Max and I are in New York City. I sit at a window stuffing myself full of bagels and think about things I meant to write but didn’t. Forgive me, internet, I haven’t sent a newsletter in more than a month, forgive me I didn’t post a photo shoot on insta, my followers want to know where I went, am I still alive, what am I up to.

My dear Reader: I do not have any fucking clue what I am up to.

I’m writing this quick and dirty because I have been stuck on sending newsletters even though I have a million things I want to say and my schedule is capacious enough that I should be able to find the time to say them.

But the words are all jumbled up in my mind and I know they are just the best words, the cleverest words, I have all the best words, she says, giraffe and airplane and rhinoceros, I can ace your cognitive test, like Our Dear Leader has been bragging, but words are just words, they need to be put together in the right order, they need to have meaning, they need to be chosen deliberately by a human mind, I would not ask you to read words that were not, but that’s why I haven’t sent you any newsletters, because when I go to write the words down I can’t immediately make them meaningful, intelligible, and it HURTS, it burns, master, it burns, it feels bad, and then I stop almost immediately.

Oh look, she has no grit, she failed the cupcake test, she doesn’t know how to grind, she’s a quitter, she’s a loser, she’s a flake.

I mean, what I am is someone who spent April thru August trying very hard not to die, and so yeah, I guess my grit got ground down, it’s hard to come back from that, I’m trying to have some compassion for myself, but also I really want to send something out to you all because it is one of my most fundamental beliefs about the world that my words can make a difference.

But, ugh, I hate all those words I just wrote and now I want to cry.

***

Let me try again, with lower standards this time.

I’m sitting now in a coffeeshop across from where we’ve been staying in NYC, and it’s not the best location for the moment due to the fact that they are loudly digging up the street, but another woman just came in as well, driven to this coffeeshop because the one she usually goes to has a gas leak and we are commiserating about the noise and the coffee shop guy closes the door for us to block out the noise — and — here we are, in community….

***

Last week I was walking back from the Soho Trader Joe’s and I tried to bum a cigarette off a nice woman I saw sitting on a bench smoking a cigarette. “Oh, I bummed this one,” she said apologetically. “I don’t let myself buy them anymore”. I laughed. “Me either,” I said. Another day I was sitting outside Penn Station and I watched a woman bum a cigarette off a guy sitting next to me. Three minutes later he turned to me and asked did I want one too. “hah, you saw me looking,” I said, “but no. I mean, yes, but no. But also I just think it’s heartwarming, the bumming of cigarettes.” He looked at me like I was a little daft, which I am. But the bumming of cigarettes is a microcosm of mutual aid, as is the provision of a lighter. In this paper I will —

And — community —

***

Speaking of community, speaking of mutual aid.

In late August, I started volunteering for my local food pantry. I show up and help unload trucks. Acorn squash, limes, diapers, soap. Carrots, lettuce, eggs, granola bars, milk. Ramen and canned tomatoes. I live in a town with a lot of wealth, but people are always lining up for the food pantry. For me, it is simple, straightforward work. It is physical, it is social, it is IRL.

I didn’t really used to think of a food pantry as political, but of course a food pantry is political. A food pantry declares that people should not have to go hungry in the midst of plenty. A food pantry is not trying to disrupt anything, turn a profit, address theoretical future existential risks to humanity. A food pantry is addressing current existential risks to humanity, to actually existing humans right in this minute, just as the Gaza flotillas have been trying to do. A food pantry does not think that poverty or hunger mean you are defective or immoral or lazy, it does not comment on these topics, it simply provides food.

