Last night, I asked you lovely readers to give me the cars you’d love to see turned into a pickup truck. Sadly, the coupe utility vehicle never really caught on that well in America. Certainly, Americans didn’t fall in love with the car-based pickup like our friends in Australia have. But that doesn’t stop enthusiasts from dreaming.
Readers gave a lot of great answers to my question, including the Toyota Sienna, from Spikedlemon:
Hear me out.
It’s large so would make a useful size vehicle for those who pretend to need a truck.
It’s rather posh on the inside with a nice ride so stacks well against current crop of trucks, but would happily take your comfortably and quietly down endless American Midwest highways.But counter-argument is than a van (minivan) is already a far more useful vehicular format. And so many current truck owners could have been far better served by having a minivan in the first place.
To Cadillac’s Blackwings, from Patrick O’Donnell:
CT5-V Blackwing & only available with the 6 speed.
But more than one of you specifically mentioned the Ford Fairmont, including John Beef:
I just commented in the other article that the Fairmont Futura would make a good ute. It wouldn’t need an extension or anything, just a transformation between the side panels and behind the driver’s seat.
And TheDrunkenWrench from this morning’s Cold Start:
The Fairmount Futura is my answer to yesterday’s question on what car should be a truck.
Look at that rear B-pillar line, it’s just BEGGING to be a Ute
I have good news. Thanks to Ford dealers and National Coach Products in California, such a thing existed in the form of the Ford Durango!
Click here to read about it.
Earlier today, Thomas wrote about how a Porsche Macan diesel’s Y-pipe looks, as the kids would say “dummy thicc.” From Canopysaurus:
Germans, so anal.
MAX FRESH OFF:
Step filter what are you doing?
Dodsworth:
How much will it cost to fix your Porsche? Allow me to show you an interpretive sculpture.
Tbird:
Thank you sir, may I have another.
Honestly, all of the comments in that one are COTD-worthy. Thanks for the end-of-day laughs!
There was an episode of junkyard digz where he worked on one of these. If you’re not familiar, it’s a great channel where barn finds are brought back to life to be made into decent daily drivers. Great channel.
The real axle is too far forward to give the Durango any meaningful cargo capacity. Fully loaded, the fulcrum effect would reduce traction on the front tires, creating massive understeer.
We need more car-based trucks. There is a huge (and potentially very profitable) gap in the marketplace for them. There are way too many identical SUVS, from every single automaker, but only the Ranger comes near to the compact-ish pickup that would also work as a daily driver for millions of people, with useful cargo capacity, good fuel economy and maneuverability, without requiring a second mortgage to finance the thing.
Counterpoint: we need fewer trucks (car based or not) and need to bring back meaningful tow ratings to cars and smaller SUVs.
Many cars have useful tow ratings – my Volvo V70 can pull 3500 pounds, which is a bit more than it weighs. A Camry can easily pull over 2000 lbs. An aftermarket tow hitch and a utility trailer (decent sized) can eliminate the need of a truck for most hauling tasks. You have a good point. (You can find a good utility trailer on Craigslist for under 900 bucks if you have a little patience.)
My point is that the good old 1/2 ton LUV/Hilux/720/B2600 and so on were very useful and didn’t get low teens in the MPG department.
On another point, it occurred to me: why do oversized 4WD pickups have blue plastic testicles hanging under the bumper?
Because they had no balls when they came from the dealer.
Maybe I’m recalling the brat which had seats blocking from the rear axle line forward.
It liked 700lbs or rock better than the crap ranger the arrived at the same time. Im certain a better ranger existed as the explorer could cough up anything the ranger didn’t have in the parts bin. Which is the real issue the Durango had. Ranger had plenty already developed for utility use, while foxbody had a narrow range.
FWIU the Durango’s conversion cost priced it out of its’ market, it was more expensive than the Chevy El Camino of the same years but felt more cheapened-out because the base Fairmont had been designed and costed to come in a class below the base Malibu (compact vs midsize) even though they were about the same size.
And of course the Malibu’s main, infamous cheapening-out was entirely irrelevant to the El Camino – no back seat, no rear side windows, no fixed rear side windows that should’ve rolled down.
“step filter what are you doing?” got me so good.
Congrats to the winners!
Thank you and Happy Birdy to all!