The performance rating is supposed to be 4, not 2.
(I am not allowed to edit any more posts in a couple of hours if you wonder why I’m writing it here.)
4 Likes
REPRINT FROM ISSUE # 19 1994
FIRST LOOK: SEIKATSU CAT4 200Q
MOUNTAIN LION OR DOMESTIC KITTEN?
At the first glance, one might think that Seikatsu’s new CAT4 is an offroader suited for rough terrain and hard work. Nothing could be more wrong though. Maybe the friendly rounded shape, moving away from the boxy offroad vehicles we’re used to see will make you suspicious. But it is under the bodyshell the big difference lies. Here, you won’t find some truck like ladder frame, instead it is built on a passenger car unibody platform, actually from the Esper. That also means a transversely mounted engine, and refined suspension with double wishbones both front and rear. And forget regular 4WD. The rage now is the so called “AWD”, no locking hubs, low ranges etc. to take care of. No need to engage or disengage it on dry or slippery roads - just drive it like a normal 2WD car. AWD is primarily for safer and more relaxed driving on bad roads, and somewhat better capacity to handle slippery conditions - not with offroading primarily in mind.
And there is nothing wrong with this. Market research shows that most offroaders are never used for the most rough conditions anyway. Some people just want better abilities to cope with rough roads and bad weather - but would prefer if they could get power to all four wheels and a little more ground clearance without having to sacrifice the nimbleness, comfort or economy from the passenger car, so this type of vehicle is something I am sure that many swedes are interesting in taking a closer look at.
At the first glance, the fit and finish seems good, the panel gaps are even and there is a sparkling shine from the purple metallic paintjob on our test car. The model they provided for us was the 200Q, with a 180 hp turbocharged engine and we are not sure that it is the sane choice in this case. This type of vehicle doesn’t need sports car performance, the turbo lag doesn’t make it any favour, not to mention the price premium. We guess that the 128 hp naturally aspirated engine that is also available will be the choice for most customers - and honestly speaking, it is good enough.
The interior is very nice when it comes to materials and finish, and features everything that we have learned to expect from more upmarket cars today, like electric windows and mirrors, a great sound system with CD player, air conditioning and much more. That, combined with a good tuning of the suspension system and decent sound insulation, contributes to the excellent comfort. This is really a car I would take for a long trip without any doubts. It is really very far from the often bouncy, crude and loud 4x4 vehicles on the market.
However, it is not without its compromises after all. Even if it is not as bad as a “real” offroader, it is obvious that the handling has gotten a bit compromised by the high ground clearance. It is predictable and easy to drive, but the cornering abilities are a bit on the tame side. The electric power steering is fingertip light but takes away some of the feeling of driving. Also, the brake performance is a bit weak (but ABS is standard, thanks for that!). To use an old saying, this might be the car you “rather ride in than drive”. But if the active safety is a bit lacking, the passive safety more than makes up for that. It has everything you can expect from a car today, like door beams, air bags, pretentioning seat belts, headrests on all places and much more. Seikatsu promises that it will pass the upcoming stricter crash test standards coming in 1998 with flying colours, and we don’t doubt it. However, don’t be tricked into believing that this is a tank that will crush everything in its way, it’s built on the platform from a regular family car, and except for the height, the measurements and weight are not far from that.
So, a vehicle for you? Yes, if you has to cope with rough conditions without the need to take the car off the road, if you prefer a comfortable and practical car over a sporty one, and has the money needed. In the financial crisis we are experiencing now, we guess that the tested model, the 180 hp turbo, will be quite expensive for most buyers when it reaches the Swedish market, considering the price of $32800 Seikatsu were talking about. Probably the sane decision will be to forget the 180 hp and go for the cheaper 128 hp model, it will save you some money and work well enough for this type of car. But we will wait with the final verdict on that when we get a possibility to do a more in depth review when the vehicle arrives on the Swedish market, probably at the beginning of 1995.
Thanks to @Tzuyu_main for the car!
5 Likes
Oh hey, thanks so much for the in-depth review! It’s good to have a second perspective on a car I made.
Just notice though that I am trying to catch the spirit of what automotive journalists probably would have written back then, not necessarily my own thoughts. I’m saying this already now for the future too, if someone feels that they have gotten an unfair review, it’s not necessarily me trying to trash your car…
1 Like
REPRINT FROM ISSUE # 19 1994
FIRST LOOK: IP COLIBRI 1600DX
YOUR NEXT RENTAL CAR?
Almost 25 years ago, IP presented their first generation of the little Colibri, back then a small city car, with a cheerful and charming design that won the heart of many buyers that saw it as looking “fun” or “cute”. Often painted in the bright and vibrant colours of the 70s, they were spreading happiness in the crowded city traffic that were their natural habitat. But even the technology was remarkable, it was the first IP model that followed the formula popularized by the british Mini, with the engine mounted sideways and the front wheels pulling the car.
Fast forward to 1994. I open my eyes and what I see is a compact 4 door sedan in off white. A generic rental car. If it weren’t for the trademark “angry mouth” (a modern interpretation of the tombstone grille seen on the 1948 IP Lily) and the somewhat weird looking taillights (doubtful if any buyers will see them as a benefit), it could be a car from almost any asian brand. And it might be compact but it is certainly not a small city car, it is almost one meter longer than the original Colibri. Now, judging the looks aren’t what we should be doing as an automobile magazine since the buyers taste is what’s playing a big role there, but honestly speaking, it’s hard to deny that the Colibri lost much of its charm in the transition from generation 1 to generation 5.
At a closer look, there is nothing to complain about when it comes to the fit and finish neither on the in- or outside, it is on the level you could expect from a reasonably priced compact car, nothing more and nothing less. And since the technology is tried and true, it will probably run withouth giving its owner too much of a headache. With much of the bodyshell galvanized, it will probably not face the rust issues that killed off most of the examples of the 70s and early 80s Colibri models. And the IP 4G engine is known to be a reliable powerplant, in this example it’s a 98 hp 1.6 litre unit, mated to an optional 4 speed automatic that is far from the most modern on the market, but made driving relaxed and comfortable. Probably it will take its toll on the fuel economy though, with no lockup or advanced electronic management.
