(EXPANDED FROM 3/1/2020)
Once upon a time a Truth About Cars commentator lauded the simplicity of the then-new Jeep Renegade.
“Well, I for one am yearning for a simpler time, and this vehicle suggests that,” wrote Detroit-X. “When headlights didn’t touch the door mirrors, and the bulbs didn’t cost $125 each, and squared off bodies meant more room per footprint. And that Moab topo map on the dash . . . nice. That’s how I want to die; with that embossed on my face” (Miquelon, 2014).
Of course, the 2014+ Renegade was more of a styling exercise than a simple vehicle in a similar vein to the classic post-war Jeeps. But Detroit-X nevertheless gave voice to a market niche that automakers — domestic and foreign alike — have increasingly ignored as they have joined the bigger, glitzier, more powerful arms race.
What are the ideal qualities of a simple car?
The most important characteristic of a simple car is that form follows function rather than merely looks like it sorta might but doesn’t really.
Simple also suggests plebeian — but like a Swiss Army knife rather than a strippo price leader with an unsatisfying flimsiness to it.
Also see ‘Is brand management really an automaker’s No. 1 priority?’
A simple design has a certain spare elegance in that the car does its job in a highly competent but unostentatious way. The paradox here is that a truly simple car doesn’t need to be plastered with emblems and clever marketing because its character stands out even in a crowded parking lot of stylized posers.
Most importantly, a simple car withstands the test of time. This is not a mere appliance that is quickly thrown away and forgotten. The simple car brings a quiet joy to its users that cultivates a long-term bond.
A simple car reduces its owner’s ‘hassle map’
An automaker intent on building a truly simple car should possess a single-minded focus on reducing the owner’s “hassle map.” Here’s how Adrian Slywotzky (with Karl Weber) defined the term:
“1. a diagram of the characteristics of existing products, services, and systems that cause people to waste time, energy, money 2. (from a customer’s perspective) a litany of the headaches, disappointments, and frustrations one experiences . . .” (2011; p. 55).
A key way a simple car can reduce consumer hassles is by being exceptionally efficient in its design. This can play out in different ways depending upon the car’s intended use. That’s why a simple car is not necessarily the smallest on the market. However, it will likely be unusually roomy, versatile, reliable and economical.
Also see ‘If you ran VW in 1959 how would you prepare for Detroit’s compacts?’
A simple car is ahead of its time not so much because it uses exotic technology but because it better anticipates the long-term arc of its usage. This is both from the standpoint of the individual owner as well as the automobile’s role in society. For example, the rise of smaller cars after World War II was a direct response to suburbanization; a big car wasn’t well suited for quick errands.
By the same token, a simple car sticks around for an unusually long production cycle with minimal cosmetic changes. This holds down the cost of purchasing the car as well as replacement parts. However, functional improvements are made continuously. The slower pace of change allows more attention to be paid to improving build quality and customer service.
When a major redesign is initiated, it results in meaningful functional improvements and is phased in so teething problems are minimized.
My votes for a Simple Car Hall of Fame
If you took a survey of U.S. automotive historians I suspect that only two cars would be consensus choices: The Ford Model T and the original VW Beetle.
To me these cars rise to the top of the list because they were both the biggest game-changers in American automotive history. The Model T single-handedly shifted the industry to lighter and more affordable cars. The Beetle’s influence was more diffuse but perhaps more important in the long run because it challenged virtually all aspects of industry groupthink.
VW — particularly through its advertising — made a mockery of bigger + glitzier + more powerful = better. By the same token, few cars eschewed planned obsolescence for a longer period of time than the Beetle and its derivatives.
Other nominations I would make include:
- 1933-42 Willys — The closest heir to the Model T and the father of the modern American compact.
- 1952-55 Willys Aero — Neither the smallest nor the most advanced early compact, but the best balanced.
- 1964-65 Rambler American — The basic design was unusually efficient and simple, e.g., the bumpers and door windows on four-door models were interchangeable.
- 1967-72 Datsun 510 — A largely conventional design brilliantly executed with elegant simplicity.
