There are certain kinds of cars that, conceptually, just don’t really exist anymore. Like when a company takes a mass-market everyday car and strips it down to make something fun and silly. That’s no longer a thing. You know what else isn’t a thing? Cars that are proudly cheap. Yes, cheap, as in inexpensive, to buy and to operate. There was once a time when carmakers would have distinctive versions of cars for cheapskates, proudly branded and named and badged and (often) sticker’d, cars that really leaned into the whole idea of frugality, without shame. Frugalcore cars.
Today, the concept of everything having to be “premium” has killed this idea, and has been a disaster for small, cheap cars, which have been forced into metallic gray paint and made to try to be things that they are not, to their detriment. There’s a reason a new Nissan Versa is such an undesirable thing, and that’s because it’s a cheap car forced to pretend it isn’t, and deep down it knows that this just isn’t true.
In the past, a cheap car was something to be celebrated, allowed to thrive and revel in its perfidy, and no attempt was made to hide what the cheap edition of the car was. It was celebrated, in fact, with special names and identities, and there was no shame. As a result, a cheap car could be charming and appealing. Here, to sum up this idea, is a simple diagram, featuring two Nissans – a modern-ish Versa and a ’70s Datsun B210 Honey Bee:
I miss the days when being broke but wanting a decent car wasn’t something you had to hide, but something automakers actually courted, with cars like the ones I’m about to show you. Consider the one I just used as an example, the Datsun Honey Bee.
The Honey Bee was introduced in 1975 as the lowest-spec version of the Datsun B210. They started with the basic B210 two-door with a four-speed manual transmission and the A14 1.4-liter engine. To get the price down, Datsun removed or altered a bunch of stuff compared to the normal B210 (list from Datsun1200.com):
- No Wheel covers (dogdish caps fitted)
- No “honeycomb” wheel covers
- No Spare tire cover
- No Trunk mat
- No Cigarette lighter (blind plug fitted)
- No Speedometer trip meter
- No Rear window defogger switch (blind plug fitted)
- 1976 Honey Bee has the defogger
- No Carpet (only Mat)
- California models included carpet
- No Armrest (pull handle is fitted)
- No Door trim molding
- No Rear side molding
- No Rear seat ashtray
- No Wiper blade high-speed fin (uses basic type from 620 truck)
- No Door lamp switch for assistant side
- No Console box
- No Non-glare glass
- No Chrome molding for windshield
- No Chrome molding for rear window
Changed Equipment:
- Blackwall tires now fitted (instead of whitewalls)
- Trunk finisher: hardboard instead of laminated
- Front seat is folding only, instead of reclining + forward-folding
- Interior Trim: Black or Beige only (Deluxe has Black, Blue or Brown)
- Floor trim: Black only (Black or Brown in California)
After all this, it actually weighed 10 pounds less than the regular B210, too, which helped it hit that 41 mpg highway figure, I’d imagine.
Pretty much all of these seem like reasonable trade-offs to get to a selling price, in 1976 for example, of $2,844 (about $15,700 today, which is dirt cheap for a new car). I mean, no rear seat ashtray? Fine, the kids don’t have to smoke all the time. No wiper blade high-speed fin? What are we, sharks, who needs that? Rubber mats instead of carpet? Good, easier to clean. No spare tire cover? Fine! It’s not like you didn’t know it was a tire already! All of this is fine!
I like how Datsun made their ultra-basic stripper model something that felt fun, more than anything, and the name they gave it reflected this idea of cheap and cheerful, not dire austerity. Honey bee! That’s just a happy name.
Plus, Datsun managed to make an ultra-cheap car without taking the drastic measure that some American carmakers resorted to to get the same basic result: removing the rear seat. Both Chevrolet with the Chevette Scooter and (a few years earlier) AMC with their base-model Gremlin were two-seaters only, the back seats of which had been sacrificed on the altar of frugality.
I made a chart comparing these two stripper models a while back:
Unlike these two, the Honey Bee could be used for an actual family of four, and I’m pretty certain it was, often.