Overall, relaxed and comfortable sums up most of the driving experience. It’s far from the penalty boxes compact cars could be in the past, it even offers some gizmos like electric mirrors, central locking and power steering, there is even air conditioning and electric windows among the options, to name a few. The interior is an ocean of grey cloth and plastic, not very exciting but will probably hold up for the whole expected lifespan of the car. Even the handling could best be described as relaxed, it is safe, secure and honest, but offers absolutely no joy or excitement when it comes to driving, the car is an appliance and should be used as such.
There is much evolution when it comes to safety in smaller cars at the moment, and the previous Colibri with its roots in the late 80s had a hard time keeping up with the competition there. IP now promises that it will be among the leaders in its class and while waiting for some independent test results before we can give a final verdict, things like door beams, a sturdy body shell for its size, a standard drivers side air bag (passenger optional, something to keep in mind if you need to place rear facing child seats up front), pretensioning seatbelts and headrests on all outboard places at least looks promising. ABS is now standard and the brakes offer a surprisingly good bite.
The 1.6 model is your only choice if you want a 4 door sedan and/or automatic transmission. The base 1.4 model will probably be a real price fighter and if you are satisfied with a manual 3 door hatchback, it might be an interesting option to consider as it might give you great value. The sportier 2.0 model is a completely different story and almost needs a test on its own as the hot hatch it is, but it probably will only be a player in the margins.
We really can’t find many reasons to complain on the new IP Colibri and it probably will be a favourite with fleet managers and rental car companies all over the world. And, IP is correct in their claims that if you haven’t had a test drive in a small car for a while, chances are that you will be surprised, and find out that a car like this might be enough for you and that there is no need to think bigger.
What IP does not tell you, though, is that it is true for most of its competitors too.
(Yeah, reviewing my own car feels strange but I try to be fair, it can at least show where it is positioned compared to its competitors on the market at the time)
5 Likes
REPRINT FROM ISSUE #8 1975
USED CAR REVIEW: 1969 KYUNG-YEONG SSANVAN
SPOTLIGHT ON SSANVAN
The little korean Ssanvan has lately been an interesting used car purchase for many buyers. But is it really worth the money?
Something many readers have asked for is a test of the korean Ssanvan as an used car. And we can understand why, for a car in its class it is far from the cheapest you can buy. If we compare it to another popular asian car for example, you could buy a much bigger IP Lily for the same amounts of money when the little Ssanvan was introduced in 1969. But the first visit at a Kyung-Yeong dealership soon gave us troubles. It turned out that even getting an used Ssanvan was problematic. The salesman almost laughed at us, but he could offer cars from almost any other brand that had been traded in for Ssanvans. Some searching finally got us a 1969 1.4 automatic in burgundy to test though. The sporty “GT” is a different story that we might get back to at another time.
But what makes the Ssanvan so attractive then if it is just a small car that seems to be overpriced at the first glance? Well, even if the fuel crisis is more or less over at the moment, it made many people rethink their beliefs. Suddenly, many people started to question why they had to burn a lot of gasoline to chug around a lot of steel just to transport themselves. On the other hand, small cars have often been crude and unrefined, not offering much in the terms of space and comfort, and the driving experience often have been questionable. And there is were the Ssanvan comes in somewhere in between. We aren’t exactly saying that it is comparable to a larger car, but that could not be expected either, but being something of the small car of the future, it made more than one driver of something larger, or for that matter, older and less refined small cars, change to a Ssanvan.
The transversely mounted engine and front wheel drive is a real space saver for example, meaning that there is actually a little bit more room inside than in, for example, a large IP Vagant. What you have to sacrifice though, is a bit of luggage space. Also, the small trunklid is something that shows that the car is coming of age, a hatchback like many of the recent superminis offer would have made it a bit more practical. The 1.4 litre engine is still completely up to date, featuring an overhead camshaft and actually also fuel injection, which for the most part is only science fiction in this class. That means no fiddling with a choke, no troubles at cold- or warm starting, a low fuel consumption and for the most part, greater reliability. The big drawback is that if something breaks (which it rarely does) there is nothing you can do as a regular DIY mechanic, it needs to be repaired by a proffessional, and parts can be expensive. Other than that, the engines are extremely well built and should not cause troubles in most cases. The torsion beam rear axle is a intelligent construction that manages to combine most of the positive sides of an individual suspension with a live axle. You really could not call the driving characteristics sporty, thanks to a front heavy bias and comfort oriented suspension, but it is safe and predictable and works excellent for everyday driving. Gas shocks and power steering is something you really won’t expect to find in this class either, but the Ssanvan has them as standard equipment, improving driving characteristics a lot.
Even though the Ssanvan features advanced technology, it is quite straightforward and should not cause unnecessary or expensive repairs compared to other cars in the class. Though the service costs aren’t exactly the cheapest, we believe that ownership could be economical in the long run, since it is very sparse on fuel and holds its value well. And even though the rust protection seems to be sparse, we have gotten indications that Ssanvans are a bit more resistant to corrosion than many of its competitors. We really don’t see any big traps you can walk into when it comes to ownership of an used Ssanvan.
What you have to sacrifice in a small car is always some safety. Less mass and shorter crumple zones means that the smaller car will always come out worse in a crash against a larger, heavier one. In that case, we dare to say that the Ssanvan is about average for its size. There is no proof that a Ssanvan would be a more dangerous place to be in if an accident occurs than other small cars, and it fulfills the legal requirements, but hardly anything above that. Mounting points for rear seatbelts means that they are an easy retrofit in 1969 models though (since the law didn’t require them until 1970).
The only major drawback, as we see it, is that the Ssanvan is very overpriced now in the used car market, and it is really hard to do any bargains, if you’re looking for one you have to accept what you might find at the moment, it is purely the sellers market. So, there is many other cars to consider for the same price, you might get an almost new compact from another brand for the price of a late 60s/early 70s Ssanvan, or if you aren’t purely in the market for a compact car, there is bargains to be done in the class above the Ssanvan for the same money, or less.
Hot tip: The rumours says that the Ssanvan will be facelifted in a not so distant future. That will probably cause a drop in the prices for older models. The sane thing would be to wait until that before buying an used example.
(Thanks to @Aruna for lending me the car!)
