![[Datsun 1200 encyclopedia]](/wiki/upload/wiki.png)
From Sports Car Graphic September, 1970
SIX OF ONE, HALF DOZEN OF OTHER, ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME, BROTHERS UNDER SKIN, ALIKE AS TWO PEAS IN POD, BIRDS OF FEATHER ... WHAT CAN WE TER YOU? TOLD BY PAUL VAN VALKENBURGH
A JAPANESE CAR ALWAYS SEEMS to inspire a lot of bad humor. 'I like driving oriental cars, but an hour later you always want to drive one again.' 'I had a Japanese car once, but it kept trying to go sideways.' 'How do you tell them apart? All oriental cars look the same to me.'
American industrialists aren't laughing very hard, however. Look at what effect all the deprecatory humor had on the Model T, and the Volkswagen but then there is no joy in Wolfsburg, either, with Toyota sales eating away badly at the Bug. The fact is, Japan has an exaggeration of all the real automotive problems we have here mainly traffic and pollution only they are more willing to alleviate them with reduced size. Add to that the practicality of simplicity and its relationship to quality by way of reliability, and you find an awfully attractive dollar-value. Without anyone really noticing, the term 'Japanese copy' has lost its negative connotations. There are no innovations, no heavily researched 'better ideas,' no gimmicks just a small, but strong and simple, means of local transportation. A tool instead of a toy. No more than a scaled-down version of the best 1950s designs from England and the United States.
However, now that the Japanese know they aren't second-rate industrialists anymore, they have taken to copying each other with inscrutable impunity. Take the Toyota 1200 for example or is it the Datsun 1200? We had so much trouble telling them apart that it almost lost all meaning as to which was which. These two particular cars are more alike than a Ford and a Chevrolet, to the point where it is practically impossible to identify either without the nameplates. Except for a deeper trunk lid on the Toyota, it appears that the new Datsun is only a chrome-trim styling change away from the Toyota.
There are significant detail differences, however, with some points so weak on one or the other car that we would have appreciated a better copy of the better design. The best solution, since the two are so close, might be to order the best of both. 'I'll take the Datsun, but with buckets and fuel tank from the Toyota no, make it the Toyota with fold-down rear seat and vinyl dash out of the Datsun no, maybe....'
Anyhow, just about any way you want to look at them, they both beat Volkswagen. Lower price, more power, smaller engine, smaller size, better performance, more room. Except legroom. If every car has a national trait, then inconsideration for taller races is the fault of the Japanese. Even for the statistically average American, having the seats all the way back still leaves his legs cramped, although an equal amount of room is left in back. Better they should extend the tracks back for the long fellow who seldom has passengers. It's not at all surprising how fast your legs can tire when working the pedals from a jackknife position. If you're really sold on the cars otherwise, a little work with drill and strap iron could probably get the seats back the necessary distance. In the Datsun, the seat also ought to be tilted rearward a bit. The Toyota buckets are extremely comfortable in themselves, and the Datsun's would be if the cushion weren't so flat or perhaps it is tilted forward, because you tend to fall on the floor unless your belt is tight.
Unless you happen to be a short-legged five-two, there is definitely no thigh support. The headrests vary also: for driving, the Datsun's are well-placed farther forward, while for sleeping (both seats recline nicely) the Toyota's are better placed, being farther rearward. Generally, the Toyota seats appear more luxurious, while the Datsun has a less cabish looking interior with vinyl and textured plastic instead of painted steel.
We'll have to mention the Datsun rear window, even though it is so badly distorted that even the public relations folks noticed it and promised the press it will be corrected in the future. In all the cars we drove, it was so bad you could hardly identify the make of a car following or whether it had white doors. Say, Datsun just may have stumbled onto a million dollar idea here. They could take out the windows, silver one side, mount them upright in a room, and charge admission for people to come in and look at their funny reflection ....
One valuable advantage the Datsun does have is in the luggage area. Though both take about thesame number of cubic feet, the Datsun rear seat-back folds forward, allowing much more effective cargo space when needed. And, again, the size driver who would have legroom up front would also fit supine behind, if the need should 'arise. Not only are the two identical in appearance, there is slight distinction in engineering design. Only a few dimensions were changed to protect their identity. Same type engine, trans, driveline, rear suspension and front suspension, and even most of the specs fall within five percent of each other. The only obvious design difference is in the lower front A-frame design. Both front suspensions are sprung with a MacPherson strut, but in the Toyota there is also a transverse leaf spring to help carry the load. Also, the Datsun comes with front disc brakes, but that's it otherwise merely reflections of each other.
The performance picture looked a little different. This Datsun walked all over this Toyota. Before we get involved in the details, however, it's only fair to mention that the Datsun came with optional larger tires. If you read our Corvette/ Camaro comparison or the Mangusta series you know that tires are probably the single greatest influence on sports car performance. These are not sports cars, however, so we tried to avoid placing too great a value on the athletic prowess of either.
