You just missed your chance to buy one of the most unusual cars ever made: the twin-engine Citroen 2CV Sahara. In the late fifties, when France was still very involved in the Sahara regions of Northern Africa, the ever-creative engineers at Citroen came up with a novel idea to build a 4×4 2CV (4CV?) by adding a second engine and transaxle in the rear. The controls operated both engines and transmissions simultaneously, or just one. How great is that? Now we know where the CoronoroC got its inspiration from, although it has twin 440 CID engines instead of the Sahara’s twin 425 cc engines, rated at 12 hp each. No wonder they added a second one; 24 hp goes a bit further conquering those giant sand dunes in the Sahara.
Yes, the Sahara was well named, and one of the advantages of its double drive train was that there was no need for any sort of central differential, since each engine and transmission worked essentially independently. If the front one starts losing traction and encounters wheel slip, the rear one is still chugging away.
The regular 2 CV’s umbrella-handle dashboard shifter had to be ditched for a floor-mounted one that was coupled to both transmissions. Not surprisingly, performance with only one of the engines was modest, with a top speed of 65 km/h (40 mph). But with both of the little 425 cc boxers at work, the Sahara’s top speed was raised to a blistering 65 mph.
Here’s that second engine, taking up valuable trunk space, which explains why the spare had to be moved to the top of the hood. Another apparent advantage of the second engine is twice as much heat for the interior, if those two ducts are what I think they are.
Only some 694 Saharas were ever built, and 27 are known to still exist. That makes this one pretty rare, which probably explains why the final bid of $30,099 wasn’t good enough to win it. Oddly enough, this Sahara now resides in the wonderfully named town of Boring, Oregon.
Hat tip to johnnyangel! Full 2CV Curbside Classic here
At my university way back in 1995, these Citroens were very popular vehicles, along with Trabants and East European scooters.
My flatmate’s friend had a red “Ente”, ( a VW Beetle was ein “Kaefir”, and we called 2CVs, “Enten” (ducks)), I used to hop into and take off around Oestfriesland. His car was the first Ente I had the chance to really get acquainted with and back in the States, I never saw an Ente before. Torsten’s was really well restored, but he always made sure that no one else drove it. I don’t blame him for his caution.
It barely moved fast enough to get out of its own way. It was loud, tinny and really a throwback to Beetle-era European transporation. You wouldn’t want to get into an accident in one and I was often concerned when we took any highways since other cars rode our bumper and I was in the back seat.
An Ente is really quite a rare bird!
2CV meant the nominal (not actual) horsepower rating used for taxation. This rule hindered the development of powerful cars in France.
From this to the JDM Kei Cars to the current crop of corn fed USDM 8000lb “1/2 ton” pickups spawned from the chicken tax, size/displacement/etc regulations have all sorts of unintended consequences.
This has a cool factor of infinity and beyond!
I REALLY like this and wish I actually wanted one, but a VW Thing would have to come first.
Aside from a 2CV featured on “American Graffiti”, the only one I had ever seen in the flesh was in 1970 in San Francisco. Battleship gray, of course! I thought I had seen a ghost, as the likes of it jarred my senses.
This car? Never knew they existed, but I suppose they needed something on salvage trips after the war to see what goodies could be found on destroyed military vehicles.
But Zackman, not even the front windows roll down in this one. 🙂
Hmmm… you have a point there, JP!
I must re-assess…
True, but they do flip open at least.
See, if they’d just had one of these in ‘Flight of the Phoenix”, they could have just driven home! 😛
4CV or 2CVX2?
2CVTwin.
4X 4CV.
Or, 2CVrossCountry?
I think this wins the title of “The Most Interesting Car in the World.”
For today, anyway.
Must be a short list of twin-engined cars:
Citroen Sahara (and a production car at that)
Twinni Mini (one-off)
Saab speed record car (one-off)
Hurst Hairy Olds
What else?
Car and Driver or Road and Track did a CRX, I’ve seen a FWD Cadillac get an extra Northstar in the trunk, and there are 1 or 2 24hrs of LeMons cars that have been dual engined, where a Corolla and a MR2 were mated. Of course those were all one-offs.
There was a double engined toyota in one or more of the lemons races. Doubt Toyota would claim it though. Ok Eric, thats what happens when I don’t read all the comments.
Jeep did a Hurricane concept in 2005 that was a Wrangler-esque vehicle with twin 5.7 Hemis and 4 wheel steering.
Is that leather in a 2CV?
Camel skin leather, of course 😉
Citroën sells a car like this today, the DS5 with Hybrid4, their AWD hybrid system. Its 163 hp 2.0 HDi diesel FWD drive train is augmented by a 37 hp (28 kW) RWD electric motor with NiMH battery pack.
Hybrid4 diesel-electric hybrid power is also available in the Peugeot 3008 crossover (which was first) and 508 family car. Peugeot 3008 HYbrid4’s mileage is 3.8 L/100 km, beating the smaller Toyota Prius’ 3.9 L/100 km.
The Toyota Hybrid 4wds work the same way.
Except the Toyota hybrid AWDs have a full-hybrid FWD drive train plus a motor and diff for the rear wheels. In other words, they have electric motors at both ends.
