Tariffs aren’t new; in fact, the Subaru BRAT owes its existence to a tariff, namely the “chicken tax.” The 25% chicken tax was passed in 1964 by the Johnson administration as retaliation against Europe’s imposition of a tax on American chicken. It applied across the board against all imported light-duty trucks. The tax has never been removed, though various companies have found work-arounds over time. The Subaru BRAT is one of the craftiest evasions in history: the company installed jump seats in the bed, against the cab, to qualify the truck as a passenger car. And thank goodness, because the BRAT is a funky, useful little machine. Here on eBay is a 1979 BRAT bid to $5000 with reserve not met. This BRAT is garaged in Pollock Pines, California; it runs well and might make it home!
Yes, the spare lives in the engine bay… The motor is a 1.6-liter flat-four rated at 67 hp. A four-speed manual was standard, but “BRAT” actually stands for Bi-drive Recreational All-terrain Transporter. This boils down to front wheel drive during normal driving, with selectable four-wheel drive. Built on Subaru’s station wagon platform with the rear made into a bed, the BRAT is quite capable off-road if not very powerful on the highway. This one comes with an extra engine, axles, wheels, and a host of other parts.
The driver’s seat is as bad as the passenger’s seat is good, though both could use repair. The door panels are damaged, and the dash has a few cracks. Japanese makers equipped even their value models with bucket seats in the ’70s, while American car makers were still dishing up bench seats at the cheap end of the price spectrum. Two BRAT trim levels were available: the DL and the GL. The latter is the base model, while the GL has quad headlights and a dual-range transfer case after 1980, along with a few cosmetic upgrades.
Here’s the money shot: those plastic jump seats are still present and intact. Fun! This BRAT’s paint is nice enough, especially considering the vehicle is nearly fifty years old. But alas, there’s damage to the passenger’s side door, presenting a conundrum: repair it, or leave it? A repair means a partial repaint, of course. Fortunately, BRATs aren’t selling based on matching numbers or original paint as yet – those obsessions are relegated to Porsches and Ferraris and the like. Nice early BRATs can command mid-teens and even more, but four-figure cars are still available. If you’re hankering for a mini-ute, today’s BRAT is a decent prospect.
Former not latter.
Id like one of these as a toad for the rv, but I don’t think I want to the left coast to get one.
The Japanese dished up bucket seats not because they were the hip cool kids. It was because their cars were not designed as six passenger vehicles. If you go back far enough that was the purpose of putting the manual shift on the column. Creating space for the third passenger was a great sales feature.
Great find. I was a bit surprised that the reserve wasn’t met yet, but then I saw the list of spares, wheels tires and engine. This is the vehicle that drew my attention to Subaru when it was first released. Regarding the thought of towing it behind an RV, does anyone have experience doing that with this model, or the model with the dual range?
Very nice. I’ve seen Subaru BRATs before, but this is the earliest model I’ve seen.
Good friend of mine put a deposit on a ‘78 BRAT, sight unseen, in July of ‘77. Got one of the first ones off the boat. He had to take whatever rig was next up, or he lost his $100 deposit. He was allowed to specify one color that he could reject, other than that he had to take whatever the dealer dished up. Paid $3800. Drove it 38,000 miles over 2 years, and sold it for…$3800 with a canopy thrown b in.
It was a blast to drive. Mostly, put your foot to the floor and wait for the little Japanese squirrels to catch up. One weak point was that the transfer case in early models had no low range. If you got mired in mud, or even sand, you were just stuck.
I had a ’79 wagon. It was a great car, but it was so slow it bordered on dangerous. 0 to 60 in five miles.
I had one back in the day. It was phenomenal in the snow, went anywhere.
With a little more ground clearance nothing would stop it.
Until recently, Ford performed a similar “chicken tax dance” with the Transit Connect van. Cargo versions were delivered with a rear seat to avoid the 25% tariff. Once the vehicles cleared customs, the rear seats were removed and destroyed, with Ford indicating it was cheaper to install new seats rather than shipping the temporary seats back to Turkey for reuse. I guess Subaru preferred to let buyers remove the seats.
The Chicken Tax only applied to Pick-ups.
CCFisher is right about those Transit and Ram vans. The tax still applies therefore the cargo van is shipped with a rear seat and converted back at port.
Seems like a good deal with extra parts and 2 sets of rims and tires. Decent tow behind vehicle if you have a RV.
Remember these and loved them sticking those seats in the bed to work around that tax lol. Sure miss this era. Can you see a car company doing that today and getting away with it?
In the early 70’s, I worked at Madison Motors, a small family repair shop north of Chicago. They were I believe one of the first dealerships that Subaru used to get a foothold. The GL’s and DL’s were all stick with 4cyl opposed engines. My job was to install the after-market a/c system. Being a 20yr old, my goal was quantity and not quality. Sigh. Wish I could go back and redo some of those hasty installs……
Ended at $5K.
Reserve Not Met.
1 bid.