Good morning! It’s time once again for Shitbox Showdown. Today we’re celebrating the unsung hero of days gone by: the humble pushrod inline six. But first, we need to see which German bad-guy barge you chose yesterday:
The Benz wins it by a hood ornament. That would be my choice as well. However, if I wanted a big German sedan, I’d forego either of these and look for something a couple generations older. They just looked cooler back then, and they were way easier to work on.
There certainly was lots of griping about how unreliable both options were yesterday. I mentioned this on Slack, and threatened to do two identical very-reliable-but-dull cars today, a pair of plain white Corollas or something. You were saved from this terrible boring fate, as we all so often are saved, by the Bishop. His piece on “Gremlinizing” the Tesla Model 3 (an absolutely brilliant idea, in my opinion) made me want to look for AMC Hornets and Gremlins. I found a Hornet, but during my search for a Gremlin I was side-tracked by the ultimate surfer van, and so we have today’s matchup. The common thread between them? Both skip the V8 option and rely instead on a tried-and-true inline six. Let’s check them out.
1972 Ford Econoline – $3,800
Engine/drivetrain: 240 or 300 cubic inch inline 6, three-speed manual, RWD
Location: near Napa, CA
Odometer reading: 31,000 miles (probably rolled over at least once)
Runs/drives? Yep!
Ford’s long-running Econoline is no more, at least in van form, replaced by the Transit. It’s arguably a better van, more efficient and all that, but nobody is going to write not one, but two songs about their Ford Transit. Just saying. Ford officially stopped using the Econoline name in 1999, but the rest of us didn’t. Back when this first-year second-generation van was built, the Econoline name was in full swing.
The original Econoline (or actually Falcon Van, initially) was a flat-nosed forward-control design, with the front axle under the seats and the engine between them. For this generation, Ford moved the front wheels and the engine both forward, creating the “doghouse” engine cover protruding from the dash that became the hallmark of all American vans for decades. The stubby hood and wheel well cutouts in the doors make for an appealing shape, especially on a short-wheelbase van like this. The mag wheels and side-exit exhaust are just icing on the cake.
The seller tells us this is a six-cylinder, but not which displacement it is. Ford’s long-serving truck six was available in two displacements back in ’72: the commonly-seen 300 cubic inches, and a smaller 240 cubic inch version. Whichever one this is, it spins those glorious mags through a three-on-the-tree manual.
This one was originally a work van, I imagine, based on the fact that there’s nothing behind the seats. These days, it looks like the perfect way to transport surfboards or other toys. I would say it would make a good band van, except that there are only two seats. Well, it would work for the White Stripes, I suppose.
1974 AMC Hornet – $3,500
Engine/drivetrain: 232 or 258 cubic inch inline 6, three-speed automatic, RWD
Location: near Vallejo, CA
Odometer reading: 137,000 miles
Runs/drives? Indeed it does
“Plucky underdog” is the phrase that comes to mind when I think of ’70s AMC. Terminally short on cash, but blessed with a brilliant designer, the legendary Dick Teague, American Motors Corporation managed to do a lot with a little, and in a lot of cases out-cool the Big Three. AMC made its name early on with small cars, and when the Rambler was due for replacement in 1970, Teague penned the sharp-looking Hornet. The name was a callback to the legendary Hudson Hornet from the ’50s, and the styling echoed the Javelin introduced a couple years earlier.
This Hornet is the popular two-door hatchback model, introduced in 1973 and famous for performing what might be the coolest movie car stunt of all time. This one is powered by AMC’s trusty inline-six, though here again, the seller doesn’t tell us whether it’s the 232 or 258 cubic inch version. It’s bolted to a “Torque-Command” automatic – AMC’s branding for the Torqueflite automatic it bought from Chrysler. The car runs and drives, but that’s about all the information we get about its mechanical condition.
Cosmetically it looks pretty good, except for a few bumps and bruises, the most notable of which is a dent in the rear hatch. Honestly, on this car, I don’t even mind the dents. They give it a little character. I also have to give kudos to the seller for taking good photographs; the low angle really shows off this car’s shape well. When you see as many terrible classified photos as I do, you learn to appreciate the good ones.
The inside looks good, with the vinyl upholstery more or less intact, and that nice Jeep-style three spoke steering wheel instead of the more common two spoke wheel that always looks upside-down. It’s also got cool Centerline-style wheels that actually have AMC center caps. It’s an attractive package.
So that’s what I’ve got for you today, a pair of cool inline-six-powered vehicles old enough to not need smog testing. Either one would make a fun drivable project. Which one is your style?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
Van, especially if it is the 300. While many AMC models were my jam, that Hornet isn’t one of them.
I will vote for ANYTHING that is up against an AMC Hornet. I remember quiet well suffering in the back seat on long hot summer drives with no AC and rear windows that did not open. I was never so glad to see a car go (driver’s seat collapsed, and terminal rust out) as the old copper colored Hornet.
Econoline.
