That thing has BOTH, else it would never have sold proto ONE.

They're going like hotcakes over there - and no wonder.

Can you imagine the HOTROD response over here if they were on the US market?



THAT TRUCK IS HOT!!!!@!



It's everything we ever dreamed of - an F-111 +2 mach afterburner design on wheels......

AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT!

This truck is to trucks, what the GT-40 was to cars in it's day.

WTF are we waiting for?

 

Big problem I see is lack of clearance--although they show a pic of it in shallow water, you're gonna rip the bottom out even on some fairly mild access roads. Hell, looks like you'd rip the front bumper/spoiler off on a typical parking lot block. Still, it looks like it would be a riot to drive.

Subaru made that Baja thing a few years ago (ugleee), and I don't think anyone bought them because the bed was about 3 feet long--made no sense for the stuff that I need to carry. Earlier on was the original Subaru BRAT, which was a little car/pickup thing like the Dodge Rampage.

Bring back the original pre-bloat mini-pickups; cheap and simple--I think they were cheaper to operate than almost any other vehicle. I can deal with rubber mats, am able to roll up windows (used to do it years ago in everything I owned), and don't mind a little mechanical noise. Even though they were small, they were real TRUCKS, and I like trucks.

George

 

The problem with the subaru brat(baja) ford ranchero and the chevy el camino was that they would not perform or handle like a car and they also did not have the towing/payload capacity of a truck so instead of getting the best of both worlds you ended up the worst.
Pesonnaly I think if you can justify a crew cab truck with a 5' bed because thats all the cargo capacity you need and you worry about gas mileage then in reality you should get a full sized car or a crossover SUV.

 

"Bring back the original pre-bloat mini-pickups; cheap and simple--I think they were cheaper to operate than almost any other vehicle. I can deal with rubber mats, am able to roll up windows (used to do it years ago in everything I owned), and don't mind a little mechanical noise. Even though they were small, they were real TRUCKS, and I like trucks."

The trouble is the folks like us who want them aren't enough to justify producing them. Americans can get credit to buy expensive stuff, so they do.

 

A thing about Australian roads that must have figured in the design scheme is that it is a "LONG WAY TO ANYWHERE".

And not all the roads in the outback are camel trails...

Like the interstates in America, they have well maintained blacktop that is near endless, and practically nothing to see along the way - so why not go FAST?

It's the ultimate "OTTOBAHN". Worry more about kangaroos than cops...

The more I think about it, the more I like it. We've seen an influx of Aussies coming over here - someone ought to replace them.
(He observes)

 

YES! YES! YES! Count me in! We're driving to Australia!

 

I have a bad feeling there is more to it than that - check the International forum.

 

Mahindra is supose to bring a new truck next year and a hybrid in 2010
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/11/m...ext-year-dies/

 

We'll see if it actually makes it...

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...2/pageNumber=1

 

I have a suspicion that small engines may not be the answer, because there is greater friction and engine resistence that must be overcome in them unless they are designed very simply.

No matter what, the load being carried is the single most critical design criteria.

 

But thing is, more often than not, people do not carry big lods, so many of those pickup trucks are running empty most of the time.

 

True, and aero styling can help some. In fact a lot. When you do haul a full load it should have reserve HP.

The fuel used by a bigger engine will be in proportion to the load carried, speed, and any resistance (mechanical or other).

A bigger engine doesn't have to work as hard, or run at high RPM's.

 

Or more gears. For the weight they can carry, big trucks have less HP per GWWR or GCWR than light trucks.

To *some* degree. For one thing, bigger engines are normally heavier so there's more weight right there.

That's true but that doesn't say much about fuel consumption. While there's not a 100% correlation, in many cases the equivalent vehicle with a bigger engine has a worse EPA mpg rating.

 

"RIGHT SIZING" the engine is then critical. Not too little, not too much.

I still prefer to err in the direction of MUCH though - it's more fun....

 

A Ford Ranger with a turbocharged 4 cyl and manual trans should do good on fuel and still have enough power.