Car Lust

1966-77 Ford Bronco and Bronco II

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. I refer to the brief period during which I owned a Ford Bronco II. Now, I will readily admit that the Bronco II does not, shall we say, have a sterling reputation, probably about on par historically with its II-suffixed cousin the Mustang II. And it certainly didn't worm its way into my heart by breaking down 500 miles from home in the middle of Oregon and causing me to leave it there with a dead engine. In fact, I do find it rather difficult to defend in great depth which is, partly, why this post lumps it in with the original Bronco.

But they share a common heritage and design philosophy that seems to keep cropping up: the small, fairly utilitarian sport utility vehicle. . .with an emphasis on the utility. The original Bronco has achieved something of a cult status--a perennial favorite here at Car Lust--and it also represents  some of the cultural and market factors that were going on at its introduction and says something about the modern SUV  and its many  manifestations.

That and both really look cool.

Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8

Nothing about the Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 makes any kind of sense. Aside from the insane incongruity of a  420-horsepower Jeep, the whole idea of a high-performance SUV is almost entirely nonsensical.

Compared to cars, sport-utility vehicles have certain advantages--increased cargo-carrying capacity, off-road ability, and the visibility provided by a high-seating position. The inevitable trade-off is a set of dynamic compromises that militate against performance. SUVs tend to be heavier, tipper, and far less aerodynamic than their more car-like stablemates. This goes double for Jeeps, which have admirably retained the off-road prowess that made the brand famous--even as other automakers have emasculated their SUVs' off-road abilities.

So why take a perfectly good Jeep Grand Cherokee and make a hot rod out of it? Especially when by so doing you drop its ride height and cripple the off-road and towing abilities that make it special? Basically, what you have left is an SUV that has plenty of S but no U.

Angry Cars--Current Generation Chevrolet Trucks/SUVs

Car: Current generation Chevrolet Trucks and SUVs

Condition: Downright peeved

Possible Motivation: Bean-counting cost reductions sap all the joy of engineering and any happiness from being the best-selling car-maker in the world. Nobody's buying trucks because gas prices are high, but when gas prices drop the economy disintegrates!

Defining Overblown High-Testosterone Action Movie Quote:
Chevy SUV: "I like you. That's why I'm going to kill you last."
(from Commando, 1985 )

--Nathan of Brainfertilizer Fame

Comparing trucks

I don't often link to online road tests--if I did, I'd be too busy to post about anything else. But I thought I'd pass along this Popular Mechanics comparison test of the five full-size pickup trucks.

I thought it was a bit entertaining that the Toyota was described as fast but clumsy and inhospitable, while the Dodge Ram Hemi was sophisticated and refined. Interesting, don't you think? But mostly I'm linking to it because, given the current market conditions, comparing full-size V-8 trucks can be considered a little countercultural. Two years ago, who would have thought we would be able to say that?

--Chris H.

Dodge Li'l Red Express

As we've said many times in this space, the mid-1970s were a fallow period for automotive performance. Emissions concerns robbed the all-conquering muscle cars of their horsepower; spiraling insurance rates made them too expensive to own; and fuel shortages forced customers to consider lighter, less powerful, more economical cars.

Trucks, however, were another story. Less fettered by governmental regulations than their automotive brothers, many full-size trucks sported bigger, easier-breathing engines that helped make them a performance match for the fastest cars around--at least up to 80-100 mph, where the trucks' brick-like aerodynamics put a stop to the party. For example, the late-1970s Chevy full-size pickup was available with a 454 cubic-inch big-block V-8 that hadn't been as strangled by pollution controls as automotive engines. That certainly didn't help clear the L.A. air, but it did make the pickup as quick as the Corvette and Trans-Am of the era.

1956 Fargo Truck

In the course of looking up something else, I came upon a reference to "Fargo" trucks built by Chrysler. I had never heard of such a thing before, so I followed the hyperlinks to this article at allpar.com, which tells the story.

The Fargo brand name originated in 1928, and was used on commercial vehicles sold through Chrysler-Plymouth dealers. After Chrysler acquired Dodge, all of its U.S. trucks were branded as Dodges or Plymouths, and the Fargo name was used only on trucks sold through Plymouth dealers in Canada, and in certain other export markets.