Yes, I understand there are complexities to the operation of food pantries, but my role is simple: move the food. I like this simple role, one that does not require me to add links or mess with styles, make a slide deck, care about ARR or EBIDTA. I do not have to talk to a chatbot or a tech bro to do the work. I do not have to join the zoom, answer the Slack message, write the progress report. I just move the food.

~~~

If you have been reading the news the last few days, you might have noticed people writing ever more urgently about the food. That is because, while the (US) federal government has the money to continue to provide SNAP benefits in November, but they are choosing not to. 12% of US residents receive SNAP benefits. SNAP, for those who are not US-based or aren’t familiar with current terminology, provides cash for food.

Our government is choosing to deliberately starve the US population.

Other people have written about how cruel and fucked up this is, about the kind of evil people willing and eager to starve their own populations into submission. I won’t repeat them here. I will just, along with everyone else on the internet who gives a damn, tell you that you have before you an unbelievably simple and satisfying opportunity/obligation for the practice of mutual aid and the building of a community strong enough to stand against shameless cruelty: feed your neighbors.

The first and most obvious way to do this is to donate money to your local food bank and food pantry. In Boston this is the Greater Boston Food Bank and my local pantry is the Brookline Food Pantry. If all you do is give money, that is very fucking important, so don’t say “all I did was give money” and feel bad about it. Money buys food, and the food banks can buy more food per dollar than you can.

Also you can volunteer. As I described above, it is hard to find a more immediately feel-good way of spending your time than feeding people. Most importantly, THE PEOPLE GET FED!

Finally, there are other ways to help get people food. Food pantries can’t serve every hungry person, for all kinds of reasons.You might have a community fridge that you can drop food off at. You might get involved in a group that provides meals and other supplies to the unhoused. You might check with your local schools and libraries to see if there are opportunities to distribute food through those channels (even just classroom snacks can make a difference to students who aren’t getting enough food at home).

It’s evil to starve people, but we don’t have to let people starve.

***

Max and I went to No Kings in New York City. This seems like a million years ago now but that is because since then somehow half the White House has been demolished and we are starting a war with Venezuela and ICE is throwing more and more tear gas in the streets of Chicago and we are debating whether a man with a Nazi tattoo and some kind of fishy stories about that Nazi tattoo, a guy who also turns out to have worked for Blackwater, i.e. WAS A MERCENARY, is a suitable Democratic candidate for the Senate. (sidetone: read Tressie McMillan Cottom about hit, she always has a great take.) So much has happened since No Kings that if I hadn’t already started this newsletter last week, when the White House had not been mutilated, I might have entirely forgotten that No Kings happened at all.

It did happen, and it was huge, despite the poor media coverage. It was also a lot of fun. (Yes, we are allowed to have fun while protesting). I hand-rolled a poster from some spare cardboard and the sharpie I carry with me everywhere these days. The poster said “Absolutely the Fuck Not” and it was very popular amongst middle aged women at the protest. Apparently we’re all very angry.

Anyways here I am with my sign:

****

Also while we’ve been in NYC, friend.ai, which I will not link to, has been papering the city with ads, which the people of NYC then creatively defaced. friend.ai is a company that sells a little surveillance pendant you can wear to ensure that you lose all your actual friends. Last weekend the company did some promotional event in a park near where we are staying, which Max and I stumbled upon. Those of you who follow me on bluesky may have noticed that I have a lot of rage toward wearable surveillance tech.

Reader, I saw that friend.ai promo event and I lost my fucking head. There was a guy with a camera and a line of people waiting to yell at some poor person dressed up as the friend pendant. “What is this, do I get to yell about the surveillance tech?” I yelled. “Yes, absolutely,” someone told me. “Just a couple of waivers for you to sign.” “Waivers?” I yelled. “This is a fucking promotional event? Fuck that! Fuck your surveillance tech! People who wear this shit are unfuckable losers!” I yelled, directly at the camera, while giving the double finger.

Max casually walked away to the other end of the park, like he didn’t know me, which he probably at that moment wished were true. I started walking away after I was done with the yelling, but the cameraman followed me. “I’m filming a documentary” he said, “and I’d like to use this footage.”

I got the documentary filmmaker’s number and said I’d think about it. I did think about it. But in the end I told the guy I didn’t think you could make a documentary about a 23 year old tech founder and his dumbass startup without it becoming a hagiography, and I had no desire to play a bit part in a hagiography as the wild-eyed profanity-spewing enraged middle-aged woman, even though I am, in fact a wild-eyed profanity-spewing enraged middle aged woman.

***

Finally, again, I know it was a month ago now that Ezra Klein wrote a completely dumb essay about Charlie Kirk and then had Ta-Nehisi Coates on his podcast (can we get rid of podcasts, by the way? PLEASE???) so that Coates could explain to him how very wrong he was and Klein could utterly fail to understand his point. But I keep thinking about that conversation (I read the transcript, because I don’t listen to podcasts — gift link)

In it, Klein asks Coates why “we” are losing, and Coates matter of factly says sometimes you lose. Losing doesn’t mean you’re doing something wrong or, importantly, that your values are wrong because they are out of step with the values currently in ascendance. The values currently in ascendance are cruelty and punishment, exclusion, hate, degradation. They suck.

Anyways, here’s part of the exchange:

Then let me flip that question a bit. Why are we losing?

We’re losing because there are always moments when we lose.

See, that feels very fatalistic to me.

It doesn’t feel fatalistic to me. It feels like the truth. Let me express what I mean.

I’m Ta-Nehisi Coates, I’m the writer, I’m the individual, right? But I am part of something larger, and I’ve always felt myself as part of something larger. I have a tradition, I have ancestry, I have heritage. What that means is that I do whatever I do within the time that I have in my life, whatever time I’m gifted with, and much of what I do is built on what other people did before them.

Then, after that, I leave the struggle where I leave it, and hopefully, it’s in a better place. Oftentimes it’s not. That’s the history in fact. And then my progeny, they pick it up, and they keep it going.

I can't get this exchange out of my head.

When you read or listen to a man like Coates talking to a man like Klein, it’s immediately obvious which of those two people is more admirable. Coates clearly has wildly more moral clarity, understanding of history, and courage. Coates is grounded; Klein is not. Coates has really thought through what matters to him; Klein has spent his career scrambling to say stuff to stay relevant and feel important.

I keep going back to this exchange because there has never been a more critical time for each of us to clarify our values and to reach for courage. To access the courage of our convictions, we will need to pay more attention to the people who are obviously already doing that, like Coates, and less attention to the ones flailing around trying to make sure that they “win”, like Klein.

***

I started this essay by saying I don’t have any idea what the fuck I am doing. Here we are at the end of the essay, and I see that this is not true.

Sure, in the day-to-day sense it is frequently true: I wake up and try to figure out how to spend my day, I start a neighborhood chat group but I don’t know if it will work or if I am doing it right, I take a drawing class and can’t even decide if I like it or not. I wait for Max at the entrance of a camera store in New York, and while waiting I start talking to the guy at the door, and he tells me it’s a grand opening and there will be prosecco later, so I return to the store for prosecco and I meet a woman there who I think is cool and we exchange numbers and go to a wine bar and then I have maybe a new friend, but maybe not, because I don’t have any idea what the fuck I am doing.

But in a much deeper sense, I know exactly what I care about, and what I’m trying to do. I am trying to orient my energy and creativity and labor towards the moral ground on which I stand, I am trying to live up to my own values, I’m trying to build courage and clarity and strength, for myself and my community. I’m trying to show the fuck up to this terrifying historical moment, with bravery, not cowardice.

Just because it’s difficult and confusing, just because I’m not sure exactly how to do what I’m trying to do, doesn’t mean that I don’t know what that is.

Subscribe now

Share

If you’ve ever dealt with replacing a modern headlight assembly before, you’ll know they’re insanely expensive. The pods that hold the lights, daytime-running lights, and turn signals can easily cost four figures.

Because they’re usually sealed together with glue, replacing individual parts within the assembly is a huge pain, to the point where it’s actually cheaper to buy a whole new unit. For years now, owners and insurance companies have had to front massive costs to get headlights fixed, even when there’s only minor damage.

Mercedes, under the guise of wishing to make it easier for scrapyards to disassemble and recycle parts, finally has a solution—one that I hope the rest of the industry follows.

Mercedes Wants To Make Sure Its Cars Are Easy To Recycle

Have you ever wondered what happens to a car when it’s no longer viable as a car? Whether it’s been crashed, broken to the point of being too expensive to fix, or rusted to the point of being unsafe to drive, cars like this usually end up in a junkyard to be salvaged.

Even if a car can’t be driven anymore, it still has some value. Cars are complex machines with a lot of different parts, which means even worthless examples usually have working or undamaged pieces that can be salvaged and sold (glass, body panels, interior pieces, wheels, etc.), and metals that can be recycled. This is how salvage yards make their money.

Because cars are made up of so many different materials and assembled in increasingly intricate ways, it’s impossible to recycle everything from a vehicle in a reasonable time frame. Taking apart a modern car by hand, with all of its wiring, glue, welds, and fittings, can take weeks. So a lot of recyclable materials end up in the trash because they’d take too long to separate from the rest of the car. There usually isn’t much delicacy when it comes to this type of work:

Mercedes, realizing a lot of materials that could’ve been recycled in the dismantling process are ending up in the trash, never to be used again, has launched a new initiative within the company called Tomorrow XX. The program is taking a look at more than 40 components, reengineering them to reduce their carbon footprint and make them easier to use again as raw materials. From the release:

At the end of a vehicle’s lifecycle, Mercedes-Benz wants to close the loop and return as many recyclable materials as possible to the system. The prerequisite for material recycling is ensuring components are easy to dismantle and that different materials can be separated by type.

How, exactly, does Mercedes plan to do this? Less glue and less welding, by the sounds of it.

Finally, A Modern-Day Headlight That Makes Sense

Previously, replacing something as simple as a headlight lens or bulb on a modern headlight assembly would take a ton of hours and a lot of painstaking glue-related work, where you’d have to heat up the glue and peel apart delicate pieces of plastic. Do it wrong, and you’ll end up breaking something (ask me how I know). Mercedes’ new headlight concept sidesteps all of that with an exceedingly simple method:

The various components such as the lens, cover trim and frame, housing and electronics are joined with fasteners rather than glue (today’s standard practice). As a result, the headlight can be separated into individual components with ease and without damage. This means individual components can be replaced, making a modern headlight repairable for the first time. Following a stone chip, for instance, there is no need to replace the entire headlight, just the lens. For customers, this could make repairs more efficient in future. The longer service life of headlights could also help conserve resources and minimize carbon emissions.

