We reviewed the Flxible Clipper back in Feb 2016, but it’s such an iconic design, I thought it would be worth another look.  Specifically, let’s dive into the variations and changes Flx made during the Clipper’s nearly 30 year production run.

Clipper Gen 1.  While Flxible had been building front-engined buses using the Clipper name for several years, in 1938 they introduced their first rear-engined model with an all steel semi-monocoque body.  It was 27 feet long and could seat 29 passengers.  In 1939, Flx added another row and overall length grew to 30 feet.  Power was supplied by a 320 cubic inch Buick straight-eight engine – a powertrain that would remain a popular choice.  Note the lack of the familiar engine cooling duct on the back of the roof and the straight rectangular windows.

In 1941, more of the recognizable Clipper shape began to appear – forwarded-canted windows replaced the old straight designs, and the cowling duct was added to the rear of the roof to improve engine cooling.  Two broad steel bands were also added to the front.  Flx continued to produce these during the war for government use and then returned to commercial sales in 1945.

In late 1946, Flx updated the Clipper to the version most people recognize today – dual headlights with a wrap around front windshield, and the “Flxible” badge added underneath.  Three lengths were offered; a 27 foot model seating 29, 30 footer holding 33, and a larger 35 foot version seating 37.  It proved a popular seller in the vibrant post-war market, and over 2,000 were produced over a four year production run.

Clipper Gen 2 – Visicoach.  From 1950 – 56, Flx produced an update to the Clipper called the Visicoach.  Larger side windows, similar to ones used on GM’s 4104, Highway Traveler coach were incorporated, along with a one foot stretch in the engine bay, to allow for more powertrain options.  Flx had been offering Fageol gas and propane engines as options and in 1953, bought the company outright.  Engines were mostly the Buick straight eight and these Fageol models, with the occasional Hercules or Waukesha gas straight six, or Cummins diesel.  The Buick straight-eight, which by 1954 had been supplanted by the “Nailhead” V8 in the division’s cars, was still manufactured and continued as an option.  Many attribute this to the fact that GM Vice President Charles Kettering sat on the Flxible Board, and encouraged GM support to the company.

,

Clipper Gen 3 – Early Starliner.  In 1957, the Starliner model replaced the Visicoach.  Two major updates were incorporated; one you could see, one you couldn’t.  To perhaps give the bus a more modern, bi-level appearance, Flx put a ten inch rise in the roof in the center of the coach.  While it did increase headroom and visibility, it did not affect the seating arrangement which was still on one level.  Underneath, Flx finally updated the old leaf spring suspension with a version of BF Goodrich’s “Torsilastic” torsion bars, then in use on its VL 100 VistaLiner model.

Clipper Gen 4 – Later Starliner.  The roof “eyebrow” was not popular with operators, and Flx went back to a flat roof in 1960.  From then until 1967, only 200 or so Clippers left the factory.  The 60’s were all about modern change – a “New Look” – and to 60’s bus passengers, Clippers looked anything but modern.

Our readers in Australia and New Zealand may recognize these Clippers; between 1950 and 1960, Ansair Pty Ltd of Melbourne produced 131 under license.  They typically were powered by a 7.4 litre Leyland diesel, though Cummins or Deutz diesels were available also.

I still think they’re just a timeless beautiful design.

I’m not familiar with this Clipper though – perhaps it’s a one-off…

More Info:

Flixible Owners International Club

Flxible Clipper Club of Australia

Isn’t it interesting that as we get older, our perspective evolves regarding what makes a car “great.”  I can remember as a teenager and into my twenties (late 1960’s to 70’s), it was all about acceleration – 0 to 60.  I lusted for a 428 Cobra Jet Mustang or Torino, though I never was able to own one.  In my later twenties and thirties,  I matured a little and went for sports cars – this time I was able to buy a 1977 Nissan JDM Fairlady – a 240Z.  I still wish I had that car.  Then came marriage and a family and a string of sedans and minivans.  We’ve owned a Toyota Estima/Previa for twenty years – currently on our third one, though with the kids now grown, it will soon be replaced.  Several years ago in my late fifties, acceleration, sportiness, practicality, were still automotive virtues I desired, but another one was now at the top of the list – comfort for my ever expanding backside.  With that in mind, I took a trip down to the nearby Volvo dealership…

I had always admired Volvo’s, but never owned one; primarily because they were out of my price range, and other than the P1800 coupe, they didn’t inspire much passion.  But the small Volvo C30 coupe had a funky vibe to it, and channeled a little of the P1800 ES in it’s design.  I’ve owned one now for eight years – and plan on keeping it – for a variety of reasons, but primarily because I love the seats.

Volvo’s reputation for excellent seats is well founded.  I have never sat in a vehicle with seats so comfortable.  The padding is just right, and it’s perfectly contoured – every portion of my upper legs and back come in contact with the seat.  The old metaphor of “like falling into a baseball glove” is quite accurate.  In other vehicles, I get fairly stiff after a two hour drive – I’ve done six hour stints in the Volvo and step out fresh as a daisy.

There’s one other thing that I’ve been impressed with – look under the seats of most cars and you’ll see two seat tracks and maybe some wiring.  Look under a Volvo seat and you’ll see some sophisticated engineering.  For several years, Volvo has been equipping its cars with its Whiplash Protection System (WHIPS) – that cradles the occupant by moving the seat downward and back in a rear-end collision.  It’s an innovative safety feature that few other manufacturers have yet to copy.