Peugeot/Citroën have a nearly-conventional FWD drive train and make it hybrid and AWD with a separate electric system out back. No ‘power split device’ aka planetary gearset like Toyotas have.
The French system seems easier to do, and probably works better with a diesel than Toyota’s system. I wonder how often DS5’s engine shuts off. I’m guessing it takes more energy and time to restart a diesel than Toyota’s gas engine (which easily restarts in milliseconds).
it sure looks like the Citroen system has a motor up front too as part of it’s “start stop system” IE it appears to be a system similar to the one GM used on some of their Hybrid/E assist vehicles. As far as being cheaper I’d say not I know before the price of copper went through the roof the Toyota eCVT was cheaper to make than a conventional torque converter automatic, much cheaper. Now that the price of copper has gone up I don’t know what the relative cost differences are. Either way the eCVT is the cheapest way to do a Hybrid and allow for engine shut off. Once a diesel is up to temp it can start just as quick as a gas engine. The Prius engine does not start as quickly as a conventional gas engine they hold off fuel until oil pressure has built, to reduce the effects of the many start-stop cycles.
Have you ever seen a car with the gas filler in the driver’s door? How weird is that?
Nothing like sitting directly over the gas tank to make a driver feel safe.
Does a Willys MB count? Tank fill under drivers seat cushion
These were developed for the oil explorationin the Sahara desert for French oil companies.
And it is just brilliant, the caris simple, there are two engines instead of one, so you could limp home on-the-one engine if necessary.
A normal 2CV already has great off-road qualities, FWD, light, large wheels and no powerrrr, so it does not dig itself in so easily.
The Dutch Forrestry administration had a few of these, only to inspect or survey the state of the Dutch dunes, which keep our feet dry.
The ugly duck name for the 2CV comes from Holland as well, in the late fifties the Dutch Automobile Club (ANWB) got rid of their side car ex-dump Harley Davidson patrol motor cycles that were there to help stranded motorists and they were replaced by the 2CV Van. (truckette)
At the time the Walt Disney tale of the Ugly Ducklin’ was very popular and when the 2CV van in YELLOW livery was introduced, they nick named it the “Ugly Ducklin”
The ANWB patrol men were estatic , no more frozen balls in wintertime on the Harley’s but the “comfort’ of a car.
It was the era they greeted you on their Harleys when they saw your yellow ANWB membership emblem on the grille of your car.
And if the Auto Club sold their vans people were in line because these guys took really, really good care of their cars.
I’ll bet these are great off-roaders. The main reason: the absence of overweight.
I visited a lot of off-road events in the eighties and nineties. You know which 4x4s always made it to the top or managed to go throug the deepest mud ?
Those tiny and light-weight Suzuki SJ and Samurai off-roaders with their small gasoline engines. Leaving all heavy and screaming V8 monsters behind.
+1.
That’s my primary complaint about today’s Jeep Wrangler: It’s too heavy. And to think, the military and Willys so carefully obsessed over the original MB’s final weight, that they monitored the amount of paint that was used for each unit!
The original Willys was a crude knockoff of the Bantam prototype military car. It ALWAYS had weight issues, from the initial evaluation. When the final bid was let, the weight requirement had to be moved upward to allow the Willys vehicle to be found acceptable.
In spite of the supposedly-open bidding process, the evaluators were heavily in favor of Willys. As I remember, Bantam was considered too weak, and the comittee wanted the Willys engine. Ford was only allowed part of the bid in building to Willys design using the “Go-Devil” engine.
As for this thing: Clever concept. I see problems in operation…say you only want ONE engine? How do you NOT put the other drivetrain in gear? How do you not work the throttle of the dead engine and thereby flood it with raw gas while it’s shut down?
I see potential problems, too. Wouldn’t there be issues keeping the engines in sync without computer controls?
I’m not a mechanic, but can this be done pneumatically ? If I recall correctly that’s how it was done with the DAF Turbo Twin rally raid trucks in the eighties. 4×4 trucks with two diesel engines, one for each axle.
I don’t think keeping them in sync would be a problem – the car itself would keep them in sync. Front engine drives the front wheels at, say, 50kph; the rear engine, up and running, could not but run at the speed that that gear chosen would have it run at 50kph. One engine might be digging in more than the other, but unless there was a real mechanical malfunction, both engines would be working some load.
The problem I would see would be with one engine shut down. The single gearshift would select, say, fourth gear front and rear…is the rear engine just gonna spin, not running, until and unless its ignition is turned on? Not very practical or economical.
They are “road coupled” so in most operation they will spin at the same speeds. In theory if you were foot to the floor near the red line and one of the ends got on a slippery surface then I guess it would be possible to over rev the engine in that end.
JPT: you don’t give the clever Citroen engineers enough credit. There are obviously quick-disconnects on the engines for the throttle, clutch and gearshift. If you knew how the gearshifts on these work, you’d know how easy that was.
One didn’t exactly switch engines on the go. It might have taken a minute or two to disconnect or re-connect the second engine.
Buzz Dog: Synchronization is absolutely not a problem; why would it?