This is exactly how headlight assemblies used to be, when stuff was easy to fix. I feel like this sort of fastening method could’ve been reimplemented on modern headlights years ago, when manufacturers started realizing how expensive and annoying dealing with glue was. Alas, it was probably quicker and cheaper to use glue, which is why virtually every headlight assembly still uses it.

Mercedes goes on to say that each part of the headlight is made from one specific material, making those parts easier to sort for reuse or recycling. The company estimates that using this type of assembly could reduce carbon emissions by nearly 50 percent by saving on manufacturing. I’m just happy it won’t cost owners an arm and a leg to replace a cracked lens anymore.

Headlights are just the tip of the iceberg for Mercedes. It provides the door panel, a shockingly complicated part in 2025, as another example:

A similarly complex component are interior door panels, which consist of different parts joined by ultrasonic welding. Mercedes-Benz has developed a new joining technology to better and more easily separate individual materials. The adapted thermoplastic rivet is now easy to undo, allowing faster separation of individual components without damage. Optimizing dismantling in this way both simplifies repair and improves recyclability. The new technology could potentially replace a large number of thermoplastic joints in vehicle interiors.

Having dealt with the horrors of disassembling glued-together headlight assemblies and door panels in the past, I really think Mercedes is onto something here. Even if there was no environmental benefit here, I’d be really into this idea, because it makes the lives of repair workers and disassembly facilities way easier. Every other automaker should take notice.

Top graphic images: Mercedes-Benz

The post Mercedes Has Finally Figured Out A Way To Sell Modern Headlights That Don’t Cost $1 Billion To Replace appeared first on The Autopian.

I felt a great disturbance in the force this morning, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. Those were the myriad bloggers and Instagrammers ready to write their “I’m over Gymkhana” takes. And I get it. The temptation is strong. Maybe one day I will write that post. But that day isn’t today.

Friends, I am old enough to remember when Gymkhana was a weird project that Ken Block and Brian Scotto were working on, with Mike Spinelli somehow tangentially involved. We had these things called magazines and, for whatever reason, this magazine took Block and his Crawford Performance-prepared WRX out for some ridiculous stunt driving.

They didn’t even call it Gymkhana. They called it “Gymkhana Practice” and it ruled. It was just a car on some tarmac dashing around like a very expensive horse. Or, well, like 530 horses. It was pure, and it was excellent.

Like all things pure and excellent, it felt more commercialized as it got bigger. That’s a silly thing to feel since the original was simultaneously an ad for DC Shoes and Monster Energy, but the lack of polish was kind of the point. If someone gives you millions of dollars to make one of these things, it’ll get polished. That’s what the money is for. They even called the second one an “Infomercial” in a nod to what had changed.

You could argue that each one got better, as the filmmakers involved improved, the technology evolved, and the cars got wilder. There was the switch to Ford, and then the final one with Ken, his Electrikhana, shot before he tragically died.

Travis Pastrana had already taken over by then, back in a Subaru, and it was a little more goofy and fun like the originals. It was content to enjoy and not think too much about, frankly. So when it was announced that Pastrana would be driving a 9,500 RPM Subaru “Brataroo” and going to Australia–home of the hoon–I didn’t give it much neural energy.

The 2025 Gymkhana is “Aussie Shred” and, yeah, it shreds. From start to finish, it’s both as beautiful as the later films (great work to Will Roegge, the cinematographer) and as buoyant and pleasingly self-referential as the older ones (props to Scotto and the creative team).

We’ve got a guy in a kangaroo suit on a Segway for the old heads, Pastrana in flannel driving across water for the new kids, and mayhem for all sickos in between.

Do I have a favorite moment? Yeah. Perhaps this is because Mount Panorama is on my list of tracks I have to visit before I kick it, or my love of Aussie Supercars, but Pastrana driving onto Bathurst is a cinematic adrenaline rush as good as anything you’ll see in modern cinema. It felt real and hyperreal at the same time.

Did you catch all the cameos? There are a lot of them. It’s also significant that they filmed it in Australia at all.

“Australia had long been at the top of the list of potential Gymkhana Film locations.” said Scotto. “Ken Block and I attempted to shoot Gymkhana Nine there, but were met with a resounding no, because of the climate of anti-hoon laws at the time. A decade later, when we reapproached the Australian government, we were met with open arms. This combination of the unfinished business we had down under and this being Pastrana’s last film in the series, not only makes it very special to me, but also put the pressure on to push the limit of what we could do both in the car and behind the camera.”

Sometimes pressure creates diamonds.

Top photo: Hoonigan

The post I Think This Is The Best Gymkhana Since The Original, But Watch It And Tell Me What You Think appeared first on The Autopian.

Ford’s upcoming “Universal Car Platform” promises to give customers far more budget-friendly autos, reportedly starting with a sub-$30,000 EV pickup truck. But when pushed, Ford spokespeople claim the pickup isn’t really going to be a “pickup truck” in the traditional sense at all.

If it’s not a pickup, what is it? Do people really want an electric pickup anyway? How is “under $30,000” really budget-friendly? After thinking about this for the last few weeks, I have ideas for what Ford’s “Universal Car Platform” entries could look like, and how Ford could deliver the fun and affordable new vehicle many are looking for.

We’ve gotten a taste of a few “affordable” new-style pickups that have resonated with buyers. Ford’s Maverick unibody pickup exploded on the market at the magic “sub $20,000” price point back in 2022, but has quickly risen in cost to the point that now it’s essentially a near-$30,000 proposition once you add a few options. It’s still a good value, but not the how-do-they-do-it deal that fired up car buyers initially.

So Cheap, You Could Buy Two!

Recently, the Jeff Bezos-backed Slate truck appeared to attract those same bargain pickup truck hunters with a bare-bones EV that was supposedly going to start at – you guessed it – around $20,000. Since the press launch, tax credit issues and such have started to push the price up to the point where the Slate is starting to look a lot like a too-good-to-be-true misfire.

Honestly, I’m not surprised that a startup would have a hard time creating the super-cheap vehicle that the public seems to be clamoring for. To make such a car will likely take a sea change, and it’s no wonder that Ford is talking about reinventing the assembly line to do it: the very thing that Henry Ford made over a hundred years ago to make cars affordable to the masses in the first place.

Ford is understandably vague about how this will work, showing an image of subassemblies coming together to form the finished car instead of the traditional Henry Ford straight line:

We’ve seen patent drawings from Ford that show front and rear units that bolt to a central module with batteries; it’s essentially a Lego system of making cars.

Tesla has shown what appears to be a very similar system with its “gigacast” parts – large, one-piece stampings that reduce labor costs. It seems that both Ford and Tesla are also using adjustable frame rails to connect these components like Lego pieces, which helps alleviate my fears of rusted bolts connecting the front motor module in place giving way and the entire nose of your ten-year-old car driving off across an intersection while you stay sitting at the light.

Such a system would take the whole modular thing to a new level, as we quoted from Ford a little while back:

The platform reduces parts by 20% versus a typical vehicle, with 25% fewer fasteners, 40% fewer workstations dock-to-dock in the plant and 15% faster assembly time. Lower cost of ownership over five years than a three-year-old used Tesla Model Y.

Ford is also showing animations that indicate the mechanical components would be used to make a wide variety of different vehicles. Pickup trucks, SUVs and vans would all be possible with the same mechanical components.

This is a more advanced version of what is not even close to being a new idea, of course, as Lee Iacocca proved around four decades ago with a capital letter K:

Indeed, Ford did the same things as well, such as these identical-under-the-skin cars being made to fit the very disparate personalities of Charlie’s lovely Angels.

There have been plenty of renderings shown on various websites of what this “compact EV pickup” might look like; our own Adrian Clarke did his own cool rendition of something that was a bit like a more aerodynamic and simplified Maverick. Still, to really save money, I think Ford should start with a collection of vehicles that share the vast majority of body parts, too.

Also, I believe that Ford needs to push this idea even further than the purely electric platform they’re proposing. This “$30,000 EV” isn’t something that’s in as great a demand today as we thought it might be five years ago, and the F-150 Lighting has shown the appetite for EV pickups is about the same as that for haggis outside of Scotland. If the first Maverick and the Slate have proved anything, it’s that people want a $20,000 new vehicle, full stop. Also, the impending death of Nissan’s last sub-$20,000 car in America indicates that even the cheapest buyers seem to want something other than a subcompact four-door sedan. With today’s fastback styling, the utility level of most modern sedans is pretty pathetic, and the near-vertical trunk lid opening of the Versa proves this.

I’m not sure how Ford could hit this very low price point, but I’ve got a few ideas. We’ll also have to explore what this “not really a pickup” body style even looks like. Let’s get started on Project Pinto. Yes, that’s the name.

Like A Real-Life LEGO Car

First of all, there’s a misconception that making a “stripped down” version of a car with crank windows and no radio will be the answer to the ultra-cheap car. That’s usually not the case today; you’ll certainly never chop thousands out of the price of a product by doing that. You see, a wind-up handle mechanism doesn’t really cost any less than an electric motor, and electronics likely cost the same whether they receive FM radio or not. In fact, it might cost the company more since they’ll need to make two separate window mechanisms and a special non-radio-receiving head unit to offer as options instead of just making them all the same. As Adrian has alluded to in earlier posts, the way to build an economical car is fewer parts, and parts that are shared with other vehicles in your lineup.

Here’s what I have in mind for Project Pinto. First, we’ll want the Pinto to be a smaller car than the Maverick; I’m thinking more like the length of that Slate and the similar-sized Bronco Sport like below:

Ford has called this upcoming “EV pickup” a “midsize,” but that’s a rather big vehicle, especially if low overall cost is the main goal. I think a cheap car should be small for economy of materials; at the very least, it needs to be a size down from the Maverick for logical progression of price point. Ford claims a midsized EV can exist in the same space as the hybrid Maverick, but why muddy the waters?

We could build the front, center, and back of the Pinto separately as Ford intends, but I’m not sure about the whole EV-only thing. Let’s let the buyer choose; the front and back modules could offer options. Maybe we’d start with a gasoline-powered 2.0-liter four up front with an automatic for the cheapest version; maybe 160 horsepower or so? Ford is claiming the new Universal Car will be as fast as an Ecoboost Mustang. My question is, why? A Mustang is supposed to be fast, but an economical car just needs to be “peppy” with “good pickup.” That two liter will be plenty quick for an entry-level pickup (as much as it pains me to say it, there’s no point in spending money we’re trying to save to develop a manual transmission version that a hundred people would buy).

Next up could be an EV version with batteries in the floor section and an electric motor either up front, front and back, or with the gas engine up front and the electric motor in back for a hybrid setup. Jason would probably want two liter fours front and back as an option, but we’ll just let that one go.