So, even if you’re not a Volvo fan, as a automotive enthusiast, I’d recommend a trip down to the Volvo dealer if one is nearby – just to check out the seats.  I assure you your backside will thank you…

We’ve reviewed electric-powered buses several times over the past couple of years; in Apr 17 we looked at the Proterra electric coach, and in Oct 16 when we reviewed possible mass transit future motive trends.  Now in mid-2019, almost every bus manufacturer has an electric model in their product line.  China is far out in front of other regions in transitioning their urban transit bus fleets to electrics, but the US and Europe are striving to catch up.  One example – in 2020, a new electric bus will transport passengers down the historic Avenue des Champs-Élysées in Paris – the Alstom Aptis…

Alstom SA is a large French multinational company most known for its integrated railway systems and technology; both high-speed trains and urban metro models.  Alstom’s TGV currently holds the world record for wheeled trains set in 2007 when it reached 574.8 km/h (357.2 mph).  The Aptis is the company’s first bus, and it draws from Alstom’s deep experience with trams and other small tracked carriages.

In comparison to other electric buses, it has some unique qualities.  First is its appearance – it’s pretty easy to tell that the manufacturer of this bus has experience with trains and trams.  It appears tram-like and utterly functional – a square box with the wheels pushed out to the four corners to maximize interior space.  Contrary to its appearance, it is not bi-directional – in the picture above the front is on the right and the rear to the left.

Length is 12 meters, with width 2.5.  To ensure a low floor height, the batteries and control mechanisms are all located on the roof – which makes the coach top-heavy.  The suspension has been strengthened and is dynamically controlled to ensure stability.

Electric motors are located at each wheel, which allows both axles to steer.  At higher speeds, the rear wheels counter-steer to reduce the turning radius, and at lower speeds can turn in the same direction allowing the bus to “crab” into tight spots.

Volvo Electric Bus at High Capacity Pantograph Charger

Battery range is less than some other models, to include the Proterra – 200 KM (124 miles) but a recharge can be done at route end-stations via an overhead high capacity pantograph in six minutes.  Alstom is working on road embedded charging options also.

It’s definitely open and airy – maybe a little too much for me – like sitting in a moving storefront window…

The Paris Public Transport operator, RATP, has ordered 50.  The Aptis will no doubt be extremely efficient and functional – but in terms of style, it may not add much appeal to the beautiful streets of Paris…

CC readers know our site’s Founder has enjoyed outfitting his Promaster Van into a nice, cozy, small recreational vehicle – but we also know he has larger ambitions…

And here it is Paul – I’m not sure if it’s for sale or for how much, but it needs your talents…

We’ve looked at a number of buses our parents and grandparents could have toured Western Europe in during their  vacations in the 1950’s and 60’s; the Krupp SWO 480, Mercedes-Benz O 6600 H and O 321 H, Pegaso Z 403, and Krauss-Maffei KML 110.  Let’s review a bus from this same time period from the prolific German coach manufacturer Neoplan – the NH series, or “Hamburg”.

Neoplan SH 6

Neoplan was established in 1935 by owner and founder Gottlob Auwärter – the company built mostly coach bodies that went over an existing OEM truck chassis.  In 1953 Auwärter moved from just being a coach builder to a full manufacturer when he designed his own rear-engined semi-monocoque bus – the SH series.  The SH series was fairly popular with operators but Auwärter wanted something much more innovative and modern – a product that would leapfrog his competitors in style and efficiency.

Hamburg Prototype

NH 12

Fortunately, Auwärter had sent his son, Albrecht, to Hamburg University to study engineering.  There, Albrecht met a Swiss student named Bob Lee.  Both had an interest in buses and together, they submitted a design for a new type of coach as their graduation dissertation.  Albrecht then soon presented these plans to his father, who approved it for production in 1961.  And that’s how the NH series received it’s nickname – the Hamburg…

Auwärter’s desire to leapfrog his competitors was expressed in three areas; first, the Hamburg differed from the then current “rounded” styling in vogue – it was more upright and square, which maximized interior space.  Second, it was the first European bus to incorporate an aircraft-style ventilation system, with individual, controllable vents above each seat row.  Lastly, it had an elevated seating area (higher than the driver), which allowed for larger luggage/storage bays.

NH 6

NH 14

Sales immediately took off – and the Hamburg was made in a wide variety of sizes; six, eight, ten, twelve, fourteen and sixteen row variants were produced.  The series number after “NH” designates the number of seat rows.

As we’ve seen with other successful intercity coaches, an urban transit model was spun off the platform – the Hamburg transit bus/airporter was built from 1969 – 72.

Engines could be provided by any of the major manufacturers, though Mercedes and Henschel inline six cylinder diesels seemed to be the most popular.  Engine orientation was longitudinal.

Other manufacturers soon copied the Hamburg and by the early 1970’s, Neoplan was looking at a successor.  In 1974, the last Hamburg came down the line – replaced by the Jetliner – the subject of an upcoming post…

Both Albrecht and Lee joined Neoplan after graduating from Hamburg University.  Albrecht took over management of the company from his father in 1965, and Bob Lee later became head of Engineering and Design, Vice President, and ultimately Chairman of the Board.  Neoplan was integrated into the MAN Group in 2001.

CC readers may remember this tidy mid-60’s Mazda Porter minicar we reviewed some three years ago.  I strolled by the same lot here in Tokyo this past weekend just to see if it was still there – it was.  Unfortunately, it looks like whoever was giving it a wipe down every couple weeks has moved on – and it now has an abandoned car notice on the windshield.  I was really hoping someone would have pulled it out and got it back on the road again.  What really surprised me though was another car that’s taken up residence nearby.

You really can’t get too much farther on the automotive spectrum from the diminutive Porter to this Rolls Royce Silver Spur.  What a shame, this elegant steed has certainly seen better days.

The Silver Spur was the long wheelbase version of the Silver Spirit – they were manufactured in four series (Marks) between 1980 and 1999.  The picture above shows the longer rear door and window.

1987 Silver Spur – Picture found on internet

There was very little change in the exterior throughout the production run, so it’s hard to tell a specific year for this one.  Given the black bumpers, it’s likely a Mark I or II.  I found a picture of a 1987 model with the exact same paint, vinyl roof, and colored hubcaps so I’ll make an educated guess and say it’s a Mark I built between 1980-89.

