Problematic Pinto

This photo was taken at the carwash in Nordeast over a year ago.  I actually posted this picture in my facebook photo album back then, but thought I’d bring it back to the forefront since I spent a few posts covering hot, and not so hot hatches.

I had a nice chat with the gentleman who owns this little jewel after he struck up a conversation at the carwash by noting his car was a little pony and my mustang was a big one. A pinto, when not a tag applied to an automobile, is a painted pony, and a mustang is a wild roaming horse, and at the carwash, the source of those names is good fodder for starting up conversations with strangers.  Mr. Pinto picked up this beast for $200 and is fixing it up to take part in the Pinto Sprint Across America.   The Pinto was a rear wheel drive car that Ford made from 1971-1980.  Initially, it could be had with a 1.6L 4 cylinder with 75HP and 96 lb ft of torque or a 2.0L 4 cylinder that put out 100 HP.  Brand new when they debuted, one could be had for right around $2,000. 

The Pinto doesn’t fit with the figurative definition of a hot hatch as a performance oriented hatchback, but it was literally at hot hatch.  It may be better known to some by its other name, "The Barbecue That Seats Four" -a title it garnered due to a fatal design flaw that caused the car to burst into a fireball of doom after rear impact collisions. 

The fuel tank on the Pinto is positioned directly in front of the rear bumper with no significant framing around it to blunt any type of rear end collision.  There were a number of things that could intrude upon the gas tank when the Pinto took a hit from behind, including the license plate screws, the shock absorber brackets, leaf spring suspension brackets, differential bolts, muffler mounting brackets, and of course, the front end of the striking vehicle.  To make matters worse, the force would cause the wheel wells to separate from the floor pan of the car, which meant that when flames burst out, they had an easy means of entry into the cabin.  But what sucks most about being in a flaming Pinto is that the rear impact could jut the door jambs ahead, which meant you couldn’t get the doors open to get out.  This car was like the perfect storm of being completely screwed in an accident.  The owner of this car claims that the Pinto's death-trap design feature can be remedied simply by replacing the rear license plate bracket screws with plastic ones that are less able to puncture the ill-placed gas tank. I'm happy not to be the one testing that theory.

To make matters worse -and not to put Ford in a negative light, because this was a long time ago and they’ve evolved into a different company with a solid product line these days -but when they realized that Pintos were apt to become death traps, instead of bucking up and paying the $10 or so per car it would have cost to make the Pinto safer, they had some egghead run a cost benefit analysis, comparing how much it would cost to recall and fix all pintos and start building them so as not to kill their drivers vs. how much it would cost to settle lawsuits from burn victims and next of kin.  The conclusion of this comparison was that it was cheaper by nearly 70 million dollars to pay out on lawsuits than to do the right thing.  The memo was eventually made public, and it was a shameful thing for Ford.  In fact, if not for that memo, the whole debacle may have blown over a lot easier.  After all, there were plenty of cars being built around that time that weren’t anywhere near what we would call safe these days, and studies have been done that show the Pinto to be no more fatal than any other car of its time.  In fact, statistically, it had fewer casualties to its name than its competition of the day, the AMC Gremlin, the Chevy Vega, and the Toyota Corolla. The Pinto just had the misfortune of making the biggest spectacle of itself when it failed its precious cargo. 

Hot Rods at the Drive In

 Today we have a trio of hotrods I spotted while out and about yesterday.  I saw them on Hwy 81 going the opposite direction I was headed at the time.  So, when I was done with my errands, I made sure to go back the way I saw them go, and sure enough, I found them at the drive in restaurant I thought they’d be headed to. 

I approached the three guys and introduced myself, then asked if it would be okay if I took some pictures of their cars.  The leader of the group, we’ll call “Frank”.  He was kind of a surly old fellow who, unlike most people I’ve talked to who put this kind of work into a car, did not seem to want to talk too much about it.  I told him my name and he responded with “I’m Frank,” then pointed to the name patch on his work shirt and followed up with “and that’s all you need to know.”  -Well, okay then, Frank, sorry I happened to notice your shiny, flashy, super-loud, attention-getting hot rod.  I didn’t realize you were trying to be all discreet and undercover when you parked in a prominent spot at the drive thru where people go to show off their wheels. 

I got the distinct impression that I was intruding on their No Girls Allowed Hot Rod Club, so as I tried to gather info about their cars, I was only getting succinct answers.  I reduced myself to playing dumb even, and asked what kind of engines they had in their cars, when I already knew I was looking at small block Chevy engines -which are pretty much a staple of hot rod customization -to no avail, and at that point, I called it quits and bid them adieu.

Here’s what I did gather though:

The first photo is of Frank with his car.  You’ll note I’ve obscured Frank’s face, because I didn’t actually ask permission to photograph him -only his car.  Cantankerous old guy that he is, I don’t think he’d much appreciate being in my blog. 

Anyway, Frank’s car is a 1922 Moon.  Moons were cars built for middle class car buyers between 1905 and 1930 in St Louis Missouri.  Originally, Frank’s moon probably had a straight 6 engine and about 20 or so HP.  Alas, the great depression came along and wiped out Moon Motorcars, which is why it’s possible that you’ve never heard of it before today. 
Frank has obviously altered his car from what it originally looked like and how it originally performed.  Gone is the straight 6, and in its place is a Chevy 355 (5.8L) V8 which is a Chevy 350 cu in (5.7L) V8 engine that has been bored out.  It’s also got a 6-71 blower mounted on top of it with 2 4 barrel carburetors. 