Also, I’d want cars to share as many parts as possible, not just under the skin. That means the front doors, entire front clip, and dash will be common, and only the overall framework would change to make the different body styles. Still, what body styles are we talking about?

Well, to start with, what is this “not necessarily pickup” thing that Ford says will kick off the program? For that, I figured this bargain basement thing would indeed have a cargo bed, but it would be so short that it would almost be the size of a sedan trunk. This isn’t a new concept; Jason wrote about examples of this from overseas over half a century ago:

That’s the inspiration for our car/truck, which we’ll call a “utility.” The bed would be covered and weatherproof, but you could take off the cover to accommodate tall items. You could fold down the tailgate and put a “fence” around it to get a larger cargo bed, or with an optional “midgate” open, you might carry items that are surprisingly long. This new kind of “sedan truck” we’d call a “utility” could look a bit odd, but Ford might provide rails along the cargo bed to “normalize” the look of the Pinto. These would, of course, be optional, but the salesperson would tell the customer that “they’d only add a few cents to your monthly payment.” What you’d have then is a “sedan” without the stigma of “small sedan,” and with far more utility.

Not your scene? There would be a Pinto SUV, of course, with the rear cargo bed enclosed. Need more room? No problem; a larger center floor and roof section would allow for a longer wheelbase compact pickup, not much smaller than the Maverick, but again with the same doors and front end. You’ve already guessed the next part: we can enclose the long wheelbase pickup to make a larger Pinto SUV that would be just long enough to allow for a little third row.

Now we have a full Lego kit of parts where you can build a series of products that could fit the shopping list of almost any sub-$30,000 car buyer. The last question is, what would it look like?

This Pinto Will Be Fire

It’s sort of odd that the Ford Maverick and the proposed Slate seem to be well received in today’s world of ultra-swoopy-looking cars with so many creases and cuts in the bodywork that I sometimes wonder if they’ve just been in a fender-bender (sorry, Hyundai). Simpler isn’t always better, but somehow this clean aesthetic cuts through the overly-trendy overstyled visual language on many cars today that will look hopelessly dated in five years (again, sorry Hyundai).

The only glimpse (and I really mean glimpse) of Ford’s upcoming Universal Car appears to show a painfully simple and featureless fascia, so it seems like the clean direction of the Maverick is the way this new product will go as well.

Extrapolating as best we can on that tinny snippet, I’ve come up with an extremely clean and functional-looking design for the new Pinto with single-piece stamped doors and as few body panels as possible. Here’s the animation:

This is the least-expensive version- the “utility” with the short covered “bed”. The optional rails at least make it look less like an oddly proportioned sedan and more like a poor man’s Lamborghini LM002:

The post Instead Of A $30,000 EV, Ford’s Universal Platform Car Should Be The $20,000 Vehicle Everyone Wants appeared first on The Autopian.

Restomods have their place in the world, but most of them don’t excite me. Striving to differentiate the new car from the old one, small tuner shops and manufacturers often do too much when it comes to modification and modernization.

The results are usually restomods that stray too far from the original car’s design, and end up looking goofy or worse. These cars also almost always cost way more than a lot of new supercars, making them appealing only to a very small sect of rich people.

While this latest Lotus Esprit restomod will cost an arm and a leg, I have to admit I really like it. Instead of going over the top with a widebody kit and extra aero, Encor, the firm responsible for the car, uses a far simpler, cleaner design inspired by the 1975 Series 1 Esprit.

This Is How All Restomods Should Be

I think restomods should aim to be as subtle as possible. All modern underneath, but generally comparable to the original car. From a distance, I shouldn’t be able to tell whether the car I’m seeing is a restomod or not. And I think Encor nailed it here.

The only significant changes are to the lighting and the wheels. In place of turn signal lights embedded in the front bumper, there’s now a thin strip of daylight running lights. The pop-up headlights have been retained, fortunately, though the lights themselves are far smaller than the originals. The taillight area, meanwhile, has also been rewored to include a thinner set of blocker light pods.

The wheels are the biggest differentiator here. Instead of using the original S1 wheels for inspiration, the five-spoke wheels were inspired by the five-spokes found on the Esprit Sport 350, a rare, more hardcore version of the Esprit V8.

It’s Not Actually an S1 Esprit

Encor very creatively calls this restomod the Esprit Series 1, and while it might look like a Series 1 Esprit, its bones come from the opposite end of the Esprit family tree. The carbon fiber body panels hide a Series 4 Esprit from the 1990s, complete with that car’s 3.5-liter twin-turbo V8 engine.

Being a restomod, every inch of the powertrain’s been thoroughly gone through and upgraded. Encor says it’s added forged pistons, better injectors, and rebuilt turbochargers. The throttle body has been converted to an electronic unit, while the fueling and cooling systems have been replaced with more modern, higher-performing equivalents.

The result is an extra 50 horsepower, for a nice, even 400 horses in total. Torque is up about the same, from 295 pound-feet to 350. Encor says the Series 1 can sprint to 62 mph in four seconds, on to a top speed “close to” 175 mph, in case you care about performance numbers like that. I personally don’t, but more power and modernity are always nice when dealing with vintage sports cars.

What I’m really happy about are the changes Encor’s made to the transmission. The Renault-sourced five-speed is famous for its ability to fail, even at stock power levels. Chief engineer Will Ives told Autocar the firm wanted to replace the gearbox altogether, but the car’s packaging made that difficult. The press release mentions a stronger input shaft and revised ratios, but it goes deeper than that:

Ives said “it was always considered a limitation of the [original] car, but it’s pretty much impossible to package anything else within the space”, so the team had to find a way to “effectively recreate a new transmission out of the casings of the old”.

Keeping “just a few” pieces of the gearbox’s internals, the team created effectively a new unit. They also added a limited-slip differential to improve the drivetrain’s strength.

“We’re addressing that weakness and that enables us to then take the engine up to a slightly higher output, because we’re no longer limited by the original gearbox,” said Ives (pictured belowm, centre right).

A bunch of other stuff has been upgraded, too. The Series 1 gets the suspension from the Sport 350. The new brakes, meanwhile, come from AP Racing. Thankfully, the power steering has not been converted to electric assistance; Encor is keeping it hydraulically assisted to preserve the car’s “driver-focused character.”

Okay, Maybe I’m Not Completely Sold

I think I can forgive Encor for the wheels, but I don’t think I could live with this interior. While it retains the same general shape as the original Esprit’s cabin, it’s decidedly modern, with a carbon fiber center console and two big screens: one for the gauge cluster and another for the infotainment system.

The inside doesn’t look like a bad place to spend time. I greatly enjoy a plaid-trimmed cabin and the two-spoke wheel, after all. But if I’m paying £430,000 (around $574,000) plus the cost of a donor car, I feel like some nice, classy analog gauges and trim would probably be more appropriate here.

Encor is planning to build 50 of these Series 1 restomods, which feels like the right amount. There can’t be that many more people in the world who would want a car like this and have that kind of money to blow … right?

Top graphic image: Encor

The post Don’t Be Mad: I Actually Love This Lotus Esprit Restomod appeared first on The Autopian.

The Apollo Missions. The Manhattan Project. Ford successfully beating out Ferrari at LeMans. There are certain engineering achievements in American history that have seemed almost super-human, inevitably ending up adapted for a blockbuster movie on the silver screen (see Apollo 13, Oppenheimer, Ford vs. Ferrari). But one American achievement that hasn’t received nearly enough credit is the development of the World War II Jeep, because when you dig into it, you’ll realize that, in a way, it was almost as unlikely as the three incredible feats I just mentioned and that you likely enjoyed along with a cup of soda and a bag of popcorn. Here’s what I mean.

An Undeniable Masterpiece That Inspired Every Iconic 4×4

The World War II Jeep — the subject of the extremely ambitious build I’m tackling thanks to our partners at eBay — is one of the auto industry’s greatest masterpieces. General George C. Marshall referred to it as “America’s greatest contribution to modern warfare.” Legendary WWII journalist Ernie Pyle once said: ““I don’t think we could continue the war without the jeep…It did everything. It went everywhere. Was a faithful as a dog, as strong as a mule, and as agile as a goat. It constantly carried twice what it was designed for and still kept going.” General Dwight D. Eisenhower said the Jeep was one of the most “vital” tools in the U.S.’s success in Europe and Africa.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by The Autopian (@theautopian)

But the Jeep isn’t just a masterpiece because it was an excellent tool for allied forces during WWII; the vehicle’s genius has been proven time and time again well after the war ended in the form of copycats. Just look at the world’s most legendary non-Jeep off-roaders: the Toyota Land Cruiser, the Land Rover, and the Ford Bronco.

Toyota has sold tens of millions of Land Cruisers over the years; Land Rover is a brand built entirely on off-road SUV offerings; and Ford calls the Bronco an “SUV Family,” with two Bronco vehicles selling in absurd quantities. And all three of these iconic brands owe their existence directly to the World War II Jeep.

The very first Toyota Land Cruiser, shown above, was basically a carbon-copy of the WWII Jeep, with Toyota even referring to it as the “Toyota BJ Jeep,” but that name changed, with Toyota writing on its website: “As the Jeep name was a trade mark of Willys-Overland Motors, Toyota changed the vehicle name to the Land Cruiser in June 1954.”

Car culture website Silodrome says the original Toyota Land Cruiser came about when Toyota essentially reverse-engineered a leftover WWII Jeep, with the site writing:

The story of the Toyota Land Cruiser J Series (FJ40 / BJ40 etc) starts in the Philippines during the Second World War, the Japanese had invaded the nation, along which much of the rest of East Asia, and they found an abandoned Jeep that had been left by retreating American forces.

There is a little contention as to exactly which Jeep or Jeep-like vehicle it was that they found, most sources say it was either a Willys Jeep or a Ford GPW (Ford’s Jeep), but some claim it was an American Bantam BRC 60 Mark II.

Toyota themselves haven’t included any reference to this captured vehicle in their own history of the Land Cruiser, and instead pick up the story in the 1950s.

Whichever vehicle it was, we know that it was an American military 4×4, and we know the Japanese military immediately recognised how useful it would be to have their own version.

It was shipped back to Japan, and Toyota was tasked with building a local version using as many off the shelf parts as possible – they were also instructed to make sure it didn’t look too much like a Jeep.

The Land Rover brand was also inspired by a WWII Jeep, and in fact, it began life as one, per Land Rover Sarasota:

Inspired by his own Jeep, Maurice Wilks began creating the very first designs of the Land Rover vehicle alongside his brother, Spencer at Newborough. In an attempt to fill a void in the markets, the design was created to include the Rover car engine and a Jeep chassis. The design originally featured the steering wheel in the center of the vehicle. This was done to make it suitable and convenient for both left and right-handed drivers.

The Land Rover was finally launched in [1948] at the Amsterdam Motor Show, where it was regarded as a huge success. Despite its British origin, they were a universal success, shipping to over 70 countries by the end of the year and to the U.S.A in 1949.

When Ford writes about the initial development of the Bronco, it leans into its WWII Jeep roots, since the company was one of two that built them (along with Willys-Overland):