These Silver Spurs had the spring-loaded retractable “Spirit of Ecstasy” mascot on the front radiator; if it is disturbed, it would retract into the radiator shell.  Current models also have this, but it’s a much more complex electric motor driven system – that’s a $3157 option.   I really wanted to try that, but thought any “hands on” would likely invite a visit from the local gendarme.  Trying to explain to the officers that I’m not a memento thief, just a Curbside Classic contributor would be tough with my limited Japanese.

These Silver Spurs and and Silver Spirits came with a hydropneumatic self-levelling suspension, modified with a Girling automatic hydraulic ride height control system and gas-charged shock absorbers.  One can only imagine what it would cost to fix a problem with all that.  Perhaps that’s why it was abandoned here.

Given parts and labor are three times more expensive here in Japan than in the US or Europe, it’s doubtful this Roller will ever see the road again – darn shame…

From the post-war period, up until the later 1950’s, coach builders and manufacturers in the UK were enthused with curves – bus design incorporated semi-elliptical and elliptical shapes along the sides, the roof, even the front.  Some designs didn’t wear this curvy look well – others were fairly distinctive.  This AEC Regal IV chassis with a Seagull body by Burlingham I thought fell into the latter group.

Above are several examples of curvy post-war UK buses…

AEC, or Associated Equipment Company, was a prolific manufacturer of mostly urban transit buses in the UK from 1909 to 1979.  Their most famous product was the iconic Routemaster double decker – the classic red London Bus.  But the company also made single floor models – and the Regal was one of its most popular.

Bedford Val with Plaxton Panorama Coachwork

While still true today, the UK in the post-war period was chock full of coach builders – Duple, Plaxton, and Thomas Harrington were some of the more widely known.  These coach builders would take a basic chassis procured from a manufacturer and fit it with a body that best met the customer’s operational requirements and/or aesthetic desires.  Fellow CC Contributor and good friend Roger Carr said it best – during this period you had to use two names to accurately identify a UK coach.

The Regal IV was made from 1949 to 1960 – and would typically seat 41 passengers.  Length was a touch over nine meters and width 2.2.  It was somewhat unique in that it had an underfloor, mid-mounted “lay-down” engine – an AEC 9.6-litre AH590 in-line diesel six cylinder with 120 hp an 430 ft lbs of torque.  This engine in a vertical orientation was also used in the Routemaster.  Quick note on photo above – this coach was likely used to transport US military children from their off-base homes to on-base schools – DODDS stands for Dept of Defense Dependent Schools.

With an initial glance, one wonders if the floor and seats curved in an elliptical fashion, matching the windows – they didn’t, the floor remained mostly flat.

The Regal came with coachwork by other builders, some being much more traditional.

The Burlingham Seagull body could also go over a Leyland chassis – this being a late 50’s Leyland Tiger Cub.

In 1994, the Burlingham Seagull body came in second in the Classic Bus reader poll to find the most attractive UK coach body style of all time.  Obviously, appearance is a matter of taste, but this coach certainly was both popular and distinctive – I like it.

Along the route of our Sunday weekly walk here in Tokyo is a small transport company – they have several 29 pax Toyota Coaster mini-buses, a couple of Estima vans, and about five hearses.  Last weekend they had a new model parked outside – I was sort of taken aback when I first saw it – as I’ll explain below…

This hearse or “Funeral Car” as they’re referred to here in Japan, is based on the current JDM Nissan Fuga; the Infiniti Q70 in the US.  This is the first time I’ve seen a Fuga converted to a funeral car.  Most are based on either the Lincoln Town Car or Cadillac Fleetwood/DeVille/XTS.

The more popular JDM model is the Toyota Crown.

You’ve probably seen pictures of these ornate, Buddhist-themed funeral cars in Japan – at least in our section of Tokyo, you don’t see them as frequently these days.

Several years ago, one of the all-time great Yokozuna (champion) of Sumo, Chiyonofuji, passed away – and he was transported in a regular funeral car rather than the more ornate version.  Just another tradition that seems to be slipping away.

As I mentioned above, I did a double-take when I saw this – the Fuga’s taunt, “pulled-down”, curvy body just seems to clash somewhat with the square back-end, at least in my eyes.

As the previous owner of two Lincoln Coupes (a 1967 and a 1978), I’ve already told my wife that I’ll only be driven to my “final resting place” in a Lincoln – though it’s not like I’ll be able to tell…

Add’l Posts:

CC-Outtake-yasuraka-ni-nemure-rest-in-peace/

CC-Outtake/dealer-outtakes-the-curious-cars-of-motorman-imports/

As we saw in our post on the NH series “Hamburg” bus, Neoplan was a German coach manufacturer on the move in the 1960’s – 1990’s.  Always looking to innovate, it wanted to push the boundaries, or perhaps better said, the dimensions of the then current bus restrictions with regard to size and length in Europe.  The vehicle that helped accomplish that goal was the double-decker, four-axle, 15 meter (length) Megaliner bus.

While the Megaliner was introduced in 1990, it was not Neoplan’s first 15 meter (49.2 feet) four-axle model.  While European regulations at the time limited single body (non-articulated) bus length to 12 meters, Neoplan built a four-axle 15 meter version of its double decker Skyliner model for a Chilean customer in 1975.  It proved popular in Chile and in other South American countries, in addition to Saudi Arabia, Libya, Turkey, and other areas with less restrictive size limits.

Through the 70’s and 80’s, Neoplan continued to sell four-axle 15 meter versions of their Skyliner and Cityliner models in countries where permitted – but really wanted access to the larger and more lucrative European market.

So, in 1990 they built the Megaliner.  The Megaliner was part of a strategy to lobby German and EU officials to extend the 12 meter limit to 15 meters.  Neoplan offered several operators cut-rate prices on the Megaliner, which could be driven on European roads on a limited basis with a special permit, giving the public a preview and also  showing it could be operated safely.  At the same time, the company began the arduous process of petitioning for a change in the EU’s bus length regulation.