A blower is the same thing as a supercharger.  Normal cars use atmospheric pressure and the vacuum produced by the piston moving up and down in the cylinder to move air into the engine.  Superchargers use mechanical means to stuff and cram air and fuel into the combustion chamber for more power.  The goal isn’t added pressure, but rather, denser air -and cool air too -which is more dense than warm air, of course.  If the air gets too hot, it can cause engine detonation, which can wreck your engine from the inside out.  A blower like the one on Frank’s car can’t just be bolted on by itself.  There are other things that need to be added to make it work and keep the engine from self destructing.  High flow heads, a high volume fuel pump, and larger exhaust valves to let the car exhale all that extra breath are just the start of what needs to be added.  In short, this stuff gets expensive in a hurry, and you have to take care to keep it tuned up nicely, or things can go haywire. 

One thing Frank was forthcoming about was stomping all over the power of his two comrade’s vehicles by insisting that he was pulling over 800 HP out of his set up.  I asked the other two guys (who, in their defense, were a bit more outgoing than Frank) how their cars stacked up, and they sheepishly muttered something vague about not having as many horsepower as Frank was packing, but never spoke an actual number. 

The second photo here, is a 1927 Ford with a 355 Chevy V8 and a 6-71 blower, much like Frank’s set up, but apparently, less powerful. 

The third photo is a 1924 Ford with a 350 V8, and a 4-71 blower.  It also features some naked lady wheel covers that its owner said might snag him a win at a hot rod show.  Well, they are cool wheel covers, and the guy has to have something to try to keep up with Frank. 

All personal feelings aside, Frank did build himself one crazy cool car.  Even though he might not like to talk about it (to me, anyway), I have to give him credit for all the work, time, and money he must have poured into building such a fantastic machine. 

Mazdaspeed3 -original post date 4/27/2013

 

For your entertainment, I present the happy go lucky 2010 Mazdaspeed3 Sport I spotted at a local car lot a few weeks ago. Just look at that silly grin on its fascia... I just had to stop to say hello. The Mazda3 was introduced in 2004 as a replacement to the 323/protege, and shares a platform with the Ford Focus. Just as I am fond of the Focus ST, so am I fond of the Mazdaspeed3, and I'll tell you why.

A base Mazda3 features a 2.0L four cylinder engine that gives you 148HP and 135 lb ft of torque along with mid 20s in the city and low 30s on the highway for gas mileage, which is decent for a little car like this. This isn't a base model Mazda3, though.

Madzaspeed is Mazda's very own performance shop, kind of like SVT is for Ford. They take Mazda vehicles and work their magic on them to turn them into rip-snorting versions of their former selves. In this case, the Mazda3 that has been transformed into a Mazdaspeed3 is endowed with a turbocharged 2.3L 4 cylinder engine that puffs out 263HP and 280 lb ft of torque, which you can engage via a 6 speed manual transmission. That's a fast little hatchback. It gives you high teens/mid 20s for city/hwy gas mileage. But all is not perfect in happy Mazda land, as the front wheel drive set up translates into some issues with torque steer. For the 2010 model year, anyway, there wasn't any type of torque vectoring system in place to try to correct this issue. It's still a fun little hatch though, and quick as a jackrabbit.

Brand new back in 2010, this car had a sticker price starting at just over $24,000. This used one I found has 25,000 miles on its odometer and has a tag of $18,997. I'd estimate the dealership that took it in on trade probably owns it for around $15-16,000, so there ought to be a little bit of latitude in negotiating a deal. Getting out the door with one like this for $16,500 to $17,500 would mean you could drive off with a smile on your face to match the one this perky little Mazda wears.

The Mazdaspeed3 is a spirited car with styling that will make you think of it as a bright-eyed, tail-wagging puppy that's always overjoyed to see you approach from across the parking lot. Sure, it can get a little carried away with its exuberance and pull at the leash with its torque steer, but with some practice, you can reign in its happy dance and have yourself a hell of a good time with it.

Viking War Van -original post date 4/26/2013

 

Last night, as I was navigating my way through the Haaf ramp, I spotted the little gem pictured here: A Ford Aerostar van. Not just any Aerostar, mind you, but the "Vikinator II"... Which means that somewhere in the world (probably in Minnesota, to narrow things down) there's a Vikinator I to be found. Keep an eye out, people, I want to see the vehicle that inspired a sequel in the form of this purple monstrosity.

Last night was the NFL draft, or some such sports related event that I know of tangentially because the Metrodome calendar made mention of it. I knew that meant it was a dome event day and I risked getting a ticket if I tried my normal free street parking routine downtown. You'll have to forgive my ignorance of sports. I've never taken a keen interest in them; figuring that if and when I want to see a big, dumb animal run around a field chasing a ball, I can just take my dog out to play fetch. I'm sure there are perfectly nice athletes, but between my dissatisfaction with the new Vikings stadium that is being built at great expense even as our local infrastructure is crumbling, and the fact that the brushes I had during my schooling with sports oriented people were by and large unpleasant, I don't view sports in the best light. Vikings, however - not the sports team, but the raiding, plundering Norse people of the late 8th-mid 11th centuries, are a pretty interesting lot.

So, how does ye olde Vikinator II stack up against the vehicle that was the epitome of Viking might and bravery, the Viking war ship? Lets see.

In this corner, we have the slim and limber sea going vessel made with overlapping planks of wood riveted together. These ships could be anywhere from 30' long to around 100' long, leaving room for lots of Vikings in either case. They were capable of sailing the sea at about 10 knots (from what info I've been able to find) or about 11.5 mph, and weathering turbulence as well as navigating rivers. If the ship's owner popped for some extra expense, the vessel featured what we'll call the "Raiding Party Appearance Package" in the form of sculptural elements protruding from the Bow and stern of the ship.

Aside from transport, warring, and raiding activities, these vessels were used for religious purposes. In fact, if you were a high enough ranking Viking, you could be buried in one along with a bunch of your most valuable possessions and perhaps a servant or two who was sacrificed in your honor... All in the name of showing some swagger in the afterlife. If you happened to die in battle, you'd want all that bling to make an entrance when you traveled to Valhalla -you can't have the other deceased warriors seeing you pull up in a dinghy or something, you know.