Why and how did Ford develop the Bronco? For that story, we need to return to World War II. In addition to its other war-time production, Ford was one of three companies which worked to develop the Jeep. During the war, Ford produced more than 250,00 Jeeps and were renowned for their quality. After the war, surplus Jeeps were the choice of returning veterans and outdoor enthusiasts. However, with the improving highway system and demand for a more comfortable driving environment, even on the trails, Ford saw the chance to design and develop a best of class utility vehicle that could also serve as a sports vehicle. We already had experience building the Jeep, and during the late 1950s and early 1960s Ford designed and built the MUTT, a troop utility vehicle.

In 1962, Ford began to extensively survey Jeep and International Harvester Scout owners to see what they liked and disliked about their vehicles. These findings were summarized in an internal memo on July 11, 1963 noting that both vehicles had “poor comfort, ride, noise and vibration qualities” and that the size and power of both were also unsatisfactory. These findings, indicating a gap in the market, went to the Product Planning Committee on October, 23, 1963 with the recommendation for “funds for further development of a Ford utility vehicle, code named Bronco.” A fascinating memo a week later had the subject line “1966 G.O.A.T” as it heading. The G.O.A.T. terminology was indicative of the desire to develop a Goes Over All Terrain vehicle while the document itself describes the drivability of the car.

The list goes on and on. The Steyr Puch Haflinger, considered the greatest 4×4 by the 4×4 King of the World, Victor Ma, was Austria’s replacement for the WWII Jeep. The Nissan Patrol was inspired by the Jeep. One of the largest companies in India is Mahindra & Mahindra, with an annual revenue around $25 billion and over 300,000 employees around the world; where did the company gets its start? It received Knock-Down Kits (CKDs) of civilianized WWII Jeeps (CJ-2As) from the U.S., and simply assembled those vehicles in India. Mitsubishi also built its own WWII Jeep-inspired 4x4s in Japan, the Philippines has literally built its culture around WWII Jeeps (go into any Filipino store and you’ll see a toy “Jeepney,” which is an adapted WWII Jeep used as a bus).

Copied by many, beloved by all, the WWII Jeep was the undeniable beginning of the world’s 4×4 obsession.

80 Years Later, It’s Still The Perfect Formula

Before I get into the unbelievable story of how the WWII Jeep was developed, I just want to reinforce how masterful the design ended up being. I’ve already mentioned how it inspired the world’s 4x4s, but I’d also just like to point out how the Jeep’s basic formula remains pretty much perfect to this day.

As a car journalist, I often review four-wheel drive vehicles, and when I do, the first thing I mention is this: The most important attribute of a capable off-roader is favorable geometry. No lockers or low range gearing or tires can make up for lack of ground clearance or long overhangs. Geometry is king. From there, low-range gearing is important, as are tires, a “flexy” suspension that keeps the tires on the surface even when it’s uneven, underbody protection, traction aids like locking diffs, sway bar disconnects, low end torque, and on and on.

The WWII Jeep’s geometry remains phenomenal even in comparison to modern automobiles. Check out the datasheet above, and you’ll see an approach angle of 45 degrees and a departure angle of 35 degrees. While ground clearance is only about 8.75 inches, as I’ve written before, it’s the location of the ground clearance that has to be considered, and the WWII Jeep’s rocker panels and overhangs are way up high off the ground.

Let’s compare these figures to the two best off-roaders of today: The Ford Bronco Sasquatch and Jeep Wrangler Rubicon two-door have approach angles of 43.2 and the 44, respectively. While they both outdo the WWII Jeep when it comes to departure angle (43.2 and 37, respectively), the WWII Jeep wins in approach angle, which is the more important of the two figures, because getting the front wheels up on an object is a requirement to traverse it; you can often drag the belly or rear end whereas you can’t just ram the front bumper into an object.

Ground clearance is higher on the Wrangler and and Bronco, but that’s because they have absolutely gigantic tires, and while that can be an advantage, it can also be a huge disadvantage. With big tires, tall overhead valve engines (compared with the WWII Jeep’s low flathead motor), and just tall overall profiles, hillclimbs become sketchy unless you extend the wheelbase, which makes the vehicle larger and less maneuverable.

Speaking of larger, the WWII Jeep’s size is one of its biggest advantages. No, it doesn’t have the lockers or the disconnecting say bars or even the flexy coil spring suspension of the Wrangler and Bronco, but it makes up for those disadvantages with a small, flexy frame and just tiny dimensions, which are a huge deal when trying to snake through trees or boulders.

The two-door Jeep Wrangler is 35 inches longer, and the Bronco is 42 inches longer. Width wise, both are about a foot broader. And thanks to the Willys’ folding windshield and lack of a roll bar, it’s 20 inches shorter in height, allowing it to slither under fallen tree branches. As for curb weight, both the Bronco and Wrangler are over 1,500 pounds heavier.

Compare an 80 year-old sports car to a modern sports car, and the oldtimer will get left in the dust. But compare this 80 year-old legend to a modern off-roader, and the gap is surprisingly narrow. It’s proof that America got the formula correct on its first try.

Just watch how the WWII Jeep-based Willys CJ-2A outdoes a modern Mahindra Roxor during my comparison test:

And watch me drive a bone-stock CJ-2A (with slightly bigger tires) through the rocks of Moab, Utah:

A stock Wrangler Sport and stock Bronco Base would probably compare quite evenly off-road to a WWII Jeep, and while the higher trims, the Rubicon and Badlands, would probably leave a WWII Jeep behind in certain terrains, a modified WWII Jeep can hang with darn-near any vehicle out there. It’s a testament to the brilliance of that original platform, as demonstrated by Jeff Petrowich’s BAM BAM and Stan Fuller’s Grampa’s Jeep. Here’s BAM BAM doing crazy things:

And here’s the WWII Jeep king, Rick Pewe, showing off Grampa’s Jeep:

One Of The Greatest Feats In Automobile History

In order to achieve near-perfection on the first try, surely there were thousands of people working on the government’s 1940 request for proposal (RFP) for for a lightweight, troop-carrying 4×4 reconnaissance vehicle, right? Surely, like all those other achievements I mentioned, the full force of American engineering was working together towards this common mission, right?

No.

Only two companies responded to the government’s request, and the one that developed what would become the legendary WWII Jeep was a total underdog: a tiny company in Butler, Pennsylvania that was going through bankruptcy, again. That company was American Bantam, and before I give you some background on how this all went down, you need to know this: This small group of only 16-ish employees designed and built the off-road vehicle that would forever define the world’s off-roaders in a mere 49 days.

Forty-Nine Days.

It Seemed Like Destiny

The improbability of this whole endeavor becomes astounding when you look at the history of American Bantam. Initially, the company was called American Austin, the U.S. division of the British car company Austin, which in 1922 had released its hot-selling Austin Seven, a small car that was a great fit for the U.K. and its struggling economy and high population density. It was, however, not a great fit for the U.S., which, like today, wasn’t so keen on tiny cars.

Nonetheless, Herbert Austin worked to sell his company’s Seven in the U.S., opening a factory in the former home of Standard Steel Car Company in Butler, Pennsylvania. As Paul R. Bruno writes in his book The First Jeep, Butler made a lot of sense, because it had a “forward-thinking business community and a workforce with the skills to manufacture cars.”

After the great depression, a small economy car like the Seven seemed like the perfect option, especially given how well the vehicle had been executed, as Bruno writes:

The vehicles delivered were masterpieces in small car engineering. The basic Austin specification of a 75-inch wheelbase, 40-inch tread, 122-and 53-inch length and width, 60.5-inch coupe height, 8.75-inch ground clearance with a total weight of 1,130 pounds were maintained [from the U.K. car] with American styling.

The American Austin Roadster was an affordable ($445) little car with an absurdly tight turning radius and dimensions much smaller than those of any other American car on sale. But nobody bought it. American Austin tried advertising the car as a secondary car for local driving, but this didn’t work, especially in a struggling economy; only just over 8,500 cars were sold in 1930, per Bruno.

American Austin then doubled down, offering more versions of the car; sales got even worse in 1931, and 1932 looked like the end. Then, per The First Jeep, a salesman named Roy S. Evans who had been excited about the small-car concept in the U.S. bought out the company, built the leftover stock of 1,500 cars and sold them for a rather reasonable $295, and did a bit of dealing with suppliers. He moved some more cars, but before long, American Austin Car Company was again headed into bankruptcy.

Evans didn’t give up, raising more money and rebranding the company with a nickname the diminutive vehicles had earned from the general public: Bantam. Thus, in 1937, American Austin Car Company became American Bantam Car Company. After working the then-new Reconstruction Finance Corporation and using a lien against the factory for more cash, American Bantam was back churning out cars, this time with more standardized off-the shelf parts. Harold Crist became the plant manager, and the vehicles were restyled, though another recession hit in 1938.

“The Bantam, thanks to Harold Crist and his team, was a state-of-the-art small car, and the little company in Butler, Pennsylvania was the unlikely, and singular depository of expertise on economy cars in the United States,” writes Bruno. Evans cut up the coupe to offer a new car, a convertible, but America just didn’t want tiny cars. “The firm had excellent, high quality products, which were state-of-the-art for small cars at the time, but nobody wanted them,” The First Jeep reads.

In 1939, the company sold just over 1200 vehicles, then down to 800 in 1940, and by June it was bankrupt again. But there was one last gasp for American Bantam: a military vehicle.

Everyone knew that by the 1930s warfare would be more mobile than the trench warfare of WWI. The military tested numerous tractors and 1/2 4×4 trucks including the Marmon Harrington (which the army was keen on), and it had developed out of junked American Austin parts a small scout car called the Howie Machine Gun Carrier. With a need for big payload to carry weapons for the infantry, but also the desire for a horse-like, stealthy reconnaissance vehicle for the artillery, it seemed like something between the 1/2 truck and the Howie Machine Gun Carrier (or the motorcycle+sidecar that the military had used up to that point) made sense. From The First Jeep:

“Development and testing during the latter half the 1930s had shown an adequate vehicle did not exist between the motorcycle and sidecar and the 1/2 ton 4×4 truck.”

American Bantam had sent a 1/2 truck for evaluation in the late 1930s (this was after the army had bought some American Austin Roadsters for testing in the early 1930s), but it wasn’t good enough. Bantam essentially apologized to the army and asked for another chance, but it was denied. Bantam’s leadership knew this was the only hope the company had to remain solvent, so it refused to give up. From Bruno’s book:

“[Bantam President Francis Fenn] knew that his company’s small cars were not selling, that by the beginning of 1940 the firm was bankrupt, and that producing an automobile for the Army was the only option left to save the company.”

What happened from here gets a bit murky, but there’s no doubt that a key player was Charles “Harry” Payne, a former naval aviator who became an ace salesman, and someone who had needed a good, small off-road vehicle when trying to rescue pilots being trained for an aircraft company he used to run. Per The First Jeep, Payne had been introduced to Bantam through someone at the Reconstruction Finance Committee, and was brought in to interface with aircraft companies keen to leverage Bantam’s manufacturing expertise to build aircraft parts.

As there was no Air Force at the time (it was the Army Air Corps), the assignment saw Payne interfacing with the U.S. Army. Here was a former-army, expert salesman who worked for the premier small-car company in the U.S. chatting regularly with the U.S. army, which had interest in a small reconnaissance vehicle. It was a perfect opportunity.

Here’s what Col. Oseth, who was in charge of “development of motor vehicles” for the Chief of Infantry Office said, per The First Jeep:

“I told Mr. Payne, in substance, this after we had definitely dismissed these other two vehicles, if you will take your bantam and put a front wheel drive, a front wheel driven front axle on it so as to make it four by four, strip the body down to the bare essentials and put power enough in there to keep those wheels turning, we will be willing to talk business with you, because that is what we are looking for. Mr. Payne said it was almost impossible…”

As I understand it, it was these meetings between Colonel Ingomar M. Oseth (whom Time Magazine called in a Nov. 1941 issue “The Army’s No. 1 jeep expert”) and Bantam’s Harry Payne that ultimately led to the establishment of detailed specs that would be sent out to over 130 automakers.

Development of those specs also involved a trip to Bantam’s factory, which was run by Harold Crist. Brian J. Duddy of the U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Acquisition University (a Ft. Belvoir-based training school for the military) wrote in The Jeep at 70: A Defense Acquisition Success Story:

The details of the reconnaissance car specification drawn up by the Technical Committee were as follows: The 1 /4-ton vehicle had to have 4-wheel drive, a maximum weight of 1,200 pounds, a useful load of 600 pounds, a maximum height of 36 inches, and a wheelbase of 75 inches. The body style was to be rectangular with bucket seats and a fold-down windshield. Performance requirements included a minimum top speed of 50 mph and a minimum sustained speed of 3 mph.

As soon as the requirements were formalized, a small group of Army officers and civilians visited the Bantam factory in Butler, Pennsylvania, to further test Bantam vehicles and discuss the concept of the new military car with the Bantam development group (Denfeld & Fry, 1973; Rifkind, 1943). The results of this meeting allowed the Army to continue to refine the specifications and even sketch a rough outline of what the new vehicle should look like. Thus, by working with industry the Army had arrived at a set of requirements that was simple, functional—and most importantly—achievable (Denfeld & Fry, 1973).

On June 27, 1940, the Ordnance Technical Committee issued its final recommendations for a 1 /4-ton, 4×4 truck. (The term 4×4 meant the vehicle had four wheels, all of which were powered.) The vehicle maximum weight was now raised to 1,300 pounds with a 600-pound payload, and the wheel base was increased to 80 inches (Probst, 1976; Wells, 1946; Vanderveen, 1971; Denfeld & Fry, 1973). To keep the design simple, the Army intended for manufacturers to use several common pieces of military vehicle equipment already available such as tail lights and towing pintles. The Army sent invitations to bid on 70 “pilot” trucks or sample models to 135 manufacturers. Bidding instructions mandated that the first pilot model should be delivered to Camp Holabird in Baltimore in 49 days.

Only two automakers bothered answering the call, because what the Army was asking for was, frankly, impossible. Bantam, though, had no choice, and it also had a trick under its sleeve: Its new freelance designer, Karl Probst, simply ignored the weight spec. 1,300 pounds, in conjunction with the other specifications, was just not going to happen, and Bantam had enough engineering know-how to recognize that nobody else could pull it off. As Motor Trend wrote in a story that quotes the great Jeep historian Patrick R. Foster:

Bantam was confident no competitor would come close to the specification’s weight limit. Its own four-cylinder engine made half the 40-horsepower minimum, so Bantam fitted its entry with a 46-horse Continental four. Bantam won a contract for 70 vehicles, with a prototype to be delivered to the Army’s Camp Holabird, Maryland, proving grounds by September 23.

Bantam Reconnaissance Car #1, BRC, looked like the World War II Jeep we know, except for its curved hood and rounded front clip, not the flat pieces that would make the Jeep so easy to build and repair. It weighed 1,840 pounds, 570 more than the prescribed limit. Bantam delivered the prototype to Camp Holabird on September 22, where it performed beautifully before the eyes of the Quartermaster Corps, with Ford and Willys representatives also in attendance.

Developing an off-road icon in 49 days (and then having to make 69 remaining models within 75 days), whether you meet the weight requirement or not, is absurd. And it makes sense that the only two companies that responded to the bid, American Bantam and Willys-Overland, were struggling automakers that had expertise in small-car development and that offered a small four-cylinder engine.

Willys couldn’t pull off the ask, and was therefore out of contention, but American Bantam worked late into the night to meet the deadline, with Duddy writing:

Undaunted, [Bantam] pressed on with their design. Working around the clock, Bantam completed the prototype and company executives drove the vehicle directly from the factory in Butler to Camp Holabird, its first long-distance trip. On September 23, they made it through the gate at Holabird with only 30 minutes to spare on their 49-day deadline.

The Bantam vehicle, as delivered, weighed in at 1,840 pounds and was powered by a 45hp Continental engine. Since the vehicle was able to successfully complete a series of strenuous tests at Holabird, the Army representatives believed that the maximum weight target could be reconsidered.

[…]

Since it was extremely satisfied with the prototype, the Army gave the go-ahead to Bantam to initiate production of the other 70 pilot vehicles based on that design, but incorporating some design changes and improvements that resulted from the early testing of the prototype. These changes were to improve both performance and reliability.

The story from here is fairly well-known, and a bit sad. This scrappy little bankrupt, Butler, PA-based company had, against all odds, revolutionized not only warfare, but the auto industry at large, eventually inspiring every legendary 4×4 that would come after it. And it did it all in 49 days! But in the end, the U.S. Army handed over Bantam’s brilliant design to the competition, as Motor Trend writes:

“Much to the horror and surprise of the Bantam engineers,” Bernier writes in “Bantam’s jeep,” “Bob Brown, a civilian engineer for Holabird, provided the Willys and Ford representatives copies of Bantam’s blueprints and engineering data, as well as full access to the Bantam prototype car.” The Quartermaster, he writes, encouraged the two competitors to develop similar prototypes.

After tweaking BRC #1, the Army ordered 500 reconnaissance cars each from Bantam, Willys, and Ford. Bantam protested, and the Quartermaster Corps explained that there was a shortage of constant velocity joints from its supplier. Spicer Manufacturing required orders for 1500 vehicles to justify mass-production tooling.

The Army eventually revised its weight requirements, with the full spec sheet at the bottom of this article. In the end, almost every single WWII Jeep was built by either Willys-Overland or Ford Motor Company,  firms that the U.S. government believed had better likelihood of quickly manufacturing hundreds of thousands of Jeeps. Bantam built utility trailers for the Jeeps, as well as other wartime instruments.

The scrappy team had changed the world forever with a true engineering masterpiece — a game-changer by all metrics. But it would be one that Bantam would never mass-produce, and one that wouldn’t save it from its 1956 demise.

 
¼ ton 4×4 Specs Sent To 135 Companies:

C.  SERVICE REQUIREMENTS.

C-1.  General. The trucks described in this specification are intended for use as tactical trucks by the United States Army. They will be required to transport the rated payload, which consists of military supplies, equipment and personnel, at relatively high rates of speed over all typos of roads, trails, open and rolling cross country, under all conditions of weather and terrain, while at times towing a trailed load, such as a 37mm anti-tank gun, and all units and assemblies in the truck must be suitable for such use. Any design which renders servicing, adjustment and replacement unduly difficult under field conditions, is not acceptable.

C-2.  Abilities. The truck, fully equipped and loaded, shall demonstrate the following abilities on smooth concrete roadway:

a. Speeds.

(1) A level road maximum speed of not less than fifty-five (55) miles per hour, at an engine speed that does not exceed the peak horsepower speed.

(2) A level road minimum speed of not more than three (3) miles per hour, at engine full torque.

b. An ability to ford (hard bottom) water crossings of at least eighteen (18) inches (water) depth, at a truck speed of at least three (3) miles per hour, without water objectionably entering any chassis unit or seriously affecting engine operation, this with cooling fan operating.

C-3.  Traction Devices.

a. Tire chains are required for use on driving wheel tires, and frequently will be used when traversing hazardous terrain. The truck construction shall permit the, satisfactory installation and use of the tire chains.

D.  SPECIFICATIONS.

D-1.  Chassis.

a. Weights and Loads.

(1) The weight of the truck, fully equipped (including lubricants and water), but less fuel, tire chains and payload, shall not exceed twenty-one hundred (2100) pounds for two (2) wheel steer trucks, and twenty-one hundred and seventy-five (2175) pounds for four (4) wheel steer trucks, and every effort, consistent with best recognized engineering practices, shall be made to minimize the weight.

(2) The payload allowance shall be eight hundred (800) pounds, for operating personnel (including the driver) and military supplies.

(3) The truck maximum gross weight shall be the minimum consistent with the sturdiness required by the service conditions and, where a requirement in this specification stipulates that the truck shall be fully equipped and loaded, it shall include the weight of the truck completely equipped, including fuel, lubricants, water, tire chains, and payload. Gross weight distribution shall minimize tire overloading,

(4) The towed Load will be one thousand (1,000) pounds gross weight, and will be mounted on two (2) pneumatic tire equipped wheels.

b. Dimensions. The angle of approach shall be at least forty-five (45) degrees; angle of (departure at least thirty-five (35) degrees, with the truck fully equipped, loaded, and in a level. position. Ground clearance under all portions of the chassis below the frame shall be sufficient to permit operation over unimproved road, trails and open, rolling and hilly cross country without interference with the terrain, not less than nine and one-half (9-1/2) inches other than under the axles, and not less than eight (8) inches under the axles, each with truck fully loaded. If the ground clearance offered, other than under the axles, is less than deemed necessary, the right is reserved to require that it shall be properly increased, without additional cost to the Government. The wheelbase shall be not more than eighty (80) inches. The design of the cowl, engine hood and radiator shall provide for the driver the maximum visibility practicable. The height of silhouette (body proper, cowl an hood) shall be the minimum practicable, not more than forty (40) inches with truck fully equipped and loaded. Overall height and body floor height above ground, minimum practicable.

c. Flexibility. With the truck fully equipped and loaded, tire chains installed on front and rear wheels, and the front wheels cramped at any angle (rear wheels also cramped on four wheel steer truck), the truck construction shall permit eight (8) inch high blocks being placed under two (2) diagonally opposite wheels without part failure or interferences occurring.

D-2.  Frame. The chassis frame shall be of such design and construction as to support adequately the maximum gross loads and maintain necessary chassis alignment and stability under the most severe operating conditions. The frame shall be properly braced for pintle mounting.

D-3.  Power Unit. The power unit shall consist of an engine, clutch and transmission embodied in a unit power plant. The engine mounting shall be guaranteed to be effective in eliminating strains resulting from frame distortion. The transfer case may be unit with the transmission, or may be a separate unit independently mounted, provided that the unit is properly mounted. Transfer case mounting bolts on separate unit mounting, shall include cotter pins, or the heads shall be effectively locked.

