Ask almost anyone to name a rear engine sporting car from the late fifties-early sixties time period and you’ll probably hear Karmann-Ghia. Say Renault Caravelle and you’ll likely get a blank stare. That may be what’s going on with a pair of 1962 Caravelles for sale on Craigslist in Birmingham, Alabama for $2,000.
Renault has had a tough time selling cars in the US market. Where Volkswagen sold their Beetle in the tens of thousands, Renault struggled to move their similarly sized and powered Dauphine. It would seem simple: both cars were rear engine with modest power output; both cars got great gas mileage; the Dauphine was even a four door, but that alone couldn’t overcome the French car’s reputation for fragility. What was needed, decided Renault, was a sporting version of the Dauphine and thus in 1959 came the Caravelle.
Renault sold the Caravelle in convertible and coupe form and the seller of these two ’62 Caravelles has one of each. The convertible even has a removable hardtop- and a spare – which Caravelle enthusiasts would probably kill for. According to the ad, one good car might be able to be built from the two. He states that there is one engine and “multiple spare parts,“ many of which can be seen loose in the cars.
The bodies are likely pretty rusty and if they’ve been outside for any great period of time, the floors are probably gone. We don’t have a lot of exterior photos to browse but a close inspection reveals some perforation in some of the body panels. And from the side you can see the crease ahead of the rear wheel well that some critics say Ford borrowed for the first generation Mustang. I’m not sure I see it, but it’s out there.
There one photo of the one engine that comes in the package and we do not know its condition. It could be seized but perhaps it could be successfully rebuilt. Being from a 1962 car, it may be the “bigger” 958cc, 51 horsepower four cylinder that was introduced in the middle of the model year. If it is the smaller unit, it would be the 845cc 37 horsepower version. What do you think: Mais oui or Non merci?
Having owned/resurrected one of these, I can speak with at least a little experience…
First of all, I believe both cars are convertibles, and both have removable hard tops. The later versions,( I think around ’63), had a more squared-off hardtop to allow for more headroom for the rear passengers, (who would be impossibly cramped in either configuration frankly). From the photos, I’d say the engine is earlier, so it would probably be the 37 horse version, one horse more than a Beetle of that era if I recall. Slow indeed, by any measure.
The later car probably has a 4-speed, and the earlier car a 3-speed, which makes it even worse. Parts aren’t that hard to come by, but they are expensive. One guy out in El Cajon is the Rear-Engine guru, ask for Jacques.
Fixing the brakes is a very arcane pursuit…the differing O-rings used (not interchangeable), and the odd E-brake setup can be a real head scratcher. But I loved my Caravelle, and summer evening cruises with the top down at 45mph along the river road were awesome.
Restore? It would cost a boat-load to do it, and the car would be really cool and quirky, but not much fun unless you lived in Paris. I’m in Paris as I write this, and all week I keep saying to my wife how much fun it would be to have the Caravelle here. But if I had these cars, I’d part them out.
I think these cars should go to eastern Europe for bodywork, interror and paint. Then to france for mechanical resto. Sell one right there and send the other one (now with higher compression engine) back to the States. Never had or even driven in a RENAULT but it does have a decent fan base in Europe…
A Caravelle (Floride on the other side),,,it’s why I renewed my BF’s membership. When I was a kid, the old man came home with one. Rex is right, these are convertibles, although, I don’t remember the old mans having a hardtop. I do remember he had to get the body reinforced, because if you opened both doors, they wouldn’t close again. Renault( he called them Ray-nultz) was the only foreign car he would own, he never had a British car, WW2 thing, you know, had a Dauphine once too. Renaults were actually kind of common in the Midwest. It was like the “other” foreign car to buy besides VW, way before the Asian invasion. My 1st car was a ’59 4CV. While Renault’s are quirky, I still say, besides VW, they are the best European cars for the average person. Better than a Fiat anyday. Cool find. Parts, I’m sure, would be an adventure.