In the other corner, we have the Vikinator II. Underneath its fabulous horned purple exterior lies a Ford Aerostar minivan. These things were built from 1986-1997 and were available as passenger and cargo vans. The passenger version could hold only 7 people, so on the raiding party capacity front, it loses compared to the 30-100 foot long war ship.

The name Aerostar has significance because it comes from the fact that these vans have a decent drag coefficient compared to their competition of the day. These are aerodynamic vans; thus the first part of the name. So, just as the sleek Viking ships were able to handle sea turbulence, the Aerostar, with its sloped nose, is able to split its way through the breeze as it travels.

Of the two, the Aerostar certainly has a higher top speed, though not if you try to sail it through the water, where it will quickly become an immobile submarine. It's also much easier to find an Aerostar than a genuine Viking ship, as there were over 2 million made during their production run. I have no idea how many Viking ships were made or survive to this day, but I bets it's less than 2 million.

The Aerostar was a front engine, rear wheel drive van, with optional all wheel drive. There were a variety of engines offered from a 2.3L 4 cylinder to a 4.0L 6 cylinder for a range of 100-160 HP. The Aerostar, being rear wheel drive, could tow up to 5,000 lbs, meaning that you could use one to haul your very own Viking war ship to and from the marina.

So, who wins? I guess it depends on if we're measuring by land or by sea. I'm sure though, that if you were to pit the occupants of the Vikinator, with their beer helmets, tailgating gear, and purple jerseys, up against the occupants of a Viking war ship, with their battle helmets, swords, axes, and shields, the real Vikings would win hands down, unless it was in a beer swilling contest - then they'd break even, I bet.

MGA -original post date 4/25/2013

Since we covered my MGB GT yesterday, it seemed fitting to feature its predecessor, the MGA today. Its own predecessor was the MG T-type, a much more old school looking vehicle that resembles the MGA only in its outward oozing of Britishness. This car was a dramatic shift in styling from the T-type and showcased sleeker design elements and svelte body lines. This is a photo I took years ago at a car show on the Minnesota State Fair grounds. It’s a beautiful example, but the paint on the car is not a factory color as near as I can tell. Who cares though? It looks fantastic.

The MGA had a seven year production run from 1955-1962, during which time there were just over 101 thousand MGA roadsters and coupes produced. They featured body on frame construction (remember yesterday, the mention of the MGB’s new monocoque structure?) and were a rear wheel drive car with drum brakes on all four wheels. Later, the front wheels were upgraded to discs, though if you get your hands on one of these MGAs nowadays (lucky you!) and it’s still got the drums in front, you should really just throw authenticity out the window and upgrade to discs -after all, the car won‘t stay original for very long if you can‘t get it to stop before plowing into the back end of the vehicle in front of you.

The MGA originally came with a 1500 cc engine (well, technically it was 1489cc, but we like to round up) and produced 68HP (which was later adjusted to 72HP). Weighing in at just under one ton, that was an acceptable amount of power to send the MGA whizzing along. There were a few engine upgrades made during its production run, and eventually they settled on a 1622cc engine that made 90HP and 97 lb ft of torque. It‘s a small car, at just over 4‘ tall, 4‘10“ wide, and 13‘ long, and seats only two. If you ever get an opportunity to be one of those two people who gets to ride in one, I say take it.

MGB GT -original post date 4/24/2013

 

Keeping with the hatchback trend I’ve got going on, I present my very own 1969/1971 MGB-GT. You’ll note the inclusion of two model years there… that’s because my car is registered as a ‘71 model because its frame is from a ‘71 MG, but everything else about it is 1969. I usually just tell people it’s a ‘69 because aside from the VIN, it is.

The MGB was a roadster that was brought to the market in 1962 by the British Motor Corporation/British Motor Holdings/British Leyland Motor Corporation (apparently, there were some corporate shake-ups along the line). The MGB took the place that had been occupied by the exquisite MGA roadster, and brought with it monocoque design instead of body-on-frame structure as well as 2+2 seating.

In 1965, the fixed roof version of the MGB hit the sales floor and was called the MGB GT. The greenhouse of the MGB GT was worked on by a design firm out of Cambiano, Italy known as Pininfarina -a name you may have heard of, as they’ve done beautiful automotive design for many car companies, from Cadillac to Ferrari.

Measuring just under 13 feet long and 5 feet wide, with a weight of just barely over one ton, these cars were light (not as light as the roadster version, but close) and nimble. Under its hood -or perhaps I should say “bonnet” since these are British cars- is a 1800 cubic centimeter engine (remember the mention of the Volvo P1800 from the Volvo C30 post? That 1800 in the name means these cars had the same sized engine)… Actually, if we are being exact, the MG has a 1798 cc engine -but it just doesn’t have the same ring as 1800 now, does it? That means it’s just under 110 cubic inches, or 1.8 liters. The 1800 cc engine was a little zinger back in its day, and propelled the MGB GT along with 95 HP and 110 lb ft of torque for a top speed of just over 100 MPH and low 20’s/high 20’s for city/hwy driving -though I used to go back and forth between Nebraska and Iowa with mine and topped 30 MPG pretty often with highway driving. That’s probably due in part to one thing that makes my car a bit rare among MGs. Mine is one of the 20% of MGs ever made that features overdrive -it’s an uncommon and quite desirable feature of these cars.

Overdrive lets a car cruise with a lower RPM (engine revolutions per minute), so it uses less gas and does a lot less grunting and groaning as you go. Think of it as kind of like having a bonus gear to shift up into for highway driving. MGBs came with 4 speed manual transmissions, so having that “bonus gear” of overdrive is a pretty nice thing. In my MG, the switch that engages overdrive is a little stalk that protrudes from the right side of the steering column, and it can be engaged in 3rd or 4th gears.

I consider the MGB-GT to be the grandfather of the modern hot hatch. Though these little cars could easily be overrun by their modern day offspring, for its time, the MGB GT was considered to be quite the brisk little sports car. Where little British cars tend to shine is not in brute force or driving in straight lines, but rather, in handling and zipping around curves and through peaks and valleys. These are cars you drive for pleasure, fun, and a bit of exhilaration -not so much for white-knuckle thrills and break-neck speeds.