Source: did you read the comment or my name first
All about the van today! Add an air mattress & a disco ball and away we go!
…and bumper stickers…at least one of two:
Ass, Gas, or Grass, Nobody Rides for Free
If This Van’s a Rockin’ Don’t Come a Knockin’
Me? I love ’em both
I’m am going to choose the Hornet, AMC Hornet. Somewhere a slide whistle whistles.
I do love the old Econoline vans, though. I thought the VW vans were the official surf van.
An absolutely incredible stunt that no one else could pull off, done in just one take. But was completely ruined by slow motion and a fucking slide whistle note that could have been ripped right out of an episode of Wile E. Coyote.
That jump makes the entire movie worth watching for that alone. I would rewind and replay that part over and over. It’s a wonder the VHS survived.
It also has a flying car. Meanwhile in 2023 we’re still waiting. Count Dooku and his doo doo brown AMC Matador took to the skies while we’re all still earhtbound. Sadly Herve Villachaize didn’t have his signature line yet. Scaramanga lived on an island…
I must’ve had a pretty rough night, cause that Hornet is very easy on these half-closed, bloodshot eyes.
I was expecting one of the two song links to be Neil Young’s “Tonight’s The Night” – that’s the first song that comes to mind when I think of the Econoline.
Nanci Griffith’s “Ford Econoline”:
my wife used to sing this, while driving our 82 Econoline with a 4-speed manual..
that Econoline was and is my dream car..
As a Jeep XJ owner I will always stand by an AMC six, and I kind of dig the whole package of that Hornet. Looks like the kid’s soccer cleat clad feet were rested on the passenger dash many times, apparently something my wife used to do which drove my father in law insane. If I didn’t have the Jeep that Ford van would make an appealing Home Depot, dumb project junk hauler, etc vehicle.
The 258 had much less power and reliability than the 4.0 in your XJ. I had an early YJ with a 258 that left me wondering why those engines are so popular.
They are the same engine. 199, 232, 258, and 4.0 share the same basic design. The older sixes can be just as if not more reliable than the 4.0. Very stout motors
The AMC is nice and normally probably would have been my pick but I’m a van man and I need that van. It’s a perfect base to start building it into the 70s style custom van of my dreams
IT certainly would be interesting to find a 95 sportside F150 rusted out, but otherwise running adequately and update the van drivetrain.
Vans are just blank canvases…
https://www.shared.com/12-far-out-van-interiors-from-the-70s-that-will-make-you-scratch-your-head/
You had me at AMC inline six.
As an AMC guy I’m going with the Hornet, cause I know that the motor will run forever, and the timing gears are not made out of bakelight, like they are on the For straight sixes.
I like everything about the Econoline, except the condition and price.
So, Hornet.
If one of those vehicles is going to sting my wallet, it’ll be the Hornet. Just way cooler than an old van.
I do like the 72 front end of the free candy van, but I prefer the Hornet shape by far, and I really want to swap a HO FI jeep 4.0 in that thing and daily it. Maybe if Hollywood DT is feeling Robert Downy Juniorish, he could make a series about swapping in a 4XE jeep drivetrain and suggest he is going green.
The Hornet. Sting me, baby.
I must be french, because I am feeling Hornét today.
They also used the same platform as the Eagle, so swap in a later 4.0, a 4×4 frontend, and make a more ultimate overlander. Remove the hatch for some fuel drums and mad max it up if you must.
I’m buzzin’ for that Hornet.
Since I retired from human trafficking and moved away from the river, I’ll choose the Hornet. I always wanted to drive a Bond car.
But you can still use the van to sell stereo speakers that “fell off the truck”.
Apparently, unlike the other commenters, I love both of these!! Maybe I’m just weird.
I voted for the van, though. Manual>auto.
eh, in this case the manual on the tree with only 3 forward gears is not as desirable. plus if you get a 4.0 H0, it is highly possible an AX15 – 5 speed is nearby, so add that tot he swap.
The Hornet also only has 3 forward gears. Manual 3 speed > automatic 3 speed. And if a transmission swap is on the table, there are a lot more options that’ll bolt to a ford 6 than an AMC 6. And the van also already has a clutch pedal.
On this day, Kenosha > Dearborn.
If this was the Sportabout version of the Hornet it’d already be in my driveway, but the hatchback is OK. I almost went with the Econoline, but I got to thinking: middle aged guy in a beat up, white (sort of), old panel van. The only way that could be creepier is if I wore an ice cream man hat and shirt. Hornet, please.
This will be a very one sided vote I imagine. Hornet is the only option here worth paying money for.
They’re both too expensive for what they are. I went with the less clapped out Hornet
Owned both of today’s shit boxes at one time in my misguided youth. As such I vote “none the above.”
Both of these look beat to hell. ND on both.
Actually the hornet looks like the proverbial little old lady car that was handed down to the grandson and then partially disassembled for a repair and respray. Then found out the price of Paint and could not find some parts. just a guess though.