There was no 220..

The Datsun 240Z was a 125mph, 0 – 60 in 8s car which looked like a European supercar but at a fraction of the price. It was given the 240Z name because it was powered by a very nice 2.4 litre OHC engine.

It’s a copy, exclaimed the British public, and it has no racing pedigree. Oops..

Nissan had an answer for that. In 1971, a 240Z won the East African Safari Rally and it looked like a …. 240Z.. and then Nissan did it again in 1973, by which time it was all getting a little boring. The winning, not the car..

It is a difficult car to criticize, and as time marched on, it became even more difficult because Nissan released a 260Z and then a 280Z and it still looked almost the same and it was fast and cool and cheap, apart from the insurance of course.

There was enough room up front to fit a 350 small block V8 too, and some did it. Wah.. Cars that looked this good and fast shouldn’t ever be as cheap as the 240Z. Owners never complained, and the rest of us look enviously from the interiors of our 1300L Capris. It was tough but somebody had to do it.. 

The car still looks good today, bodied as it was in timeless elegant GT attire.

A look around a very nice example of the marque.. worthwhile watching..

Chevy S-10.. the ‘big’ little truck..

I am annoyed that I can’t find a photo of the S-10 that we had. It was a real workhorse and had helped move a few people and their chattels from one house to another. With the extended cab and long bed, it was a real handful to park anywhere.

This is NOT the actual S-10. Ours was two tone Bright Teal and cream, a fairly rare colour combo for the S-10 pickup, but the photo above shows the 1992 type admirably well. There aren’t too many around that look like the one above because the S-10 is a very popular vehicle for customizing, as in low riders, high riders, and the type that can jump about like a scalded cat.

On the topic of scalded cats, the 4.3 V6 could step of the mark very quickly indeed, reaching its top speed in remarkable times. Of course, being a pickup there was little weight to hold it back.

Unfortunately, having little weight meant that wet weather and snow were not the best times to go out. I used to load it up with bags of salt/sand mix and leave the snow in the back in an effort to increase traction, but even that could work against what I was trying to achieve. To suggest that the S-10 was tail happy is something of an understatement.

On the bright side, the cab didn’t take too long to warm up as there was not too much of it, even in extended form.

With all of the options, it was comfortable, fast, and you would get to know every gas station for miles because you would have to pull into one at regular close intervals. Gas mileage was not a strong point of the 4.3, but fun was in abundance. It could pull 6000lbs too, better than many SUVs can do today.

S-10 owners will tell you that it is the best truck they have ever had. I would agree.

Re customizing, there is no shortage of ‘go faster’ parts from just doing little bits to personalize right up to 12 second quarter miles..

More on the S-10, the small truck with a huge heart..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_S-10

Ginetta G21

This is one limited edition car, only 70 ever made, but it was a good looking car and it was quick. Getting one was difficult enough, getting it fixed was even harder.

This car came from a manufacturer who supplied kit cars for road and race, and under the shell was a mix and match of engines, transmissions, axles and suspension. It was not the kind of car where you could go into a local auto repairer and say ‘Fix it’.

It never altered the fact that I would have really liked one, but I was acutely aware of the issues already mentioned, and finding one even in a country as small as England was problematic. Add to the equation that those lucky enough to get one would never part with it, one was just left with dreams.

The car was fast, getting up to 60mph in less than 10, and a top sped of 165mph would keep a smile pinned to one’s face all day. And remember, there would only ever be another 69 people lucky enough to get the same view as you.

Ginetta still make cars, and if you see one from afar, you could be forgiven for thinking that it is an Italian supercar of some description. Take a look at the current model line-up on the Ginetta website, as nice a combination of road and race cars as you will ever see in any brochure.. http://ginetta.com/g60 

As affordable sports cars go, Britain is STILL the place to look, and even though some may be less affordable than others, Britain is STILL the place to look.

.

"the vehicle does not meet the fundamental technical requirement of a motor-car ...

… it is quite unattractive to the average buyer ... To build the car commercially would be a completely uneconomic enterprise."

This was the response by the British motor industry when offered what was to become a motoring icon. Do you recognise it? 

The photo shows a 1949 split window type. Over time, it received grille slots in the engine cover and larger rear light clusters, and a one piece rear window which improved vision via the interior rear view mirror.

One of the selling points on the 70’s Beetle was a rear light cluster the same size as a regulation UK football. It was the first time that a manufacturer decided that larger rear lights were a good safety feature

Mechanically, it was very simple, a flat four air-cooled engine, driving a gearbox which fed power directly to the rear wheels. The only mechanical connections from the front were gear change and accelerator pedal. Fuel and spare wheel lived up front. 

The whole car sat on a floor pan to which were fixed all of the important parts, and were you to remove the original body, you could replace it with something more ‘groovy’… like a Beach Buggy.

Who said that a VW Beetle couldn’t be fun? Weatherproofing was a another question altogether..