The 2+2 seating layout of the interior meant that this was a practical sports car -unless you actually had to ride in the back seat -then it was pretty awful. The seating, much like the windshield wipers and defroster are more ornamentation than functional aspects. You ought not to count on them to actually work, though when you’re trying to convince yourself to buy one of these things, you’ll use them as justifications for how the car will be more than just a pretty little brat that will make you late to work because it won’t start when it’s supposed to. The back seat really, is more of a decoration that’s in place to hide the two batteries that are mounted underneath it. The wipers move a bit, but won’t actually clean your windscreen -which is why you keep a bottle of Rain-X and apply it regularly to the glass, and the defroster will spit out a bit of warm air, but not enough to defog the windows if anybody inside the vehicle actually wants to inhale and exhale.

I bought mine several years ago from a family friend who had a collection of MGs. We had bonded over the fact that we both drove black Jeep Cherokees at the time and that commonality opened the door for him sharing his MG collection with me. He was willing to part with the GT because he was a tall guy and fit better in his roadsters (provided the top was down). Besides, he had used the GT as his winter driver, so the body had some issues with rust. Brand new back in 1969, the GT probably cost between $3,000-4,000 depending on the options. I paid him $500 for the car and started out for home with it. Just a few miles out, the car ceased functioning and had to be towed the rest of the way. At home, I discovered that my MG was being starved of gas due to the suction created in the fuel system when the gas cap was on tight. I handled that issue, and soon after, the fuel pump gave out. The pumps these cars come with are finicky things that are made more complicated than need be, so I yanked that out from under the car and replaced it with a much simpler pump I bought at the auto parts store that is more commonly used on Japanese imports. The sending unit on the fuel tank never did work as it should even after I bought a brand new one, so I can never tell exactly how much gas I have left in the tank and have to judge more by how many miles are on the car than by what the fuel gauge says. I’ve dumped tons of cash and time into fixing things that go wrong on my MG, and I still have a long way to go -in part now thanks to my dad backing into the rear fender with his car -so add some more body work to that list of things to do.

At one point, the head cracked and I had to pull it off, bring it in and have it magnafluxed to find the crack, then have it repaired. I painted it before I reinstalled it, and chose a cherry red for the color as a kind of joke, so I could say that I had a Testarossa -which means “red head” in Italian and would imply something a bit more potent than a little 1800 cc engine. I spiffed up the look of things under the hood by incorporating that same red engine paint on the air intakes for my SU carburetors and in various other places. I know it’s not in keeping with how things originally looked, but my car isn’t a numbers matching vehicle anyway, so I do what I want -though I try to keep the outward appearance of the vehicle pretty much as the designers meant it to look.

You’re probably getting the impression that MGs are perhaps not the most reliable of vehicles -and you’d be right. I have a very adversarial relationship with my MG. On one hand, I love and admire the little ripper, but on the other hand, it gives me no end of aggravation and frustration. I’ve been through a lot with my MG and have -through force of necessity- learned a lot from it as well. I love the car, but it’s best if you think of it like a friend who you enjoy hanging out with, but who is also self-absorbed and completely unreliable. Don’t call them if you need to be bailed out of a situation because they’ll probably let you down. Keep things casual though, and the relationship will flourish. Aside from actual problems, these cars are just temperamental. One morning, it will seem to decide it just doesn’t feel like starting. Come back an hour later and it will pep right up and run like its earlier automotive temper tantrum never happened. You never know what kind of mood these cars will be in, so it’s best to keep one as a secondary vehicle rather than rely on it as a daily driver.

I’d venture to say that if not for the attractiveness of them, nearly each and every MG would probably have been sent to the junkyard by now thanks to how frustrated they can make their owners. Years back, I decided I was going to embark on a little documentary film project. I set up the rules like this: I would take off one day in my MG and travel as far as the little car would take me before it broke down. I made sure I added towing to my insurance (which you should always have with any little British car, anyway -you’ll need it) and loaded up my luggage. I started my camera rolling as I took off from home, excited about the project. I made it just about a mile before my car conked out, and so the bulk of the footage that would have been my MG roadtrip documentary (working title was “The Junker Junket”) consisted of me at the side of the road fuming at my little car, calling it pretty much every four letter word I could come up with. It would have been the shortest and most profanity-laden documentary film ever, so the idea for the film was scrapped.

The good news was that I had broken down just about two blocks from a body shop where I was friends with the owners. They took pity on me and pulled my MG up onto their flat bed and hauled it back home for free. I was so disgusted by the ruination of my documentary project that I could barely stand to look at my car, and I didn’t touch it for two months. Finally, I decided to forgive the MG and started poking around to figure out just what had gone wrong. It turned out to be the simplest thing. One of the wires powering the fuel sending unit had broken off, and after soldering it back in place, the car worked once more. I never did pick up with the Junker Junket project again, as a certain trust had been violated between my MG and I, and so, that was that for my documentary film making days.

In conclusion, the MGB GT is a fun, but not particularly reliable little car. It will make you fall in love with it, only to break your heart with its perpetual tantrums and spurning of your attempts to spend quality driving time with it. They’re not particularly valuable, but not junk either, and they can be money pits. If the MGB GT was a person you were dating, all your friends would be telling you to break up with it, because it just doesn’t treat you right… but you wouldn’t take that advice. Those times when thing are good with the MG are just too good to walk away from. The thought of parting ways will make you weep when you think of missing out on the throaty little howl of its engine, the sensation it give you when you’re whipping and winding around curves, and the swell of affection you feel just gazing at its beautifully rendered compact form. I can’t wholeheartedly say I recommend ownership of such a car, but I can say that for all the trouble it’s been, I don’t regret having mine.