- 1980-83 Honda Civic — The best-engineered front-wheel drive economy car of the 1970s and early-80s.
- 1989-91 Honda Civic — The all-time best Honda sedan or wagon. Mercedes-like in its purposeful simplicity.
- 2004-07 Scion xB — Overly brick-like profile but laudable for its unusual degree of versatility for a subcompact.
- 2009-12 Hyundai Elantra Touring– Not exceptional except for being a rare example of a contemporary small wagon.
None of these cars ranks with the Model T and Beetle in paradigm-challenging simplicity. In addition, none of the more recent nominees are still on the market.
In recent years, if you wanted a versatile smaller Honda you have to go for the Fit, which was roughly the same size as a 1989-91 Civic wagon. However, the Fit was endowed with increasingly gaudy styling and was ultimately discontinued. Honda’s smallest vehicle in the U.S. is now the HR-V, a tall wagon that had been classified as a “subcompact” but in 2023 form weights almost 3,300 pounds and has roughly the same footprint as a 1960s American compact (Dorian, 2023).
Also see ‘Will history repeat itself by punishing automakers for their big SUV binge?‘
These examples hint at how the auto industry has suffered from a long-term drop in its commitment to smaller and simpler vehicles. The stylists and branding experts now dominate every automaker with a presence in the U.S. market. This all but guarantees that their products will be bigger and glitzier.
Hey, but what about trucks, SUVs and CUVs?
One could argue that trucks, SUVs and CUVs have at least partly supplanted cars when it comes to simplicity. However, as they have become more popular they have drifted away from their humble roots.
Consider how much trucks have grown over the last few decades. As late as 2004 the simplest vehicle on the market was arguably the subcompact Toyota Tacoma pickup. Today you would be hard pressed to find even a mid-sized truck with a decent edge over its full-sized sibling in gas mileage.
Also see ‘Is Tesla Cybertruck a brilliant breakthrough or a gimmick?’
Smaller CUVs such as the original Honda CR-V and the Ford Escape were styled with truck-like simplicity. Even so, their extra weight, height and boxy profile made them less versatile than the all-wheel-drive version of the 1989-91 Honda Civic wagon, which I consider to be the closest anyone has come to an ideal simple car from 1985 to present.
By the same token, the 2003-11 Honda Element offered some interesting features, such as easily cleanable seats and floor. Unfortunately, it suffered from unimpressive gas mileage due to overly brick-like styling and excessive weight. Clearly the designers and branding experts were trying too hard to present a hip image. The result: Too much hat and not enough cattle.
What should a modern simple car include?
Let’s do a mental exercise: What if we locked the stylists and brand managers out of the building and gave the engineers complete freedom to design a simple car for the future. What features would it include? What would it look like?
Also see ‘NHTSA and automakers drag their feet on pedestrian safety’
In years past, a simple car might look a lot like a Volvo wagon, with blocky styling that maximized space efficiency and visibility. Today, those qualities are still important but the car also needs to be aerodynamic. The car’s profile should be tall enough for easy ingress and decent ground clearance but shouldn’t suffer from the “on-stilts” handling of CUVs. Kind of like a 2009-12 Hyundai Elantra Touring hatchback.
A simple car should have terrific visibility and a shape that is not unduly hazardous to pedestrians. It should also be less vulnerable to parking-lot dings, so bumpers would be unusually robust for a contemporary vehicle and side cladding would make a reappearance. The sheetmetal should eschew fancy bulges that are more dent-prone and increase wind resistance. The original Ford Transit Connect offers a partial example of that approach.
Aerodynamics no longer allow the level of interchangeability used on the Ramblers of yore. However, with a wagon the taillights as well as the rear-door windows could be interchangeable.
Also see ‘Hemmings highlights late-70s attack against U.S. bumper regulations’
A simple car should avoid, at least where possible, gadgetry that adds cost, weight and reliability issues. In my book that means reverting to manual roll-down windows and adjustable seats. The dashboard should offer a balance between control knobs and a touchscreen. Perhaps it’s a bridge too far to ask for a car you can hose out, but the interior design could be a lot easier to maintain than even your typical entry-level econobox.