D-4.  Engine. The engine shall be of the internal-combustion, four-stroke cycle type, having not less than four (4) cylinders. Piston displacement shall be not less than one hundred and ton (110) cubic inches and, less only fan and generator operating, the engine shall develop not less than eighty (80) pounds-feet torque, with a compression ratio suitable for use with fuel having a knock rating of not more than seventy-two (72) octane number.  The peak horsepower speed shall be sufficient to enable the truck, fully equipped and loaded, to demonstrate definitely by actual test, compliance with the ability factors specified in Paragraph C-2.a. herein. The crankshaft shall be statically and dynamically balanced and supported by not less than three (3) main bearings. Cylinder heads shall not be made of aluminum. Manifold manual hot-spot mechanism, if provided, shall have its operating positions clearly inscribed. Automatic hot-spot heat control may be furnished when approved by the Purchasing and Contracting Officer. The engine shall be tapped for 14 mm or for 10 mm spark plugs. Oil pan drain plug shall conform to Q.M. Drawing 08636-V. Oil pressure gauge connection, preferably, shall be standard one-eighth (l/8) inch pipe tap. Carburetor fuel inlet connection shall be standard one-eighth (1/8) inch pipe tap. Water jacket drain shall be standard one quarter (1/4) inch or three-eighth (3/8) inch pipe tap size, with Weatherhead #1415 or #270 (or equal) drain cock. Water temperature gauge connection in engine shall be standard one-half (1/2) inch pipe tap.  Oil filler tube cap and crankcase breather tube cap, if removable for engine servicing purposes, shall be fastened to the engine by a chain on other suitable means.  To prevent stones damaging the engine oil pan, a metal plate shall be provided under the oil pan, the plate stock thickness to be at least #12-U.S.S. Gauge.

D-5. Cooling System. Paragraph D-5, Federal Specification KKK-T-706 applies. The system shall be capable of maintaining a differential in temperature, between the radiator inlet (Engine outlet) water temperature and air temperature, of not to exceed one hundred thirty (130) degrees Fahrenheit as measured on a vehicle dynamometer at full engine torque speed. A thermostat shall be provided in the cooling system. The radiator core shall be of the tubular type and so mounted that it will not be damaged by frame distortion. Counterflow of heated air to the front of the radiator from the engine compartment shall be effectively prevented. Radiator drain shall be standard one-quarter (1/4) inch or three-eighths (3/8) inch pipe tap size, with Weatherhead #145 or #270 (or equal) drain cock so positioned that it will not be opened or damaged by contacting brush. The radiator filler shall conform to Q.M. Drawing 08593-W, equipped with pressure type cap. The fan design, mounting and drive shall be consistent with the sturdiness, efficiency and quietness required by the service conditions. It shall be possible to quickly remove, install and adjust the fan belt, this to facilitate the fording of water crossings of a depth greater than eighteen (18) inches. A substantial metal shield shall be provided under the fan driving pulley and bolt, arranged to effectively prevent brush and stones damaging the pulley and belt.

D-6. Lubrication System

a.  The engine lubrication system shall be in accordance with best commercial practice, and the system shall function satisfactorily on side slopes up to forty (40) per cent, and on longitudinal slopes to sixty (60) per cent.

b.  An oil filter conforming to Q.M. Specification ES-No. 565 shall be provided.

c.  A flexible line conforming to Q.M. Specification ES-No. 495 shall be provided from the engine to the oil pressure gauge.  The crank case oil filler shall be so constructed that oil can be poured from a one (1) gallon approved container into the filler opening without requiring the use of a funnel and with only the hood raised. The crank case oil bayonet gauge finger loop shall be properly accessible.

d.  The chassis lubricating system shall be of the high pressure type, with hydraulic type fittings located in accordance with & best commercial practice.  The fittings shall be of a design that will permit proper attachment of the grease gun.

D-7. Ignition System. The engine shall be equipped with a complete battery-generator ignition system. Spark advance mechanism shall be of the semi-automatic (with manual advance mechanism) or effective automatic type. Manual advance mechanism, when provided, shall be so constructed and mounted that it is readily operatable from the driver’s seat. The ignition switch shall conform to Q.M. Drawing 08674-W. The distributor and coil shall be types to be approved by the Purchasing and Contracting Officer. Ignition suppression shall be provided conforming to Q.M. Specification ES-No. 603.

D-8.  Fuel System.  The fuel system shall consist of. One (1) gasoline tank, having a capacity of not less than fifteen (15) gallons, including baffles properly secured in place, the tank to be mounted under the driver’s seat cushion. Tank filler to be located approximately at the center of the top of the tank, to conform to Q.M. Drawing 08592-V, and equipped with pressure cap and chain. The tank drain plug to be standard one-quarter (1/4) inch or three-eighths (3/8) inch pipe tap size.  Mechanically operated fuel pump including strainer, metal sediment bowl and hand primer, pump to be AC Model #1537714 (except as to rocker arm), hand primer to be accessible. Auxiliary fuel filter conforming to Q.M. Drawing 08366-W, imposed in the fuel line between the fuel tank and fuel pump, so located on the chassis that it can be serviced readily by one (1) man without requiring the removal of surrounding material and, unless mounted at a point higher than the fuel tank, to include a suitable shut-off valve in the inlet line to the filter. Air cleaner of the oil bath type, having sufficient oil capacity and volume to deposit one (1) pound of dirt and maintain an efficiency of at least ninety-seven (97) per cent, designed for high angle operation, and so mounted that mud and water will not enter the air inlet opening. Solid wall fuel lines shall be five-sixteenths (5/16) inch size tubing equipped with inverted flared type fittings. The fuel line connection to the tank shall be so located that it will not be readily damaged. A flexible fuel line shall be provided from the fuel line on the frame to the fuel pump; in addition, flexible lines shall be provided at every point where vibration might cause tubing failure. Flexible tubing shall conform to Q.M. Specification ES-No. 495. The fuel pump and lines shall be so arranged that vapor lock is effectively prevented. Fuel lines shall be located in a protected position, properly clipped to the chassis, and metal protective loom must be provided on the fuel lines at all points where the lines pass through metal members. The fuel system shall function satisfactorily on side slopes up to forty (40) per cent and on longitudinal slopes to sixty (60) per cent.

D-9.  Exhaust System. A substantial leak-proof exhaust system, amply proportioned and securely mounted shall be provided. The tailpipe shall discharge into the slip stream of the rear tire, in such a manner as-to-effectively preclude the entrance of fumes into the body, undue heating of tires and disturbance of road dust.

D-10.  Clutch. The clutch shall have a torque capacity at least equal to the maximum (gross) torque developed by the engine. Except where it is the truck manufacturer’s practice to furnish the clutch throwout bearing grease packed for the life of the truck, a lubrication fitting shall be provided, for the throwout bearing, at a readily accessible location which does not require the removal of floor or toe boards.

D-11.  Transmission.  Shall be of the three (3) forward and one (1) reverse speed type, with direct drive in third (3rd) gear. The low gear reduction shall be at least 2.9 to 1.0. Gears shall be heat-treated and properly finished to insure quiet operation. Input torque capacity shall to at least equal to the engine maximum (gross) torque.

D-12.  Transfer Case.  Shall be of the two (2) speed type having a high range ratio of 1.0 and low range reduction of approximately 2.0 to 1.0. The case shall include front axle drive declutching mechanism. Input torque capacity shall be guaranteed to be ample to transmit the maximum (gross) torque of the engine as developed through the lowest gear reduction provided in the transmission. Gears shall be heat-treated and properly finished to insure quiet operation. Separate control handles shall be provided for shifting the range gearing and declutching mechanism, with simple means provided that will prevent low range gearing being utilized when the front axle drive is disengaged.

a.  An S.A.E. power take-off aperture shall be provided on the transfer case at the rear end of the top (main) shaft, so designed that commercially obtainable power take-off mechanism can be properly installed without requiring machining of transfer case parts or disassembly Of the case. The design of the case shall permit power take-off operation both with the truck moving and at a standstill.

b.  A substantial metal skid shoe shall be provided under the transmission and transfer case, to prevent stones damaging the unit cases.

D-13. Propeller Shaft. The combined torque capacity of the front and rear propeller shafts shall be at least equal to the maximum (gross) torque of the engine, as developed through the lowest intervening gear reductions. If a propeller shaft is provided between the transmission and transfer case, its torque capacity shall be at least equal to the maximum (gross) torque of the engine as developed through the lowest gear reduction provided in the transmission. Universal joints shall be of the same make and type, of latest design and metal construction through out, and shall be guaranteed to function satisfactorily under continuous operation at the angles that will prevail with the truck in the fully’ equipped, loaded and level position, and for momentary operation up to the maximum angle that will prevail. Propeller shaft lengths shall conform to unit manufacturer’s recommendations.

D-14.  Axles.  The front and rear axles shall be of the full floating type, of such construction that in the event of an axle shaft failure, at any point, the wheel will not be released. Axle reduction gearing shall be located in the axle housing bowl and ratios shall be perfectly matched between front and rear axles. The axle ratio shall be not less than 4.75 to 1.0, Axle shafts shall be not less than one and one-eighth (1-1/8) inches in diameter over the splines in the differential. The ratio of impact resistance between the horizontal and vertical planes of the axle housing shall be suitable for the use indicated by the service requirements of this specification. If breathers are provided in the axle housings, they shall effectively prevent the entrance of water when the axle is submerged. Gear lubricant shall be positively confined to the differential bowl. Axle shaft flanges all shall be tapped for puller screws, tapped holes all to be the same size; puller screws to be furnished in rear axle flanges. The combined input torque capacity of the two (2) axles shall be at least equal to the maximum (gross) torque of the engine as developed through the lowest intervening gear reductions. The front axle shall be equipped with steering drive ends that include constant velocity universal joints having an outside spherical diameter not less than three and one-quarter (3-1/4) inches. Steering pivots shall be equipped with approved type bearings, with suitable means for adjustment. The offset between the king-pin center and tire center, at the ground, shall not exceed two (2) inches. Steering end bell packings shall include spring steel expanders. The front wheel cramping angle shall be at least twenty-six (26) degrees at the wheel on the inside of the turning circle. When axle stops have been adjusted to provide a maximum cramping angle of twenty-six (26) degrees (plus zero (0) degrees, minus one (1) degree) they shall be so welded that the angle adjustment can not readily be altered. Axle stops shall be so designed that they positively limit the cramping angle to the maximum angle intended by the stop adjustment. Hubs shall not include provisions for lubricating fittings. The steering tie rod shall be at least one and one-eighth (1-1/8) inches outside diameter steel bar stock, heat-treated, and its ends shall be so threaded that a fine toe-in adjustment is permitted. The rod shall be fully protected from damage, Axle bowl cover plates, when used, shall be bolted to the housing. The strength and stock thickness of the cover shall be equal to that of the housing. It shall be possible to remove all wheel bearings without having to remove snap rings.

a. When the Invitation for Bids requires that the truck shall be of the four (4) wheel steer type, the rear axle shall be equipped with steering drive ends identical to those furnished on the front axle, this to provide for four (4) wheel steering on the truck.

D-15.  Springs. Clearance between the springs and spring stops shall prevent any frequent objectionable bottoming, and front spring stops hall prevent any possibility of the front axle and front propeller shaft striking the engine oil pan, under all conditions of operation including one where the moving loaded truck front axle encounters an obstacle or drops into a hole while the brakes are simultaneously applied, and operation where the trailed load is being towed with its brakes inoperative. Springs shall have at least two (2) spring leaf clips provided each side of the center bolt, properly spaced to prevent fanning of the leaves. Spring arch shall be minimized; filler blocks between axles and springs shall be limited to the usual spring seats.

