Mystery car pix

stever · February 2013

Jeep fans will insist that it have round headlights too.

andre1969 · February 2013

The overall shape of that thing isn't too bad, but that front-end looks like it's trying to be 4 or 5 different vehicles, all at once!

andys120 · February 2013

fintail · February 2013

Mid 70s Maserati Quattroporte. Look at the weird headlight wipers. You're not German, stop trying :shades:

(I won't even mention those wipers...oops)

fintail · February 2013

You're probably right about that. The lights on the thing will be a stumbling block for their sheer oddity, too.

andys120 · February 2013

Yup, that's the 1974-78 Maserati Quattroporte II which was built on a Citroen SM chassis and featured some of the weirdness inherent in Citroens.

andys120 · February 2013

The lights on the thing will be a stumbling block for their sheer oddity, too.

Screwy lights don't seem to hurt Juke sales. :confuse:

fintail · February 2013

The Juke is a freakshow all-round, the Jeep is pretty normal other than that lighting arrangement.

stever · February 2013

Yeah, I've already read a couple of comments about the new Cherokee and how it's not a "real" Jeep without round lights.

People forget that some Jeeps have had square lights before though - one of the CJ/YJ flavors iirc.

(The whole "Jeep" thang begs the other question - many people didn't think the Liberty was a "real" Jeep either).

ateixeira · February 2013

Juke is cheap and fun to drive, if you're blind.

This new Jeep won't be cheap. I guess they're targeting rich blind folks.

fintail · February 2013

A real Jeep with square lights:

fintail · February 2013

But it replaces the Liberty, right? Those weren't terribly expensive. The Grand Cherokee can get a little pricey, but not unacceptably so.

explorerx4 · February 2013

That Mustang is a Red tail edition in honor of the Tuskegee Airmen.

tjc78 · February 2013

Those Grand Wagoneers certainly have a following. I knew someone who had one and if he didn't total it, I bet he would still be driving it.

ateixeira · February 2013

Not expensive but the Juke will still be cheaper.

ateixeira · February 2013

They sure did have a following, but I didn't get why.

We had one as a company car where I worked in college, and that thing was a rattle trap and wandered all over the road. It was in the top 3 worst cars I've ever driven. Ride, handling, steering, and comfort were dismal. But at least it was expensive and guzzled gas!

My dad's Olds Custom Cruiser wagon was not a great car but it was a whole lot better.

stever · February 2013

That's not a "Jeep" - that's a station wagon made by Jeep. :shades: I bet the purists complained about them too, not to mention losing the Jeepster fender overhangs.

This '95 Wrangler has square lights and a crimp in the grill. Sort of looks like a Fantasy Island shuttle though.

stever · February 2013

lostwrench1 · February 2013

We used to fly down the Autobahn in those small Army jeeps. Canvas roof, no doors, no speed limit, 19 years old, no common sense.

ateixeira · February 2013

The head lights give it away -2014 Grand Cherokee.

stever · February 2013

Yep, here's the full on face:

2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee First Drive

Mr_Shiftright · February 2013

ateixeira · February 2013

That one looks ok. The smaller lights do make the grille look smaller, but it is the two piece lights that spoil the non-Grand Cherokee.

andre1969 · February 2013

My dad's Olds Custom Cruiser wagon was not a great car but it was a whole lot better.

Try to take Dad's Custom Cruiser off-roading, or chain it to a tree stump and keep it in low to pull it up, and you'll see the advantage of the Wagoneer.

My uncle had a '76 Jeep pickup, built on the same platform as the Wagoneer, and that thing was tough! Yeah, it squeaked and rattled, and the bed rusted out. But it made most modern pickups back then (this was the early 90's that he had it) and today look like pretty princess poseurs in comparison.

ateixeira · February 2013

Off road, no, but we definitely pulled some tree stumps, and towed a 19' ski boat.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2013

It would be brutal towing with that Jeep today, at today's pump prices.

andre1969 · February 2013

What was the biggest engine you could get in one of those Jeeps, anyway? IIRC, AMC never had a true big block. Instead, I think they had one basic engine that spanned across something like 290, 304, 343, 360, 390, and 401 CID? Sorta like how the Olds "smallblock" ranged from 260 to 403 CID?

My uncle's '76 Jeep had an AMC 360 and a 4-speed stick. Dunno what kind of economy it got, as he rarely drove it long distances.

magnette · February 2013

Bonus point for guessing where it is registered.

stever · February 2013

I think you've got it.

No clue on the car, other than we called similar body styles "whale cars" when I was growing up.

bhill2 · February 2013

Oh man; a Volvo 544. Those were tough, especially with the B18 engine (red badge on the trunk lid).

stickguy · February 2013

uplanderguy · February 2013

Remember, those "Grand Cherokees" of 'back then' (nee 'Wagoneer') came out in the 1963 model year!