As with any bureaucracy, it took some time, but in 1993, both Germany and the EU approved a change allowing single bodied dual-axle 15 meter coaches – but with some stipulations; the interval between the center of the front and rear axles had to be at least 4 meters, and all four axles had to be steerable.

The Megaliner was all set and ready to go – besides being 15 meters long, it was 4 meters (13.1 ft) high and 2.5 meters (8.3 ft) wide.  It could seat 50 passengers on the upper level and 40 on the lower.  Engines were mostly the big Mercedes OM 442 LA 15.1 litre (921 cu in) twin turbocharged V8 diesel with an output of 525 hp and 1425 ft lbs of torque.  In addition, engines from MAN and Scania were also offered.  The transmission was a ZF 8S-180 eight speed manual.

With the basic Megaliner launched, Neoplan then introduced two variations.  The first was the Megaspace – a Megaliner with the lower seating level converted to a galley and lounge.

The Megashuttle was a Megaliner built for high-volume urban transit use – 55 seats on the upper level and 45 below, with standing space for another 80.

Scania K380 (14 Meter)

As the new century approached, motor coach regulations were again changing – several manufacturers had successfully petitioned the EU to permit 14 meter (45.9 ft) length buses with a single front axle, given they met axle loading standards.  Obviously, a single front axle bus is a lot less complex and less costly than a tandem axle version.

With sales decreasing, Neoplan ceased marketing the Megaliner in 2000 and the last one was built in 2003.  In 2008, one of these Megaliners operated in Japan by Japan Railways caught fire – all passengers were evacuated but the bus completely burned.  Approximately one year later, another Megaliner caught fire between Tokyo and Osaka – again everyone was evacuated – but the remaining Megaliners in use were all pulled from service.

As was mentioned in the previous post, Neoplan was integrated into the MAN Group in 2001 – their largest current model is the Skyliner (14 X 4 X 2.5 meters).

I recently came across this trio at a house near ours in suburban Tokyo.  It’s certainly an eclectic bunch – two luxury models from two continents and a minicar that could fit in the trunk of the other two.  Let’s take a look at what we have…

The Cadillac appears to be a 1997-99 Deville – a base version, and not the upmarket and more powerful Concours model as it lacks the Cadillac crest in the center of the grille.

These base versions came with the LD8 version of the Northstar V8, good for 275 hp and 300 ft lbs of torque.  Fairly pricey to fill up here in Japan where a gallon of gas is around $4.24.  At 209 inches in length, it’s 10 inches longer than its stablemate, the President.

The President is a real find – these were sold mostly to government or corporate fleets similar to the Toyota Century.  This third generation shared its platform with another JDM model – the Nissan Cima.  The Cima was also the basis for the 2002-06 US Infiniti Q45.

President

JDM Cima

They came with Nissan’s strong 4.5 L VK45DE V8, pushing out 276 hp (though unofficially closer to 300) and 333 ft lbs of twist.  The US Q45 version had 340 hp.

This cute little Daihatsu Copen “kei jidosha” coupe is a first gen model and given the collection of leaves and water stains on top, looks like it hasn’t been on the road in a while.

It has the 659 cc JB-DET twin-scroll turbo four cylinder, with a government mandated max 64 hp.

The owner obviously is fairly well-to-do – having just one of the larger cars would be a pretty expensive proposition here in Japan, given gas prices, road taxes and other fees, etc., which all go up as the exterior dimensions and engine size increase.

Hope he or she soon gives that Copen a much needed wash…

It’s been a couple years since we last perused the “Lemon Lot” here at the US military installation on the outskirts of Tokyo where I used to work.  For new readers, Lemon Lot is GI-speak for the Resale Area where outgoing personnel can sell their car, and incoming folks can pick one up.  This is the off-season as most US military folks “PCS” (Permanent Change of Station) in the summer, but there were about 14 cars during my last trip by – let’s look at a few…

Vans are always popular here, just like any suburb back in the States – here we have a 2003 JDM Toyota Voxy – a mid-sized van that comes with a 2.0L 1AZ-FSE four.  It has a sister model with a slightly different grille called the Noah.  This one has 122K kilometers, but looks well cared for – and being a Toyota, that’s means it’s hardly broken in.  Yours for $2800.

2006 Teana

2002 Laurel

Next up is a 2006 Nissan Teana – the Teana is built on the same platform as the Maxima and Altima, and comes with similar engines; a 2.0L four and two versions of Nissan’s VQ V6 – 2.3L and 3.5L.  This car replaced the Laurel and Cefiro – two cars I thought were much more attractive than the Teana.  The Teana always looked too generic and somewhat “droopy” to me.  Oh well, this one has 93K and can be yours for $2000.

Another van – this one a 2003 Nissan Presage.  The Presage is Nissan’s equivalent to Toyota’s Estima (Previa), and is a touch bigger than the Voxy – and comes with a 2.5L four or 3.5L V6.  This one has 92K, one year left on its two-year Japan Compulsory Insurance – and is priced at $1200, but with the added “or best offer” – the owner must have a plane to catch soon…

Here we have a 2006 kei-sized Subaru Stella – the Stella is Subaru’s “tall-boy” kei wagon similar to the Suzuki Wagon R.  But this is a Custom model with the supercharged 658cc EN07X four, putting out the government-limited max 64 hp for this class.  It has 65K and the owner says it has all maintenance records, a new Alpine stereo, recent oil/filter change, and new brake pads – $3000.

Next we have a 2004 Honda Edix.  This is an interesting model – it’s a six-seater, configured 3X3, similar to the Fiat Multipla.  The 3X3 seating means it’s wider than other models in its class, so they tend to stand out here in Japan.  Engines are both gas and diesel in the 1.7L to 2.2L range.  This one has 99K and the owner wants $2000.