AMC Pacer -original post date 4/23/2013

 

Last night, I got myself stranded in Mankato thanks to the relentless winter snowstorms we keep getting. Thankfully, I brought my trusty new iPad and my trusty old iPhone, so even now as I sit in Mankato, waiting for the sun to glare down on the icy roadways to make them a bit more hospitable to my Mustang, I have access to some photos.

I realized that before I really started going on Car Du Jour, I posted some pictures of cars that didn't get proper write ups, so today is a bit of a rerun. That said, I present the AMC Pacer that I spotted in the Haaf ramp several months ago. I decided to bring this one up to the forefront because it's in keeping with the 2 door hatchback direction that we left off with on the Volvo C30 last time... Though if you have to choose between the Volvo and the Pacer, definitely go for the Volvo.

You'll note that the Pacer in my photo is parked in an area meant for compact cars. That's fine, right? It's a compact car, isn't it? Well, that's only half right. The Pacer was sold from 1975-1980 and according to an old ad I saw, was marketed as the "Small Wide Car". That wasn't just a tag line. The Pacer had the same width as full-sized cars of its day, but was otherwise a compact. Kinda cheating on that compact car parking space, aren't you, Pacer? But that's ok, I've seen guys park F-150s in the Haaf's compact spots and justify it by saying that theirs is only a half ton trucks and not a Super-Duty -totally ignoring the fact that their truck is still a behemoth compared to the Fiesta next to it.

Back in the day, the Pacer's egg-like dimensions and styling were considered futuristic. Today, they're considered cheesy, which is fitting, considering these things were made at a plant in Kenosha, Wisconsin. I bet it's design was inspired by a cheese curd.... Mmmm, cheese curds... But I digress. Indeed, the disco-era kitsch of these little cars is undeniable, but it's also charming. You may remember a certain powder blue Pacer "Mirth-mobile" with itty bitty flame decals from a movie called Wayne's World, where it was the setting for a stirring rendition of Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody. I bet that song is going to be stuck in your head all day now that I've brought it to mind. The point is that it's hard to look at a Pacer and not smile. Granted, it may be a laugh at the Pacer's cheesy little expense, but it's happiness none the less.

The Pacer featured a 3.8L straight 6 cylinder engine that only made 90 HP and 163 lb ft of torque. That's weak, and mileage wasn't all that hot either, getting you mid to high teens in the city and mid to high 20s on the highway. So why would anybody buy one? Because the Pacer has charisma, that's why. It's a silly little car that likes people. The Pacer, you see, was designed around its hypothetical occupants, starting with a spacious passenger compartment and built out from there. It even incorporated a passenger side door that was 4" longer than the driver's side to make it easier for passengers to get in and out of the car. At the time, it was a considerate way to design a vehicle... Not that AMC took into consideration how silly those passengers might feel for having to be seen inside the Pacer - but hey, it was futuristic in 1975. The price of a new Pacer would have started right around $3,600, which is about what you can expect a near mint example of one to be worth nowadays.

Like · · Promote · Share

Blue Moon Volvo C30 -original post date 4/22/2013

 

The first picture is obviously not a car, but it was the inspiration behind why I chose the car that I did for today. The first photo is ice cream. Not just any ice cream, but that most mysterious flavor one can search out in the upper Midwest known as “Blue Moon“. Nobody who knows what flavors go into this ice cream will say, and between companies that make Blue Moon, there’s probably plenty of variation anyway. For those of you who have not tried Blue Moon ice cream, I’ll try to describe the taste. To my somewhat unsophisticated palate, Blue Moon tastes like a mixture of amaretto, possibly lime or pineapple sherbet, and perhaps some pistachio flavoring. Those of you who have ever sampled “Superman” ice cream may recognize Blue Moon as the blue component of the yellow, red and blue concoction. But what does this have to do with cars?

It turns out that Blue Moon ice cream shares its Smurfy hue with a car that I’ve lusted after ever since seeing the prototype a couple years back, the Volvo C30 Polestar Limited Edition hatchback offered in a distinct shade called “Rebel Blue“. The one featured in the 2nd and 3rd photos is the now available production version of the prototype, which is considerably less impressive, but a pretty neat car none the less.

Polestar is a company that is officially partnered with Volvo, and their goal is to enhance performance by tuning up the vehicles they take on. Polestar the name speaks of a visible star up in the sky situated near the earth’s celestial pole, and thus its axis of rotation. It’s usually referred to as Polaris, but of course, that company name is already taken (in fact, Polaris now owns Indian Motorcycles, and makes some very gorgeous bikes -one of which my nephew Lucian was awed by when I took him to the Moto show earlier this year -the picture is somewhere in my photo archive).

The prototype Polestar Volvo C30 that I fell in love with back in 2011 looked very much the same as the one pictured here. It started out with the same 2.5L 5 cylinder engine that a base C30 has, but it was turbocharged, tuned and tweeked to produce 405HP and 376 lb ft of torque. That’s an insane amount of power for a car this small. It was fitted with Brembo brakes, a six speed transmission, and a Haldex all wheel drive system (Haldex is a Swedish company that specializes in AWD systems). In other words, it was a swift little hot hatch rally car that could smoke just about anything in its path. I wanted to get behind the wheel of that car so bad, I could almost taste it… like Blue Moon ice cream.

Alas, the stuff I liked best about the Polestar C30 prototype was set aside for the production Polestar tuned Volvo. Gone is the Haldex AWD system in favor of the regular front wheel drive set up. The six speed transmission stayed, but the turbocharged engine was only calibrated to push out 250HP and 273 lb ft of torque, which is still 23 more horses and 37 lb ft of torque more than the non-Polestar C30, but considerably less potent than the prototype. The “Rebel Blue” paint stayed though.