Sometimes stripped-down cheap cars have made fuel economy the banner they fly, proudly, which gives a cheap car a sort of extra bit of justification, as the concept of “efficiency” feels somewhat more embraceable to people than “I’m cheap as shit.” Fundamentally, they’re really doing the same basic thing: reducing content in the cars, here in the name of weight, but it saves money, too, and that was as important for these cars, even if it wasn’t hyped as much.
There are a few of these worth noting, like the cleverly-named Plymouth Feather Duster from 1976, sold for about half a year:
The Feather Duster managed to shave 187 pounds from the regular Duster and get better fuel economy thanks to using aluminum instead of steel for some components (like the manual transmission case), having a more efficient rear axle ratio, and special Slant Six tuned for economy. They also included Mopar’s goofy “Fuel Pacer System” which used the driver’s side turn indicator tell-tale lamp to let you know when you’ve been pushing too much on that go-pedal:
Where Feather Duster was a clever, fun name for their cheap, fuel-economy and frugality-focused car, later on Mopar seems to have lost the plot and named their ’80s-era fuel-sipping car something far less fun: the Miser.
Well, it was either the Dodge Omni Miser or the Plymouth Horizon Miser, but “Miser” was in that name regardless. Can you imagine a carmaker selling something called a “Miser” today? Does anyone want to be associated with a miser? Did GM have the trademark on Scrooge or Skinflint? Oy.
The Miser got an impressive 30 to 35 mpg in the city and 50-52 on the highway, I guess depending on which ad you’re looking at. The price of $5,299 in 1980 comes to about $20,000 today, so that’s definitely on the cheap end of things, and I guess it got there by eliminating things like the rubber impact strips on the bumpers, using the cheapest steel wheels, and even giving up any grille badges.
I like how this commercial couches the idea of buying a dirt-cheap car in the context of “America’s not going to be pushed around anymore,” said by that guy from the Naked Gun movies and who once punched out Paul Newman, George Kennedy.
I think the last really unashamedly frugal car that hit the market was likely the Honda CRX HF, which was an interesting example, as it was an extreme economy/frugality car based on a sporty car variant of a normal-level-frugality/economy car, the Civic.
The CRX HF (High Fuel) version arrived in 1985 and used the 1.5 liter engine with the two-valve-per-cylinder CVCC head, and only made 62 hp, the lowest of any CRX. It was also significantly lighter at about 1,850 pounds (compared to about 2,100 pounds), with lighter-weight sway bars, rear axle, rear brakes, and other parts, letting the HF get 49 mpg city and 52 on the highway, impressive numbers for a non-hybrid to this day.
I’m not sure that commercial up there really got the point across, equating an air pump with a gas pump, but it looked pretty cool.
Today, we still see cars that wear their fuel economy numbers as a point of pride, like Priuses and other hybrids. But the idea of cheapness as something to revel in and be proud of, that feels very gone. The idea of getting economy just from austerity, from deleting unnecessary stuff from a car, leaving just the most basic, usable, and affordable transport, I’m not sure that’s coming back anytime soon.
And yet, it’s a formula that could work for modern EVs, too. Not every EV has to be so damn heavy, and a genuinely light EV could get the desired range demanded with a much smaller and cheaper battery if things like a Featherweight Edition of a Tesla Model 3 or something existed.
But they don’t, and I’m not sure the current car culture will change enough so they could. But I’m still hoping for a cheap-ass car comeback.
Yep. There’s a reason “cheap and cheerful” isn’t a common expression here.
The closest you’ll get are the “I can’t believe it’s a Buick” and other nonsensical ads that highlight the premium qualities of slightly tarted up basic cars.
This was known as the 120Y in my neck of the woods, and it was a very popular car in all its body styles. Quite likely my favourite Datsun ever. I have very fond memories of riding shotgun in my friend’s 120Y back in the late 90s. His 120Y had, and still has – that car is still going strong and looks as beautiful as ever – the American B210 grille, which made it very unique even back in the day.