Lastly here is a Gen 1 2006 Toyota Ractis.  In Toyota-ese, that’s an acronym for Run, Active, Space.  The Ractis is the follow-on to the Fun Cargo, and is a competitor to Honda’s Fit.  Both have below-floor rear seat storage giving a surprisingly large rear cargo area.  Our son has one similar to this and he loves it.  No mileage stated but the owner looks motivated – asking $1750 but “no reasonable offer refused.”

As you are aware from his posts, our current Leader Jim Klein visited Japan this month to attend the Tokyo Motor Show.  This past weekend he, our in-country JDM expert Tatra87, and I had our own small “CC Far East Meet-Up” in Shinjuku.  It was a very enjoyable night out that did not involve copious wine, women, or song – just tasty tempura, a few draft lagers, and a very spirited discussion of all things automotive.  Cheers Gentlemen – thank you for making the trek to Tokyo.

We’ve had some superb recent posts on the Toyota Crown, which hit me as strangely coincidental as I sit and watch  the current Netflix series “The Crown.”  CC effect I assume.  That series continues to be extremely popular and is now entering its third season.  The program focuses on the life of Queen Elizabeth II, from 1947 until the present – over sixty years.  I guess you could say I’ve had a somewhat similar experience with royalty, though mine didn’t involve the Windsors, only covered some thirty-five years, and came with four doors…

I’ve owned three generations of Toyota’s Crown – which other than the limited production Century, and the recent Lexus LS series, has always sat atop Toyota’s JDM model hierarchy.  The recent articles on the Crown addressed its history, so let me just offer some commentary on these three I’ve owned.  Unfortunately I don’t have any original pictures but did find several on the net that were very similar.

Crown MS 60 – Exactly like one I owned

MS 60 – Call Me Captain Ahab…

In 1981, with two years in the Air Force, I was assigned to Japan.  I had recently purchased a 1981 Olds Cutlass Supreme with – wait for it – the 350 diesel.  I could only ship it to Japan on my dime, and after checking on what would be required to get it registered (meet all Japan emissions and safety standards, etc.), decided it would be better to put it into storage.  So I arrived needing wheels.

I looked at the Lemon Lot on base and at several used car dealers off-base.  I quickly discovered that, at that time, JDM models had much shorter seat tracks – understandable given the then median height in Japan.  It was difficult finding something I could fit my 6’6″ frame into.  Finally after a week, I saw a curious looking vehicle at an off-base lot run by a retired GI – it loomed large against the background of smaller Corollas. Celicas, and Sunnies.

It was a 1974 Toyota Crown Super Saloon – model code MS 60.  In Japan, these MS 60’s were nicknamed “Kujira” which is Japanese for “whale”.  The picture above may help explain how it got that name.  This one had about 60K kilometers on the clock, no rust, good tires, nice paint, perfect interior, and two years of Japan Compulsory Insurance (JCI).  The 2.0 carburetored M-series inline six purred smoothly.  Price – $500.  It was at this time that I realized that the guy back at my previous base that told me “everything in Japan is expensive” must have only rode a bike.  The Crown served me well for three years, only needing oil changes and a battery.

Why did I sell it?  Well, I had the opportunity to buy a bright red 1976 Mazda Cosmo with the 13B rotary engine.  I had never owned a rotary before, so…sold the Crown to a buddy for $300.  I got my money’s worth…

Final Thought: Typical Toyota – comfortable, cheap to own, and absolutely reliable.  Throw in quirky styling and it was a real winner.

Ranking (Of three I’ve owned):  #2

MS 85 – Exactly like one I owned

MS 85 – The Snoozy Saloon…

After a few more cars, to include a beloved 1978 Nissan Fairlady Z, I received an assignment to Korea and knew taking the firm-riding, two-seat Z would probably be a bad idea.  An older guy on base was selling his 1978 Crown Royal Saloon – model code MS 85.

It was very similar to my previous one – with exception that the M-series six was now bumped up to 2.6 litres and was fuel injected.  It also had a more modern, much nicer interior compared to the ’74.  Price – $800.  I shipped it to Korea and for a year it floated down the gravel and pot-holed, poor Korean streets – a Queen among a sea of first gen Hyundai Ponies.  Just as importantly, as there were no Toyota dealers, and even few general mechanics, it never gave me a hint of trouble.

Why’d I sell it?  My next assignment was to Hawaii and even though it’s somewhat easier today, back then it would have cost a fortune to try to federalize and get registered.  Sold it to another GI for $600.  Got my money’s worth…

Final Thought: Another very comfortable, dead reliable Toyota.  But the exterior styling of this one was rather bland – so I had more respect for it than passion.

Ranking:  #3

S 140 – Exactly like one I owned

S 140 – The Royal Rocket…

In 2003 I returned to Japan, with a larger family and the need for two cars.  One was easy – we had a Toyota Previa van in the states and wouldn’t think of buying anything else.  While at an off-base lot looking at a first gen Previa (Estima), I noticed a nice looking older Crown nearby.  It was a 1992 Royal Saloon – model code S 140.  Though it was eleven years old, the body and interior looked brand new and it only had 40K on the odometer.  It also had the big 3.0 2JZ-GE DOHC normally aspirated straight six engine.  After a little negotiating, we left the lot with both a car and a van for $7000.

The other Crowns were all very well built, but I could sense the Lexus DNA in this one as soon as I stepped in and drove off – understandable given it shared the same platform as the Lexus GS 300 (called the Toyota Aristo in the home market).  It was smooth, impeccably put together, and powerful.  The advertised specs on this year’s Crown with the 2JZ-GE was 220 hp and 210 ft lbs of torque.  My seat of the pants meter said it made more than that.  That engine had power and torque all through the rev range – and it was turbine smooth.  I can understand why the twin-turbo versions are so highly regarded.

