The 66 was the first compact to wear Volvo’s “ironmark” logo.
One of the parking-lot curiosities I noticed after joining Volvo of America Corporation in mid-1976 was a diminutive, boxy two-door sedan that bore absolutely no resemblance to any of the other cars in the company test fleet. I learned that it was a Volvo 66. Introduced in Europe only about one year earlier, it was a badge-engineered version of the DAF 66. Then the newest product of the Netherlands’ Volvo Car BV, the Volvo 66 was a mildly face-lifted version of the previous DAF 66, with heftier bumpers and other safety features added to align the model more closely with Volvo’s larger cars. More CC commentary is available here and here for those hardy souls who wish to learn more.
From time to time between the first and second U.S. oil crises energy shocks, VAC investigated the potential addition of a smaller vehicle to Volvo’s stateside lineup. I’m not sure that the 66 was ever a serious contender, given its mini-compact dimensions, its 1.1- or 1.3-liter Renault-sourced inline four cylinder engines, its unusual belt-drive CVT transmission, and its relative lack of the comfort and convenience features which were becoming increasingly popular with U.S. customers. After some time in the VAC test-car pool, the 66, which entered the U.S. on a temporary import bond, was most likely scrapped, rather than being shipped back to Europe, and we focused our attention on “adapting” Volvo’s 240- and 260-series sedans and wagons to become more attractive to our own existing and potential future customers.
That is, until the Volvo 66 was replaced by the new and (slightly) larger 340-series. Introduced in Europe toward the close of 1976, the Volvo 343 was the first fully new model from Volvo Car BV. Now in the compact class, it featured a practical three-door hatchback body style and was the first Car BV model to apply Volvo’s standard three-digit model nomenclature, where the first digit indicated the model series, the second digit the number of cylinders, and the third digit the number of doors.
The Volvo 343. Not quite as much of a red-headed stepchild as the 66 had been. A longer four-door with a conventional trunk and better proportions would be added to the lineup later.
Although the 343 retained Renault power, its displacement was increased to 1.4 liters, and its gearbox was moved to the rear, improving weight distribution (but not doing any favors for the hatchback’s luggage capacity).
With the 343 now seen as being somewhat more competitive in size and performance than its predecessor, it seemed only natural that VAC should again assess its stateside market potential. This time, the exercise wouldn’t be limited to one or two test cars. Volvo of America was given the green light to go further in its “adaptation” efforts than ever before. And who better to be given that assignment than the company’s sole Product Adaptation Engineer?
We knew that a sportier version of the Volvo 242 was in the works for the 1978 model year, so the natural thought was that a similar treatment could be applied to the 343. It was also obvious that the 343’s European lighting had to be changed. My alternatives were a dual-rectangular system (which allowed the grille to be wider, giving the front end more of a horizontal theme which it desperately needed), or the quad-rectangular system, which we had been promoting for Volvo’s “big” cars (and which would eventually be introduced for ’81, replacing the dual round headlamps used on the 242 and the quad-rounds on the rest of the 240- and 260-series).
The 343 GT proposal. A new front clip, bumpers and body-side trim changed the character of this compact hatchback.
In the end, we went with the quad-rectangular setup, thinking it to be a bit more upscale in appearance as well as being more appropriate for a near-luxury European compact, though it meant a narrower grille was required, a compromised solution for sure. Along with the lighting changes, the then-obligatory blackout window and body-side trim was added. In retrospect, a somewhat lighter touch might have been appropriate. My only rationale was that this was the apex of the “Eurosedan” years, when every automaker seemed to adopt the noir livery, whether justified or not.
A new dash and center console highlighted our proposed 343 GT interior. The Recaros later found a temporary home in one of my test cars.