4 Likes
REPRINT FROM ISSUE #2 1984
TEST DRIVE: JESA BIANCHI GECKO I.E. TURBO
FORGET THIS ONE!
It is already too late to get this Gecko. Fortunately it is never too late to admire the gorgeous bodywork.
For many people, a JESA Bianchi Gecko is a dream car, and I really can’t blame them for that. The lines are sleek and beautiful, timeless and classic. The driving experience is something you don’t find in ordinary cars and the performance is good enough to make you lose your drivers license in Sweden within the blink of an eye. So, what car could possibly make a Gecko look like a mobility scooter in comparision?
The answer is easy, another Gecko. And this time it is not any Gecko, it’s the i.e. Turbo, the Dutch-Italian manufacturer’s latest weapon in the group B series. 200 of them will be made, and the Swedish importer will get three of them. Chances are that you will not be able to buy one, unless you are one of the three lucky customers that have already bought their example. But this is something of an ultimate dream car, and dreaming is free for everyone.
So, what are the differences compared to a regular Gecko then, if you ever can call the Gecko “regular”? Well, on the outside JESA has avoided the worst tacky cladding, adding only a rear spoiler and on our example, rear window louvers and subtle gold painted BBS wheels, and the results aren’t unpleasant to the eyes at all. Mechanically the differences are of course even bigger. The engine is now stroked to 2140 cc and a Bosch supplied fuel injection system have replaced the somewhat stubborn Weber carbs of the past. 242 hp in the street legal version is enough to make the sub-1000 kg Gecko a little pocket rocket. In 4.4 seconds you have reached 100 km/h and reaching speeds of over 240 km/h is not impossible. There is a little turbo lag but considering how this is a high performance engine nothing remarkable, and the well-suited gearing means you can keep the engine in the right powerband most of the time.
On the roads this will be what most drivers will see of the Gecko. The question is still what it will show its competitors in the rallying circuit.
Of course, it is a fantastic car to drive on the pavement with its sticky rubber. The factory claims that it has a cornering ability of 1.13G and even if that number almost sounds unbelievable, we trust them. The brakes are able to stop the car from a speed of 100 km/h in only 33.8 metres and are almost unsensitive to fading. But out on the gravel it shows its true nature as the rallying beast it is. With 58% of the weight at the rear wheels, a strong turbocharged engine and a locking differential an unskilled driver has to watch out for not being passed by his own rearend - and a skilled driver can use its characteristics to his own favour and drive this thing FAST on a rally course.
The question is if it’s fast enough? Some people claim that 2WD is a thing of the past in rallying now with 4WD taking over as the winning formula. Chances are that this fantastic evolution of the Gecko already is doomed, which would be unfortunate for JESA that really needs a halo car.
But rally winner or not, nobody can take away from this car that it is pure joy and excitement on wheels. Is it a car for you then? Probably not, if you’re not one of the three lucky customers that got the chance to buy one before it was too late.
If it’s a car for your dreams? Of course it is.
(Thanks to @Mythrin for lending me the car!)
3 Likes
REPRINT FROM ISSUE #19 1994
FIRST LOOK: FAROX ENDEVIA
ALL TERRAIN ARMCHAIR
This is exactly what the american market wants at the moment, a large, luxurious offroader. But probably it will be more of a lukewarm success with Swedish customers.
If a car for over $40 000 can be called “great value for the money”, question is if not the Farox Endevia is a hot candidate for that title. How could you describe something that is able to climb mountains, looks like a luxury limo on the inside and has performance that could rival hot hatches from 10 years ago in a better way?
On the outside, the offroader looks huge, but fact is that it has a marginally larger footprint than a Volvo 740. At over 2 tonnes, however, the price per kilogram is still reasonable. And with a 4.9 litre V8 you get lots of engine for your money too.
The test drive was probably as undramatic as it gets. The ride quality is comparable to relaxing in your favourite armchair at home. Yet the handling could almost rival some passenger cars, even if the high ground clearance makes the offroader a bit wallowy in the turns. Mainly this is a result of the advanced suspension, no classic solid axles here, a 4 wheel double wishbone suspension is almost extreme technology, compared to what you usually find in this class. Our only concern was that the rear brakes had a tendency to lock up before the front, but with standard ABS it perhaps should be less of a worry.
Speaking about ABS, it is of course loaded with other safety equipment too. Pretensioning seatbelts, dual airbags, door beams, headrests on all six seats, just to name a few. Traction control will help you avoid the accident in the first place, and should it still occur, you probably will be safe in the big, heavy steel box - but it will be worse news for the driver of a small car that crashes with the Farox.
But of course there is some objections. One of them is if we really need cars like this at all? Even though it is capable to conquer rough terrain, very few of the buyers will even try it anywhere else than on the tarmac. It’s not really an exciting driving experience there, even if it is surprisingly passenger car-like, and as stated earlier, the fact that it is built like an offroader, with a sturdy ladder frame, heavy transfer cases etc. means that you have to haul around a lot of weight that for most buyers will sit unused most of the time.
And that weight doesn’t do any good for the fuel economy, since this thing is gulping fuel at a rate that very few people are going to accept with the Swedish fuel prices. And even if the purchase price could have been worse, owning a Endevia will be questionable when it comes to economy. The second hand value on cars like this usually drops very fast and very much. Replacing 18 inch all terrain tyres will not be a cheap affair, service costs are high, as are the costs for insurance and tax.
In earlier tests, it has shown that Faroxes sometimes have been a hit and miss. But when it comes to the Endevia, I am pretty sure that we are talking about a hit. There is not many weak points, and even if the car type itself is a bit questionable, Farox is only building what the market wants. And when it comes to the american home market, this is what they want at the moment. Many manufacturers are rushing out luxury SUVs now to get their share of this important market that is flourishing at the moment.
But at the Farox importer in Sweden, we doubt that the Endevia is a model that is met with praise. Chances are that it will only be a player in the margins, especially in the middle of a financial crisis like we are now. Don’t expect them to sell more than a handful every year.
(Thanks to @On3CherryShake for the car)
5 Likes
REPRINT FROM ISSUE #7 1984
COMPARISION TEST: HOLBORN ALBION GTI vs. IP COLIBRI TURBO
DUELLING TURBOS
Are small turbocharged hatchbacks the performance cars of the future, or are they a passing fad? We tested the Albion GTI (silver) and the Colibri Turbo (yellow) to find out!