Why’d I sell it? Well, after three years, I saw a very nice 2002 Toyota Mark II with the 2.5 1JZ-FSE direct-injection engine.  Sold the Crown to another GI for $2000.  Got my…well, you know…

Final Thought: Smooth and fast – wish I’d kept it…

Ranking:  #1

2019 Toyota Crown

So, is my time with Japanese royalty over?  Maybe not.  For the past eight years I’ve owned a Volvo C30.  It’s entertaining to drive – rowing through the gears and hearing that unique five cylinder snarl – and I love the seats.  But I have to admit, the new 2019 Crown looks pretty enticing.  And I still occasionally peruse the used car websites for a clean, low-mileage S 140.

Related Posts:

Curbside Classic: 2002 Toyota Crown Comfort Super Deluxe G – Time For A Change

CC Capsule: Toyota Crown – Japanese Import Royalty

Curbside Classic: 1962-67 S40 Toyota Crown – The Generation Gap

Curbside Classic: 1980 Toyota Crown Super Saloon (S110) Hardtop Sedan – Forecourt Queen

Automotive History: Toyota S60/S70 Crown – Thunderwhale

CC Capsule: 1989 Toyota Crown (S 130) Super Deluxe – Conservatism On Four Wheels

In-Motion Classic: 1976 Toyota Crown (S80) Super Saloon – My Kingdom For A Crown

In the recent COAL article on my time with Japanese Royalty, I mentioned that I had purchased a 1978 Toyota Crown while in Japan and in 1985 shipped it to Korea for a one year military tour.  One reader had a question in the comments section regarding what it was like driving in Korea at that time – now almost thirty-five years ago.  Though I can rarely remember now what I had for lunch yesterday, thankfully anything automotive is still lodged firmly between the ears.  Here are my recollections of the “car scene” and driving in Korea during a much different time.

From an automotive perspective, South Korea has gone from the Jurassic Age to the Twenty First Century in what seems like only four decades.  While it tends to be forgotten today, prior to 1987, South Korea was effectively ruled by a military dictatorship – a full democratic government not emerging until 1988.  So during my time there in the mid-80’s, the country was very “controlled”, to include the automotive sector.  The government was trying hardest to support and prop-up local domestic car manufacturers, so import restrictions on foreign brands were very tight.  It was essentially a closed market – there were no Japanese models, no US brands, and only a handful of European makes that were driven by the very wealthy or those having a government connection.

What there were plenty of were Hyundais – mostly the Gen 1 Pony; South Korea’s first domestically engineered, mass-produced model (though with a lot of help from Austin, Mitsubishi, and Italdesign).  Ninety percent of the cars on the roads that I saw were these first generation Ponies, with most of them being taxi cabs.  Personal car ownership for even the middle class was still a decade off for most South Koreans.  They were pretty crude – I remember looking down the side of one of these Ponies and seeing more waves in the sheet metal than at Oahu’s North Shore…

Hyundai/Ford Cortina

Hyundai/Ford Granada

What were some of the other cars?  Surprisingly European Ford Mk IV Cortinas and Mk II Granadas.  Hyundai had signed a co-production agreement with Ford and they sent these models in knocked down kit form to be assembled in Korea.  As Dave Saunders points out in his excellent article, this partnership went back to 1967.  Hyundai sold the Cortina until 1982 and the Granada to 1985.

Mazda Familia/323

Mazda Luce/929

KIA was then separate from Hyundai and was perhaps the second most frequently seen brand.  The company didn’t have any domestically designed models – all of its cars were older model Mazdas.  Mazda evidently licensed or sold its old tooling to KIA for manufacturing in-country.  I remember in 1986 going for a walk one day and stumbling across a KIA dealer.  The dealership was new as the military government had only that year permitted KIA to again begin building cars – being restricted to only trucks the five years prior.  There were KIA versions of the compact Mazda 323 and the larger 929.  But what I remember most is that of the four cars on the showroom floor, all had multiple drip pans underneath them – and the pans weren’t empty.  As with the Pony, it was a reminder that Korean automotive production and assembly still had a way to go…

One of the other Korean brands I’d see frequently was Keowah/Dong-A, later called SsangYong.  Keowah had a co-production agreement with Jeep, and specialized in 4WD vehicles.  Its Korando (CJ 5/6/7/8) model was fairly popular – and I can understand why.  The base I was stationed at was in a rural section of southern Korea – most of the main, large streets were paved, however a majority of the secondary roads were gravel, with lots of dips, potholes, and ruts.  While it seemed to puzzle car reviewers in the U.S., I always understood why early Korean cars were noted for their very soft suspensions.

Daewoo Maepsy (Opel Kadett)

Export version Crown

There were a couple other brands but most were few and far between.  Daewoo had reorganized in 1983 and was slowly getting back into the car business selling several GM European models; mostly versions of the Opel Kadett and Rekord.  Surprisingly, I did see one other Crown – an MS 80 almost exactly like mine.  It belonged to a wealthy businessman in the town near the base – it differed slightly style-wise and was left-hand drive.  I assumed he imported it from Taiwan or Singapore.

G90

G70

Fast forward to today and I am utterly amazed and impressed at the speed and scale with which Korean manufacturers have caught, and even surpassed their former partners and competitors.  From building Ford products in knocked down kits, I now look at the Genesis G90 and think it would make the perfect Town Car, and the G70 a RWD Continental Lincoln wished it had.

Kudos to the Koreans – it makes you wonder what things will look like in another thirty-five years…

Age…they say it brings wisdom.  In my case, it’s brought a fading memory, expanded girth, and an inverse ratio of head hair to ear hair.  But it has done one thing; it’s allowed me to reassess some of the earlier judgments I made about vehicles in my younger, less informed days.  So how about you?  Was there a specific model that you absolutely hated when you first saw it, then realized later in life that you were completely wrong?  Here’s mine…

My formative automotive period was the ‘60s and early 70’s.  While I was a Ford guy, I was forced to admit GM’s beautiful designs, all styled under the supervision of Design VP Bill Mitchell, set the benchmark for everyone else.  The ‘63 Stingray, the ‘63 Riviera, the ‘66 Toronado were all standouts, but even more plebeian models – the ‘65 Impala for example, was and still is, drop-dead gorgeous.