The Honey Bee specifically is the only Datsun I can remember being referenced by name in an episode of Archer, a show in which cars felt like way more than just an afterthought – pretty sure Adam Reed is a car guy. That has to say something of the Honey Bee’s cultural impact.
Portugal is nirvana for those of us who love the 120Y, but even more so the preceding generation (Datsun 1200).
Yes, the 1200 was super popular here back then, and has more die-hard fans than any other Dastun around here nowadays. There’s lots of very well preserved/fully restored ones, and you still see some banged up daily drivers every now and then.
Honey Bee…what a great name! I had no idea these existed. I still prefer the Super Bee. Although I do love stripper models if you know what I mean…also I love the CRX and want one
Our 2022 Civic Si has blended frugality with performance: The front seats are trimmed with red stitching and fabric, colored trim on the doors too. Back seats get barebones base Civic spec stuff. I’m ok with it. Also, if you drive frugally, it can get 47-49mpg on back roads. It’s also lighter then most modern sedans at 2800lbs and change.
Side note: Jason can you do an article on white wall tires? Those on the Horizon brought back memories and yet some people still buy white walls and they are still for sale. Why?
Unfortunately, once capitalism went rampant in the 80s and we had ‘greed is good’ and ‘more is better’, being cheap started to take on a negative connotation.
We’ve become a society where everyone wants to give off the impression that we have money, even if we do not.
You’re gonna want that cheapass ride when the taxman comes sniffing’ around.
Look, if I’m buying a cheap car that brags about fuel economy as it’s number 1 feature among a list of features it lacks to get there… There’s only one choice:
https://www.cjponyparts.com/resources/mustang-mpg-package
A few corrections on the CRX HF: The Gen 1 HF weighed about 1720 pounds and had a 1.3L carbureted engine. The DX had the 1.5L and weighed about 1850. I think the HF put out somewhere around 60 HP (DX was 76). The visual differences between a DX and HF were that the HF had no passenger side mirror and cheaper, lighter wheels. I think it also had no rear spoiler, which the DX had.
I had a DX 5sp with no air that I loved to death, and then sold on to someone who loved it to even more death. Car was bulletproof and light enough that I could get a little air over the railroad tracks on my route. I imagine that one of the very best things about my car would translate to the HF, and that was the very direct steering with no power assist. But, with a passenger and climbing steep hills I would have to downshift into third to get the sweet spot in the torque band to maintain speed. I imagine that was even harder to do in an HF.
On a 14,000 mile roadtrip of the US one summer, I averaged about 42 MPG in my DX.
Can confirm no spoiler and manual steering.
It was geared very tall for maximum economy, so merging on the freeway was a second gear task. Imagine said hills would have been too, but it was a winter beater that never left SE Mich in my custody.
By the time I got it, mine had lost many of those 1720 lbs to salted roads. Put it in a jack once to check the rear brakes and the car started to bend on the jack point. Dropped it real quick and decided the brakes were probably ok. Drove it for a couple more years and sold to a FoaF who drove it at least one more winter.
Loved that car, because all fucks had left the building.
Need to carry mulch? Trash can in Hatchback.
Want to merge in the silverdome parking lot after a show or any other traffic shit show? They will let me in every time.
Shitty Michigan potholed roads ruining people’s suspensions? Not my problem, it’s already ruined.
my parking routine when the roads were snowy was an e brake 180. Rolled up in front of the house on my Ann Arbor suburban street and did the 180. When successful I ended up parked in front of my house. I got pretty good at it.
The best feature of a shitbox is the ability to merge anywhere. The Audi driver always yields.
In defense of the Nissan Versa, the latest iteration is a flat-out bargain for what you get. It doesn’t feel or drive like an historically “cheap car” – it drives nicely, is smooth, comfortable and can get out of its own way. You can see 40+ mpg on regular fuel. You can have three pedals. It doesn’t look or feel awful in any way. And I still trust the build quality and technological engineering of a Mexican-made Japanese car than a Korean-made GM product.
Hey dude not cool.You have me almost giving them a modicum of respect!
