Shoot, literally; while I’m trotting to catch this Dodge A100 pickup. I though for sure it was going to park, but it kept going. And so did I. I’ve been wanting to do a CC on one of these for a long time, but it’s looks like it may not going to be today. Trot, trot, trot…
I almost catch up with it. Folks are always driving around this little half block to find a parking spot for the County Courthouse and Offices. Maybe on the other side of the street. I had an A100 van, which will appear as a CC one of these days. But the pickups were much less common. As is all-too obvious, weight distribution on these rigs is atrocious. I wonder what the actual percentages are? Anybody know?
He wasn’t looking for a spot, but just staging himself to pick up someone at the curb. She was probably paying her property taxes, the deadline for which was yesterday. Three guesses why I was heading there too. The landlord’s least favorite day of the year. 🙁 Shoot.
These old forward control pickups have always fascinated me. The Corvair 95 was a sales disaster, and the Econoline pickup hardly set the world on fire. I always wondered why Dodge chose to wade in here after seeing how poorly its competitors fared.
That said, the A-100 was always appealing to me because of the V8 engine availability. The way these look, I always imagined that if you could set a glass of water on the front bumper, the back wheels would rise up and hover about 8 inches over the pavement like an automotive teeter-totter. I am sure that weight distribution is better than in my imagination, but it can’t be by much.
I cannot imagine driving one of these in any kind of substantial snow. I just put 350 lbs of sand tubes in the back of my 2wd F100, but at least the rear axle is in the middle of the box. There’s no way you could put sand over the rear axle of that A100 if you didn’t want the truck to be even more prone to sudden pirouettes.
That said, I still love the way these look, both the pickup and the van.
I guess that’s why he took off the front bumper; got tired of folks doing that.
The V8 added all that much more weight on the front, making its power that much harder to put to the ground. I would go for a barrel slant 225. These things were light to; not much to them, as a matter of fact.
A Hyper-Pak /6, of course.
Isn’t the engine set back just a wee bit, like back parallel to the seats? Still, I always thought the same thing…set a glass of water on the front bumper and the back lefts up. Cool looking truck though…can’t deny that. It’s been decades since seeing one here in the East that wasn’t at a show/cruise.
Those things…I lusted for them, partly because I’ve always liked the flat-front design (yeah, I know it’s more dangerous, yada yada) and partly because there were NONE where I grew up and these were new.
The first time I saw them, and I say “them” because I saw many, was on my first trip to the Pacific Northwest, 1990. Man, how I wanted! But I was broke and on a mission – Alaska or bust, probably both (that saga has an O. Henry ending; fodder for another ramble). So I’d not buy.
Now, of course, they’re all the older; and thus all the less practical for any kind of use-driven owner. And I still want that flat front unit…Toyota canceled their flat-front van just as my pay increased to allow it. And there just WERE no used ones; in that permutation, the Toyota van didn’t sell many to begin with.
But that’s how it is. Some lusts, in fact most lusts, remain unsated in life.
Here’s a cure for that falling over problem. This could really be built, without the rear engine of course. Rampside. Kids would love to ride in the rear cab. Call it the Kid Cab Pickup.
And what a peaceful drive for mom and dad! Every parent’s dream 🙂
Are double-ended vehicles a Dodge specialty?
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-bi-directional-dual-440-powered-1973-dodge-coronet-police-pursuit/
Apparently so! You’d think the double-ended brand would be Honda.
Don’t think the weight could be that bad for me. I never drive without toolboxes full of tools and being a slob means there would alway be plenty of weight in the rear. I’m not real sure why I like them but I always have. There is a ford parked not far from my church but (unlike this one) it never moves.
It just seems they are more efficient as they use the same amount of wheelbase for folks and engines. Anyway, hope you catch him Paul.