Hard to compare with anything later, but even my wife always loved them. There used to be a guy who advertised in Hemmings called 'the Jeepsterman" who bought, sold, and refurbished Wagoneers up to Grand Cherokees. He was in Texas I think. I'll have to look at the latest Hemmings I've bought to see if he still is in there.

fintail · February 2013

Volvo PV444/544, can't see the front details, which is how I tell them apart. I'd guess the B engine badge means it is later, so 544.

I am 99% certain that's a license plate from Iceland.

fintail · February 2013

I like them. Well, I think they are nice to look at. Have never driven one, but the styling is pleasing to me.

fintail · February 2013

Tiny pic!

Looks Austin A40 based.

andre1969 · February 2013

Remember, those "Grand Cherokees" of 'back then' (nee 'Wagoneer') came out in the 1963 model year!

Yeah, and because of that, those Wagoneers, and the pickup truck versions, were smaller than their competition in the 70's, when trucks got larger. For instance, I could tell that Granddad's '85 Silverado (which dated to 1973) was notably bigger inside than my uncle's '76 Jeep pickup. But, that Jeep just had a ruggedness about it that the Silverado lacked.

uplanderguy · February 2013

They originally ('60's) called those Wagoneer-based pickups the "Gladiator" (which I like), but I think later they started calling them J-2000's or something like that. I know, that sounds like an '82 Pontiac version of the Cavalier, so I might have it wrong.

andre1969 · February 2013

At some point they started calling them "Honcho", but I don't know if they did that in '76.

omarman · February 2013

I liked the old "Gladiator" Jeep trucks too. I think they just called them "Jeep trucks" after that but you could order custom trim options that were probably just decals and minor trim.

Scroll down this page of Jeep pics tagged 1978 to see Jeep trucks trimmed in "Honcho," "Golden Eagle," and "10-4" trim. I wonder if the 10-4 version came with a CB radio and a 102" steel whip!

stickguy · February 2013

yeah, that pic did not come out right. Just more of a challenge!

it is a 1950 Austin A40 countryman.

magnette · February 2013

Yes -a Volvo 544 B18 - and Fintail is right - it is registered in Iceland, although the plate could technically be for a British registration, as that series of plates was issued in the 1900's in Britain (in Stafford actually). This one is from a place called Akranes in Iceland which is where it was taken last summer.

andys120 · February 2013

These became a big deal when they were adopted as the carriage du jour by the moneyed
horse owner set. These folks had access to plenty of nice cars for grocery getting and commuting duties but it wouldn't do to hook your hose trailer to your Benz or what have you. When the GW
was phased out they gloomed on to Suburbans and Tahoes and the Wannabes followed.

It's the same set that made Range Rovers popular in Europe and I guess didn't care that they weren't very well made either.

bhill2 · February 2013

FWIW, the 444 had small round taillights and the 544 had the larger oval ones seen in the picture.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2013

Easy way to tell---a PV444 has a split front windshield and the motor is a B16--not a very good engine. (3 main bearing crankshaft--whipped around like a piece of licorice--and usually broke).

B18 was a great engine!

bhill2 · February 2013

B18 was a great engine!

You ain't kidding. I had that engine is a '62 122S that I got in '67. Despite having been lovingly maintained for five years by the most incompetent owner/mechanic in creation it was still going strong (unlike the suspension and brakes, which had pretty much succumbed to the malpractice by the time I got it.) My father also had that engine in his '67 122S (a great car), my sister had it in her '68 144S (kind of a dog, only because the car was too heavy for the engine), and my father had it in his '68 144S automatic (a major dog for the same reason and also because the engine was totally unsuited for a slush box). Finally, I had a '69 142S (the dealer offered me $900 for the '62 described above, which was at least 3 times what it was worth) with the B20 variant, and it was a great engine as well.

stickguy · February 2013

when I was 9 my parents got a '69 144S (4 speed) with the B20, and that was the car they still had when I learned to drive. Had some recurring issues (carbs and mufflers I believe) but I loved that car.

Still how I remember how to convert litres into CI.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2013

It wasn't the mufflers--what happened is that the rubber doughnuts that held up the exhaust system were defective and when they broke the exhaust hung down, and if you didn't fix it right away, the weight of the muffler broke off the header pipe.

I have never, EVER seen a B18 engine with a thrown rod.

I've seen plenty of B16s with broken cranks however.

The B18s only weaknesses were fiber timing gears and soft camshafts.

fintail · February 2013

Interesting. I guess in the US anyway, 444s are virtually unknown anyway, so if I see one on the street, I can guess what it is.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2013

The 444 is rare and many that you do see carry B18 engines. The B16 is really not suitable for use in America. It's based on an old tractor design I believe---you know, low RPM puttin' around the barnyard.

grahampeters · February 2013

G'day

Bit late, but an Austin A40 Countryman. For a long time I assumed that the model was "Austin of England" because that was the nameplate on the side of the bonnet.

When I was small, my now brother in law's family had a grey one, into which they would cram their six children and travel far and wide. The back had bench seats along each side and was remarkably uncomfortable. However, it lasted for a long time, probably reflecting the lean times when you have six kids!

Cheers

Graham

Mystery car pix

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles