Rare Rides: The 1978 Sbarro Windhound, a Luxury SUV of 6.9 Litres

Today’s Rare Ride is the third car in the series from designer Franco Sbarro. Our premier Sbarro creation was a windsurfing-specific take on the Citroën Berlingo, and the second was a very hot hatchback called the Super Eight – a Ferrari underneath.

While both of those creations were one-off styling exercises, today’s Sbarro actually entered very limited production. Presenting the Windhound of 1978.

The full-size SUV world of the late Seventies was very different than it is today, even though you’ll recognize all the names present. Trucks like the Toyota Land Cruiser, Mercedes-Benz G-Wagen, the Range Rover, and the International Harvester Scout were just that: Trucks. Their ornamentation was minimal, most of the time they were seen with only two doors, and sometimes a rear seat was optional. There wasn’t wood or leather, but one could find vinyl seating surfaces and minimal soundproofing. There was one exception to this rule, the luxurious Jeep Grand Wagoneer.

But a few visionaries at the time saw the potential for more luxurious off-road SUVs. We’ve covered one of the earliest examples of such a luxury truck previously: The Monteverdi Safari that went on sale in Switzerland in 1977. Based on the IH Scout II, the Safari beat Sbarro to the punch by just one year.

The basis of the Windhound was the aforementioned G-Wagen, not a bad place to start. Using the G’s chassis, Sbarro designed an entirely different body up top. With its original design, the Windhound took things a step further than the clip swapping completed on the Safari. Windhound was available with either two or four doors, and sort of looked like an Eighties Toyota 4Runner. Four-door Windhounds were identified by their two rectangular headlamps, while two doors used quad circular lamps. A distinctive feature was the wrap-around roof spoiler above the rear hatch. This was supplemented in one example by exhaust pipes that ran up over the roof rails. All examples featured an interior full of wood and leather trim, and an unusual tailgate design with dual lower porthole windows. The Windhound was Sbarro’s second original design, as he’d spent the earlier part of the decade building replica cars (usually BMWs). His first original design was from 1974 and was a mid-engine Maserati-like sports car called the Stash, with an interior done by Pierre Cardin. We’ll cover that one later.

The Windhound was designed to be more powerful than other SUVs on offer, and as such used the 6.8-liter V8 from the 450SEL 6.9 as its primary motivation. The V8 was good for 282 horses and 410 lb-ft of torque, very impressive during the smog-choked Seventies. Typically the transmission paired to it was a three-speed automatic.

Typically is used above and applies to the 6.9 engine as well, because the Windhound was a built-to-order truck. Though its chassis remained G-Wagen, the truck on top was powered by different engines per customer preference. Six examples used the Mercedes 6.9 engine, while two used BMW power. A further five used Jeep engines. Finally, one used the 2.8 inline-six from a 280GE. After a run of 14 cars, the Windhound disappeared off the world’s radar and Sbarro moved on to other creations. Mainstream luxury SUVs would catch up about a decade later.

[Images: Sbarro]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

For GREAT deals on a new or used Nissan check out Mossy Nissan National City TODAY!

Rare Rides: A 1971 Maserati Quattroporte Prototype, the King’s Sedan

<img data-attachment-id=”1774900″ data-permalink=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan/1971-maserati-quattroporte-3/” data-orig-file=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/1971-Maserati-Quattroporte-3.png” data-orig-size=”1920,1080″ data-comments-opened=”1″ data-image-meta=”{“aperture”:”0″,”credit”:””,”camera”:””,”caption”:””,”created_timestamp”:”0″,”copyright”:””,”focal_length”:”0″,”iso”:”0″,”shutter_speed”:”0″,”title”:””,”orientation”:”0″}” data-image-title=”1971 Maserati Quattroporte 3″ data-image-description=”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zJqTZPCsgQ

” data-medium-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-6.png” data-large-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan.png” class=”aligncenter wp-image-1774900 size-large” src=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan.png” alt width=”610″ height=”343″ srcset=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan.png 610w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-5.png 75w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-6.png 450w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-7.png 768w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-8.png 120w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-9.png 800w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>Today’s Rare Ride was one of just two finished examples of the ill-fated second generation Maserati Quattroporte. Maserati envisioned a promising future for their large luxury sedan, but the company’s corporate parentage at the time had other (worse) ideas.

And this very car was fit for a king.

Maserati produced its first-generation Quattroporte from 1963 to 1969, a very early example of a brand new class of car: the high-performance grand touring sedan. With a large engine at the front and lots of leather in the middle, it was one of three Sixties sedans from Europe able to meet a 200 kph (124 mph) top speed.

<img data-attachment-id=”1774898″ data-permalink=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan/1971-maserati-quattroporte-4/” data-orig-file=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/1971-Maserati-Quattroporte-4.png” data-orig-size=”1920,1080″ data-comments-opened=”1″ data-image-meta=”{“aperture”:”0″,”credit”:””,”camera”:””,”caption”:””,”created_timestamp”:”0″,”copyright”:””,”focal_length”:”0″,”iso”:”0″,”shutter_speed”:”0″,”title”:””,”orientation”:”0″}” data-image-title=”1971 Maserati Quattroporte 4″ data-image-description=”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zJqTZPCsgQ

” data-medium-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-11.png” data-large-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-1.png” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1774898″ src=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-1.png” alt width=”610″ height=”343″ srcset=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-1.png 610w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-10.png 75w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-11.png 450w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-12.png 768w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-13.png 120w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-14.png 800w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>By the end of the Sixties, the original Quattroporte styling was looking fairly dated. Karim Aga Khan wanted a fresher Quattroporte and ordered up a bespoke sedan. Maserati set to work and built a new four-door on the Indy’s platform. Exterior design was handed to Frua, as the first-gen model was penned by Pietro himself. The new Quattroporte used Maserati’s 4.9-liter V8, good for 296 horsepower. Said power traveled to the rear wheels via an unspecified automatic transmission.

<img data-attachment-id=”1774896″ data-permalink=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan/1971-maserati-quattroporte-5/” data-orig-file=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/1971-Maserati-Quattroporte-5.png” data-orig-size=”1920,1080″ data-comments-opened=”1″ data-image-meta=”{“aperture”:”0″,”credit”:””,”camera”:””,”caption”:””,”created_timestamp”:”0″,”copyright”:””,”focal_length”:”0″,”iso”:”0″,”shutter_speed”:”0″,”title”:””,”orientation”:”0″}” data-image-title=”1971 Maserati Quattroporte 5″ data-image-description=”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zJqTZPCsgQ

” data-medium-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-16.png” data-large-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-2.png” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1774896″ src=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-2.png” alt width=”610″ height=”343″ srcset=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-2.png 610w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-15.png 75w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-16.png 450w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-17.png 768w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-18.png 120w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-19.png 800w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>The car was production-ready by 1971 and was displayed that year at the Paris Motor Show. Maserati knew there was a market for the new Quattroporte, and sealed its production fate with a new chassis code: AM121. But Maserati’s product plans were no longer their own to dictate, as the company’s ownership had passed from the Orsi family to Citroën in 1968.

<img data-attachment-id=”1774904″ data-permalink=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan/1971-maserati-quattroporte-2/” data-orig-file=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/1971-Maserati-Quattroporte-2.png” data-orig-size=”1920,1080″ data-comments-opened=”1″ data-image-meta=”{“aperture”:”0″,”credit”:””,”camera”:””,”caption”:””,”created_timestamp”:”0″,”copyright”:””,”focal_length”:”0″,”iso”:”0″,”shutter_speed”:”0″,”title”:””,”orientation”:”0″}” data-image-title=”1971 Maserati Quattroporte 2″ data-image-description=”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zJqTZPCsgQ

” data-medium-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-21.png” data-large-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-3.png” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1774904″ src=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-3.png” alt width=”610″ height=”343″ srcset=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-3.png 610w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-20.png 75w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-21.png 450w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-22.png 768w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-23.png 120w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-24.png 800w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>Citroën took a look at the very Italian and ready-to-go AM121, and said “Mais non, you will not build this car.” The French brass pressed Maserati to move on in a different direction with Quattroporte – a front-drive direction. The basis for the newly-ordered Quattroporte II (AM123) would be Citroën’s own SM luxury coupe. That one was a big flop but we’ll discuss it in another Rare Rides.

<img data-attachment-id=”1774906″ data-permalink=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan/1971-maserati-quattroporte/” data-orig-file=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/1971-Maserati-Quattroporte.png” data-orig-size=”1645,1013″ data-comments-opened=”1″ data-image-meta=”{“aperture”:”0″,”credit”:””,”camera”:””,”caption”:””,”created_timestamp”:”0″,”copyright”:””,”focal_length”:”0″,”iso”:”0″,”shutter_speed”:”0″,”title”:””,”orientation”:”0″}” data-image-title=”1971 Maserati Quattroporte” data-image-description=”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zJqTZPCsgQ

” data-medium-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-26.png” data-large-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-4.png” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1774906″ src=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-4.png” alt width=”610″ height=”376″ srcset=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-4.png 610w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-25.png 75w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-26.png 450w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-27.png 768w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/rare-rides-a-1971-maserati-quattroporte-prototype-the-kings-sedan-28.png 120w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>In the end, only two examples of the AM121 Quattroporte were finished. Aga Khan received his (chassis number 004) in 1974. The other finished example was chassis number 002, completed in 1971 and retained by Frua. Frua sold it fairly quickly to the King of Spain, Juan Carlos I. The king’s blue over tan AM121 goes to auction in November at Le Castellet, wherever that is.

Note: Images in this article are of the later 004 chassis, as they were the only ones publicly available for use.

[Images: YouTube]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Buy/Drive/Burn: Basic Japanese Compacts From 2008

Today’s Buy/Drive/Burn trio are the 2008 versions of the same Japanese compacts from last time. Many of you were split on the relative goodness of 1998’s Civic versus Corolla, but agreed Sentra should burn. Do those views change when the cars are from 2008?

Honda Civic

The eighth-gen Civic is in its third model year in North America, where it’s available in sedan and coupe formats. Civic is a bit edgier and serious-looking than its older Nineties sibling but promises the same overall value. In 2008 there are seven total trims That range in price from $14,800 to over $23,000. The most affordable sedan is a DX trim with a five-speed manual transmission. DX uses a 1.8-liter inline-four good for 140 horses and asks $15,010.

Nissan Sentra

Sentra entered its sixth generation in 2007 and continues unchanged for the 2008 model year. Sentra is available only as a sedan and rides on the same C platform as the Rogue. Unlike Civic which offers standard automatic transmissions, Sentra is offered only with a six-speed manual or a CVT. Five trims are available that range in price from $16,140 to $20,570. The base 2.0 has a CVT, so we upgrade to the 2.0 S for its six-speed manual. 140 horses arrive via the 2.0-liter engine. Nissan asks $16,370.

Toyota Corolla

The Corolla is in its ninth generation, and its final model year; it’s been on sale since 2003. Not to worry, Corolla was refreshed for 2005 to keep with the times! North America receives only the Corolla sedan, though wagons and hatchbacks are available elsewhere. Trims are three and have a narrow price range of $14,405 to $16,250. The cheapest CE with a five-speed manual asks $14,405. A trailing 126 horses arrive at the front wheels from the 1.8-liter engine.

Three late 2000s economy sedans, all of which are arguably build with less care and concern than their Nineties counterparts. Which one is worth buying?

[Images: Toyota, Honda, Nissan]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Vaccine Mandates Being Considered By Auto Industry, UAW

<img data-attachment-id=”1773672″ data-permalink=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw/covid-19vaccinationrecordcardsissuedbycdcunitedstatescenters/” data-orig-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-5.jpg” data-orig-size=”1000,667″ data-comments-opened=”1″ data-image-meta=”{“aperture”:”0″,”credit”:”Shutterstock”,”camera”:””,”caption”:””,”created_timestamp”:”0″,”copyright”:”Copyright (c) 2021 Michael Vi\/Shutterstock. No use without permission.”,”focal_length”:”0″,”iso”:”0″,”shutter_speed”:”0″,”title”:”Covid-19,Vaccination,Record,Cards,Issued,By,Cdc,(united,States,Centers”,”orientation”:”1″}” data-image-title=”Covid-19,Vaccination,Record,Cards,Issued,By,Cdc,(united,States,Centers” data-image-description=”

