GM will bring back the El Camino... IF...

[dug777]

Won't sell well, which is why there are no such vehicles in the US now. Australia isn't the US so what they want there is of little relevance to this market.

A car with a bed is really a silly idea. You don't end up with a large bed, you have no truck-towing capacity, so it's only helpful for those on the weekend bringing back a few bags of mulch, something they could do in a trailer or rent a $20/hour truck from lowes for. And the rest of the time they've got this silly looking thing that can only seat two.

Its market would be tiny.

Eh?

With a flat tray, the bed on the Ford utes I linked to above is 7.2ft long. Style side box it's just over 6ft.

That's compared to 6ft for a Ranger. No width is given for the Ranger bed that I can see on the Ford USA site, but the Falcon utes is 5.92 ft.

You get a tonne payload.

From the Ford USA site I can't see a payload rating for the Ranger, but I doubt it's meaningfully higher.

You can tow 2.3 tonnes, or 5070lbs. The Ranger allows you to tow 5,800lbs. Oh teh noes

I think that pretty much answers everything you said, and I must note that your comments are clearly from a position of great knowledge with regard to utes sold in Australia, rather than an off-the-cuff dismissal of something you know very little about

Sure it's no massive truck, but I would imagine that a significant proportion of people and business who need a tray, or need to tow will fit into the capabilities of, for example, a Falcon ute as referred to above. Plenty won't, but nobody is suggesting that utes would replace F150 and above type vehicles

Compared to a traditional 'pickup', the form factor inherently provides much better handling, is safer for occupants and pedestrians, and lends itself to being much more economical...what's not to like, other than the look?

 

[exar333]

I would have loved one of these things in college. Hauling dorm stuff, bikes, kegs, whatnot. It is extremely useful and practical. For those who haul things often, and do not want to either buy a truck or pay for one regularly for rentals, it is definitely handy. A buddy of mine bought a Baja back in 04 or 05 and really liked it. He had a couple dogs and hauled them around all the time. You could throw them in the back seat if they were clean, or keep em in back if they were all wet/muddy.

They also used it a ton for their remodeling of their house at the time. You could fit lots of gear and supplies in the bed and not get the inside of your car destroyed. The El Camino likely would have a larger bed too...

I could see myself getting this to pair with a fun weekend-type car. If you could get this with AWD, it would be a great winter car + occasional hauling vehicle. Awesome combo...

 

[Zargon]

Eh?

With a flat tray, the bed on the Ford utes I linked to above is 7.2ft long. Style side box it's just over 6ft.

That's compared to 6ft for a Ranger. No width is given for the Ranger bed that I can see on the Ford USA site, but the Falcon utes is 5.92 ft.

You get a tonne payload.

From the Ford USA site I can't see a payload rating for the Ranger, but I doubt it's meaningfully higher.

You can tow 2.3 tonnes, or 5070lbs. The Ranger allows you to tow 5,800lbs. Oh teh noes

I think that pretty much answers everything you said, and I must note that your comments are clearly from a position of great knowledge with regard to utes sold in Australia, rather than an off-the-cuff dismissal of something you know very little about

Sure it's no massive truck, but I would imagine that a significant proportion of people and business who need a tray, or need to tow will fit into the capabilities of, for example, a Falcon ute as referred to above. Plenty won't, but nobody is suggesting that utes would replace F150 and above type vehicles

Compared to a traditional 'pickup', the form factor inherently provides much better handling, is safer for occupants and pedestrians, and lends itself to being much more economical...what's not to like, other than the look?

all this.

LOL at can't tow, the holden version has the base LSx V8.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Eh?

With a flat tray, the bed on the Ford utes I linked to above is 7.2ft long. Style side box it's just over 6ft.

That's compared to 6ft for a Ranger. No width is given for the Ranger bed that I can see on the Ford USA site, but the Falcon utes is 5.92 ft.

You get a tonne payload.

From the Ford USA site I can't see a payload rating for the Ranger, but I doubt it's meaningfully higher.