On some 1930s Canadian models, Chrysler took a Dodge truck and gave it Plymouth front body panels to make it into a Fargo. However, most Fargos were just Dodges with a few Canada-specific details. As time went on, economic efficiency concerns forced Fargo trucks to become increasingly de-contented, until they were almost indistinguishable from their American cousins. Chrysler finally "rationalized" the Fargo brand name clean out of existence in 1972.

The delightful 1956 Fargo pictured here (in a photo from Wikipedia) is basically a '56 Dodge with Fargo badging and trim and a Canada-only hood that opened from the side. Another example of the distinctive Fargo hood can be seen here. As far as I know, these were the only vehicles being made in North America in the 1950s with a hood that worked this way.

When the Fargos finally got modern "alligator" hoods for the 1957 model year, Chrysler's Canadian ad agency waxed ecstatic over this great engineering advancement. That advancement came at a price. The side-opening hood may have been impractical and anachronistic, but it's unique and it looks cool. Isn't that what really matters?

I'm not a truck person, but for some reason I find the idea of exploring the Great White North in a Fargo with side-opening hood panels very appealing.

--Cookie the Dog's Owner, eh?

GMC Syclone/GMC Typhoon

Dropping a hot engine into an everyday vehicle is a time-honored method of creating a hero car. The original Pontiac GTO is one such example, as is virtually every other 1960s muscle car. We've seen this practice continue today; for example, turbocharged rally-inspired engines have transformed humble Mitsubishi and Subaru compact cars into performance legends.

But of all the possible foundations for a world-beating performance car, where would the compact Chevy S-10 pickup rank? Certainly the cringing little S-10, the replacement for the unloved Luv, was a useful little truck, but it doesn't strike me as a vehicle with a great deal of untapped performance potential. I mean, really--what's a more unlikely base for a world-class performer? An Isuzu I-Mark? Perhaps a Chrysler Town & Country minivan? An Amphicar?

The Car Lust Lifestyle

Today I'd like to introduce you to someone who gets it.  Someone who has an irrational passion for a vehicle, and isn't afraid to show it.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you: James F. Jones.

Chevy LUV

If you've been reading this blog for any amount of time--in which case, my most profound apologies--you'd think the Chevy LUV would be a natural for Car Lust. Consider the following:

• Notwithstanding its Isuzu origins, it's a 1970s Chevrolet, and I'm on the record as loving Chevrolets from that decade (Examples 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and more no doubt to follow)
• I like my trucks unpretentious; trucks don't come any less pretentious than the LUV
• I liked Nathan's Ford Courier, which was essentially the Ford flavor of the same minitruck formula
• Most telling, I have a fatal weakness for helpless little bedraggled cars; and the LUV is nothing if not helpless and bedraggled.

The LUV is the exception to all of those rules. I should like the LUV, and I'm powerless to tell you why I don't. My only guess--and admittedly I'm being incredibly inconsistent here--is that the LUV wasn't good. For one thing, compact pickups of the time only barely qualified as transportation. The early 1970s compact pickups lasted forever but were hampered by their incredibly tiny size and complete lack of grunt. Most of them made do with much, much less than 100 horsepower--the LUV only got up to 80 horsepower late in its production run--and four-wheel-drive was not as typical then as it is for today's compact pickups.

Suzuki Samurai

A riddle--what vehicle was dirt cheap, mechanically simple, had a 60-horsepower 4-cylinder engine, and is world-renown for its off-road performance? 

The answer: The original World War II-era Jeep ... and the Suzuki Samurai.

The Suzuki Samurai was, at least on paper, the perfect off-road vehicle for its time in the 1980s. The closest thing to competition it had was the Jeep Wrangler, which was significantly more expensive and significantly less fuel -efficient. Its low price point and comparatively frugal fuel consumption led to initially high sales, with more than 47,000 sold in its first year. The Samurai seemed destined to do to the American SUV market what the Toyota Hi-Lux did to the American pickup market.