Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Have You Ever Heard of a _________?!!
Mr_Shiftright
Member Posts: 64,481
Maybe you're walking down the street and you see
one. Strangest car you ever laid eyes on. Or you're
paging through an old magazine, perhaps watching
an old movie, and there in front of you is a car
you never even knew existed.
If you'd like to know more about a certain unusual
make of car from the past, or would like to share
one of your recent discoveries, please post here.
one. Strangest car you ever laid eyes on. Or you're
paging through an old magazine, perhaps watching
an old movie, and there in front of you is a car
you never even knew existed.
If you'd like to know more about a certain unusual
make of car from the past, or would like to share
one of your recent discoveries, please post here.
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Anybody remember which US dealer sold them?
bodywork) at Nanterre, France. Initially the company built Fiat cars under licence, with the odd "special" being constructed (Fiat chassis with unique bodywork). The
successful Aronde models of 1951-60 marked the end of Fiat control, although the engine design continued to be used. However, the Fiat influence carried through to the
1000 series of 1960-79, of which over 1.6 million were built.
In the 1950s Simca bought Unic, Talbot and Ford of France (which made the Vedette - a car once planned to be a smaller American Ford, and which looked like a mini-1949
Mercury, but was neither one). Chrysler became the majority holder in 1963 and by 1970 changed the name to Chrysler France. The new model programme initiated by
Chrysler produced the succesful (2 million made over 1967 to 1982) 1100 series, which formed the basis of the Chrysler Europe Alpine and Horizon (and Dodge
Omni/Plymouth Horizon too), and was briefly fielded in the States in the early 70's as the Simca 1204, one of the Chrysler's trio of captive import subcompacts (along with
the Plymouth Cricket from Hillman and Dodge Colt from Mitsubishi). After the Peugeot takeover of 1978, the Simca name survived until 1981 when Talbot was used
thereafter.
The Fiat Topolino (which, incidently, was named after Mickey Mouse, believe it or not) was decades before the Renault R5; a completely different machine.
The R5 was a derivative of the 5, known here as Le Car because the French figured we couldn't pronounce 'cinque', even though most of us can handle the word 'sank' without much trouble.
For homologation for rallying, they built a series of 5's so highly modified that really nothing was the same but the body (like Nascar). It had a different chassis and a powerful V6 mounted between the axles (not like Nascar), driving the rears. Must have been quite a machine. Due to its intended use in rallies, it was literally built for powerslides (like midget racers).
I've often thought that it would be a great car for the States, cuz people would assume that it was impotent, but it could, in fact, out-handle and out-accelerate almost anything on the road. Probably fairly tough too (for a French car), since it was made to be thrashed.
I wasn't thinking of the "new" R-5...I try never to think of them, although Mickey Mouse would be a great name for it.
The car you're thinking about, the R-5 Turbo 2 was truly awesome, a low production (3,576) rallye car, nothing much like the original little rat built by Renault. It was mid-engine, but it did use the actual R-5 platform. Apparently it came in varying packages, from 160 to 250 horsepower. The 160 HP did 0-60 in 7 seconds, so with another 90, it must have been fast. That's a lot of power out of 1300 ccs!
Remember the SHOGUN? An R-5 with Ford SHO engine. Now we're talkin' a serious car. It had that same steroid look of the R-5 turbo 2 you mentioned.
A+ for your efforts!
Now, Buick sold the Opel.
What was the name of the import that Pontiac Dealers sold during the late fifties?
No cheating, now!
My compliments.
Now as to this Pontiac thing. Holy Xmas. That was a ways back. I don't even have any car magazines that old. This was an import, I take it? Sporty? Mundane?
What could it have been...Austin? Renault? Peugeot?
Anybody...?
1958 Canadian Pontiac Laurentian
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Garage/2251/body.jpg
BTW, I believe the R5 motor was a Turbo-4. Small one too, well under 2 liters with levels of boost that ranged from "high" to "insane."
I also seem to recal a distant memory of the Shogun. Maybe I have an article somewhere. Wasn't it Fiesta-based rather than Festiva?
Alright, I got one - Marcos. British sportscar, late 60's I think. Extensive use of plywood in the chassis/body, if I have the right car.
That's what this world needs. More wooden cars.
When I was in college, a buddy bought one for 50.00. It was a P.O.S. that had one redeeming feature.
We would fly down a quiet street, or better yet, a tunnel. Shift the thing into second gear, turn off the ignition, wait for awhile and turn it back on.
The resultant backfire would make an M-80 sound like a cap gun!!
Now, we did this same trick with a lot of other cars and the results were mixed.
But..NOTHING would make a window busting explosion like that old Vauxall!!
Oh, the good old days....
Yes, R5 turbo2 was about 1300cc 4 cylinder motor...I think you're right, SHOGUN wasn't an R-5, then...yeah, might have been Fiesta chassis, very possible, tough little car...I can't imagine a Festiva supporting any modifications...
Always thought the Festiva had great styling for its class. I like mini's, micros,...all categories.
Lots of good little mini's (not to be confused with the original Mini) seem to me to have deserved getting one fairly hot model. Not, perhaps, quite as hot as the Shogun, but something approaching a Mini Cooper S.