A simple car should get ahead of the curve on emerging trends, such as use of easily recycled components and toxic-free interior materials.
All-electric power could open the door to more versatile body shapes, but purists might consider the weight and toxicity of batteries a step too far. By the same token, a hybrid would increase fuel economy, but it also adds significant technical complexity.
Above all, a simple car should be relatively small. The 2020 Honda Fit came as close as any vehicle then-available on the U.S. market to what I see as ideal specs: length (161 inches), width (67 inches), wheelbase (99 inches) and curb weight (2,625 pounds). However, it could have used a bit more cargo capacity and larger wheels . . . and was discontinued in 2021 anyway.
A simple car wouldn’t try to look hip like a Kia Soul, with its exaggerated boxy shape that hurts aerodynamics. Nor would it fake ruggedness with the likes of a Moab topo map on the dash. The car’s functionality should speak for itself.
Also see ‘What’s the most excessive American car design of all time?‘
That’s why the catsup oracles would declare this car the automotive equivalent of white underwear — way too small, plain and boring to generate adequate sales. But if such a car also possessed superior build quality, dealer support and reliability, then it would have the potential to develop a cult-like following akin to the classic Volvos. Or even the original Beetle.
The bottom line is that the public can’t show its interest in a truly simple modern car when one isn’t available.
NOTES:
This story was originally posted on March 8, 2014 and expanded on March 1, 2020 and April 14, 2023.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Cole, Aaron; 2023. “Ford Transit Connect Officially Discontinued After 2023 Model Year.” The Drive. Posted March 29.
- Detroit-X; 2014. Commentator in, “Manley: Renegade Will Appeal to U.S. Customers Despite Italian Roots.” The Truth About Cars. Posted March 7; accessed March 7.
- Dorian, Drew; 2023. “2023 Honda HR-V.” Car and Driver. Accessed Feb. 1.
- Slywotzky, Adrian J. with Karl Weber; 2011. Demand: Creating What People Love Before They Know They Want It. Crown Business, New York.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- wildaboutcarsonline.com (Automotive History Preservation Society): Volkswagen (1961)
I thought this was a very well-thought out piece, Steve. I can just about imagine someone getting into a modern car with manual roll down windows (if there is such a thing) and not being able to figure it out. A simple car, very much like the one you describe here, was chosen by Road & Track in their August 1981 issue as one of the 10 Best Cars For The Eighties. It was the RWD Toyota Starlet. I’m sure most people don’t even remember it. According to Wikipedia, it was sold in the US from 1981-84. How’s that for a 10-best choice at a time when the VW Rabbit was already in it’s 6th year of sales in North America?
Besides, manual windows are apparently no longer viable as a cost-cutting measure, as power window regulators have become so common that most likely cost less due to the economy of scale.
That may well be so, but they nevertheless add weight and complexity to a vehicle. And is it really that hard to turn a crank a few times to open or close a window? One reason I prefer manual windows is that they operate when the car’s power is off.
I have never owned a car with power windows Steve, for those same reasons.
Those old Volvo ads from the ’60s {the 11 year car}, the VW ads, Checkers, Ramblers, the rejection of planned obsolescence and a minimalist philosophy was baked in for me early on.
There really is nothing out there aside from the Kia, Mirage and perhaps the Versa.And even they are pretty sophisticated [KIA- CVT type trans, no manual].
Over-teched, electronically bloated, hyper-stressed engines, glass-jawed transmissions, overpriced, over sized, 3500 lbs $30,000. I’ll take two. NOT.
Though not quite a proper car, more of an enclosed quad-scooter, the new Citroen Ami electric city car is causing a stir in Europe. Maybe it might did a home in the larger cities of the US.
https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2021-citroen-ami-first-drive-review/
Thank you for the link; the Ami is very cool. It reminds me of one of those Brooks Stevens’s concept cars that maximized interchangeable body parts.