There are many Van/Utes designed like this with the driver sitting over the front axle with the Toyota Hiace being the default van worldwide. The weight distribution isnt too bad considering these vehicles were designed to spend their lives loaded not empty as cars but in reality the weight is mostly between the axles so no it wont tip over despite the way it looks
Where I grew up, the Ford version of this vehicle was seen more often than the Dodge one. I have wanted one of these since being a kid as well. It seems that there was a sweet spot for these rigs about 15-20 years ago where they were both 1) more plentiful and 2) not seen as desirable yet and thus had much lower perceived value then they do today.
I still want to buy a late 60s Ford or Chevy panel van and make it into the Mystery Machine too!
I bought an Econoline version of this pickup brand new in 1961. Had to cough up $1635 for it. It was the deluxe model with rear windows wrapping around the corners. 144 six and three on the tree.
How many vehicles can you raise up the engine hood while driving and diagnose how the engine is running while sitting next to it?
I fashioned an iron pipe U-shape affair with padded back attached to the engine shroud so three could ride in it, the center one sitting on top of the engine cover. (three people in jeopardy instead of just one).
Attached an aluminum shell on the back, installed a bunk and curtains and camped in it all across the country (working in Oregon part of the time). Other than side winds in the wide open stretches, it handled everything well.
It was a happy vehicle. Simple, great visibility and it smiled at you.
Years later I owned an orange A-100 van with the slant six and the 727 torqueflite. (Odd combo normally, but not unusual in the vans). Outfitted that one with a cross-wise bunk at the rear and full carpentry tools underneath, leaving plenty of wide open space towards the front.
Both remembered fondly.
This commercial from Chevy shows the differences between the FC van based PUs. Be sure to see the braking test at about the 1:20 mark
LOVE that braking test of the Econoline. Wow!
Love the a100 first car I ever drove. (really would love to own one someday.) In high school I volunteered at the Trolley Museum in East Windsor CT. At the time they had an A100 pickup slant six auto. The kicker was it had Hi rail wheels. Not just Hi rails but Manual models. When you see Hi rails today they usually have inset wheels to match the rail width the a100 seemed to match right up on its own. With the rail wheels engaged via a 6′ lever arm the tire still had a couple hundred pounds on the rail allowing just enough traction to drive. I actually did drive in the snow a few times and it did fine. But my guess is the Hi rail wheels added an extra few pounds to the rig. The auto shifter came out of the dash and the parking brake was a pull cable with a T handle bolted to the engine dog house. Also has a manual foot pump for the windshield washer. So weird it was wonderful.
Here’s an Econoline pickup I saw at a car show last summer. It was totally restored, and very sharp.
Had one back in high school (1976-80). Engine is over the front axle, so hard stop was no problem. Mine was 225 S6 with oil bath breather filter. Beat it to death and it kept going. Had it on two wheels once (passenger side). It wasn’t much for handling. In the end the rust did it in and I was off to school.
Oh, you people, don’t you know the most famous Dodge A100 pickup?
http://www.allpar.com/model/littleredwagon.html
In action:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIpW6ueiIEQ
How they built it:
http://www.sweptline.com/hist/lrw.html
I even built the model:
http://www.mnacreations.com/completedpages/drag/LittleRedWagon.htm
Yes I do. This was just a quick outtake. A full CC is coming one of these days.
We dealt with it in a sideways fashion here. https://www.curbsideclassic.com/uncategorized/curbside-classic-1990-dodge-ram-radio-flyer-the-big-red-wagon/
The van truck idea probably would have worked better on the second generation vans of the 70s, where you have the front wheels ahead of you, and you’re much less likely to experience the teeter totter effect .Weight distribution is a little better. On occasion I’ve seen custom truck conversions of the 70s and up era vans. When you think about it , it would have saved the Big 3 money by sharing a van with a pickup truck design, instead of having the separate Ford F150, for example. It’s what they do in Europe with the VW Transporter and Ford Transit. You could still order a big Ford Econoline truck with 4X4 !! No need for a Chevy Suburban, the passenger van works !! I’m sure I’d get a few pickup truck enthusiasts that would disagree.