Michael Vi/Shutterstock

” data-medium-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-2.jpg” data-large-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw.jpg” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1773672″ src=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw.jpg” alt width=”610″ height=”407″ srcset=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw.jpg 610w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-1.jpg 75w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-2.jpg 450w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-3.jpg 768w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-4.jpg 120w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-5.jpg 1000w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>

With the Biden administration having announced that it would start requiring companies to vaccinate employees, automakers and UAW are finding themselves in a sticky situation. Unions had previously said they wanted to hold off on endorsing or opposing mandatory vaccinations until after they discussed things with the industry and their own members. Considering Joe Biden said he wouldn’t make vaccines mandatory less than 10 months ago, employers are getting caught with their pants around the proverbial ankles.

Automakers had previously been surveying white-collar workers to see what they wanted to do while upping on-site COVID restrictions, but operating under the impression that any hard decisions were likely a long way off and left entirely to their discretion. Now the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration is planning a new standard that requires all employers with 100 (or more) employees to guarantee their workforce is fully vaccinated or require any unvaccinated workers to produce a negative test result on a minimum weekly basis. 

Employers that fail to implement the stated requirements could face fines of nearly $14,000 per violation, according to the White House, with penalties also doubling for those who refuse to wear masks during interstate travel. Those are potentially steep fees when you’re employees number in the thousands. Union officials have said they’re considering the matter without committing to more than absolutely necessary — though the UAW officially opposed vaccine requirements in the past.

From UAW President Ray Curry:

“The UAW has and continues to strongly encourage all members and their families to be vaccinated unless there is specific health or religious concerns. We know that this is the best way to protect our members, coworkers and their families.

We are reviewing the details of yesterday’s announcements and the impact on our members and our over 700 employer contracts.

In the meantime, we continue our member commitment to practice safety in every one of our worksites by following protocols including masks, sanitizing and reporting any exposure or symptoms of the virus. At the UAW we all understand that fighting this pandemic and protecting our families is key to our survival.”

Assuming the union ultimately decides to endorse the vaccine decree, it’s likely going to be fracturing its membership. While I am hardly against vaccinations, I strongly support informed consent and speaking candidly about this has resulted in autoworkers frequently confessing they’re similarly opposed to forced vaccinations. Many have said they would immediately quit their jobs, matching a recent Washington Post poll claiming 70 percent of unvaccinated workers would simply abandon their positions if vaccine mandates are instituted. It’s my assumption that the industry will have a sudden, catastrophic staffing shortage were it to move forward with the Biden plan.

Automakers have been similarly noncommittal, with manufacturers (including Ford, GM, Stellantis, Honda, and Toyota) stating they encourage staff to get vaccinated and want to adhere to all government-issued health protocols. But they typically steer clear of addressing the Biden plan directly, possibly indicating some hesitancy. That said, it hasn’t even been a full day since the vaccine mandate was announced and their HR and legal departments are probably wringing their hands as they ponder upon what’s to be done and the fallout it might create.

Every statement automakers have been willing to make thus far can be paraphrased into “hold on … we’ve got to think about this,” followed by a paragraph about how they believe in vaccinations and want to adhere to recommendations coming from the relevant health experts. Conversely, very little has been said about the rights or preferences of their employees.

I’m not going to beat around this bush. The entire premise of these mandates seems insane to me, bordering on wicked. As an American, I always thought the whole premise of the country was predicated upon the shared belief that personal liberties and freedom of choice trump everything else. But that doesn’t seem to be what’s coming down from the top anymore. The rhetoric being used by Joe Biden is egregiously confrontational, including statements like “we’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin” as he made sweeping assertions about how the unvaccinated are stifling national unity and progress. He also confusingly stated that vaccinated workers need to be “protected” from the unvaccinated.

Assuming vaccines are effective, shouldn’t it be the other way round? What exactly are we shielding people from when new strains continue to manifest, can still be spread amongst the vaccinated, and the shots we currently have are targeting older COVID variants that have lost steam?

The economic and social stress this is likely to place upon the industry and country as a whole will be nothing short of monumental. Protests have been erupting across the globe all summer. Truckers have started organizing in numerous countries and have refused to deliver to areas imposing strict COVID rules, exacerbating food shortages in urban areas. In the United States, the same was true for cities that opted to defund police departments. Now they’re starting to talk about strikes focused on vaccine and mask mandates while they’re already experiencing a severe shortage of drivers. Imagine if that spills over to an automotive sector that’s already been beleaguered by the semiconductor shortage, their suppliers, and every other industry you rely on.