D-16.  Shock Absorbers.  Hydraulic shock absorbers, of adequate capacity, shall be furnished on both axles, mounted at each side of the frame.

D-17. Bogie.  Does not apply.

D-18. Wheels and Tires.

a. Wheels, mounting studs and nuts shall conform to Q.M. Drawing 08795-Y.

b. Tires, size 6.00-16, 4-ply, conforming to Federal Specification ZZ-T-381, shall be balloon, mud and snow tread type. Tread design to be submitted for approval by the Purchasing and Contracting Officer. Inner tubes shall be of the heavy duty type, conforming to Federal Specification ZZ-T-721. The tire, tube and flap shall be balanced within forty (40) inch-ounces, Tires shall have a permanent balance mark on the side wall on the valve stem side. The wheels, hubs and drums shall be suitably balanced.

c. One (1) spare wheel, tire and tube assembly shall be furnished with each truck, properly mounted at the rear of the body.

d. The truck, including the wheels and rims, shall be suitable for use with inner tubes of the approved bullet sealing type conforming to Rock Island Arsenal Specification RIXS-114, regardless of whether or not bullet sealing inner tubes are required to be furnished.

D-19. Brakes. The truck shall be equipped with a braking system that will safely control the fully equipped and loaded truck under all operating conditions; the system shall be complete with every necessary piece of equipment and the mechanism shall readily be accessible to external adjustment.

a. Service Brakes. The service brake system shall be of the hydraulic application type. Brakes and drums shall be provided on all wheels. The drums shall have flanges or ribbing that prevents objectionable distortion when the brake is applied. The system provided shall be of a braking capacity sufficient to control and hold the fully equipped and loaded truck (without towed load) while traveling on a sixty (60) per cent grade, and bring it to a complete stop at a rate of deceleration equivalent to a stop within twenty-five (25) feet from a speed of twenty (20) miles per hour on a dry, hard approximately level road, free from loose material, at a brake pedal pressure not to exceed one hundred and twenty-five (125) pounds. There shall be no evidence of excessive fading. The master cylinder shall be of the compensating type with self-contained fluid reservoir, and wheel cylinders shall be provided at every wheel. Hydraulic line maximum pressures shall not exceed hydraulic brake manufacturer’s recommendations. Brake lines must be securely anchored to the chassis, adequately protected from damage and frame to axle brake flexible lines shall be designed and installed in a manner to be approved by the Purchasing and Contracting Officer. Metal protective loom must be provided at all points where the lines pass through metal members. The hydraulic stop light switch shall conform to Q.M. Drawing 08773-V.

b.  Parking Brake.  The parking brake or brakes, shall be hand lever operated, provided in addition to the service brakes or entirely separate mechanical operating mechanism connected to the service brake shoes. The system shall be capable of controlling and holding the fully equipped and loaded truck (without towed load) while traveling on a sixty (60) per cent grade. When the parking brake is so mounted that it is applied on the propeller shaft, it shall be located in such a position as to be operatable at all times on the rear wheels.

D-20.   Electrical Equipment. Paragraph D-20, Federal Specification KKK-T-706 applies, unless otherwise specified. The system shall be of six (6) volt potential.

a. A storage battery shall be provided conforming to Q.M. Specification ES-No. 512. The battery negative terminal shall be grounded to the chassis.

b. The generator and starting motor shall be off adequate capacity, properly mounted, and effectively protected from exhaust heat. Generator operating speed shall not exceed 5100 r.p.m. at the engine peak horsepower speed. The generator shall be of the shunt type, with integral ventilating fan. Generator regulation shall consist of an apparatus box containing a cut-out relay, voltage regulator unit and current regulator unit. The current regulator unit shall be set to limit the generator output to the maximum output guaranteed by the generator manufacturer. The apparatus box shall be substantially constructed, dust-proof, and suitably mounted. The generator and apparatus box shall be of the same make. The generator, apparatus box and starting motor, including pinion meshing device or over-running clutch, shall be types to be approved by the Purchasing and Contracting Officer. The starting switch shall be suitably located.

c.  Wiring shall be properly installed, shall include terminals soldered to the wire ends and junction blocks shall be provided having Bakelite (or equal) bases equipped with brass or properly rust-proofed steel bolts, washers and nuts for the attachment of wire end terminals. Wiring shall include distinctive colored tracers or metal identification tags.         Wires in conduits shall be thoroughly insulated from metal conduits. When junction blocks are installed at locations where they probably will be coated with mud or water soaked, the blocks shall be properly covered. A main junction block shall be mounted on the dash in such a manner that all wiring to the dash can be disconnected from the junction block.

D-21.  Chassis Equipment. The chassis equipment shall be complete, including at least the following enumerated articles:

a. Engine hood, brush guard, front fenders, short running boards, sturdy front bumper and rear bumperettes, conforming to Q.M. Drawing 08825-Z. The bumpers to be mounted at such heights that the front bumper will overlap by at least three (3) inches the rear bumperettes on a similar truck, with the trucks loaded and unloaded and on level ground; rear bumperettes not to interfere with the use of the rear pintle; front and rear bumpers to be bolted to the chassis.

b. Instrument board. Shall include speedometer, ammeter, fuel, temperature, and oil pressure gauges, conforming to Q.M. Drawing 08677-Y, Ignition and light switches, carburetor choke, hand throttle and, when provided, manual spark control, shall be arranged generally as shown on Q.M. Drawing 08660-X.

c. Tool Equipment. The tool equipment shall conform to Motor Vehicle Tool Set Type I as specified in Q.M. Specification ES-No. 422. Chains, four, (4) of Type D (extra heavy truck type chains) required. Provisions shall be made for the use of the starting crank.

d. Accessory Equipment. The accessory equipment shall be complete, including at least: One (1) rear view mirror substantially mounted at the left side on the outside of the body, mirror to conform to Q.M. Drawing 08634-X.  Two (2) separate windshield wipers of the hand operated type, suitably installed on the windshield. Locks, Code H-700 key operated type, provided in the ignition switch on spare tire carrier, and on tool storage compartment; keys in triplicate with each truck; padlocks (where used) to be one and one-half (1-1/2) inch size, with hardened steel shackles, chained to chassis; during shipment keys furbished with each truck to be inclosed in a substantial cloth bag and wired securely to the chassis steering wheel. Electric horn end mounting, conforming to- Q.M. Drawing 08641-W.

e. Lighting Equipment.

(1) The lighting equipment shall all be of the best commercial grade.

(2) Two (2) head lamps shall be furnished of the five (5) inch Sealed Beam type having an upper driving beam and a lower traffic beam. The filaments shall be rated at forty (40) watts (minimum) for the driving beam and thirty (30) watts (minimum) for the traffic beam. Suitably approved means shall be provided for aiming the head lamp beams, and head lamps shall be mounted as low as possible.

(3) The wiring and lighting system shall conform fully to Q.M. Drawing 08675-X, (Trailer lighting socket not required.)

(4) Reflector Equipment. Reflectors complying with Q.M. Drawing 08642-W shall be suitably mounted at protected positions on the body as follows:

Four (4) Red Reflectors shall be mounted on the lower rear corners of the body, two (2) visible from the sides and two (2) visible from the rear.

D-22. Controlling Mechanism. Paragraph D-22, Federal Specification KKK-T-706 applies. The steering wheel diameter shall be not less than fifteen (15) inches. At least two and one-half (2-1/2) inches clearance shall be provided between the outer edge of the steering wheel and nearest projection. The column shall be attached to the instrument board by means of a substantial bracket that includes rubber insert. The gear housing shall be attached properly to the frame.

a. When required by the Invitation for bids, the truck shall be of the four (4) wheel steer type with suitable delayed steering on the rear wheels. The design of the steering mechanism shall preclude and tendency to over-steer due to too rapid steering action, end there shall be no noticeable weaving of the rear end of the truck. Steering mechanism design shall be approved by the Purchasing and Contracting Officer.

D-23. Operating Mechanism. Paragraph D-23, Federal Specification KKK-T-706 applies. The mechanism shall be so located that it does not detract from the comfort of the occupants. The accelerator pedal shall be a type on which the whole (driver’s) shoe rests, shall be so located to the right of the brake pedal that it can be comfortably used for long periods of time, and shall include a foot rest. The transmission and transfer case shift handles and hand brake lever shall be located at the center of the driver’s compartment.

D-24. Name, Caution and Shifting Plates.

a. Name Plate. A name plate shall be mounted on the truck, bearing the following data:

Nomenclature:                          Truck, 1/4-Ton, 4×4.
Supply Arm or Service
Maintaining Vehicle:                  Quartermaster Corps
Make and Model:
Serial Number :                        (Manufacturer’s Number)
Gross Weight:   (Including 800 lbs. Payload, fuel and tire chains)
Maximum Payload:                   800 lbs.
Maximum Trailed Load:            1000 lbs.
Date of Delivery:
Recommended by Manufacturer:
Octane Rating of Gasoline:
S.A.E. Grade of Oil for Summer Use:
S.A.E. Grade of Oil for Winter Use:

b. Caution Plates. Plates shall be installed on the truck on which shall appear the maximum road speeds permissible in every gear range, and specific data concerning draining of the cooling system.

c. Shifting Plate. A plate shall be mounted on the truck on which shall clearly appear data concerning transmission, transfer case range gear and declutching mechanism shift handle operating positions, and the statement: “Disengage Front Axle Drive When Operating On Dry Hard Surfaced Roads.”

d. Plates shall be metal with black background; and drawing of the plate and mounting locations shall he approved by the Purchasing and Contracting Officer, before the plates are manufactured and installed.

D-25. Body

a. The body shall conform to Q.M. Drawing 08825-Z.

D-26. Special Operating Equipment. Shall include: Rear pintle conforming to Q.M. Drawing 08783-X.  Towing hooks mounted at the front of the truck, or the front bumper to be so designed and mounted that it can be used for the attachment of a tow rope or tow bar and without sharp edges that will cut a tow rope. Pedestal mount base conforming to Q.M. Drawing 08825-Z. Shovel and axe brackets, mounted on the side of the body. Canvas covers for windshield and headlamps.

D-27. Painting And Marking. Shall conform to Q.M. Specifications ES-No. 474 and ES-No. 510 (Color blue-drab).

E.  TEST REQUIREMENTS.

E-1. Tests preliminary to acceptance of the completed trucks furnished in accordance with this specification will be made at the plant of the truck producer or at a location approved by the Purchasing and Contracting Officer. The tests will be conducted by or under the supervision of the authorized Government inspector and shall consist of such tests as are necessary to determine compliance with this specification.  Any or all of the trucks may be tested, and the truck producer shall provide without expense to the Government, the necessary fuel and other operating supplies required to accomplish them.

E-2. Unless otherwise specified in the Invitation of Bids, two (2) pilot model trucks will be produced and made available for test at the Holabird Quartermaster Depot, in conformity with Paragraph E-7.a. of Q.M. Specification ES-No. 459.

[Ed Note: David mentioned the idea of building a brand new WWII Jeep to the team at eBay, and they loved the idea so much they said, “How can we help?” Their financial support and David’s Jeep-obsession are the fuel behind this crazy build.]

Top Image: US Department of War

The post Why The World War II Jeep Is One Of The Greatest Automotive Engineering Achievements In History appeared first on The Autopian.