second- or even third-fiddle to Renaut and Peugot. It seems strange to me that the HY Van, with a decade head start and a stronger engine, did not outsell overall the Estafette, even though the Estafette is not just eccentrically styled, but downright ugly, to almost universal disclaim.
To someone from the U.S., it’s a puzzle. Perhaps it’s from Citroen’s lack of penetration in the mid-market, e.g. between the 2CV and the DS?
Citroën were no second fiddle in the late 50s / early 60s. That was the zenith of the Michelin era – the 2cv and the DS sold extremely well. Meanwhile, Renault’s only hit was their small rear-engine cars. Renault were traditionally #1, certainly before the war, and often after it, but had a bit of a dip in the mid 50s, being overtaken by not only Citroën, but also Simca. Peugeot ran in 3rd or 4th place and only overcame Simca with the launch of the 204 in 1965.
The lack of a mid-size 1200-1500cc car in Citroën’s range was clearly identified by everyone, though. For a number of reasons, Citroën took ages to address it with the GS in 1970.
It’s interesting to see how in the third-from-last pic the HY is joined on the jobsite by one of the ubiquitous modern Stellantis vans, known in America as the Ram ProMaster but with multiple badge-engineered versions in Europe (including a Citroen one) and at one point available with a body kit that made it resemble…an H-type.
SAVIEM also did a two-tonner – it used their forward-control truck panels combined with a FWD low-platform layout. the 3.5 tonner upwards were conventional frame-built RWD.
Those and the Estafette were eventually replaced by the Trafic/Master, with a bewildering range of FWD/RWD inline engine options.
The Citroen/FIAT 242 replaced the HY, retaining a similar engine layout but with bizarre transfer drives added on so the axle could be under the oil sump/pan.
It was not a success and the FIAT Daily soon replaced it.
The HY is surprisingly ubiquitous over here as a cliche mobile bar/food stall.
Surely the Citroën HY is the demonstration of how iconic a CoE one-box van can be. “Vans don’t need to be boring, though many are”.
These were exactly my thoughts when designing the successor to the similarly small van that replaced the Estafette – in commercial vehicles form can express function – the “Jumbo” roof on the Trafic/Vivaro/Primastar is one such example of this, enabling the driver and fuel tank under him/her to be placed higher and further forward, meaning the sliding side door was long enough to load Euro pallets from the side – a major advantage over competitors at that time.
LeQuement, Design Director at Renault chose this proposal as it would stand out in a market area where both Renault and GM were not present and it went on to become best selling van in europe for a number of years.
Here are the sketches for it…
3rd time’s the charm…
On the subject of vans and wine , when Citroen launched the Visa based C15 in the UK in the 80s, it was branded as the Van Rouge and Van Blanc