MEMORY LANE A TRIP DOWN
In a new occasional series, Alan Anderson looks back at past legends starting with Ford’s Transit – what else?
Focus On Vintage vans
The first ever Transit, impressively speedy for its time and refined by implementing design methods borrowed from aircraft construction. I
t sounds inconceivable, but there was a time when Transits weren’t plying their trade on our roads – 58 years ago in fact. Before then, vans were strictly working vehicles that drivers had to endure not enjoy thanks to their primitive designs and jail cell interiors. You had to pity folks who had to use them to make a living. Then along came the Ford Transit and pity turned to envy because, when launched back in 1965, here was a stunning looking van that could not only outperform many family cars but also boasted better comfort and refinement levels. The Transit changed the way manufacturers and operators viewed light commercials, from being strictly a working tool to a valued business partner. Yet, while overall standards have improved beyond recognition over the decades together with the introduction of new rivals, Transit not only remains the best seller, but for many, still the only van worth considering.
@whatvan
Transit – Project Redcap to Ford – came about due to the insistence of Henry Ford II, who was becoming tired of fragmented Ford model line-ups across Europe with many countries doing their own thing. By 1960 he decreed that there had to be more standardisation of models and designs and the Transit was going to set the ball in motion.
At that time, Ford of Britain was marketing the 400E Thames. It had been on the market since 1957 and, being a Ford, sold very successfully despite its major faults which included very poor high-speed handling and a wicked steering shimmy. Driving one could be purgatory and Ford of America was determined that its replacement would set new standards of driver comfort and on-road security. Transit was a pretty advanced design for the early 1960s thanks to Ford putting past experience of using aircraft stress structures into vehicle design.
On the Transit, it also ensured Ford could make a much bigger and wider van than its competitors but not at the expense of weight and payload. Despite bashing British and German heads together, both went their own ways into developing Project Redcap but a bit of healthy competition did the Transit no harm at all.
A V IN ITS BONNET
Launched within a week of each other, in October 1965, the Transit and the revamped Corsair saloon both sported Ford’s all-new range of V configuration power units. While looking a bit lost in the passenger car’s engine bay, the compact V4 suited the snub-nosed van brilliantly and best of all – unlike other vans – enabled a car-like cab to be designed without any intrusion from the engine, which was another reason for Ford’s impressive refinement levels. And while that V4 unit has been much criticised in Corsairs and Capris
since introduction, its gruff, lusty low-rev nature was ideal for commercial use. Two engines were offered, a 1.6hp 63hp tune for the lighter vans and a 75hp 2.0-litre for the heavy duty, twin axle alternatives. It’s become legendary how fast the development Transits were. Kent Police regularly clocked them at over 90mph in those pre-speed limit days, which was faster than most family cars, such as the new Cortina, could hit. You can imagine the looks on the faces of Mini Cooper drivers , being passed by a mere van – even more so if it was the early Bedford CA-bodied hybrid that Ford used as a camouflage! Add amazingly good handling for its day, and the Transit was a quick conveyance – small wonder then that, according to Transit expert Graham Robson, 95% of all getaways (and 80% of bank jobs) were conducted by crooks in a Transit during the 70s! There was also enough compartment space to squeeze in the 128hp
July 2023 WhatVan? 21
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53