I want to love the C30 because it carries on styling cues from a long gone Volvo of the 1960’s called the P1800ES, which was a wagon version of the P1800 coupe. If you don’t know what these cars look like, you should Google them, because they’re pretty nice looking vehicles. The C30 even has the entirely glass hatch lid just like the P1800ES. The ancestral Volvo certainly didn’t pack the kind of power that the prototype or even the regular spec C30 offers, and there was no AWD, either, but I still think these cars should have AWD as an option. If only they did, I’d be plotting and scheming to get one in my garage instead of setting my sights on the Focus ST that gave me a case of the giggles a few weeks back (no, the Focus doesn’t have AWD, but it was a blast to drive, has 2 more horseys than the Polestar, and totally loaded up, is still thousands cheaper).

The C30 is supposed to compete against the likes of the Mini. It needs to offer something beyond different styling that the Mini doesn’t, and I think AWD would be just the ticket to ramp up those sales. Who wouldn’t want to cruise around battering Minis in their very own tiny little rally car? Sales of the C30 are less than impressive compared to its rivals. The base price of a C30 is around $25,500, with the sportier R-design models clocking in at $27,850 on up, and the Polestar featured here wears a sticker price of $34,895. That’s a lot to pay for a compact car, and part of why sales aren’t going so well may be that people just don’t feel like they’re getting enough of a show for their money, so sales slump. The upswing is that as time passes, the C30 will be more rare and thus, more sought after by people looking to stock a collection with interesting little cars. In the meantime though, it’s still a decent machine, it’s just that it may be headed the way of the dinosaurs if it doesn’t find its niche.

The C30 Polestar is an unusual little car that’s not too popular, and it doesn’t seem to have a defined goal in mind for who should buy it and why. It’s like Blue Moon ice cream in that way. You don’t see it around all that often, it’s a bit strange, and you’re not quite sure what it is or why you like it… but it’s good.

Like · · Promote · Share

Dodge Ram Daytona -original post date 4/20/2013

 

Keeping with the truck theme started yesterday, today I present the Dodge Ram Daytona I spotted in the grocery store parking lot a week or two ago. This is probably a 2005 model or some year close to it, and these days, you can't buy a Dodge Ram truck, just a Ram truck -but it's still made and sold by the Chrysler Group. These trucks are named for the ram hood ornament that first adorned the front end of Dodge vehicles back in 1933.

The Daytona was a special package that was introduced in 2005 and could be had at a starting price of around $32,000 for a very base 2 wheel drive version, with more money added on top to include things like 4x4. It featured a 5.7L Hemi V8 good for 345 HP and 375 lb ft of torque. There were some body work features that went with the Daytona package, including 20" chrome wheels, an SRT-10 hood with non-fuctioning hood scoop, a Borla dual exhaust, matte black body striping, and an 11" spoiler mounted on the back end of the truck reminiscent of the '69 Dodge Charger Daytona with its huge rear wing. The color shown here is called "Go Mango".

Remember back to when I was listing the outward features of this truck and got to the "SRT-10" hood? That's a bit that the Ram Daytona borrowed from its big brother, the SRT-10 Ram that debuted in 2004 featuring an 8.3L Viper V10 engine (the same as in the Dodge Viper, as you may have guessed), 500 HP, 525 lb ft of torque, 22" wheels, and the distinction of being the world's fastest production truck. I haven't seen one of these trucks recently, or you'd be seeing photos of it instead of this Daytona.

But why do this to a truck? Aren't trucks supposed to be used for work, and to haul stuff around? Of course, but that doesn't mean they can't look pretty and go fast while doing it. This is what is called a sport truck. It's a truck for people who want, and maybe even need the utility of a pickup truck, but aren't as interested in off-road capability as they are in being able to do burn-outs on pavement. So, while some truck people may poo-pooh these vehicles as pretty little incompetent trucks, and while sports car people may similarly dislike them for being hulking powerhouses lacking in grace, neither group really understands the point of the sport truck. It's not for them; it's for sport truck people... and really, why cant we all just get along?

You'll notice on the 2nd photo that this truck does not have the spoiler it's supposed to have. It would seem that the owner of this truck removed the spoiler for the sake of added functionality. So you see, even among sport truck people, there are those who will make compromises for utility.

Like · · Promote · Share

Silverado Uh Oh! -original post date 4/19/2013

 

Car Du Jour:
...Is actually a truck today. A couple of trucks really. The first photo is of an in tact early to mid 1990's Chevy 1500 pickup truck -the second and third photos are also -though it's quite hard to tell, isn't it? We'll get into how the 1500 pick up ended up in so many pieces in just a moment. First, some info about the Chevy 1500.

I'm going to estimate these two trucks are about 1992 models or somewhere close. There were three packages you could get for your 1500 truck in those days. The base model, the Scottsdale, and the Silverado. All came with a 4.6L V6 engine with options to upgrade to a 5.0L V8, a 5.7L V8, or a 6.2L diesel V8. For today's specs, we'll stick with the standard V6, which produced 160 HP and 235 lb ft of torque.

These days, the 1500 is just called the Silverado, and they have different designations for the trim packages. 1500 means that it's a half-ton truck, 2500 will bring you into heavy-duty work truck land, and 3500 on up gets tougher and tougher for hauling and working.

Silverado is a name that Chevy probably took from an unincorporated community in the Silverado Canyon, located in the Santa Ana mountains of California. Nowadays, the site where the community was is a historical landmark, and in the mid 1980's, there was even a Lawrence Kasdan Western named for it. The name comes from a kind of Spanglish saying that's a combination of "silver" and "El Dorado". It's supposed to designate the area as a good spot to mine for silver.... and it was just such a place.

So, the Chevy Silverado is named after a place where people used to go to scrounge about for loot -which is ironic, because the Chevy Silverado 1500 featured in the 2nd and 3rd photos here was used for exactly the same thing.