[Image: Michael Vi/Shutterstock]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Buy/Drive/Burn: Economical American Compacts From 1982

Our recent Rare Rides coverage of the Chevrolet Citation made one thing very clear: We need more Citation content. Today’s 1982 Buy/Drive/Burn lineup was suggested by commenter eng_alvarado90, who would like to see all of you struggle. Citation, Aries, Escort, all in their most utilitarian formats. Let’s go.

Chevrolet Citation

The Citation is in its third model year for 1982, and sales have already fallen far from their initial peak of 800,000. The bloom is off this rose, but GM is still on track for six-digit sales this year. Sticking firmly to economy and utility, today’s Citation is a five-door hatchback equipped with the 2.5-liter Iron Duke inline-four and paired to a four-speed manual. Throttle-body injection is new this year and means 90 horses are underfoot. There’s also a new horizontal slats grille.

Dodge Aries K

The Dodge Aries is still new and is in its second model year for 1982. Chrysler started out strong last year with over 300,000 sales, and will likely reach that number again in ’82. Today’s Aries is the four-door wagon, as Chrysler does not offer a hatchback K-car at this level. Underhood is the base 2.2-liter Chrysler inline-four, which uses a two-barrel carb. Eighty-four horses are at the driver’s command, shifted through a four-speed manual. New this year: rear windows roll down on sedans and wagons, replacing the fixed glass.

Ford Escort

Ford’s Escort is also in its second model year for 1982. The American market Escort was supposed to be very similar to the European one for parts sharing purposes. However the respective design teams each headed their own direction, and the two cars share only an engine and transmission. Today’s five-door Escort hatchback is new for ’82, along with a new grille and presence of the familiar Ford Blue Oval. The base 1.6-liter CVH engine gets a high output version this year, which increases power by about 10 horses, to 80. Power is delivered to the front via a four-speed Ford MTX manual.

Economy and cheap driving are available to you, and they’ll probably hold up for at least three years before falling apart. Which gets the Buy?

[Images: GM, Chrysler, Ford]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

For GREAT deals on a new or used Nissan check out Nissan of Queens TODAY!

Rare Rides: The 1979 Renha Formigão, Rear-engine and Beetle Adjacent

Not long ago, Rare Rides featured the Gurgel XEF, a Brazilian microcar of luxurious intent that was styled like a contemporary Mercedes-Benz, and based on a Volkswagen. Today’s Rare Ride is a very different Brazilian take on the same basic bones.

Say hello to the Renha Formigão.

Renha was short for Renha Indústria e Comércio de Veículos, which in English meant Renha Industry and Commerce of Vehicles. Founded in Rio de Janeiro, the company was the creation of Paulo Sérgio Renha. Renha was a powerboat racing enthusiast and held a speed record in the Atlantic for a crossing from Santos to Rio de Janeiro.

Renha previously designed some buggies and cars for other Brazilian firms and decided to found his own car company in 1977. The firm’s original product was a trike with a Volkswagen engine. The initial iteration of the trike faced legislative hurdles, as it occupied a vehicle class not yet recognized by the Brazilian government. Renha revised the trike after its initial debut and added more power and different bodywork, and was able to get it past legalization. It was sold as a kit or a complete bike.

The next year Renha had more ambitious ideas and launched the Formigão. The very small pickup truck body was attached directly to a Volkswagen Beetle chassis. It used a 1.6-liter gas/ethanol engine. Renha created his own body but made no mechanical changes underneath.

Said body was designed in fiberglass, focused on utility, and was shaped mostly by a ruler. Renha got some headlamps from a Fiat 127 to complete the square look. The pickup bed could hold up to 1,433 pounds, and its size capacity was about 25 cubic feet.

The bed capacity was not as utilitarian as one would hope, however. Volkswagen would not supply the flat design 1.6 from its second-generation Bus to outside companies, so Renha had to make do with the Beetle’s engine in its truck. As a result, there was a pronounced rectangular elevation in the bed.