If we were asked to mention just one big advancement in automobile technology in the last 10 years, turbocharging is a hot candidate. Ten years ago, it was something that was used mainly on big diesels to improve the grunt, or maybe on some (few) exotic sports cars. Today it seems like every manufacturer is slapping a turbo on whatever they can find, sometimes with good results and other times maybe more bark than bite, more of a marketing ploy than an actual improvement on the car.
One thing you can’t deny that makes turbos a good idea, however, is to improve the performance of small engines. Small engines that does fit in small and light bodies, meaning that, at least in theory, you can combine high levels of performance with low purchase price, owning costs and fuel consumption. Two examples are the IP Colibri Turbo and the Holborn Albion GTI. Even though they look quite different on the outside, they are among the closest competitors on the market. Both are front wheel drive hatchbacks around 4 metres in length, for just above $17000, similar in performance and using turbocharging on their relatively small engines (1.5 litres in the IP versus 1.75 litres in the Holborn). But how do they stand up against each other? That was the question we asked us, and decided on doing a comparision test.
DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
Here is the proof why testing cars is much more than just looking at numbers on a paper. In theory, the IP should beat the Holborn, it corners better (1 G compared to 0.93), it brakes better (100-0 in 35.8 m instead of 38.7 m), and then the verdict is clear, right?
Fact is that it is not that easy. The cornering ability and braking capacity of the IP is amazing, no question about it, but that doesn’t take away the fact that the Holborn is still really great when it comes to pure number crunching. And probably the more refined suspension (double wishbone all around, while the IP is still using the tried and true Mc Pherson/solid coil setup that was first used on the mark 1 Colibri in 1970) is adding a more sophisticated feel to the driving. It’s easier to drive while still feeling more nimble. The IP is more of a brutal beast, that requires more of the driver with its firm suspension and greater amounts of wheelspin and torque steer. Also, the turbo lag is much worse.
When pushed hard the cars behave remarkably alike though. A feeling of oversteering that gradually switches to understeer when the speed raises. A great compromise that gives safe and predictable handling without sacrificing the driving experience.
It’s impossible to decide which one is the winner, since it’s a matter of personal taste here. We would like to say the Holborn, but the fact is that the IP outbrakes and outcorners it by great margins - if only looking on paper. And both of the cars are great, really.
VERDICT: Holborn **** - IP ****
PERFORMANCE
When buying a hot hatch, this is probably where most of the buyers will be looking. And once again, when looking on paper, it’s easy to claim the Holborn as the winner. An 1.75 litre 137 hp engine using a somewhat odd SOHC 4V layout, versus 1.5 litres, 114 hp and 2V. On the other hand, the 1.75 litre has to haul around more mass, even if we’re only talking about 70 kilograms (one light passenger in the IP would even the weight out). And the IP is marginally faster when it comes to accelerating to 100 km/h from standing still, 8.5 seconds vs. 8.8. But the lower gearing and boxy shape of the IP is probably taking its toll in the other end. The Holborn breaks the magical 200 km/h barrier with a great margin, theoretically it will not stop accelerating until it reaches 221 km/h, while the IP has a 30 km/h lower top speed. On the other hand, unless you’re planning to drive on the Autobahn in Germany, that is not the most important stat. On the quartermile the IP is marginally faster (16.39 vs 16.62 seconds), but when it comes to the maybe most interesting stat in everyday traffic, 80-120 km/h, the IP is 0.6 seconds slower (5.52 vs 6.12).
All in all, we would call the Holborn the winner. But both of the cars offer decent performance, and are worthy of the hot hatch moniker.
VERDICT: Holborn **** - IP ****
COMFORT
It is an utopia to think that cars of this size will offer big car comfort, and the firm suspension setting and low profile tyres are kind of ruining the little that was left. The Holborn has an advantage over the IP with its lower unsprung weight and softer suspension setting. But the 65 profile rubber on the IP marginally compensates for that when coming to soaking up the bumps. The Holborn engine has a pleasant burble on idle that changes into a more annoying wheezing as you climb up into the rev range while the IP engine is more muffled. On the other hand the Holborn has a more pleasant gearing on the highway that evens it out. The sports seats of the IP offers somewhat better side support than the more plain standard seats in the Holborn, and for rear seat passengers the contoured seat offers better comfort than the bench in the Holborn (but at the expense of the possibility to take a third passenger). On the other hand the padding is more firm in the IP than in the Holborn, good or bad is a matter of taste. The leather steering wheel in the IP might prevent sweaty palms during hard driving compared to the foam grip in the Holborn, and the steering is slightly lighter due to the lighter front end (none of the cars has power steering).
We would call the IP the winner, but with very slight margins, and if comfort is on your priority list, none of the cars will be suitable for you.
VERDICT: Holborn ** - IP **
ROOMINESS
Despite being built on a shorter wheelbase, the Holborn is a slightly larger car, but on the inside the difference is even bigger. The passenger space is incredibly big for such a small car, and the luggage room is almost even more impressive. The IP feels cramped in comparision, and the luggage room with the rear seats folded up is nothing to brag about. Meanwhile, the Holborn can take five passengers, the IP only four. We would go as far to say that the Holborn is suitable as a family car (even though the two door body might be impractical) while the IP is mainly a car for two, that has to take the occasional passenger at mainly short trips.
VERDICT: Holborn **** - IP **
EQUIPMENT
The Holborn has what you could expect from a compact hatchback, nothing more and nothing less. Things that are considered standard today like carpeting on the floor, comfortable cloth upholstery, digital clock, rear wiper/washer and defroster, to name a few. The stereo has an 8 track player but a somewhat tinny sound. IP went a step further and added some gizmos to make the car feel more “sporty” like fake aluminium panels on the dashboard, a full instrumentation, leather sports steering wheel and contoured bucket seats. Also the sound system in the IP sounds much better and has a more modern tape player. IP clearly wins this round even if you, honestly speaking could do without most of that equipment.