A few weeks ago, I was helping my sister with her work on the Gatsby mansion she purchased not too long ago and we noticed the bunch of debris (pictured in the 2nd photo) that had appeared overnight along the secluded road that backs up to a ravine at the edge of Wirth Park. Because it was an eyesore and it was spilling into the street, we walked over to check it out. I took some photos and sent them in to 311 using their app, which was rendered virtually useless when the administrators of the app "upgraded" it and removed the "other" designation that lets you report anything that's not graffiti or a parking problem. I just checked it off as graffiti because that was the only way I could make it work. After that, we set about picking up the littered stuff and placing it into her dumpster.

Immediately, I realized we were gathering up bits and pieces of a Chevy pick up truck (extended cab, even -as the two rear glass side panels were both out there and in tact). We assumed we were dealing with the remnants of a truck that had been stolen and stripped, the plastic bits dumped because they had little scrap value. I saw more stuff that had tumbled down the ravine, but it's tall grass, weeds, and burrs all the way downhill, so I didn't venture further to check it out. In the process of cleaning up, we did find some paperwork with a name and date of birth, along with other personal information and an expired driver's license belonging to a specific person, and we dropped that off at the police precinct afterward to let them know about it. The officer at the desk seemed less than interested in what we brought, and I suspect he probably chucked it into the trash bin as soon as we left. Oh well, we gave it the old college try.

The next day, my sister's neighbor ventured down the ravine to see what other truck parts had been dumped and discovered that there weren't just truck pieces to be found, but a stolen and looted cash machine as well. The police came out and retrieved the ATM from the ravine, and the neighbor did mention what my sister and I had found and cleaned up the day previous, but there was never any follow up with either of us, so I'm not sure those pieces ever got put together.

Most likely, what happened was the Silverado found in pieces was stolen and used in one of those ATM thefts where the thieves crash a truck through the wall of a closed convenience store and hook a tow cable to the ATM to drag it away. The whole mess of truck and cash machine was likely parked in the garage of one of any number of vacant properties and stripped of anything of value before the evidence was dumped in the ravine near Wirth park for us to discover. Who knows how much loot was had through the use and abuse of the stripped Silverado, but the "prospectors" who used it certainly belong in jail for theft of the truck, theft of the ATM, and littering. Shame that a perfectly good old truck had to get mangled so some dirt-bags could avoid having to get a job and work for their money like everybody else in the world.

Hyundai HCD-14 Genesis Concept -original post date 4/18/2013

 

Featured today is the Hyundai HCD-14 Genesis Concept I saw at the Detroit Auto Show. I've decided to talk about this car today because yesterday, I used the gift card Hyundai sent me to pick up a new ipad with retina display. Aside from the extra I spent on a replacement plan should I happen to drop or damage the device, it was free thanks to Hyundai's generous gift. Yes, my attention can be bought.. and just in case anybody out there is feeling like giving me free cool stuff in exchange for turning my little car du jour postings their way, I could sure use a Boss 302 Mustang -just sayin'.

Anywho.. Thanks to Hyundai for the gift card, and thus the free ipad. Now, let's get down to business!

I want to start out by stating again that this is a concept car. It's not likely to ever be mass produced, though some ideas and features of it will likely make their way into upcoming versions of the Hyundai Genesis, which is the Korean car manufacturer's premium sports sedan -not to be confused with the bigger flagship sedan the company makes called the Equus. This concept has all kinds of electronic features like eye tracking technology among other things, but when I looked at it, I was with a panel of other car enthusiasts and we were mostly concerned with its outward appearance. That said, I will take a moment to give you some power specs.

The HCD-14, for all its sophistication and space-age stuff didn't blow a whole bunch of money on making some new engine for its power source.. mostly because it didn't have to. Hyundai used their 5.0 TAU V8 (the same one already used in the Equus) coupled with an 8 speed automatic transmission to supply their rear-wheel-drive sport sedan concept with 429HP and 376 lb ft of torque. This is a fast car.

But the styling? Well, it's a concept, so risks could be taken with it. When I was in Detroit, I remember the group taking a vote by show of hands over who liked the car overall and who didn't. I believe I was the only one, or possibly one of two in the group who gave a positive response. It's not because I think this is a particularly beautiful piece of design work. This is, however, as stunning car with a lot of interesting components.

First thing I noticed was the wheels, infused with carbon fiber. There were a lot of cars at the show that featured carbon fiber in their wheels, so this wasn't anything spectacular, though I bet if they offer it as a package, it won't be cheap. Carbon fiber is a great way to add strength to a design while enhancing the look and reducing the weight. It's a fantastic material that you'll see on concept cars and high end vehicles as well as some pricey aftermarket upgrades to regular cars. As time goes on, and more efficient production techniques become available, the price of this type of thing should drop to the point where it won't be too out of the ordinary to see carbon fiber features on a car that's, well... ordinary. For now, it's a pricey material that says to the world, "look at this.. my wheels cost more than your entire car".

What I noticed second about this car is the fact that there is no B-pillar. The B-pillar is the structural component of the vehicle between the front passenger area and the back passenger area as you look at the car in profile. It's essentially a pillar that goes from floor to roof behind the driver's seat. The A pillar is your windshield support that goes from the base of the windscreen to the roof of the car, and the C pillar is behind the rear passenger area -usually the supports along the side of the rear window.. unless it's a wagon or suv of some kind that extends the passenger compartment all the way to the back of the vehicle, ending in what's then the D pillar.

So, this car goes from A to C with no B in between. But what are the rear passenger doors attached to then? The C pillar. The front doors of the HCD-14 open like you'd expect, but the rear doors are hinged backwards, opening opposite of the front in what's referred to as a "suicide door" arrangement. So, if you open both doors of the car, it's just a wide open space that holds the seats and all the goodies inside. This isn't anything new, mind you. 1960's era Lincoln Continental sedans and four-door drop tops featured a lack of B pillar and suicide doors -in fact, one such vehicle was what President Kennedy was riding in when he met his demise.