Renault/Dacia B0 platform cars (Logan, Sandero, MPV etc.) fit your description quite well.
And the Logan was briefly sold in Mexico as the Nissan Aprio from 2005 to 2010.
Though cars are getting more expensive, they are much better built as well, and need less regular maintenance. Thus, cars last much longer in a functional and presentable condition than say, 40 years ago. Back in the day, the 20th century cars you list were considered disposable vehicles. Perhaps these simple cars of the future should be more modular, to be able to change with a person’s lifestyle. People think nothing of remodelling a house. Why not remodel a vehicle as time passes?
That’s generally true, although some of us can milk quite a bit of mileage out of an older car, e.g., I still have a 1989 Honda Civic. It has a clean functionality that I find much more interesting than the newer Hondas.
Your idea of a modular car sounds promising. One complication is the push to electrify automobiles, but the “skateboard” chassis of EVs could lend themselves to remodeling. The fundamental challenge for engineers and designers would be to come up with a basic package that placed an emphasis on longevity rather than planned obsolescence.
Yes, you could milk a lot of mileage out of them, more than the American equivalents. However, this required more thought and preventative maintenance than most Americans were willing to give. I think the planned obsolescence days are over, brought about in part by the well built inexpensive imports, and also about an attitude change regarding cars. Remember the people who write and respond here and in other such ‘zines- I also read Hemmings and Barn Finds= are car enthusiasts, mostly fixed on cars of a bygone era. Most vehicle buyers today look upon their rides as a type of appliance, rather than back in the day when cars were status symbols and fashion statements.
While I was out getting the mail, a first-generation Honda CRV went past. That’s fairly simple and no-nonsense, but no longer modern. Honda has been wandering about in the doldrums stylistically since those days, as you allude to above.
The elephant in the room: Do people want such a vehicle? If offered such a vehicle, will they actually buy it? Both Willys models and the Rambler you mention above certainly ticked the boxes, but weren’t what you’d call popular at the time. Has public taste changed since those days? Well, the Datsun you list was a roaring success, helped no doubt by Japanese build quality and an unusually competent chassis. Toyota’s equivalent Corona was perhaps more basic but quite forgettable. The small Hondas, no argument there. I’d be inclined to throw the first-genration Honda Jazz/Fit in there too.
A lot of small Japanese vehicles not sold in the US would fit this simple modern car category. There’s the Toyota Probox (Professional+box), a basic FWD wagon designed as a small business vehicle, but available as a passenger version as well. Perhaps it would be too basic to appeal to private US buyers though.
“By the same token, a simple car sticks around for an unusually long production cycle with minimal cosmetic changes.”
This used to be a virtue. It still is for me.
That’s why my first new car was a 99 Cavalier, simplicity, ease of maintenance, commonality of parts, long production run. As a two door it looked pretty good.
My own parameters for the “ideal” are 175-185″long 68-70″ wide, 103-106″ wheelbase, 2600 lbs
All six of the cars I have owned over the past 40 years have been within that range. Simple. Space and fuel efficent.
The last truly simple car? The Saturn S Series. Easy to fix, all four fenders and the exterior door panels were polymer and could be unscrewed and removed for repair. Simple engine that even a novice could work on and do basic tasks.
The closest thing out there today would be the Mitsubishi Mirage with a manual.
I saw a Ford Ranger once on a used car lot in 2010. An 07. 4cyl, 5 speed, bench seat, rubber flooring, crank windows. My ideal and I am definitely not a truck person. Thankfully the dealership was closed as it was a Sunday, or I might have traded right there.
Fuel mileage was inferior on it though, but the rest…
It did have a bed cover and fancy wheels.
All these brands seem to think they’re premium now.
There is no effort to try and rein in prices or appeal to the masses. Henry Ford would have been appalled.
$50,000, a 94 month contract, any color you want… as long as it’s white, black or silver.
I’ll keep what I have
Just a thought; the average age of a car, in the states, is the oldest it has ever been. This says a lot!!