I had two ’67s, the only ones I thought worth buying for several reasons: First, around 1963 two major much-needed changes were made – the monocoque chassis, which was nothing but a Dauphine with the roof sawed off and the fenders restyled, was reinforced so an overly heavy rider wouldn’t permanently kink the car when the door was opened! You can always tell a chassis that’s weak by examining the door latches on the body – the ones on my Michigan car were beat to pieces from the doors being shut when the body sagged! The doorlatch would chew up the body latch every time, and you had to be careful to lift up on the door a bit to keep from damaging the body latch more. The Mich. car had been camouflaged before I bought it – the new paint on the sills below the doors turned out to be insta-foam covered with bondo and painted! The chassis was rusted badly. My California car was in much better shape.
The Caravelle/Floride was never a coupe – they were all convertibles with a soft top hidden under the hardtop – I never got either soft top up but sold them both because they were so cramped for me at 6′ 3″.
Also in ’63, the cars went to 4 wheel disc brakes with the park brake integrated with the rear calipers thru a cable & lever system. But the calipers were a very strange design, with retractor pins/springs inside the pistons which meant you had to be very careful when you rebuilt them to make sure a split in a center friction ring was at 12:00 so air could get out during bleeding. Was a silly design that the engineers of early disc brakes thought they needed, but it was thrown out on all brands after that – a total waste of time/money.
The ’67s were also the only year that had nice round conventional gauges instead of dashes that looked like they belonged on a kitchen stove – what I called the Amana radar-range school of design – often used on Detroit Iron back then.
One thing that really surprised me was that the 1108 cc engine in the later cars had to be revved very high and the clutch slipped a lot to get one of these cars moving on thick grass as their flywheels were so light they had no inertia to get the car moving when you dropped the clutch, and would stall out. They really needed heavier flywheels as they were basically gutless wonders. I loved the styling, but not the overall car.
One good thing about these cars: Their radiators are behind the engine, not in front as on the earlier Caravelles – changing a belt or waterpump was a real PITA on the earlier cars as everything was backwards to what it should have been, but they finally got smart and reversed the whole package. And very last item: I never did figure out why these cars used square seal rings, when my Citroens used all Orings – either will seal as well as the other if sized right. The admonition to only use the factory rings just doesn’t wash if you use the right size Orings which can be found anywhere, but must be of ethylene propylene, not nitrile or neoprene as the DOT 3 will eat them up.
My first car was a basket case ’65 with enough spare parts to fill the bed on the 3/4 ton Ford truck the seller delivered them in. Two transmissions, an extra well used short block, a couple of complete heads and boxes full of enough parts (some brand new oem) to rebuild both engines. I just liked the looks of the car and the thought of a project was exciting. I payed 500 bucks for the whole mess. I’d already torn two motorcycles down to parade rest and rebuilt them to better than new so how hard could this be?
The engine and trans were quite simple and once I got it done and installed four new spark plugs she fired right up! Then the old fuel pump went south a block down the road. Thankfully there were two new oem pumps in one of the boxes. I drove that thing all over hell and creation and it was more fun than a barrel of monkeys.
Soon the old water pump went bad then the brakes were almost metal to metal and one sunny day I swapped out old parts with every brand new part I had. It was a really nice reliable car now and with the hardtop installed it was leak free in bad weather. Clamping down the top stiffened the car up and made it handle even better.
But the rust wow. It was a west coast car and living right on the ocean didn’t help things at all. I decided to sell it a couple years later because I wanted a brand new motorcycle and the potential buyer jacked up the rear to inspect under the car and it damn near broke in half. I wound up selling it to someone else who was crazy for a convertible of any kind and he said he could fix the rust no problem (uh huh). He gave me $500 and couldn’t wait to get behind the wheel. He blew the engine up a month or so later by over revving it (I warned him not to because those engines were famous for flying apart when abused) and junked it for $20.
Flagged for removal…
I suspect somebody who’s interested in these cars flagged it so they could get there first. If I were stateside right now, I’d go and get them.
I can’t believe how many of these turn up,& can’t
believe that the would’ve sold many when they were new.
There was a collection of cars in Eureka,Ca,left by
the owner who passed away.There were two of these in the
collection.
These would be great cars restored! Probably could get one out of the two! I am sure that the disappointment would come when you see that one little part might hold up the restore tho! That will happen I am sure! :-)
1 out of 2 is a trial. Each typically wears in the same place so…no go (ask me how I know). 8^ (
I did it w/5 to make 1 (’66 bronco) in ’83.
Like the style, not sure on the durability/reliability.
Reminds me more of the VW Karmen Ghia (but I do C the stang r. fender)