VERDICT: Holborn ** - IP ***
ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN
We prefer the Holborn engine over the IP, it is impressive how they almost have eliminated the turbo lag, while IP still has the infamous “horse kick” that plagues too many turbo cars. The 5 speed gearboxes in both of the cars feels so similar when it comes to operation that you would think they were twins, but the close ratio box in the IP is more suitable for a sporty car than the wide ratio box in the Holborn. A limited slip would have been welcome in the IP though while you don’t really miss it in the Holborn. And the gearing on the highway is a bit on the short side in the IP compared to the Holborn. The close ratio gearbox can’t really compensate for the lack of harmony and refinement in the IP, the Holborn is simply the most well thought-out car here.
VERDICT: Holborn **** - IP ***
QUALITY
The IP Colibri is a completely new model for the year so it is hard to tell anything about the reliability yet. Older models have shown about average reliability, and the same could be said about the Holborn. But things like the paintwork shows that some more care has been put into the manufacturing of the Holborn, the IP was showing some orange peel in comparision, and the “TURBO” cladding on the door certainly looked cheap. Also, the Holborn has a slight advantage when it comes to rust protection. Older Colibris have been rustbuckets and the third generation will probably not be an exception, using plain old steel with no galvanizing, which the Holborn does on the outer panels but at least the underlying structure is galvanized. The Holborn is the winner here, maybe it will not hold up any better, but the feeling of quality is more genuine and it will cope with the swedish climate better than the IP.
VERDICT: Holborn *** - IP **
ECONOMY
One major drawback that is overshadowing almost everything in the Holborn is its less than impressive fuel economy. Even if it can cope with cheap regular fuel, it’s gulping it at an alarming rate for such a small car, 11.3 litres per 100 km is simply too much. 8.7 litres in the IP is a more sane value for the class, let go that it needs more expensive premium fuel, that still doesn’t even it out to the Holborns favour. Also, the IP is $500 cheaper, while offering more equipment, albeit a smaller, less powerful engine and less refined technology. Considering that, it is almost unbelievable that the IP has slightly higher service costs, and we believe that the second hand value of the Holborn will be better. But that doesn’t weigh up for the fuel consumption that is something that needs to be fixed urgently in our opinion.
VERDICT: Holborn ** - IP ***
SAFETY
The Holborn has larger, better crumple zones and are slightly heavier, which gives it an advantage. It also has more extensive padding of hard surfaces, the seat belt buckles are anchored to the seats instead of the floor meaning that the belt will always have the right geometry, and it has side impact bars in the doors which is missing in the IP. Even if a small car will never be as safe as a large one, the Holborn is probably about as safe as it can get in this class nowadays. The IP is probably not worse than average, but an average safety record in this class is not much to brag about in comparision.
VERDICT: Holborn *** - IP **
A symbolic photo, the Holborn passing the IP. It is actually not always true performance wise, but overall, in most aspects the Albion GTI has an advantage over the Colibri Turbo.
FINAL VERDICT: Holborn 28/45 - IP 25/45
The IP looks like, and is, a boy racers dream. It is easy to fall for things like the spoilers and big “TURBO” badging, sports seats and steering wheel, tire shredding performance from standing still, road hugging handling and impressive braking capability.
But for grown up people, there is a clearly more grown up car. The roomier, safer, more well built Holborn. That is much more harmonic to drive and still offers decent performance that actually outshines the IP in some aspects. Clearly the better car, and even though it is lacking some of the equipment from the IP, it is well worth the extra money. And even if taste is something that is individual, we think that the futuristic, sleek exterior will be more satisfying in the long run, than the boxy IP with all its unnecessary warpaint.
If it wasn’t for the almost unacceptable fuel consumption, it would leave the IP far behind. Now, that is a big drawback that is hard to overlook when comparing the cars. So, we are a bit careful when it comes to recommend the Holborn over the IP.
On the other hand, if you can overlook the fact that the Holborn is small on the outside, it offers big car room and sporty performance, and considering that, it all of a sudden doesn’t feel as bad, especially not since it can cope with regular fuel.
Still, that does not feel like much of an excuse when it could, and should, be lower.
Thanks to @agj38 for the Albion!
3 Likes
REPRINT FROM ISSUE #22 2001
REVIEW OF THE MAHANTI BACHATA
DIRTY DEEDS DONE DIRT CHEAP
A brand new offroader for $11200 sounds like a dream. Just keep it off the road since having a crash at highway speeds will be more like a nightmare.
With offroaders being the latest craze, the second hand market is getting a bit out of hand too. You simply have a hard time to find anything decent for a fair amount of money, it is the sellers market at the moment which is disturbing for many people. And in the middle of this, a capable 4x4 arrives in Sweden for an amount of money that normally doesn’t buy anything good on the used car market. Is that to good to be true? Let’s take Indias latest hope, the Mahanti Bachata, for a spin to find out!
DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
Don’t expect to get a modern car that drives like a dream for $11200. Underneath, the technology is more or less on 60s level. If you don’t take it easy in the corners it will plow heavily on it’s front end - but unlike many 4x4 cars the body roll aren’t terrible at least. Power steering is, to our surprise, standard, which is always a feature that is welcome on an offroader, an even bigger surprise is the ABS brakes, but what normally is a great feature is overshadowed by the inadequate braking performance and the fading tendencies when loaded. Also, don’t try to relax for a single minute while trying to drive straight on a bad asphalt road. Crossplies, yes you read right (!), went out of fashion 30 years ago, but this vehicle is rolling on them in 2001, which is almost unbeliavable.
But when it comes to a vehicle like this, one has to look at the offroad capability too, and the Bachata is a mountain goat. Short wheelbase, short overhangs, high ground clearance and a real part time low range 4WD with manual lockers makes it almost unstoppable. The only thing that worries us is the lack of a proper skidplate, it is easy to damage parts underneath the vehicle on sharp rocks if not being careful.
A flop on the road, but power steering, ABS and a very good offroad performance saves it from getting a horrible grade here.
VERDICT: **
PERFORMANCE
A 52 kW 1.8 litre four with its roots in the 50s aren’t really the weapon of choice for building a performance vehicle. Now, that is really not the highest priority on an offroader, and it has the necessary low end grunt for doing the hard work. A top speed of 161 km/h is more than adequate in this class, but 17.7 seconds to 100 might come as an unwelcome surprise if you are used to regular family cars of today, and 15.9 seconds 80-120 means that any overtaking is out of the question most of the time.