Datsun 1200 showing better acceleration, lower top end, and vastly better brakes
In the standing quarter mile, the Datsun ran away with the e.t. at 18.8 seconds against Toyota's 19.6. Surprising, considering that tires had a small effect with the minimal wheelspin, and both cars have almost identical (advertised) powerto-weight ratios. Perhaps one engine was up to tune and the other down. The Toyota was geared a little lower and had a four horsepower advantage, but the Datsun felt stronger in the upper rpms. Even in normal city driving, the Datsun feels a little more comfortable at higher revs, which you certainly need to keep 1200 cc's from being run down by typical American 7500 cc's. But at that, even the Toyota was a second quicker than the best VW we've tested.
Braking performance better known among the knowledgeables as the tire test was a walkaway for the fat-tired Datsun. When switching from car to car, it was obvious that the Datsun drum-discs just plain felt better than the Toyota drum-drums. Pedal pressure per g was about equal, but the Datsun pedal was much firmer and easier to modulate at the limit. In our 12 quick stops from 60, neither car lost its brakes, but the drum-drum system started acting very badly. To start with, the Toyota was severely limited in stopping distance by a locking right rear, but the hotter it got, the worse it grabbed, until the last stop when it really yawed the car around. A full-lock-and-sliding stop from a lower speed showed the tires to be capable of better stops, as the accelerometer rose about 0.1 g from the previous best average 0.64 g, but until they get better balance and modulation, we'll only give the Toyota brakes a barely passing grade.
Cornering capability is another 'tire-test,' and at that, usually of negligible interest to the kind of automotive unenthusiast who buys one of these cars. But it's worth knowing that neither one will fall over in a corner. Just about, maybe, as the limiting factor in steady-state lateral acceleration is where the inside rear wheel lifts up and paws the air. The comfort advantage of high seating (high center of gravity) and the space-saving of a narrow track just aren't compatible with roadholding. Since the asymmetrical driver weight has a very detrimental effect on right-hand cornering in a car this light, we tried adding a passenger and both he and the driver leaning to the right. The increase in cornering power was just barely measurable, at .01 g, but if you take a lot of hard right turns you might keep that in mind. Also keep in mind locking the doors, because at near record roll angles (high c.g. and narrow tread again) it's really difficult to stay in your seator even in the car. When it comes to comparisons there isn't any.
The Datsun overcame again with an average g capability of 0.73 to Toyota's 0.62. With the two chassis and suspensions so nearly identical, though, that variation has to be attributed mostly to tires. Transient response is a non-sequitur because of a lack of poop at the pedal to have any effect of any consequence at the tire.
Aerodynamics matters more than you think in cars like this. Aero may not concern you, but combined with crosswinds and truck-passing blasts, it adds up to a very washy feeling in stability. They just can't take care of themselves in gusts at speed. It takes constant fiddling to keep in your own lane. Air drag matters very much to economy on the highway when you have only a 1.2-liter engine, and 270 pounds total at a projected 100 mph is very reasonable. Neither car will easily go that fast, however, because of either an earlier rpm limit or 270 pounds of drag being too great for even 70 horsepower. Considering appearances, it's not too surprising to find both cars having identical drag, but the Toyota came up with an unexpected extra 100 pounds of lift at either end.
All this statistical equivalence didn't mean much in fuel economy as near as we could measure it in the Datsun. The problem was that half the gas that went down the filler neck was promptly belched right back out on the pavement by improper venting. The best time we got for taking aboard nine gallons out of a possible ten was set by two men with a long funnel in seven actual minutes, or almost 1.3 gallons per minute. A faster method might be to dip the entire car in a pool of gasoline and let it leak backwards from the carburetor. Anyhow, even correcting for estimated spillage and an optimistic odometer, the Datsun came in first again, 32 to 26 mpg.
Looks bad for Toyota, doesn't it? If you're planning on racing them, anyhow. But they aren't race cars, or even sports cars and, in fact, except for a couple of factory Sports/Racing Can-Am type machines, Toyota could hardly care less about high performance. Datsun is trying harder to catch up in the sales department, so they support a semi-factory 'amateur' SCCA team over here (Pete Brock's BRE) that battles valiantly against the Porsches and Triumphs, and they award real money to the independents who win. But they aren't racing 1200-cc coupes.
In everyday, non-critical driving chores, it takes a pretty sensitive seat of the pants to distinguish a performance advantage between these two cars. It's all up to the details that mean so much in the 40 to 80 thousand non-racing utility miles you'll spend in the machine, and how finely each is tuned to your particular motoring needs.
Toyota has gone a long way toward reviving the days of the Nash Rambler--only problem is, you still have to change your sheets once a week.