So I was drawn to these crisply styled, beautifully proportioned models.  On the exact opposite end of the spectrum, was something older, still seen on the streets but mostly in the poorer sections of the city – the early ‘50’s Hudson Hornet.

The step-down Hudson – I think I wretched when I first saw one.  What was this thing that looked like an overturned bathtub, with a semi-enclosed body that sloped in the back, making it look like some Giant Cock Roach that escaped from Alamogordo?  It didn’t help that these were all at least ten years old and were rust-eaten, dented, and with fading paint.  I thought they were the ugliest thing to ever haunt a driveway.

Well, time does bring some fresh perspective and hopefully a little more maturity.  Once I outgrew my “nothing is any good unless it’s packing a 428CJ” period, I started to appreciate other aspects of automotive design and engineering.  So in the ‘80’s, it finally dawned on me that the Hornet was a car driven to production not by the accountants, or the designers, but by the engineers.  The step-down design significantly enhanced safety, handling, and interior space.  The tub-like body was auto aerodynamics in its infancy.  The big 308 cu in flathead six with dual “Twin-H” carburetors made as much power as the then new OHV V-8s.

So now, yes, I love the Hornet…what’s your “used to hate it but now I love it” story?

I came across the below interesting, short twenty-two minute industrial video on Youtube the other night – it’s a recruitment film made in 1947 by the Los Angeles Transit Lines (LATL), the predecessor to today’s LA Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), to recruit new operators.  It’s interesting on a couple of levels; it’s in color and shows some great street scenes from that era, and it highlights operation of a trolley car, and both diesel and electric trolley buses.  If you’re a trolley or bus fan, grab your change maker and operator’s cap and pull up a chair…

As was mentioned in the film, the trolley is a Saint Louis Car Company H4 model.  It was in service with LATL from the late 1920’s to 1955.  It had four electric motors, hence the H4 designation.  It was 41 ft long and could seat 44 passengers.  Fortunately, several have been preserved at various railway museums.

1941 GM (Yellow Coach) TDH 4502 (Canted Windshield)

1940 GM (Yellow Coach) TDH 4501 (Flat Windshield)

The gas/diesel bus looks like a 1941 or immediate post-war 1945 GM TDH 4502 Old Look.  While it could be had with a gas engine, after 1940, most came with the more economical 6-71 inline diesel.  These pre and immediate post-war  models had “bug-eye” extended headlights rather than the flush-mounted ones seen on updated post-war versions introduced after mid-1946.  The later post-war models also had a vent above the front route sign for the “Thermo-Matic” heating and ventilation system.  For more on the Old Look, check out Paul Niedermeyer’s superb post here.

Brill TC-44 in service in Dayton

The trolley bus is a ACF-Brill TC-44, forty of which LATL bought in 1945/46, and served faithfully until 1963, where still going strong, they were sold to Mexico City.  There they trundled along the streets for another decade.

Every once in awhile, your passions in life overlap – in my case, two of those passions are mass transit and film noir.  I recently found a superb website called thetrolleydodger.com.  It’s filled with tons of pictures and interesting historical facts on all forms of mass transit, but with a focus on rail (trolleys, PCC Cars, Interurbans, etc.).  A series of beautifully evocative photos of nighttime trolley scenes really caught my eye – take a look at them below…

These photos were taken by Mr John F. Bromley – a contributor to the site and an author of several books on mass transit.  Mr Bromley lived in Toronto, and unfortunately passed away last December.  But he gifted us with a repository of beautiful photos – ones he had taken from the early 1950’s until very recently.  The nighttime scenes are especially spectacular – the locations in Toronto are included for our Canadian readers who may recognize them…

When I look at these pictures I can almost hear Robert Mitchum saying; “It was late…my car stood me up like all the dames I’ve ever known, so I had to take the trolley…I was tailing a married shoe salesmen from Baltimore who was playing footsie with a rich widow, when all of a sudden….”

Our sincere thanks to Mr David Sadowski of thetrolleydodger.com for permission to share the photos.  And to steal a phrase from Motorweek’s John Davis, if you haven’t visited the site, “cruise on over”…

Near our home here in suburban Tokyo is a Hino Motors Assembly Plant – I’m sure most CC Readers know Hino is Toyota’s truck and coach subsidiary.  In addition to assembling a variety of both Hino buses and Toyota 4WD models, the plant also makes trucks for the Japanese Self Defense Forces.  Located outside the plant are several vehicle overflow parking areas; and walking by one recently it dawned on me that here was my chance to get that Jim Dunne-like photo I’ve always dreamed of…

Well, not really.  I imagine the fence is more for security than secrecy – these BXD10 models have been produced since the mid-1990’s.  As you can see, Toyota cribbed quite a bit from then AM General and later GM’s High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV technical/HUMVEE colloquial).

HMV With Type 91 SAM System

Like the HUMVEE, they come in multiple versions – compared to the M-998, the BXD is a foot longer and a few inches taller — but about a foot narrower – it also weighs 1,000 lbs less.  It differs from the HUMVEE in two other major areas; first, the engine is a Toyota 4.1 litre turbocharged inline four cylinder diesel, that puts out 153 hp and 282 ft lbs of torque.  Second, the BXD has four-wheel steering, which results in significantly improved maneuverability and a tighter turning radius.

Similar to AM General and GM, Toyota built a civilian model; the Mega Cruiser (BXD20) – made from 1996 to 2002.  Again, like the Hummer it came with portal axles, a fully independent suspension, full-time 4-wheel drive with locking front, center and rear differentials, inboard brakes set way up high against the differentials, and a central tire inflation system.

Japan Auto Federation (JAF) similar to AAA

It was offered to civilian police and fire agencies, and a limited number were sold to the public.  But as you can imagine if you have ever driven on Japan’s narrow roads, it didn’t find many private buyers being over six feet wide.  In addition, it was expensive – price for a 1996 model new was over $90,000.  As a result, only 151 private owner Mega Cruisers left the factory over seven years.  Today, if you can find one, they fetch over $100K.