VERDICT: **
COMFORT
Rolling on solid axles all around, the ride is of course a bit bouncy, but the leaf springs of the past is at least gone up front, which means better flex and better ride comfort. In the rear the leaf springs are still there, probably because a pickup version is sold in its home market, as a compromise to get better load capacity. The engine itself is not overly loud, but the short gearing makes it a bit rev happy at highway speeds. The simple bench seats does not offer any side support and could have had a bit better padding. Being a quite small car, having bucket seats up front would probably have been a better option, at least for the european market.
Also, a flimsy body and shoddy build quality means that there was a fair amount of annoying squeaks and rattles everywhere. The brand new car felt a bit like a junker that was starting to fall apart.
VERDICT: *
ROOMINESS
Having a footprint no larger than a regular compact, the interior space are in that territory too. It is adequate, but nothing more. Don’t believe that this is a 6-seater despite the dual bench seats, 4 is the maximum amount of people to ride in any kind of comfort. But that goes for all its competitors too. One nice surprise, though, is that you get a decent amount of cargo space. That isn’t always the case when it comes to small offroaders.
VERDICT: **
EQUIPMENT
Despite some strange choices, like equipping a 00s vehicle with crossplies, you get more than you could expect for the low purchase price. We’ve already mentioned power steering and ABS, as well as a manual locker. You will also get a radio (even if the tape player is on its way out), cloth trim, rear demister and wiper, remote mirrors, clock and some other of the most basic creature comforts. Our tested example also had pearlescent paint with some matching graphics, a no-cost option. Of course, if you want to equip it with offroad accessories, there is a whole range available from the factory as well as the aftermarket. But considering the low purchase price, we think that what’s included is more than enough.
VERDICT: ***
ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN
The engine simply doesn’t cut it, being 50 years old, and should have been retired years ago, even if it is of course updated with electronic fuel injection and catalytic converter to cope with modern regulations. It has good low end grunt but becomes gutless quite early in the rev range, is running rough below 2000 RPM, is not very economical and has relatively dirty emissions.
The gearbox is a more pleasant history though. A modern 5 speed with well thought out gearing, feeling easy and smooth to shift. Manual locking differentials might sound a bit old-fashioned, but they are reliable and does their work well off road. Part time 4WD is not as old fashioned as it sounds either compared to modern AWD systems, since they simply can’t compete offroad with their more complex differentials and transfer cases to make the everyday driving easier and safer. Just don’t expect to be able to use the 4WD other than when the conditions really need it though.
VERDICT: **
A real 4wd system with locking differentials, combined with high ground clearance, aggressive thread pattern and short overhangs makes the car almost unstoppable offroad.
QUALITY
There might be questions about the reliability of a cheap indian car, but we think that the Mahanti will hold up reasonably well. Mahanti has been building cars for ages, and the vehicle is built on tried and true technology. But even if the car keeps running, don’t expect everything to last as long. There is absolutely no signs of rust protection, it’s just relying on the paintwork to protect the plain and bare steel, and the paintwork itself is of questionable quality too. The body feels flimsy and tinny which leads to rattles and squeaks that might not affect the vehicles operational status, but that will be annoying in the long run.
VERDICT: **
ECONOMY
The purchase price is low at $11200, no question about it. Low weight for the vehicle type means low taxes, insurance will probably not be bloody, service costs are sane. The second hand value is probably questionable, but being a type of vehicle that there always will be people looking for, it will not drop to insanely low levels, and there was not much money to lose there from the start either, considering the low purchase price.
What’s not so good is the fuel economy, 12.1 l/100 km is a bit on the thirsty side with the gas prices of today, and could really be seen as the sign why Mahanti needs a new engine very soon.
VERDICT: ***
SAFETY
The dark chapter comes last. If the safety was up to todays, or at least yesterdays standards, we could almost have seen the Bachata as bargain of the year. But the only safety equipment is the 3-point seatbelts on the outboard positions and 2 point lap belts on the centre seats required by law. There is a pair of flimsy headrests, only up front and only on the outboard positions, and it is doubtful if they will do any good in a rear-ender or if they just will break away. The interior is full of hard and unpadded surfaces, and the “cladding” on some of them are just a kind of rock hard plastic that will probably shatter on impact. Of course, the steering column is jointed, the spear of death from the 50s is outlawed nowadays, but the hard steering wheel seems to be of a very unforgiving type, should you hit it in an accident. Of course, there is not a sight of a single airbag in the whole car, and no side impact beams, just the tinny doors between you and whatever that might hit you.
But safety is more than what you see on paper, right? Well, many people feel safe in SUVs, and many times it is justified, but keep in mind that this is about as large as a normal compact car, and not much heavier. A regular family wagon from the last 5-10 years or so, will probably rip straight through it in an accident.
Rumours says that there has been a crash test done modelled after modern Euro-NCAP standards on a Mahanti Bachata, and that the dummy was stuck so badly in the mangled passenger compartment afterwards that they could not even get it out without cutting the car apart. Now, it is only rumours that we haven’t had any time to confirm, but until someone proves that we have been VERY wrong, we can only give the lowest safety score available to the Mahanti.
VERDICT: 0
FINAL VERDICT: 17/45
The Mahanti is not really up to date, and we did not expect it either. But for such a low sticker price, you can cope with much. Considering what you get, it could have been a bargain if it weren’t for the unacceptable safety rating. It’s simply unthinkable to recommend this car to anyone as long as Mahanti won’t upgrade the safety to at least basic levels.
But if you want a pure work vehicle, that is going to see paved roads very seldom, and that is rarely driven faster than tractor speed, then maybe. Off the road it has capacity, and the risk of a high speed crash is more or less non-existing.
Just don’t be tempted to buy this for the school run because the sticker price is low and because there is some snug feeling that you and your family will be safe in an offroader. That might as well end up as your deadliest mistake ever.
Thanks to @Dorifto_Dorito for lending me the car!
4 Likes
REPRINT FROM ISSUE #1 1988
REVIEW OF SEIKATSU GRANDMASTER
A V-SIX FOR SEVEN
In case you are in the market for a van, there is no good reason not to take a closer look at the Seikatsu Grandmaster. But don’t rule it out even if you weren’t thinking about buying a van either. Chances are that you might reconsider that after a test drive.