Inside, buyers found three-point seatbelts and rode along with the spare tire and battery that resided behind the seats. A luxury trim was also available which offered upgraded alloy wheels, leather seats that reclined, and a useful tachometer.

Formigão remained in production for a short while, as in 1980 Paulo Renha moved on to a newly founded company called Emis and produced his trike there. Formigão was reborn in 1986 as the Coyote, after the company obtained rights from Renha. By that time, Mr. Renha had moved back into his real passion – boats – and started a ship-building firm.

Today’s Rare Ride is a 1979 Formigão from near the conclusion of initial production. With alloy wheels, it’s most likely the upscale luxury model. From the photos, it seems the engine bump issue in the bed was fixed by a later owner, or by Renha later in production. This tiny truck is yours for $14,000.

[Images: Renha]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

For GREAT deals on a new or used Nissan check out Nissan 112 TODAY!

Buy/Drive/Burn: V6 Midsize American Sedans of 1997

We continue our 2007 and 1997 sedan series with its fourth installment. We’ve covered V6 Japanese sedans from two different decades, as well as American-branded entries from 2007. Today we step back to the midsize V6 sedan class of 1997. The Big Three beckon you with medium build quality, equipment, and value for money in a midsize sedan; a segment in which only GM deigns to participate in 2020. Let’s go.

Note: We’re counting these three as mid-size today, though the Intrepid leans into the full-size category. The Dodge Stratus is too small to play here.

Dodge Intrepid

1997 saw the first generation Dodge Intrepid wrap up its run, arguably as the most stylish car of this trio. It was replaced by a larger second generation the following year which seemed built even more poorly than the first-gen. Developed over its tenure, by 1996 Intrepid had standard ABS, and an Autostick shift-it-yourself feature for the four-speed automatic. Today’s car is well-equipped ES trim and features the larger 3.5-liter V6 good for 214 horsepower. You’ll pay around $22,910.

Ford Taurus

The third-gen Taurus was in its second model year in 1997, as its design went from aero three-box to ovoid, customers were less than thrilled, and Ford began to pay less and less attention to its mass-market family car. The model’s first two years saw a different trim lineup than the latter two, with G, GL, LX, and SHO as the initial group. Base models received a 3.0-liter Vulcan V6, but the LX stepped up to the 3.0 Duratec mill that made 200 horses (instead of 145). Today’s LX sends those horses through a four-speed AX4N automatic. Yours at $21,610.

Pontiac Grand Prix

The popular and cladded Grand Prix was newly in its sixth generation for the ’97 model year. Aggressive in styling and with Pontiac’s Wide-Trac stance, the Grand Prix was a go-to for many family sedan buyers at the time. Just two trims were available on Grand Prix, the base SE in sedan guise, or GT in coupe or sedan forms. The GT sedan (today’s pick) uses the Buick 3800 V6 good for 195 horsepower. Ask is about $20,319.

Three sedans around the $20,000 mark, which is worth the Buy in 1997?

[Images: Chrysler, Ford, GM]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter here.

Biden Planning to Pour $100 Billion Worth Of Rebates Onto EVs

<img data-attachment-id=”1702976″ data-permalink=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2019/12/congress-says-nay-to-expanding-ev-tax-credits/shutterstock_471343589/” data-orig-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs-5.jpg” data-orig-size=”1000,667″ data-comments-opened=”1″ data-image-meta=”{“aperture”:”0″,”credit”:””,”camera”:””,”caption”:””,”created_timestamp”:”0″,”copyright”:””,”focal_length”:”0″,”iso”:”0″,”shutter_speed”:”0″,”title”:””,”orientation”:”0″}” data-image-title=”tesla charging station” data-image-description=”

Welcomia/Shutterstock

” data-medium-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs-2.jpg” data-large-file=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs.jpg” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1702976″ src=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs.jpg” alt width=”610″ height=”407″ srcset=”http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs.jpg 610w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs-1.jpg 75w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs-2.jpg 450w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs-3.jpg 768w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs-4.jpg 120w, http://greatoldtrucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/biden-planning-to-pour-100-billion-worth-of-rebates-onto-evs-5.jpg 1000w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>

The Biden administration expanded on its $174 billion proposal to boost electric vehicle sales on Thursday, suggesting that the United States government make it rain money on those purchasing EVs.