You can tow 2.3 tonnes, or 5070lbs. The Ranger allows you to tow 5,800lbs. Oh teh noes

I think that pretty much answers everything you said, and I must note that your comments are clearly from a position of great knowledge with regard to utes sold in Australia, rather than an off-the-cuff dismissal of something you know very little about

Sure it's no massive truck, but I would imagine that a significant proportion of people and business who need a tray, or need to tow will fit into the capabilities of, for example, a Falcon ute as referred to above. Plenty won't, but nobody is suggesting that utes would replace F150 and above type vehicles

Compared to a traditional 'pickup', the form factor inherently provides much better handling, is safer for occupants and pedestrians, and lends itself to being much more economical...what's not to like, other than the look?

All of this and more.

Of all of the 'real Trucks' I have ever seen on US roads, none of them have been hauling a load in the bed, and the only one I saw towing was a Dually, not even close to being in the same ball-park as this type of machine.

 

[CrackRabbit]

I thought they almost did this already with a Pontiac badged Holden.
It was supposed to be something like the G8 Spor-truck or Sport Truck.
It got the axe shortly before the rest of Pontiac did.

 

[evident]

i dont understand the nostalgia for this thing.

 

[Zargon]

I thought they almost did this already with a Pontiac badged Holden.
It was supposed to be something like the G8 Spor-truck or Sport Truck.
It got the axe shortly before the rest of Pontiac did.

yeah and likely because they already knew pontiac was gone.

 

[disappoint]

If you have mexican friends it seats 10.

 

[SparkyJJO]

I would have loved one of these things in college. Hauling dorm stuff, bikes, kegs, whatnot. It is extremely useful and practical. For those who haul things often, and do not want to either buy a truck or pay for one regularly for rentals, it is definitely handy. A buddy of mine bought a Baja back in 04 or 05 and really liked it. He had a couple dogs and hauled them around all the time. You could throw them in the back seat if they were clean, or keep em in back if they were all wet/muddy.

They also used it a ton for their remodeling of their house at the time. You could fit lots of gear and supplies in the bed and not get the inside of your car destroyed. The El Camino likely would have a larger bed too...

I could see myself getting this to pair with a fun weekend-type car. If you could get this with AWD, it would be a great winter car + occasional hauling vehicle. Awesome combo...

One of these with a good AWD system would be pretty darn good I would think.

 

[Throckmorton]

If it has AWD it's not an El Camino!

 

[Doppel]

Eh?

With a flat tray, the bed on the Ford utes I linked to above is 7.2ft long. Style side box it's just over 6ft.

That's compared to 6ft for a Ranger. No width is given for the Ranger bed that I can see on the Ford USA site, but the Falcon utes is 5.92 ft.

You get a tonne payload.

From the Ford USA site I can't see a payload rating for the Ranger, but I doubt it's meaningfully higher.

You can tow 2.3 tonnes, or 5070lbs. The Ranger allows you to tow 5,800lbs. Oh teh noes

I think that pretty much answers everything you said, and I must note that your comments are clearly from a position of great knowledge with regard to utes sold in Australia, rather than an off-the-cuff dismissal of something you know very little about

Sure it's no massive truck, but I would imagine that a significant proportion of people and business who need a tray, or need to tow will fit into the capabilities of, for example, a Falcon ute as referred to above. Plenty won't, but nobody is suggesting that utes would replace F150 and above type vehicles

Compared to a traditional 'pickup', the form factor inherently provides much better handling, is safer for occupants and pedestrians, and lends itself to being much more economical...what's not to like, other than the look?

I was wrong about the towing then. The bed is not large, however, on this or on a ford ranger.

However, you ignored my opening and most salient point which is that "Won't sell well, which is why there are no such vehicles in the US now."

These were invented decades and decade ago. They've been tried in the US. The following is a list of available car-trucks in the United States:

1)

Every once in a while somebody tries it again like Subaru with the Baja, with a bed so small you'd be hard pressed to fit a bag of cat litter in it.

Of all of the 'real Trucks' I have ever seen on US roads, none of them have been hauling a load in the bed, and the only one I saw towing was a Dually, not even close to being in the same ball-park as this type of machine.

I won't argue people buy their trucks in great part for utility. Some do, many don't. It doesn't matter that they won't tow or haul. It just matters if they can. My next door neighbor has an F150. The largest thing he moves with it is a small pop-up trailer that a family sedan is capable of pulling.

One of these with a good AWD system would be pretty darn good I would think.