Many people request reviews of passenger vans, and it is easy to understand why. If you need to carry more than five people, it is more or less the only sane alternative. One of the more interesting newcomers on the market is the Seikatsu GrandMaster, which in turn is the people carrier version of their StarCarry van. It can be equipped to the levels that it almost turns into a rolling living room, but since the typical van buyer often might be the family man with some financial challenges, we thought that it was more interesting to review a somewhat more basic version.
DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
It is a van, and it shows. Don’t expect passenger car like driving experience, it is wallowy in the turns, and push it too hard and it will understeer on squealing tyres. On the other hand, that is the characteristics that could, and should, be expected from this type of vehicle. It’s giving an early warning that you are pushing it too hard, instead of tricking you into that you can drive this huge box on wheels like if it was a sports car. The driving position above the front axle feels as weird as always when coming from a regular passenger car, but you get used to it as quickly as usual too. The power steering is of the variable type, a very welcome equipment since it makes the heavy van easy to maneuver in tight spots, without getting too sensitive at highway speeds.
Despite not being very passenger car like and without any sporty ambitions, it is a very easy vehicle to drive. One thing that probably will be appreciated by many people here in the snowy north when it comes to a RWD van is the limited slip differential, as well as the ABS brakes. Braking capacity is, if not impressive, at least adequate for the heavy vehicle, but fully loaded we noticed some fading.
VERDICT: ***
PERFORMANCE
Contrary to many underpowered vans with too small engines, Seikatsu have equipped the GrandMaster with a 3 litre V6 with a 103 kW power output. A 180 km/h top speed and 11.2 seconds to 100 is actually very good for its class. 18.8 seconds on the quartermile is passenger car territory and the powerful six also gives a great 80-120 acceleration of 7.56 seconds, which means that overtaking slower vehicles are both possible and safe.
Nobody excepts a van to be a sports car, and the GrandMaster certainly isn’t one either, but at least it is a proof that you don’t have to sacrifice the performance of a passenger car just to transport more people.
VERDICT: ***
COMFORT
The first two rows of seating are comfy separate chairs and the last row a 3-seat couch that also offers decent seating comfort. The sound insulation is great despite the engine being more or less inside the passenger compartment, though the six is running quiet and smooth so it’s never annoyingly noisy. The suspension is tuned towards comfort and the result is nothing to complain about, even though it is a noticeable compromise with the heavy, leaf sprung solid rear axle, showing the cargo van roots.
VERDICT: ***
ROOMINESS
If a GrandMaster is not enough for you, maybe you should consider a double decker bus? With a wheelbase shorter than many compact hatchbacks and a very modest length of 452 cm, it takes 7 people that still might feel that they have enormous amounts of room. Add a completely amazing cargo space of almost five cubic metres to that and it becomes obvious that the box like shape is working like a dream. There is not much more to say, a vehicle like this should of course score high but the GrandMaster even exceeds our expectations.
VERDICT: *****
This huge barn door can - and will - swallow everything.
EQUIPMENT
As stated earlier, you can equip a GrandMaster so it becomes a rolling living room. The tested version is not. But for a not too hefty sticker price it has what you can need and expect. 7 comfortable cloth seats with seatbelts and headrests, limited slip differential, ABS, power steering, an adequate sound system and the same amount of creature comforts as you find in a regular passenger car today. Some vans are more or less penalty boxes on wheels, but the GrandMaster certainly is not. We could not find anything that felt like it was missing during our test drive.
VERDICT: ****
ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN
The V6 is strong, smooth and quiet. For a 3 litre, the power output might be modest and conservative, but at the same time it has a reasonably nice torque curve. The gear ratios seems to be well chosen in the very modern 4 speed computer controlled autobox, except that it feels like kind of a huge jump between firsstrong textt and second gear sometimes. The limited slip differential works well in slushy, icy conditions. All in all it feels like a very well thought out driveline for this type of vehicle.
VERDICT: ****
QUALITY
The predicted reliability is above average, the vehicle is of a sturdy and simple construction that shouldn’t cause any major problems. The interior is free from squeaks and rattles and the materials will probably last in the long run. Instead of being body on frame, the vehicle is built up on a sturdy monocoque that makes it a more stiff unit, but at the same time more sensitive to corrosion. Galvanized steel should cure much of the troubles, but the outer panels are still only regular steel, which will probably start to show signs of rust in some years if not taken care of properly. But that is about the only black cloud on the horizon too, a GrandMaster will be your friend for many years to come, if you want to.
VERDICT: ****
ECONOMY
The purchase price is reasonable, the simple construction makes the service costs sane, insurance costs will probably not be bloody but the heavy weight means that the tax can be a bit on the expensive side. Fuel consumption is far from a disaster for being a heavy vehicle with a 3 litre V6, bad aerodynamics and automatic transmission, but above average from what we expect from regular passenger cars today. The resale value will probably be amazing, there is always people looking for vehicles like this on the second hand market. So, despite some drawbacks, a GrandMaster will not be a financial disaster.
VERDICT: ***
SAFETY
Lately, forward control vans have been heavily criticized for offering little to no protection in a crash. Most often that is true, but some vehicles are showing signs of intelligent engineering that might compensate a bit for the lack of a crumple zone in front of you. The unibody means that energy absorbing structures could be built in to channel the energy away from the drivers compartment. It also offers safety features that is rarely seen in this class, like pretensioning seatbelts up front, side impact protection bars (that at the same time is giving the drivers compartment more longitudinal stiffness), an energy absorbing steering assembly to prevent the steering wheel to end up jammed against the front seat, headrests on all places as well as 3-point seatbelts on all outboard positions. The roominess is of course another safety factor, there is a great distance to any hard surfaces to strike, as well as the weight, it’s heavier than most smaller cars on the road meaning that it will come out as a winner in a crash against something lighter and smaller, of course on the expense of the other vehicle and its passengers unfortunately.
But despite the flat nosed design, it is probably not wrong to say that this is a safe vehicle that can be used for family transportation without feeling any guilt for that.
