REPRINT FROM #10 1975
REVIEW OF ARMOR CRICKET
MODERN TIMES
A traditional american battleship, here an Earl Ponderosa, dwarfs the Armor Cricket. But there is no question about which one that belongs to the future, and which one that belongs to the past.
It has not been good times for the american manufacturers lately. First, insurance premiums more or less killed the muscle car over a night. Then came the ban on leaded fuel, requiring modifications to the often ancient engine technology so the power of the huge 8 cylinder engines all of a sudden was overshadowed by european 4- or 6 cylinders with less than half of the volume. Safety standards made the cars gain weight, fuel economy suffered, and all of a sudden the fuel crisis came, leaving the manufacturers more or less bleeding, and at the same time paving the road for european and asian manufacturers.
It is more or less a fact that the days for the traditional american land yacht are numbered. One attempt to come closer to the philosophy of european manufacturers is the new Armor cricket. In fact, the design could as well belong to an italian supermini while the engineering is said to be heavily influed by the french. And, of course we are curious to see what they have accomplished.
DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
Following the european formula with front wheel drive, small dimensions and 4 wheel independent suspension, the Cricket is of course close to an european car in the way it behaves too. Forget the wallowy suspension you are used to - the Cricket is actually rather stiff. Though modern components like gas filled shocks and progressive springs makes the compromise between ride quality and handling a bit better. Like most front wheel drive cars, it is predictable and secure but has a fair amount of understeering. A 0.8 G skidpad rating is fully acceptable numbers. A very low tyre profile is probably adding to the secure handling but at the same time it compromises comfort.
City driving is of course a dream with this little car. And contrary to many of its competitors it has power steering, making it easy to drive and park in crowded areas. Calling it “easy to drive” is absolutely justified.
Braking is generally good, some fading was found when loaded to the max but not otherwise and a 43.2 metre stopping distance from 100 is a fully acceptable number. There is no doubt that Armor has put some energy behind the engineering of this car.
VERDICT: ****
PERFORMANCE
Despite the relatively large volume, the engine puts out a modest 75 hp. It means that it is by no means a rocket, especially considering the automatic transmission eating up some of the power - but it is still adequate. At least 0-100 that is done in 14.6 seconds - but with a 10.4 time 80-120 maybe passing other cars will need some planning. It barely breaks the 20 second limit at the quartermile at 19.99 seconds - and a top speed of 178 km/h is of course more than adequate.
VERDICT: ***
COMFORT
It seems like americans can’t let go of the idea of a comfortable cruiser. That means that the Cricket is equipped with power steering and an automatic transmission. But at the same time - the car is small and primitive, and even if the advanced rear suspension enhances the comfort somewhat, the ride is maybe a little bit stiff and harsh.
Seating comfort is on the level you could expect from a car in this class, far from as bad as in some of the low budget american cars. The sound insulation is adequate and the engine well muffled. When it finally reaches third gear it is not too revvy either. Though, sometimes you will only reach second at highway speeds which may make the drone a bit more annoying.
VERDICT: **
ROOMINESS & PRACTICALITY
It is hard to perform wizardry even if the transverse engine saves some space. The Cricket has seat belts for five, but four is on the limit of being possible, and for longer trips, more than two is probably out of the question. The lack of rear doors hamper practicality a bit but the hatchback makes for easier loading. The loadspace is small, though, and as a family car the Cricket has its limitations.
VERDICT: *
Small - in many areas unfortunately.
EQUIPMENT
For a supermini, the level of equipment in the Cricket is not bad at all. It has a not too shabby cloth/vinyl interior, carpeting on the floor, cigar lighter, clock, lockable glovebox and other things that we have almost learned to take for granted today. It also has a radio, only with mono sound and no tape player, but at least with pushbutton selector. Also, power steering is included in the price, rare for a car in this class, as well as radial tyres of the fuel saving low rolling resistance type.
VERDICT: ***
ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN
75 hp out of a 2.2 litre engine would have been perfectly acceptable 15 years ago, but now time has passed. We would like to believe that an european engine would at least have 100 hp out of that volume, especially since Armor uses an overly complicated valvetrain design with 3 valves per cylinder. The explanation is of course that the engine is hampered by american emissions regulations. It is not overly economical either and overall it feels a bit bland. Not gutless in the small car, but kind of uninspiring. A disappointment since a SOHC 3 valve 2.2 litre four sounds really good on paper.
The automatic transmission consumes even more power, but at least it is a 3 speed and not an ancient 2 speed, thank god! It works well, but we think that european buyers would have preferred a manual in most cases when buying a car of this type. It adds a bit to the uninspiring flair the engine already gives.
VERDICT: **
QUALITY & RELIABILITY
American cars aren’t really renowned for their high level of build quality. The Cricket does not really do anything to convince us otherwise, but on the other hand, european cars in this class are rarely any handcrafted masterpieces either. On the other hand, this is a completely new concept for Armor, so we are not 100% convinced that they have sorted out all problems before it has been proved to us. A surprise, though, is the galvanized body structure, meaning that it has better than average protection against rust!
VERDICT: ***
ECONOMY
$13500 for a really small car is not exactly cheap, for example, a much larger Ceder 419 can be had for just $300 AMU more. Also, if you are used to american land barges, then maybe 10.7 litres per 100 km is an acceptable figure but we think that it is a little bit high for a modern construction of this size. Servicing at $660 is acceptable but not really dirt cheap. So, an economy car that is not very economical, that is maybe the major drawback of the Cricket.
VERDICT: ***
SAFETY
The Cricket is small. To fulfill the stringent american regulations there is lots of things done to improve its safety. There bodyshell is very well thought out for the class and has things like side impact beams in the doors, well engineered crumple zones and crash resistant bumpers. Then there is of course equipment like headrests, inertia reel seatbelts on all outboard positions, a safe placement of the gas tank and a seatbelt buzzer. A car as tiny as the Cricket will always lose in a head on collision with a large car, but it is probably as safe as a car in this class will get nowadays.
VERDICT: ***
FINAL VERDICT: 24/45
First, it must be said that the Armor Cricket is an important step forward. It is probably the nearest thing to a modern, small european car that the americans have ever cranked out. And it shows that even the american manufacturers can adapt to the ever changing times if they just want to.
But for the european market, we are a little bit sceptical. It does not really have much that speaks in its favour when there are so many good competitors on the market. Also, the somewhat high purchase and ownership costs are almost ruling out a car in this class by themselves, since the buyer is almost always very economy minded.
Another question - is this good enough and coming soon enough to win back customers in the USA that have already gone for foreign cars? We are not really sure about that.
Thanks to @GassTiresandOil for the car, also credit to @patridam for the Earl Ponderosa.
)