Subaru Baja

If they bring this back it will sell. Yes, for a while. But then some people even bought the Thunderbird Ford came out with a few years back. God, that was awful. I can't see such a vehicle lasting through all that many years.

 

[senseamp]

GM should make Cruze and Malibu wagons before wasting their money bringing over a Ute.

 

[Pariah]

GM should make Cruze and Malibu wagons before wasting their money bringing over a Ute.

Agreed. The usefulness of a stationwagon exceeds that of a Ute. There is no market for a car based truck in America. If you want a small truck, buy a small truck. I don't understand the nostagia over the El Camino either. One of those cult following type things. A few noisy people will scream for one, then when one is released, no one buys it.

 

[Throckmorton]

Those Australian cars are too bland. If they bring the El Camino they need to give it retro-futuristic styling like the Camaro.

 

[Zargon]

Agreed. The usefulness of a stationwagon exceeds that of a Ute. There is no market for a car based truck in America. If you want a small truck, buy a small truck. I don't understand the nostagia over the El Camino either. One of those cult following type things. A few noisy people will scream for one, then when one is released, no one buys it.

you can't put larger things in a wagon. just longer things(thats what she said)

 

[dug777]

I was wrong about the towing then. The bed is not large, however, on this or on a ford ranger.

However, you ignored my opening and most salient point which is that "Won't sell well, which is why there are no such vehicles in the US now."

Nope, you dropped a steaming load of nonsense that i comprehensively rebutted, point by point, and you were wrong on every point.

'Won't sell well' is not a salient point, let alone a point. It's a stance that you have taken, and then proceeded to justify with a load of complete bollocks You are probably right with that stance, at least in the US, but it's not for the reasons you made up.

I shall repeat the real point, in my opinion:

It is a damn sight more practical as a light commercial and personal haulage/cartage vehicle than any 'traditional' high-riding truck-style vehicle. The form-factor is inherently safer and more economical. Accordingly, for light commercial/personal haulage, it's a no-brainer.

That makes no allowance for your apparent cultural hate for the concept, which I acknowledge

Only a complete moron would suggest this is a practical alternative to a massive, long-bed truck, and I even made that expressly clear, if reading comprehension were to be even moderately applied.

@Pariah: I beg to differ. You have a completely flat tray, so you can put anything, of any shape on the back, it can even hang over all or any of three sides of the tray, if you so desire. Try that in a wagon. You don't have the weight of the bodywork around the mid to rear of the vehicle, so your payload is much better. All you lose is being able to load into the front row (which is generally dangerous in any event), which you more than make up by being able to hang off the back of the tray. You can also strap loads down much more easily and securely...

I honestly don't think any of that is unreasonable or foolish...but please put me to rights if you disagree

EDIT: I should say that my arguments relate to the commercial flat-tray Falcons and Commodores. The shiny shiny zoom zoom styleside box versions are inherently limited in the above areas, although still in my view pretty useful. I can totally understand an inherent skepticism of the ute-form factor coupled with those limitations leading to an element of dismissal. That's where it starts to become a cultural thing - we Aussies have a strange love for utes sporting brutal LS small blocks, the latest SC Ford V8 and Ford Australia's sublime blown I6 up front, and fsck-all over the rear axle, what can I say? Circle-work

 

[Pariah]

you can't put larger things in a wagon. just longer things(thats what she said)

Yes you can. The roof creates a limit, a small truck doesn't have, but I have never seen a sedan trunk as tall bottom to top as a stationwagon. I'd like to see one if you have an example. The significant advantage of the wagon over the car based truck is passenger capacity while still being able to carry more cargo.

 

[dug777]

Yes you can. The roof creates a limit, a small truck doesn't have, but I have never seen a sedan trunk as tall bottom to top as a stationwagon. I'd like to see one if you have an example. The significant advantage of the wagon over the car based truck is passenger capacity while still being able to carry more cargo.

Here is what you call a 'car based truck':

Here is a wagon:

You are trying to tell us that the wagon can carry more cargo? That is manifestly incorrect, good sir! Not only can a ute carry considerably more payload (1 tonne), it can carry far larger and odder shapes, on a completely flat try, and you can tie them securely down. I swear I said this above, and at least once

A wagon is certainly better for carrying people. but again, I can't recall anyone arguing otherwise...

