Obscure Alternative

Better known for their two-wheelers as much as a range of small economy cars, the 1985 Suzuki R/S1 was pretty as it was bold. So of course they never made it. Or did they?

1985 Suzuki R/S1. Image credit: (c) allcarindex

For a time during the mid-1980s, it really did appear as though the automotive future was being dreamt up in Japan. With the mainstream European carmakers for the most part mired in creative and technical retrenchment, not to mention chronic overcapacity (some things never change), the Japanese manufacturers had it seemed, invested wisely and emerged as a power to be reckoned with.

Certainly, this period proved to be perhaps the great flowering of Japanese creativity and ambition when carmakers demonstrated to their European (and American) rivals that there really was nowhere to hide. Amid the numerous notable production designs which can be traced back to this period, an even greater number of concepts graced the show stands, further illustrating the Japanese manufacturer’s reach and exposing the singular lack of vision of their ‘old World’ counterparts.

The 1985 Suzuki R/S1 is a prime example. Not simply a styling exercise, the R/S1 was a fully running prototype for a compact, mid-engined sports two-seater. In typical Suzuki fashion, it was as dainty dimensionally as it was in its choice of powerplant.

Fitted with a similar G13B fuel-injected twin cam 16 valve engine as fitted the relatively unloved production Swift GT, the 1299cc unit produced 100 BHP at 6600 RPM. However the R/S1 engine was said to have been built with fibre-reinforced metal pistons, which Suzuki claimed, were both lightweight, strong, and highly resistant to wear.

Such a small capacity powerplant would be to little purpose in a heavy bodyshell, so the R/S1’s outer skin was made of fibre-reinforced plastic. Suzuki made claims for a drag coefficient “fully competitive with today’s advanced aerodynamic designs”. However, they did neglect to state the actual figure.

With the engine mounted transversely behind the cockpit, Suzuki cited a weight distribution of 45:55, front to rear, and with a version of the Swift’s independent strut suspension all round, the carmaker boasted an “unbeatable combination of a supple, well-damped ride together with excellent levels of grip in all conditions and over all road surfaces.”

Stylistically, the R/S1 was low-nosed, angular and purposeful, yet very well proportioned – quite a difficult thing to pull off with such a compact package. While it could be said to have contained similar styling elements to that of Nissan’s MID 4 of the same year, the Suzuki was far better resolved and more distinctive than Nissan’s rather undistinguished looking supercar concept.

Image credit: (c) carstyling.ru

Arguably closer in concept to Fiat’s sublime, if by then woefully dated (and visually besmirched) X1/9, the little Suzuki also showed up Toyota’s sweet-handling if bland looking MR2 for the lumpen behemoth it was.

Probably too compact and ‘pure’ for production feasibility, Suzuki evolved the concept with the 1987 R/S3 which maintained the earlier car’s silhouette, but with an eye to Japanese safety regulations, appearing softer-formed, not to mention virtually production-ready.

Perhaps the business case for such an expensive programme could not be justified in Hamamatsu, or equally, it fell prey to the same factors which befell the entire Japanese industry as it entered the following decade. Either way, the RS series was abandoned, Suzuki developing the smaller and more conventional kei-Cappuccino model instead.

In a postscript however, elements of the RS programme formed the basis for Mazda’s distinctive gullwing AZ-1 two-seater, said to have been developed by father of the MX-5, Toshiko Hirai and sold by Hiroshima’s Autozam brand and by Suzuki themselves as the Cara.

Small mercies one assumes, but we’d really have preferred the original. But it’s worth remembering, that in 1985 when the MG-F was but a twinkle in Gerry McGovern’s eye and the European industry was in thrall to the performance hatchback, Japan was creating automotive delicacies such as this. That Suzuki subsequently rowed back on such a delight is perhaps as understandable as it is lamentable.

Author: Eóin Doyle

Founding Editor. Content Provider.

6 thoughts on “Obscure Alternative”

    1. MGF? Thanks a lot, definitely not.
      Fragile K-engine, silly suspension, Japanese look against bomb proof Lampredi four (easily tunable by fitting Ritmo Abarth ancillaries) and drop dead gorgeous Pininfarina style…
      The Montecarlo actually is 10 centimetres shorter than an MGF and it’s also shorter than a X1/9.

    2. As I am not an expert on either car, I will take your word for it. Honest John says “Build quality problems, head gasket failure is common, fared very badly in customer satisfaction surveys” and also “In summary, the MGF was greater than the sum of its parts, and remains a unique driving experience to this day”. I´d bet either car promises a lot of fun and a lot of headaches.

  1. Would have been interesting seeing how the Suzuki RS Series would have evolved had it reached production, perhaps it would have quickly received a 16v DOHC G16 unit or another larger engine prior to being replaced by a more realistic version of the 1997 Suzuki C2 to replace both the RS Series as well as the Cappuccino?

    It seems Japan had a number of concepts / prototypes that could have made the sportscar segment a more competitive place during the 90s had the likes of the Daihatsu X-021 and Subaru Rioma been produced.

    And that is not even mentioning the potential of the mid-engined 1975 Nissan AD-1, which preceded the Toyota MR2 by almost a decade. One can only image how much of performer it would have been with 115 hp E15 even 120+ hp E16 turbocharged engines and that is without even mentioning the 1.6+ Nissan CA engines.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.