Along with the exterior changes, we were allowed to propose an updated interior. A fully redesigned instrument panel with a center console that flowed down from the dash were its major elements, along with more supportive Recaro seats upholstered in square-weave black cloth (which we felt would be close enough, and yet different enough from, the black corduroy we would eventually see in the ’78 242 GT). Switches for (front) power windows, power mirrors, and hazard flashers were integrated into the lower portion of the center console, and a U-shaped emergency brake handle. The latter caused a last-minute issue at our first ‘product clinic’, when the truck driver unloading the car mistook it for the real thing and gave it an enthusiastic yank, breaking it into three pieces.
The center console included a roll-top storage compartment ahead of the gearshift. The offending handbrake lever can barely be seen at the lower left.
Despite a very positive response from potential customers evaluating it against a competing proposal from our Dutch colleagues, the fates intervened to keep the 343 GT a one-off prototype. Unfavorable currency fluctuations, as well as an analysis showing that the smaller 343, when equipped with a proper Volvo four-cylinder powertrain, would yield little or no fuel economy benefit compared to Volvo’s current 242, sealed the deal. More than twenty years would pass before Volvo would add a compact companion to its U.S. lineup. But that’s a story for another day.
(Lede image from www.media.volvocars.com)
Very neat and interesting proposal.
Do you know what John DeVries made of your DAF 77 facelift? Looks as if it might have influenced the production facelift a bit.
John de Vries (filed under V, DeVries is the Anglo-Saxofonian interpretation), from DAF cars to Volvo cars to DAF trucks. All in Dutch, but plentiful images too:
https://www.autoweek.nl/autonieuws/artikel/dit-is-de-man-achter-de-volvo-480-maar-ook-de-daf-95/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.nl%2F
Sorry – coffee hadn’t kicked in…
Thanks for the interesting article – I thought de Vries’ designs were rather neat (given the very awkward proportions of the 77/343) and I liked the front and rear-end detailing on the P500 a lot.
The trucks too looked good.
Apologies not needed, just a tongue in cheek remark from my side.
Very interesting, the front-end look reminds me of some of the captive import Chrysler/Mitsubishi cars.
Of course the 300 series did eventually gain Volvo power plants, and Volvo released a sporty car in the 480. I’d be curious to know if you also got to evaluate that one?
Marijn,
Thanks, the 480 (another small Volvo we almost sold in the U.S.) will be the subject of a future post.
I like it! Lop one cylinder off the 1.4 liter four, add a turbo, keep the CVT, add wireless charging into that center console bin below the radio – and soften the straight lines inside and out, and it’s instantly ready for today’s showroom. With a plug-in hybrid option 😀
dman: Other than that, the car’s OK, right?
Seriously, I like your thought process there. I’ll have to add the V40 Hybrid to my list of future posts (no kidding).
I remember reading about the new 343 in Road & Track with speculation about it coming to the US. Nice work in making it look more attractive; the 343 was a bit mediocre in that regard in comparison to the VW Golf that arrived at about the same time.
The 300 series got off to a slow sales start due to early poor quality, but eventually did pretty well, especially in the UK. But Swedes shunned it, as it was not seen as a genuine Volvo.
Thanks Paul! In retrospect the 343 GT was a difficult assignment. We were severely limited in terms of which design elements could be changed.
For example, after the concept clinic we were also advised that the 343’s stock ‘hatch’ hood could not be modified – another element we would have had to design around if the car had been approved for production.
“quad-rectangular system, which we had been promoting for Volvo’s “big” cars (and which would eventually be introduced for ’81,”
I don’t mean to question your authority on the matter, but I believe the quad-rectangular headlights began in 1978 on the 262C/Bertone, along with the 264 and 265. For 1980, the quad rectangular lights were introduced on the 244 and 245, but only in top-spec GL trim. For 1981, the quad lights were finally adopted across the board for all 240/260 cars sold in the US.
Evan, mea culpa. For some reason, I forgot that the 262C and the 260-series sedans and wagons got the quad-rectangular headlamps before they showed up on the 240-series.
Another good example of the “trickle down” theory of product planning!