A few generalizations that apply to both are simplicity, space and comfort. As widely known as VWs are, a lot of backwater gas stations still can't handle them, but these Japanese cars are just as simple as the '50 Ford or Chevy sitting out back so they ought to be able to keep them running as far as an authorized garage. Because both designs are converted from right- to left-hand drive, there's a pretty tight pack on one side of the engine room, but everything you can get your hands on is easily understandable. Dimensions are the big bonus, as we said, with adequate room for everyone and everything but the driver's legs, and a practical, small exterior that will squeeze in anywhere. The small 12-inch wheels permit such a tight turning circle that either car can U-turn on a 2-lane street and both are the most parkable we've tested. Comfort is adequate inside the city limits but barely tolerable for any distance at highway speeds. Both have the typical 4-cylinder in-line vibration that eventually gets just about everything else in the car to harmonize with it, especially the shift lever. And both have transmission and differential gear whines that keep you thinking there's a police car chasing you at some remarkably discreet distance.
There are a couple of minor specific complaints left here in the 'gotcha' bag, such as the fierce brake squeal that developed in the Datsun after our brake beating, and the inaudible emasculated horn in the Toyota that wouldn't shoo a bird off the hood. Sure, minor, but in an inexpensive car, small aggravations such as legroom, vibrations, refueling time, window distortion can almost make the decision not to buy, since there are so many cars in the same category, and another that costs slightly more and has less performance just might have few enough discomforts to make the sale. So we come to one of those rare comparison tests where we can't say either car really won or lost. When it came to personal preferences in using the cars for what they were intended transportation there just wasn't the slightest difference. We know which car performed better in practically every instance, but the point is, we wouldn't have known if we hadn't taken the test data, and in this case, maybe it just doesn't matter.
Data
PRICE
- Datsun 1200: $1866 base price, as test $2078 w/radial tires, AM/FM radio
- Corolla 1200: $1983 base price, no options
TIRES
- Datsun 1200: Bridgestone 155SR-12
- Corolla 1200: Dunlop 6.00S-12
FUEL ECONOMY
- Datsun 1200: 32 mpg (miles per gallon)
- Corolla 1200: 26 mpg
WEIGHT (curb)
- Datsun 1200: 1640 lbs
- Corolla 1200: 1690 lbs
PERFORMANCE
- Acceleration 0-30 mph
- Datsun 1200: 3.9 sec
- Corolla 1200: 4.8 sec
- Acceleration 0-60 mph
- Datsun 1200: 13.1 sec
- Corolla 1200: 15.4 sec
- Acceleration 1/4 mile
- Datsun 1200: 18.8 @ 70.6 mph
- Corolla 1200: 19.6 @ 67.6 mph
- Maximum G-force
- Datsun 1200: ~0.47 g @ 10 mph
- Corolla 1200: ~0.54 g @ 8 mph
- Top Speed
- Datsun 1200: est 100 mph @ 6000 rpm (hp limited)
- Corolla 1200: est 93 mph @ 6000 rpm (rpm limited)
HANDLING (200 ft Digitek skidpad)
- Maximum Lateral
- Datsun 1200: 0.71 g right, 0.74 g left
- Corolla 1200: 0.59 g right, 0.65 g left
- Understeer (front minus rear tire slip angle at maximum lateral)
- Datsun 1200: 2.7 deg right, 2.8 left
- Corolla 1200: 1.2 deg right, 1.5 left
- Reaction to Throttle
- Datsun 1200: full-no effect, off-less understeer
- Corolla 1200: full-no effect, off-less understeer
- Maximum Roll Angle
- Datsun 1200: 6.1 degrees
- Corolla 1200: 7.5 degrees
AERODYNAMICS at 100 mph
- Drag
- Datsun 1200: 270 lbs (includes tire drag)
- Corolla 1200: 270 lbs (includes tire drag)
- Lift F/R
- Datsun 1200: 125 lbs/0 lbs
- Corolla 1200: 245 lbs/105 lbs
BRAKING
- Distance from 60 mph to stop (using pedal 'feathering' technique to prevent wheel lockup)
- Datsun 1200: 140 ft
- Corolla 1200: 188 ft
- Average G-force during stop
- Datstun 1200: 0.86 g
- Corolla 1200: 0.64 g
- Number of stops to fade (successive maximum-g stops each minute until brakes cannot be locked)
- Datsun 1200: Not attainable
- Corolla 1200: Not attainable
- Stability
- Datsun 1200: Excellent
- Corolla 1200: Very Poor
- Maximum Pitch Angle
- Datsun 1200: 6.1 degrees
- Corolla 1200: 7.5 degrees
SPEEDOMETER ERROR
- Datsun 1200: ~16% slow @ 60 mph
- Corolla 1200: ~5% slow @ 60 mph