Another automobile website had an article suggesting the need for a new decontented vehicle. The whining about today’s features in new vehicles, in the comments section, was almost comical.
Which brought up a question in my mind; can my fellow senior citizens read an owner’s manual?? Good grief!
We left out the decisions made by former Ford production chief Charles Sorenson on what to do with Willys-Overland as World War II was winding down. Not wanting to invest in new body-making tooling because he was unsure of what Americans wanted in a mass-produced American car, Sorenson wisely chose to evolve the Willys Jeep and its simple sheet metal forms into a line of vehicles that were basic, simple and economical, as well as versatile in applications. As a youth growing up in central Indiana, I had a newspaper customer whose daily-driver was a 1950 Jeepster Phaeton with 4WD, but fully-trimmed out. He loved that car. His wife drove a tri-tone 1956 Buick Roadmaster Riviera with every option General Motors offered. But as long as he was alive, he owned and drove the Jeepster.
Today, I would nominate the Kia Soul. I drove a Rio in 2014, but bought the base model 1.6-litre Soul. I traded it in on a new 2016 leftover base model Kia Soul in the spring of 2017. I am paid it off. It is reliable, goes quick enough and other than the power windows and locks with a/c, it is a great vehicle, simple yet dependable. I once envied my friends with expensive B.M.W.s, Mercedes-Benzs, Audis, Jaguars, Porsches, etc., but after years of hearing of all of their service and parts issues, I’ll stick with the Kia ! As the tagline of the ads of maybe 15-years ago hyped: “Damn fine cars !”
interesting realm, for sure….I’ve owned a Le Car, Mazda 323, 4 neons, Ford Feista, 2 Intrepids, a slew of cars. Loved my Neons, rust was their demise. I think the corolla and civic have overcome all the other models for good small cars, making it tough for any manufacturer to come in and be competitive. The Jeep Cherokee and Commanche are to be lauded for their simplicity and durability, though not necessarily small. I’d say it’s perhaps the most difficult market to nail down, reasonable costs, mass appeal, and interesting design….if they allowed cottage industries we could perhaps have some more variety, safety and research involved with small cars is astronomical. There was an interesting truck design that was in part made of wood for third world use…very interesting, just looked up, it’s called the Ox… pretty cool. If you can build in smaller numbers and make a profit…you can keep going.
Probably the Toyota Prius is the formula for a modern small car.
On that original list of older cars, alongside the 2CV and the VW, I would add the Mini.
I wonder sometimes what the MSRP of a modern 1955 Chevy or Ford would be. The only caveat would be all 2024 mileage and safety laws must be met. The rest-straight glass, crank windows, plain interior, no HVAC or infotainment, straight axle, 3 on a tree, etc.
The overriding concern with a modern “basic car” is that in the US at least, it wouldn’t SELL enough to make enough sense for an automaker to design one. Case in point: the Chevy Chevette, which certainly ticked most of the boxes talked about in this article. Yes it sold in its day, but only because of the oil embargo and then the recession that followed; when better times (and nicer cars) returned the car languished until GM finally pulled the plug. Today we throw rocks at the Chevette as the ultimate penalty box, a car even poor people shy away from…
Bob, I suspect that sales of what you call a “basic car” would vary based primarily on the economy.
When I talk about a “simple car” I don’t mean bare bones like the Chevette, which struck me as the definitive example of a “penalty box.” I’m talking about a vehicle that places function over form and is well engineered. As I said in the essay, “like a Swiss Army knife rather than a strippo price leader with an unsatisfying flimsiness to it.”
To offer an example, I have owned both a 1989 Toyota Corolla and a Honda Civic. The Corolla was a reliable and economical car but it had a relentlessly cheap quality to it. The doors shut with a hollow sound, the plastics were ugly and the car’s handling was uninspiring. In comparison, the Civic had a solid, well-crafted quality to it. And it was fun to drive. I ditched the Corolla fairly quickly but held onto my Civic for years because it was an enjoyable car to own even though a lot of folks would think it was archaic because it had features such as manual window cranks.