Suicide doors are called such for a reason -though car makers will try to make them seem like a good idea by sometimes referring to them as "coach doors", "rear access doors", or "freestyle doors". In the time before seat belt use was prevalent, and when cars didn't have the tight fit and finish that they tend to have today, a person whipping along in a car with suicide doors who took a corner too fast ran the risk of having the door fly open on them, after which they would probably fall right out of the car. Unlike front hinged doors, where the air pressure of forward movement helps to keep them closed, a suicide door reacts just the opposite. Also, it's a bit of a pain to deal with these things, because there's usually an order in which the doors need to close for them to latch properly, which means you have to probably make sure the rear passenger is out and has shut the door before the front passenger or driver can shut theirs. Sounds like not a big deal, but remember, it's the little annoying things that take up that extra second or two and fill the time with frustration that can ruin car ownership for people.

There were some who appreciated suicide doors, though. Gangsters of the 1930's seemed to favor them for the ease at which one could shove a person out of the moving vehicle. It probably also works better for getting people into the vehicle, so one could see an advantage for use as a taxi or even a police vehicle for loading and unloading rear passengers.

But the lack of B pillar also compromises safety for the people inside. You see, that pillar lends rigidity and support to the vehicle. In a T-bone accident scenario, you want that B-pillar there between you and the grill of the car that just hit you.

The HCD-14 also sports a sloping roofline, reminiscent to me, of a Mercedes CLS 550, which is also a high end sport sedan with some interesting qualities that include pillarless doors -meaning there's no metal surround framing the side glass.

The styling of the Hyundai shows off undulating sheet metal work that's punctuated by bold and distinct lines at various points including the beltline (the line that runs along the sides of the car, from the front fenders, along the bottom of the side glass and to the back of the car) and some pronounced folds to mark a shift in the plane of the sheet metal as it takes on a new facet to lend shape to the rear fascia around the trunk and tail lights, a crease on either side of the hood that creates an aerodynamically charged streak from each headlight back to the outer edges of the windscreen, and the transitions from the front fenders that wrap around under the headlights and lead into a plane that seems to push out the grill of the car to a prominent "in your face" position. The grill has a certain bug-zapper quality to it that I don't find particularly aesthetically pleasing -though I'd definitely feel menaced by its presence if I was tooling around in, say, a VW bug and saw this thing blaze up behind me in my rear view mirror.

The way the sheet metal work drapes off the car is what I find problematic as it nears the ground. Along the sides between the wheels, they've scooped into the form, causing it to flare out along the bottom, but the front and rear fascias both feel a bit like you're looking at a sculpture that's lost its plinth. Even the work on the sides of the car feels like it's unfinished along its bottom edge -as if it's a sheet that's been draped over the form and is just hanging there. Hyundai has tried to add some resolution at the front and back by incorporating what I can best describe as squashed down hexagon shaped features, but I don't think they accomplish the goal of finishing the car's ground effects. The HCD-14 is a car that's all dressed up to go out, but doesn't realize that its slip is hanging out from under its skirt. Hem it up, Hyundai.

So, its aesthetics and features are not all that original or ground breaking, its engine isn't some new whoop-dee-do creation, and if you get T-boned while driving it, you'll probably die... But this is still a cool car. Why? Because it's synergistic. Taken apart bit by bit, it's not so impressive, but when you take all the work, all the risks, and all the styling bits together, you have something that's more than what you started with. It's striking but not outlandish, eminent but not over-inflated, a bit unfinished feeling, but hey, it's a concept car... and whatever else you think about it, this is a car you wouldn't mistake for any other you see on the road. If Hyundai wants to push ahead with their mission of improving their stance in terms of sales and perception without breaking off a separate luxury division, this car, or something quite similar to it will probably be the best weapon with which to accomplish that goal.

 

1928 Dodge Victory 6 -original post date 4/17/2013

 

Here we have a 1928 Dodge Victory 6... made by the Dodge Brothers Company. This was the last model year of Dodge brother Dodges before it was bought out by Walter Chrysler in the same year for $170 million. At that time, Dodge was owned by Dillon, Read & Company, who bought out the original Dodge Brothers company from the family heirs three years prior in 1925 for $146 million.
This little beauty is sitting in the front show room of Ellingson Classic Car sales in Rogers, MN (formerly Ellingson car museum). This car has a 208 cubic inch (3.4L) in-line 6 cylinder engine that makes 58HP. There were just under 150,000 of these cars made during their production run, and I think at this point, it's safe to say that most of those didn't survive as long or as well as this example has.
I don't think this one is actually for sale, as I couldn't find a price posted on it, and it wasn't listed in the price list they gave me. Brand new back in 1928, though, one of these would have set you back almost $1,100.
What's cool about this car is that even though it's completely elderly and not very powerful, it can hold its own in terms of styling. In a way, it was actually ahead of its time. Pull up next to a tinted-out Escalade with a stereo that's shaking the nuts and bolts right of the car and hold your head high. I promise that 99 times out of 100, you're rolling on bigger rims than that beast next to you. That's right. The Victory 6 is rolling on 29" rims. Time to honk that horn to celebrate petty one-upmanship -Ah-oooh-gah! Granted the wheels are wooden, but still, they're bigger than most of the outlandishly sized aftermarket crap people bolt onto their cars now.
Here's something else interesting. I was talking to a guy at Ellingson who just happened to have an old Nash from around this same era, complete with wood wheels. Wanna guess what type of upkeep you have to do on those things? According to the person I spoke to, the owners manual for his Nash recommends driving into a shallow creek about once a week, letting the wheels soak for 15 minutes, then pulling ahead a couple feet to do it again until all the spokes are good and soggy. -Well, those were certainly less litigious times, when companies could advise their customers to drive cars into bodies of water without going bankrupt from the legal action that would ensue after some hapless motorist mistakes a raging river or white water rapids for a good place to perform wheel maintenance. One does wonder if this creek driving business had any influence on the later development of the part boat, mostly car contraption known as the Amphicar. I know Ellingson used to have one of those, but I think they sold it.