Anyway, the old Beetles were made up until 2003, but there was already a new Beetle around, front engine, front wheel drive, better able to conform to increasing safety standards and the competition.

The Thunderbird..

I am not a great fan of Fords but on occasion, they get it right. Such was the case with the Ford Thunderbird in 1955.

For an American, front chrome was not overdone and there were no over-extended tail fins, but the design came from the looks of European cars. It was a two seat, convertible, ‘luxury personal car’, originally lined up against the GM Corvette, but it was no sports car, despite the stock 4.8L V8. I saw one of these, just as in the photo, a few years ago in a Canadian mall. It was the prize in a draw, and I have to admit that I really wanted to win it. That didn’t happen by the way.

Unlike European soft tops, the hood folded back into the trunk. It was a complex system and hood down left little room in the trunk sitting ahead of the spare wheel. It didn’t matter though. With a passenger capacity of two, who needed a large trunk anyway.

Changes were made over the next two years to the front end but nothing too drastic. Then. for 1958, somebody had the idea to make it an ugly four seat convertible, and it all went downhill.

This car is an American classic that doesn’t look like it is going to eat the car in front, and it is a size that would fit into a modern day parking space. From ‘58 on, the car got uglier and larger and, by the time that it had completely lost its way in 1997, the name was mothballed.

For 2002, somebody decided that it would be good to resurrect the Thunderbird, and guess what? It was a clean looking stylish two seat convertible with styling cues taken from the original car. Sadly, it only lasted until 2005. With sales falling off, the car was discontinued. Maybe the majority had got used to the big ugly T-Birds and actually liked them. Strange people..

A note for Brits: If you think that you have seen a front like this before, you would be right. The basic design was used as a four seat convertible and regular saloon in the UK called the Consul MkII in 1956, but it lacked the grace of the Thunderbird, being more slab sided and with a rear seat so low that only the tallest could see out over the doors..

It’s a Daimler..

.. and quite a large Daimler. Body work is by MCW, the lightweight Orion, but this has the ‘Manchester’ front which I believe originated from the Roe bodied Manchester buses.

Early CVG6’s had the Birmingham front which was flatter and had headlights placed further inboard of the sides. The Manchester front is the better looking of the two.

So, why is it a favourite of mine? I used to travel to school on one of these, and it is a Daimler bus. See the nice Daimler badge on the front. This signifies that the part which keeps the body, engine et al from dragging along the roads is made in Coventry, essentially my home city.

Motive power came from a Gardner 6LW, an 8.4 litre superlative diesel, which was coupled to the back wheels via a pre-selector gearbox. All of this enabled sixty three passengers, the driver and conductor to travel around Coventry.

OK, so it is not the most famous of British buses, but it is the best looking, even in Coventry’s muddy red colour.

As a kid, I used to listen to the slow idle of the 6LW while it was parked at the terminus close to my home. You can hear it here..

One other thing.. these buses had open rear platforms that one could jump on and off. The Daimler Fleetlines and Leyland Atlanteans (the type behind the CVG6 in the photo) that followed all had hydraulic doors which didn’t open until the bus had stopped. Safe, yes, but people waiting at the stops always stood right in front of the doors, and you sometimes had to fight your way off. Jumping off just before the stop was a better way and far more exciting.

Ahh, the good old days..

The Amazon

.. aka The Volvo 120 series. The photo shows a four door 122S. I took my first driving lessons in one of these.

Everything about these cars looked and felt tough. The external panels could not be pressed in under thumb pressure like many other makes. The dash was all steel and minimalist. The doors shut with a thud sound, not a ping. They were high sided too.

The front seats were made from a material that held the passengers in place, and the front seats had adjustable lumbar support. They were probably the best seats of any fitted to what was a mid-sized family car. The trunk was cavernous, but the lid used to catch stuff if cases etc were piled to high.

The gear shift was a long lever coming from way up front, and there was plenty of movement, but it was mated to a good gearbox. Performance was quite sporty, courtesy of a well designed 1.8L four pot unit fitted with twin carburettors. They made good towing cars as well, despite the smallish engine.

The Volvo 122S was so good, my father kept it for four years, two years longer than anything before or since. He panicked at four years, but he need not have done so. These cars are so reliable and tough enough that over half of all production are still running around somewhere.

It is the kind of vehicle which makes you confident that you will always complete every journey and in one piece.

Volvo continue to make the toughest cars on the planet, and I would have liked to include a crash test but I couldn’t find one so I will tell you about and incident.

I was backing out of the driveway, and started my turn to position myself on the roadside. Unfortunately, I turned inches too early, and the front bumper caught a two foot high brick pillar, demolishing it and part of the wall to which it was attached. Inside the car, I felt and heard nothing. It wasn’t until I looked out of the side window that I saw the mess. I got out of the car, expecting to see the nearside front corner of the car showing the worse of wear, and all I could find was a scratch on the front turn signal lens. If only the wall had fared so well..

A nice little video here..