Every so often Porsche does a de-contented version of the 911 but boy did they not get the memo about it being lower priced.
Yet they still manage to sell every single one.
My goodness, no wheel covers or wheel covers.
Outside US, the Dacia Logan was designed from the start to be frugal, and easy to fix. Came out in 2004 from memory, and had wind up windows… Died a death, think the Sandero is meant to be the replacement, but it has become much more bourgeois..
“I think the last really unashamedly frugal car that hit the market was likely the Honda CRX HF, which was an interesting example, as it was an extreme economy/frugality car based on a sporty car variant of a normal-level-frugality/economy car, the Civic.”
Have you forgotten the ’89 – ’94 Geo Metro XFI?
Metro XFi
All Geo Metros came standard with a 1.0 liter, 3 cylinder engine. The XFi model was designed for maximum fuel efficiency. It had a lighter curb weight, different computer, camshaft and transmission than the base or LSi models. It also had less comfort and convenience options than the other models. It boasted 53 city/58 highway mpg numbers and received “Most Fuel Efficient car in America” for all six years of it’s production. It was dropped after the ’94 model year because of slow sales.
Or what about the Cruze Eco? Or the Spark LS?
The lack of cruise control on the base model Spark is a tough pill to swallow, even for extremely budget-minded drivers. Powered adjustable seats are also not offered on any Spark trim level.
This shouldn’t feel like too much of a sacrifice unless you share a car or often switch drivers. Just set the seat where you like it and keep it there.
“But I’m still hoping for a cheap-ass car comeback.”
Not quite the same as a cheap-ass car, but Fellow Autopian™ Thomas Hundal wroe this about the 2024 Trax.
When was the last time a marque launched a regular-ass car? Not to be confused with a regular ass-car (any BMW sedan prior to Chris Bangle), a regular-ass car eschews premium aspirations for affordability. Sure, a soft-touch interior for a soft-touch life sounds brilliant, but only until you remember that the average American can maybe cough up twenty dollars as a down payment. The 2024 Chevrolet Trax is a regular-ass car, and it’s about to be absolutely everywhere.
Borrowed my friend’s metro once for a trip from Sacramento (where I was visiting them) into SF.
Looked at the manual and realized it was a smaller engine than the Kawasaki I’d ridden to their place, 985 vs 997 cc or something like that.
I do remember the XFI had a 1.0 liter engine and the 5 speed transmission had 4th AND 5th as overdrives.
Wow… I was about to say that something seems wrong with the prices in the AMC vs Chevy infographic: <$1000 difference on ~$16,000 today vs >$1000 difference on historical prices ($1900 back in 1970 and $2900 in 1976), but it looks like that works out with multiple inflation calculators… damn, a lot of inflation between 1970 and 1976!
First oil embargo hit in ‘73.
“stagflation.”
55mph limit.
Price controls.
Whip Inflation Now! (WIN) Nixon? Ford? Administration program/slogan.
Inflation was a significant problem until 1981/82, when the federal reserve pumped interest rates way up to fight it. Caused a huge recession, but did the trick and in the long run was worth it.
Yea, historically I learned about all of that, but it hasn’t hit home until recently!
My Dad had a 75 B210 – bought it new. I was 2. I learned to drive on that car. By that time, he had rebuilt the engine. Even after the engine rebuild, rowing through the gears was not a pleasurable experience…trust me. Interestingly, his other car at the time (86) was an 86 Civic Si. That car was a freaking rocket ship compared to the Datsun. The Si became mine in a couple years and I wish I still had it.
Dad also got my Mom a 90 CRX HF. I drove it for a little bit while my Si was wrecked. I mainly kept it in third gear at highway speeds and it did fine. That car was refined enough for the time that I didn’t mind driving it.
In Europe we’ve had Dacias for a while, which I feel represent exactly the kind of approach you’re writing about. A Dacia brand is technically produced by Renault, but using the cheapest possible materials in order to get the cheapest possible (while still reliable) car. And their owners are very proud of it!