I was working from old memories so I decided to cross-check myself. I was close; the quad-rectangular lights started in 1977 on the 260 series cars.
https://www.240turbo.com/headlight.html#headlighthistory
I hated these malproportioned abominations from when I first set eyes on them. Learning that they were a rear drive small hatchback just made them worse, bad packing and bad looks all in one. The 400 series is the first small car Volvo got vaguely right.
The front clip on this example looks good in a euro/Japan late 70s early 80s sort of way.
What an interesting expose about a car about which I knew very little.
Thank you!
From a technology point of view, I can see why these never did anything here in the US as they apparently really offered very little over 200 series cars beyond being smaller. Still, it’s a shame in a way that we Americans held on to our big boxy 240s for so many years that there was little incentive for Volvo to offer anything else over here.
Your final photo offers a glimpse of what I believe is a version of the mighty rare Volvo “Driving Computer”. I’ve never seen one in person, although have run across them as very very rare accessories being sold used on eBay. It’s just one of those things that I’d love to have solely for the novelty and not for any practical reason. Just like the OEM Volvo integrated AM/FM/CB radio.
Jeff,
The very basic trip computer shown in the concept car’s console was a version of several digital clocks/fuel mileage computers we were working on at the time (with the assistance of Chrysler’s electronics guys in Huntsville, AL).
There was also a full-function CB microphone, which did make it into production. If I can dig up my dusty, shelfworn prototype, it might make for an interesting post.
Chrysler guys in Huntsville working with Volvo folks? Genuine rocket scientists? 🙂
That seems like yet another story that needs telling.
Thanks for the history. This just keeps getting interestinglyer and interestinglyer.
re. the “Driving Computer”: https://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?t=138739
I am a huge DAF fan, and owned several of those, but also more then a few Volvo’s 340,343 and 345.
I must say, I never saw this GT before, and it definitely makes the 3 series a better looking car, the interior looks still modern.
Hugely interesting to get these glimpses behind the curtain, thanks for sharing!
As a former owner of an early 343, the “would yield little or no fuel economy benefit” line hits home. Never had another car that used so much fuel to go so slowly.
The GT looks a lot better than the original, which kinda has a Mazda GLC look to it, not distinctive enough for the average Volvo ownder, which wanted something that, if not pretty, was at least quirky.
If it had been fitted with the 2.0 engine and the 5-speed, I would have imagine it would have had quite sprightly performance – would it have sold as an alternative to the Rabbit GTI? One wonders.
They were later sold in Australia with the 2 litre and 5 speed (and likely Europe too), and they were (on paper) not much quicker than a manual 240, oddly enough.
The proposal is not an indecent one, and finer for the fact it had to be based upon such a gormless original.
You’d think that the 1.4 Renault and a real manual would have had not-bad performance, but I suppose the US market wanted autos and the CVT wasn’t too advanced then.
Volvo were dead right about the projected results if they’d put their own bits underhood. As mentioned just above, they came here with injected 2 litres and 5 speed from circa ’83-’86, and were about on-par with the 240 for pace drinking habits..
Hats off for a visually effective restyle, albeit with a revised bonnet and front fenders as well the grille and lights, and the car has lost a lot of the dumpiness, but kept a definite Volvo feel. That revised interior looks good – simple, clean and complete.
I have a CC record for not being a 340 fan, but that is not relevant to this piece or to your work. I see this as an all round improvement.
Interesting read – looking forward to more
It’s surprising how VW like the 343 is. From the A pillar back it strongly resembles the VW Polo and the first picture of the dash is also very VAG. The center console is most definitely it’s own thing. I remember seeing DAF Volvos in UK car magazines but not being interested until the 480 came out.
It still is a car that handles quite well die to it’s weight distribution. After the 363 cs proto , and the b19 torquetube drivetrain you would have thought there could be a market for it in the USA. Always wondered why there never was a Turbo version of the GLT. That would have been a real fun car. Except for the downpipe and some small bits and pieces, all the parts where in stock!
So , no other solution of building my own. Initially built the way it could have been built back in the days. ( later things got out of hand, like they always tend to do)
A fine piece of work Bart! Autotron Rosmalen, upstairs?