Technically a part of the $2.3 trillion infrastructure plan, which has been expanded to include jobs and numerous environmental projects, the proposal makes a lot of special exemptions for alternative energy vehicles backed by large financial commitments. $100 billion will be set aside for new consumer rebates, potentially opening up the door for manufacturers that have already exhausted their quota of federal tax credits linked to zero-emission cars. 

Politico shared a U.S. Transportation Department email sent to congressional staff outlining additional details of the plan. The memo included allocating $15 billion to add another 500,000 EV charging points to the national network, $20 billion for electric school buses, $25 billion for establishing emissions-friendly public transit solutions, and an additional $14 billion in miscellaneous EV incentives. While the White House has not committed itself to explaining exactly how the funding will be broken down, the DOT email said the brunt of the money will go toward encouraging Americans to swap to electric vehicles and more energy-efficient appliances.

This comes after several years of Democrat leadership, aggressively advocating for EVs and influencing the markets as much as would be needed to achieve the desired outcome. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer was pitching a modified version of Cash for Clunkers that would have offered $454 billion (over ten years) to people trading in an older, gasoline-powered car for a modern electric one. The president also floated a highly similar Car Allowance Rebate System while campaigning in 2020.

“These are the most critical investments we can make for the long-term health and vitality of the American economy and the safety of the American people,” Joe Biden said last July. “Here we are now with the economy in crisis, but with an incredible opportunity not just to build back to where we were before, but better, stronger, more resilient, and more prepared for the challenges that lie ahead … And there is no more consequential challenge that we must meet in this next decade than the onrushing climate crisis.”

Though Biden and Schumer are just a couple of examples drawn from an incredibly deep well of politicians. Reuters noted that Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow and Representative Dan Kildee have been working on a bill to restore and expand the Obama-era EV tax credit system — which they elaborated upon in a recent interview.

From Reuters:

Kildee wants to skew the credit in favor of vehicles with more affordable vehicles with longer range, to “democratize the electric vehicle market.”

He said they are “looking at ways to make the credit more accessible to middle- and lower-income families, potentially even making the credit refundable.”

Kildee said EVs are “where the market is going — full stop. The only question that we have to answer is are these going to be vehicles made by American workers.” Kildee said they could also introduce a credit for used EV purchases.

Stabenow said it was important to give automakers incentives to produce electric vehicles in the United States.

“China has committed $100 billion to grab this market — both battery cell production but also in other component parts of electric vehicles,” Stabenow said. “We better take it seriously.”

While your author is generally skeptical of social engineering, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that the original Cash for Clunkers program was not environmentally sound. Adopting a blind push into electrification, as China has, may also have unintended consequences. China’s heavy incentivization of EVs backfired as consumers started pulling out of the market, unsure of what the next round of regulations or incentives would look like. Subsequent cuts to subsidies then crippled the auto market and started negatively impacting some of China’s biggest auto brands.

We expect to see Republicans pushing back eventually, however they seem to be preoccupied with President Biden’s recent executive orders pertaining to gun control. As many are calling the actions unconstitutional, it’s likely to receive the brunt of the media focus. It could be days before they’ll able to organize comprehensive criticisms against the infrastructure/EV proposals. But we’re betting the response will be rather meek until the current administration better explains how the credit process is supposed to work and which entities will be eligible. As things currently stand, the only censures to be made are that it sounds like a heck of a lot of money to swell a plan we’ve tried already.

[Image: Welcomia/Shutterstock]

For GREAT deals on a new or used INFINITI check out INFINITI of South Bay TODAY!

Jim Farley is Allowed to Race, and The Detroit Free Press is Allowed to Write About It

Jim Farley. Image: Ford

Car Twitter is a weird, wonderful online “place”, but sometimes bad takes bubble up. And there’s a double-whammy of bad takery floating around this afternoon.

Take number one: Ford CEO Jim Farley is taking an unnecessary risk by racing cars that could hurt Ford should an accident leave him dead or too injured to work/lead the company, according to some experts interviewed by the Detroit Free Press for a story by Jamie LaReau.

Take number two: The Freep and/or Jamie are dumb for publishing/writing this article.