VERDICT: ****
FINAL VERDICT: 33/45
It is hard to find any weak spots in the Seikatsu GrandMaster. Sure, it is based on a cargo van with the compromises that it will automatically mean, but that’s only expected. For a fairly low price it offers an almost unbelievable amount of space, decent comfort, performance, economy and safety. At the moment, it might as well be the best buy in its class.
And even if you were not looking for cars in this class, we recommend you to not rule out a test drive in the GrandMaster since it can make you change your mind.
(Thanks to @Tzuyu_main for the car)
2 Likes
I just checked it and it’s definitely working. If you have the time, you may want to start accepting cars again.
I am accepting cars at the moment, it can just take some time since I don’t have much inspiration for automation right now at all…
3 Likes
REPRINT FROM ISSUE #3 1985
"CLASSIC CARS ON A BUDGET", PART 2
CAN YOU HAVE FAITH IN THE FAITH?
Yes, it is laughable. Yes, people will look at you. But if you are stuck in the thinking that it will be a bad thing, have you really understood the classic car world then?
We know what you will say already. If the PAZ in the last issue wasn’t enough for some of you readers to cancel your subscription, you may think that we are a bit over the limit now when we suggest a Bridgell Faith. “It is hardly even a car”, you say. We won’t disagree on that point. But why would that make it any less interesting in the end, in the world of classic motoring?
The Faith was born after World war II, there was a huge need for transportation and a boom of more or less useful microcars. In that case, one has to see the Faith in the upper end of the spectrum. Maybe you think that you are sitting on top of any little moped engine with chain drive? Nothing could be more wrong, in fact, it has an unusual layout for its class and size. The engine is mounted transversely between the front wheels like in a modern supermini, and before Alec Issigonis made that layout popular with the BMC Mini, or “doghouse” as most swedes know it better, it was rarely used, even if two cylinder DKWs and Saabs used it, they changed over to a longitudinal layout when they increased they cylinder count to three.
Which leads us to the next surprising thing, the engine. Despite being only 318 cc, it actually has three cylinders. And it is not an oilburning 2-stroke either, but a 4 stroke with overhead valves, a much more serious and advanced layout than the looks of the Faith might trick you into.
Otherwise, it is a pretty interesting design, which doesn’t translate into flawless. Lifting off the fibreglass body would reveal a chassis looking more or less like a shopping cart, and why Bridgell did choose a solid axle up front on a transverse FWD setup have made more than one owner scratch his head. The transmission is a bit odd to say the least.
Driving one is exactly as it is supposed to be, easy. The light weight and skinny tyres makes you laugh at the power steering setups of today - they will never beat the Bridgell anyway when it comes to ease of steering. It can be maneuvered into any parking spot, since it is about as long as a modern midsized car is wide. The two speed automatic is also a very clever setup. This was supposed to be a vehicle that gave the elderly and the disabled freedom - and it certainly did. But don’t get tricked into believing that this thing rides like a Silver-York. The rock hard rear suspension makes you believe that you will bounce to the moon in even the slightest bumps. The tyres that seems to be stolen from some child stroller will squeal if you press it too hard - but it is more stable and secure than you first will believe. The brakes, well…they will stop the thing. Eventually. The interior is nothing more than a simple chair to sit on and a slippery plastic steering wheel to grip - and surprisingly enough also a radio (that will not work very well in Sweden today because of it being an AM unit). You want to take passengers with you? Forget it.
So is the Bridgell Faith a good car? Well, honestly speaking, it was not much of a car back then and by 80s standards it is ridiculous. But dare to break the norms, we say. It is fun - like a classic car should be. It makes people curious - like a classic car should do. It has looks that makes it stand out in a sea of cars looking more and more identical - like a classic car should look.
But we still have the opinion that you shouldn’t have to break the bank to own a classic car. And the Faith might be an alternative then. Just don’t think that it is something for a whole family to enjoy, or something you will take to classic car meetings on the other end of the country.
The Bridgell Faith is an opportunity you should not necessarily miss just because it is small and laughable. The classic car hobby is so much more than just Cadillac Convertibles.
Sara Björn, owner of the 1963 Bridgell Faith we have test driven, how did you end up with a Faith?
-Well, I guess that it is easy to spread the myth that girls only want cute and small cars, but honestly speaking, I just wanted something that would stand out from the crowd. And if a Bridgell Faith doesn’t do the trick, no car will.
So how are peoples reactions then?
-Well, it is easy to give an answer there. Smiles! I don’t think that anyone can be sad or angry when looking at something as chic and cheerful as a Faith. It spreads happiness among people, that’s it.
And it gets acceptance among the classic car crowd?
-Without a doubt. This is something that’s so unlike anything we will see on the road today so nobody is objecting against saving one.
And the experience with the ownership this far?
-Good. It is a very economical vehicle to own. Maybe not to drive since it gulps fuel at a surprising rate considering how small it is and that it only has a small 3-cylinder. And it will break down once in a while but repairs aren’t really hard to do. And they made tons of them so you still can get spares, there even is reproduction on some parts.
So you can recommend it to someone interested in it?
-Yes and no. If you expect it to behave like you are used to when it comes to cars, it will disappoint you. But if you can sacrifice all sorts of luxuries and comfort for the sake of fun, and one seat is enough, just go for one, you only live once so why die curious when you had the opportunity to try one out?
Yeah. That more than sums it up. So, if you are willing to challenge some traditional values, then a Bridgell Faith may be your next classic car, who knows?
Thanks to @Marcus_gt500 for the car!
5 Likes
Loved the story, way better than I antecipated. A pity the recent game upgrades put braces on it`s teeth.
LOL, I thought that it was some strange bumper option actually, like the extra bars they put on Volvo and VW in the states in the 60s to fulfill bumper regulations. 
Me: “This bumper is hideous but oh well…” 
2 Likes
This is how it`s supposed to look like.
4 Likes
It’s been a month since your previous review on this thread - you may be busy with The Good Old Days thread for older cars (1975 or earlier), but are you still going to accept newer cars for the purposes of being reviewed in Trafikjournalen, and if so, what type(s) exactly will you be looking for next?
2 Likes
Yes. First was the 4x4 challenge and now TGOD (that will not go on forever, but I haven’t decided when I will close it down yet). But yeah, cars are accepted. And if they are somewhat realistic for their era and type I accept most cars. Though it can take a while to get a review now, because of TGOD.
2 Likes