As I have said, I accept that it is a cultural thing as much as anything, but many of you don't seem to be able to get beyond that and stop saying black is white just to justify that dislike. Or something

 

[Doppel]

Nope, you dropped a steaming load of nonsense that i comprehensively rebutted, point by point, and you were wrong on every point.

'Won't sell well' is not a salient point, let alone a point. It's a stance that you have taken, and then proceeded to justify with a load of complete bollocks You are probably right with that stance, at least in the US, but it's not for the reasons you made up.

I shall repeat the real point, in my opinion:

It is a damn sight more practical as a light commercial and personal haulage/cartage vehicle than any 'traditional' high-riding truck-style vehicle. The form-factor is inherently safer and more economical. Accordingly, for light commercial/personal haulage, it's a no-brainer.

That makes no allowance for your apparent cultural hate for the concept, which I acknowledge

Only a complete moron would suggest this is a practical alternative to a massive, long-bed truck, and I even made that expressly clear, if reading comprehension were to be even moderately applied.

@Pariah: I beg to differ. You have a completely flat tray, so you can put anything, of any shape on the back, it can even hang over all or any of three sides of the tray, if you so desire. Try that in a wagon. You don't have the weight of the bodywork around the mid to rear of the vehicle, so your payload is much better. All you lose is being able to load into the front row (which is generally dangerous in any event), which you more than make up by being able to hang off the back of the tray. You can also strap loads down much more easily and securely...

I honestly don't think any of that is unreasonable or foolish...but please put me to rights if you disagree

EDIT: I should say that my arguments relate to the commercial flat-tray Falcons and Commodores. The shiny shiny zoom zoom styleside box versions are inherently limited in the above areas, although still in my view pretty useful. I can totally understand an inherent skepticism of the ute-form factor coupled with those limitations leading to an element of dismissal. That's where it starts to become a cultural thing - we Aussies have a strange love for utes sporting brutal LS small blocks, the latest SC Ford V8 and Ford Australia's sublime blown I6 up front, and fsck-all over the rear axle, what can I say? Circle-work

Nope. My main point was that these were invented decades ago and don't sell well. That's why there are zero for sale in the US now.

'Won't sell well' is not a salient point, let alone a point.

In fact, it is the point of why we are discussing this on a message board and not in a show room. Because that's the closest you can get to one of these things stateside.

I have already told you the problem with this vehicle. American auto manufacturers have agreed with me, which is why they aren't selling any. Not one. Despite all your claims to practicality--which were as relevant now as they were many years ago--you can't buy any because people don't want them. That is all that ever matters in the end.

It is a damn sight more practical as a light commercial and personal haulage/cartage vehicle than any 'traditional' high-riding truck-style vehicle. The form-factor is inherently safer and more economical. Accordingly, for light commercial/personal haulage, it's a no-brainer.

And again, nobody cares or else sales on these wouldn't be so bad that they no longer exist for purchase in the US.

I did argue their practical merit as a supplemental point. You've already pointed out that practically speaking they are good and I defer that to you. But in the end it doesn't matter; these haven't sold well in many years. What exactly do you think has changed about this decades-old idea that now all of a sudden Americans will buy them? If practical drove sales not everybody on my block with two kids would be getting 18 mpg in their minivan.

 

[dug777]

Nope. My main point was that these were invented decades ago and don't sell well. That's why there are zero for sale in the US now.

In fact, it is the point of why we are discussing this on a message board and not in a show room. Because that's the closest you can get to one of these things stateside.

I have already told you the problem with this vehicle. American auto manufacturers have agreed with me, which is why they aren't selling any. Not one. Despite all your claims to practicality--which were as relevant now as they were many years ago--you can't buy any because people don't want them. That is all that ever matters in the end. And again, nobody cares or else sales on these wouldn't be so bad that they no longer exist for purchase in the US.

I did argue their practical merit as a supplemental point. You've already pointed out that practically speaking they are good and I defer that to you. But in the end it doesn't matter; these haven't sold well in many years. What exactly do you think has changed about this decades-old idea that now all of a sudden Americans will buy them? If practical drove sales not everybody on my block with two kids would be getting 18 mpg in their minivan.