I do agree with the logic behind the arguments in favor of Farley racing, but that doesn’t make the Freep or LaReau dumb. It’s a reporter writing about what experts think. More on that in a sec.

The logic is this: Farley should be allowed to race because he’s a car guy and enthusiast and it’s arguably better to have a car enthusiast running a car company because a car enthusiast is more likely to understand a unique industry in which many purchase decisions are driven by emotion and/or if Ford is run by a car guy it means there will always be a place for performance cars in the company’s model lineup. Besides, the risk is low.

As I said above, in general, I agree with that, even though it’s not a given that a car guy will do a better job running a car company and/or keep performance cars alive. Just that it’s more likely. And racing today, even in vintage cars, is generally safe, although the risk of death and injury still does exist.

But to castigate the Freep for writing this story is a bit ridiculous.

There’s a “kill the messenger” critique of journalism that has existed for the past five years (and probably before that, but it’s been more noticeable since you-know-who and some of his partisan enablers took up arms against media that was fair and honest but critical). It’s not just relegated to politics — Elon Musk has rallied Tesla fanboys against media the same way, too.

In brief, this critique usually presents itself in one of two circumstances. Circumstance one: The subject of critical reporting deflects by accusing the outlet/journalist of bias and/or incompetence instead of addressing the criticism. Circumstance two: Journalist/outlet interviews a person/expert or multiple persons/experts, the reader doesn’t like what the interviewee(s) say, and instead of critiquing those who were interviewed and their claims, the reader moans that the outlet shouldn’t have published a story that dares to present an argument they don’t agree with — even if the outlet isn’t the one making the argument.

This is an example of the latter. What’s frustrating to me is that some of the annoyed Twitterati aren’t just car enthusiasts — they’re automotive journalists or people who work in the automotive media in some capacity.

In other words, people who should know better.

It would be one thing if LaReau was writing an opinion piece and got flayed for having a take that most people disagreed with. It’s an occupational hazard of writing op-eds. Y’all have flayed me a few times and that’s fine. You write an opinion column, you risk blowback.

But this is a feature story, not arguing either side. At least, LaReau doesn’t appear to be arguing either side — she quotes those who defend Farley’s racing, as well as those who think it’s not a good idea.

There’s also nothing in the piece that isn’t really true. Racing is risky, though far less so than it used to be. And none of the arguments from either side are way off-base. Regardless if you think Farley should race or not, all the arguments are valid.

To be clear, I am not defending LaReau for any personal reason — as small as this industry can be, I am not sure I’ve ever met her. I’d disclose if I knew her, or recuse myself from writing about this.

Has the discourse fallen this far? It’s bad enough that we flame each other, and cherry-pick facts, and fall for mis/disinformation, and that we’re often too tribal. Too often, people care more about “owning” and “destroying” someone in a discussion/debate to worry about being intellectually honest and reasonable.

All that makes for terrible discourse. And now we’re attacking writers and outlets for merely presenting an argument we mildly disagree with? Instead of attacking the argument itself?

This isn’t some free speech/First Amendment/cancel culture rant. The First Amendment doesn’t apply here, and there are some takes that do deserve to be shamed and scorned, and some takes that don’t deserve a platform (Holocaust denial comes to mind). I also think people are far too quick to scream “cancel culture” when someone gets deserved blowback for writing something truly terrible, especially if it’s bigoted in some way.

Obviously, tweeting out that the Freep shouldn’t have published this piece doesn’t rise to the level of screaming at some comic who said something transphobic or racist. But it’s still odd!

Why is so hard to argue that Farley should be allowed to race without suggesting the Freep shouldn’t publish a relatively harmless examination of how big companies insure CEOs who indulge in risky hobbies during their free time?

It’s actually an interesting dive into a part of the business I’ve never given much thought to before.

If you think some insurance experts (who, may I remind you, work for companies with a vested interest in NOT seeing their clients hurt pursuing risky fun during their off hours) are ninnies because they think it’s a bad idea for Farley to race, that’s fine.

Just don’t argue that the Freep can’t give those ninnies an interview because you’re such a ninny yourself that the mere suggestion that Farley hang up the Pilotis gives you the willies.

Yeah, that’s right. Don’t be a ninny.

[Image: Ford]