So the civilian model left the scene in 2002, but the military model remains in production.

M-998 Slantback

Speaking of the HUMVEE, I drove several different models during my military career – I hated them.  While they were great off-road; could pretty much go up, down or across anything, inside they were terrible.  With the wide tunnel running down the middle, there was very little interior room.  Couple that with the typical M-series military vehicle seat adjustments – which is a semi-circle hinge that went forward one inch and back one inch – that was it for seat travel.  With my height, I could stand about thirty minutes behind the wheel before the leg and back spasms started.

M-1009

M-1008

Anytime I was assigned a HUMVEE, I’d go to our Transportation section and swap it for a M-1009 which was a militarized mid-’80’s Blazer K5.  Those, and the M-1008 pickup, had regular sliding seat tracks.  We referred to these as “CUCKVEE’s” as they were called a Commercial Utility Cargo Vehicle (CUCV) in the purchase contract.  Like the HUMVEE, both had the 6.2 litre GM diesel.  Those couldn’t quite go as many places off-road as the HUMVEE but they were so much more comfortable.

Hey, a GI’s life is hard enough…

I’ve been walking by this 2nd Gen B-Series Dodge Conversion Van for several years – it sits in a parking lot near our home in suburban Tokyo.  Knowing how much our founder Paul enjoys these B-Series vans, I always made a note to shoot a few pics someday.  In going by last week, I noticed it had acquired an abandoned vehicle notice on the windshield; a sure sign it won’t be around much longer.  Time to get the camera out…

It’s in pretty poor shape now, but in its prime, this must have been a pretty snazzy custom van.  The workmanship looks fairly good – even in its present state.  It sits on the B-250 ¾ ton chassis.  I can never determine the year of these Dodge vans – they didn’t change much from 1979 to 1993.  In 1981 they did update the names from 100/200/300 to 150/250/350 – so this is a post-1980 extended length model.

Surprisingly, it didn’t have any graphics or decals identifying who made the conversion.  All I could find was this small plate on the back – “California Vans by ANIC Corporation.”  I tried a couple Google searches and came up empty – so maybe this came from one of the small conversion outfits so prevalent during the 70’s-80’s van craze.

Like the Ford E-Series custom van I stumbled across several years ago, it highlights the fact that quite a few of these made their way to Japan in the 80’s.  The 80’s were known here as the “bubble decade” – when the stock market and real estate assets were extremely inflated and folks tended to splurge.  These vans cost a pretty penny here when new, and with their engine size and exterior dimensions, would be very expensive to keep on the road (taxes, fees, insurance, etc.).  When the bubble burst in 1991, they were likely parked.

Another possible reason you see a lot of these abandoned is the lack of any dealer support.  Chrysler opened a few dealerships here, then after a couple years pulled up and left – only to come back several years later as FCA, and then do the same thing again.  Ditto with Ford – they made a big splash opening up dealerships, but only stayed for seven or eight years and quit in 2016.  There are private mechanics that can wrench on US models, but parts are always a problem.

It’s a shame this one has been neglected for so long – and that it won’t get back on the road.  Would make a great way to do some camping and touring when the cherry blossoms start blooming late next month.

This is a 3rd Generation Honda Odyssey (RB1/RB2) – sold in the home market and other countries in Asia and the Middle East.  It differed significantly from the North American model, mostly in height.  And it certainly begs the question, is it a van or a station wagon?

Well, I guess the question is really moot – Honda marketed it as a van, just like previous versions.  But I can remember when I first saw one – and thought; “that’s a sharp-looking station wagon”…

The profile certainly looks wagon-ish.  It is about 1.5 meters tall (61 inches), which is about 18 centimeters (6-7 inches) lower than equivalent vans from other manufacturers.

2010 JDM Odyssey

It sold fairly well, and the follow-on 4th Generation (2008 – 2013) kept the same basic dimensions.

2014 JDM Odyssey

With the 5th Gen introduced in late 2013 the height and contours returned to a typical van-like 1.7 meters, and incorporated a sliding rear door.  More room and practicality, less style…

Perhaps because of their lower profile, they’ve become a favorite of the tuner community here in Japan.

In my mind, this model, more than any other, hits that fine line between a van and a wagon.

What do you think?

More Info:

2004 – 2008 Honda Odyssey – World’s Sexiest Minivan 

In our JDM Honda Odyssey Van post last week, we discussed how the third and fourth generation models were much more station wagon-like than other competitors’ designs.  Then with the fifth generation introduced in 2013, Honda returned to a taller van-like profile.  While the JDM and North American models are much more similar now, they have very different exterior styling.  Which one do you prefer?

Here’s the JDM model – not much excitement here – fairly typical mini-van proportions with flat, slab styling, though there is a slight character line that runs along the lower edge up around the rear wheel well.

It’s 4.8 meters long, 1.8 wide, and 1.7 high.  Engine is a 2.4 liter K24W DOHC four cylinder.  A hybrid model is also offered.  As with most JDM vans, a luxury version has a pretty swanky interior.

The North American model took a different tack.  As with the fourth generation, a break or dip was introduced along the belt line just under the back-edge of the rear window, with a small character line underneath it.  While less abrupt than the fourth generation, it’s still very noticeable.  Another deep line sweeps downward from the front wheel well curving rearward, creating a somewhat sculpted “cove” effect along the side.

The North American model is just a touch larger than the JDM version; 5.1 meters long, 2.0 wide, and 1.76 high.  A 3.5 liter J35Y6 V6 is the only engine.

Which one do I like better?  Well, no offense to any NA Odyssey owners here but I’ve never been a fan of the “dip”.  It just seems somewhat jarring to me and doesn’t make the van look any more attractive (in my view), just different.  Perhaps that was what Honda intended.

So I’d go with the JDM version…

Which do you prefer?