I think we are in agreement

 

[Pariah]

You are trying to tell us that the wagon can carry more cargo? That is manifestly incorrect, good sir! Not only can a ute carry considerably more payload (1 tonne), it can carry far larger and odder shapes, on a completely flat try, and you can tie them securely down. I swear I said this above, and at least once

Sorry, I worded that poorly. I wasn't claiming a stationwagon had more storage capacity than a truck. I meant that it could seat more people than a truck while still having more storage capacity than a regular sedan, in reference to Zargon saying you couldn't fit bigger items in a stationwagon, just longer ones.

A wagon is certainly better for carrying people. but again, I can't recall anyone arguing otherwise...

Doesn't matter whether anyone argued otherwise. It is a relevant point when stating why a stationwagon has more utility to the average American household than a Ute. Average American household has 2.6 people; average American family, just over 3. With a Ute, someone is getting left home. If the Ute is going to have to be a second vehicle, you might as well just buy a truck.

 

[Throckmorton]

These utes are stupid. If you need a truck, buy a truck, not a unibody car with a bed.

I really don't understand why these are so popular in Australia, considering that a lot of the country is gravel roads. Why wouldn't you want the most durable platform, instead of a car cab grafted on to a solid axle leaf sprung bed?

 

[dug777]

These utes are stupid. If you need a truck, buy a truck, not a unibody car with a bed.

I really don't understand why these are so popular in Australia, considering that a lot of the country is gravel roads. Why wouldn't you want the most durable platform, instead of a car cab grafted on to a solid axle leaf sprung bed?

We're one of the most urban societies in the world, amazingly.

So while a vast amount of the roads in Aus are gravel (the interesting bits, imo!), most of the people are highly concentrated in relatively small patches along the coast of our great brown land Many Aussies can probably count the number of times they have driven on gravel roads on their fingers and toes

In that circumstance, if you need to carry more than a tonne payload, or you need to tow more than 2.3 tonnes, or you actually need ground clearance or 4WD, buy a 4WD ute (what you call a truck, basically).

If you don't, then a Falcon or Commodore ute makes plenty of sense. 5 star safety rating, economical, much quicker to drive and much better handling than any traditional high-riding 'truck', with payload/towing capacity that is more than sufficient for the vast majority of people's uses.

Perhaps also importantly, they are a hoot to drive, and come with awesome engine options

 

[Throckmorton]

We're one of the most urban societies in the world, amazingly.

So while a vast amount of the roads in Aus are gravel (the interesting bits, imo!), most of the people are highly concentrated in relatively small patches along the coast of our great brown land Many Aussies can probably count the number of times they have driven on gravel roads on their fingers and toes

In that circumstance, if you need to carry more than a tonne payload, or you need to tow more than 2.3 tonnes, or you actually need ground clearance or 4WD, buy a 4WD ute (what you call a truck, basically).

If you don't, then a Falcon or Commodore ute makes plenty of sense. 5 star safety rating, economical, much quicker to drive and much better handling than any traditional high-riding 'truck', with payload/towing capacity that is more than sufficient for the vast majority of people's uses.

Perhaps also importantly, they are a hoot to drive, and come with awesome engine options

Economical? Bullshit!! A V8 ute is not economical in any way. Or an ancient iron block I6 for that matter. The worst of all worlds.


BTW, you can carry tall stuff with a fastback.... if it opens wide enough. Too bad there are no fastbacks in America anymore. There's no reason the Mustang with its fastback profile shouldn't have a hatch.

 

[dug777]

Economical? Bullshit!! A V8 ute is not economical in any way. Or an ancient iron block I6 for that matter. The worst of all worlds.


BTW, you can carry tall stuff with a fastback.... if it opens wide enough. Too bad there are no fastbacks in America anymore. There's no reason the Mustang with its fastback profile shouldn't have a hatch.

A fastback and a flat-tray ute with a tonne of payload and 2.3 tonnes of towing capacity are in completely different leagues in terms of practicality

Economy is meaningless unless you are comparing like payload and towing capacity, and inherently a car-form factor is more economical than a 'truck' form factor: less weight, more aerodynamic, less vehicle mass eating up payload capacity You can put any engine technology you like in both form-factors, and the car-form factor will always be more economical. That's all I meant, but I did not express myself clearly