Let's have a contest. Name the car on the top of the page. Employees are ineligible to compete, unless they don't know who to go ask, in which case their guess is as good as anybody's, but then how will we ever confirm the car's i.d.?
I'm gonna take a wild stab and call it a Fiat, partly to make everybody say "You're nuts!" and partly because I think it might actually be.
They use a steel frame, but the body panels are hung on wood (Ash) supports.
The Fiesta was a tough little car, yes...had that Ford Kent engine, pretty peppy and fun to drive.
About the Vauxhall backfires-a high school friend and I did the same thing in his '53 Plymouth. One time, though, he left the key off a little too long. The resulting backfire blew the muffler apart. We had to dodge cops on the way home because of the noise of that old flathead six.
Okay, looks like your average TVR is pulling about $5-7,000 these days, except for the roadster, which must be pretty rare, I've never seen one live--called the "Taimar", made in 78 or 79...
There's a Skoda for sale in Hemmings...a "felicia" convertible of all things, 1959...$6,000, which sounds like about $5,990 too much but I wish them luck...oh, it's got 17,000 miles on it, so maybe it's at least in pretty good shape...okay, then, $5,500 too much. Be fun to have one, though... I presume you'd be the only one on your block.
But I always liked the IDEA of the Rover 2000 very much...it tried to do what BMW succeeded in doing, just didn't have the R&D I guess. Too bad.
Oh,I think SU carbs are actually quite good and have a completely undeserved bad reputation. They are simple and remarkably efficient. They only suffered at the hands of American mechanics who didn't take the time to understand all 3 moving parts inside...simplicity has its virtues, but one bad thing about 3 moving parts is that if you put a vice grip on one of them and beat on it with a hammer, the other two remaining good parts can't function at all. I will defend SUs to the death, so be careful what you say!
Hmmm...I also remember a Rover SD1 V-8 in a different body style than the 2000 in the USA, around late 70s, early 80s.
The SHOGUN was definately a FESTIVA based car. I distinctly remember it because my girlfriend at the time had a regular Festiva and I remember pointing the SHOGUN out in one of my car mags. The one you always saw in the magazines was bright yellow, huge rear fender bulges with air ducts carved into them to cool the SHO engine mounted behind the driver. I didn't think it ever went into production.
It is a convertible that I saw with 90,000 miles on it. It was a 1985. Guy wanted $3,000 for it.
Tried searching the web, but nuthin came up?
Car will probably need a new top. How expensive?
How was Buick quilty in 1985? Am I buying a lemon if i get it?
Is having this car going to be the parts search from hell??
What were they called?
Small correction, if I may make it for the sake of history and not for the sake of being right...Kaiser merged with Willys and then went out of business. That's why the Henry J (aka ALLSTATE) had a Willys engine. You must have been thinking of the Nash-Hudson merger that took place about the same time?
Thanks for the other info.
Yep, it was a Henry J. These were made in 4 cyl and 6 cyl versions but I think Sears only sold the 4 cyl versions.
They dealer was never able to move it-nobody knew NSU from a hole in the wall.
Anyway, I wonder how successful they were with the Wankel rotary-as far as I know, only the Japanese (MAZDA) really made a go of rotaries.
As for NSU; I believe they were absorbed by AUTO-UNION (AUDI) some time during the early 1970's.
Is there any chance that the Wankel engine will stage a comeback?
Close, but not quite on the NSU...it was indeed an NSU that offered the true first large production Wankel engined-car, but it was the R0 80, not the Prinz...perhaps you were thinking of the Wankel Spyder, which was a two-seat convertible based on the Prinz platform but totally redesigned by Bertone...they made very few, in 1964-66.
The R0 80 was a problem-ridden car, due to the fact that the Germans could not solve the sealing problem with the rotary's internal apex seals. This was later mastered by the Japanese, who solved all the rotary engine's problems and producted (eventually) a first-class and reliable power plant.
The R0 80 is a much unappreciated car for another reason, though...the styling..which was really the world's first aerodynamic 4-door sedan, soon copied by the Audi 5000 and then really copied by the Taurus, which was a huge sales success.
The Wankel was withdrawn because Mazda felt that it could not be competitive into the 21st Century, with regards to fuel consumption and emissions. I think they were right to do so, since now everyone in the compact and intermediate class production cars seems to be raising the stakes for higher and higher fuel mileage and lower and lower emissions.
Too bad, the Wankel rotary was a great engine and a great achievement. Thanks for bringing this subject up!
Also understand that GM made a major investment in rotary engines in the mid-70's , only to drop the whole project (after spending megabucks).
I guess the piston engine still rules! I also recall that Chrysler made a few turbine powered cars in the mid-60's (and leased them out as test vehicles); wonder how that effort ended?
Finally, we have the steam engined caes-understand a few were still made in the 1930s.
Rowdy behavior, Carnut.
I, for one, am shocked.
Yes, GM was going to put the Wankel in a number of their cars, but backed out because the engines were so fuel-thirsty at the time...early 70s...same with the Chrysler turbines, to say nothing of red hot exhaust blasting out the tailpipe and melting everything (or everyone) close by.....Rover actually raced a turbine car, as I recall....steam cars were put out of business by the self-starter motor in 1913, and just hung on for another 10-15 years.
Yep, piston engines rule, and will continue to rule into the foreseeable future. You can thank microprocessors for saving it.