This week I celebrate my Thirty-Second birthday; and that’s quite enough about that, thanks. Also brought into the world in Spring 1981 was a vehicle that went on to appear literally globally, in endless different permutations.
You’ll all have seen them knocking about, I’m sure, but possibly with Sterling or Freightliner emblems glued to the nose, but I grew up with it as a Ford.
It’s the 1981 Cargo.


“From the outset the functional styling of Cargo was to be an important feature of the whole project”
The genius behind the styling was none other than Patrick Le Quement, who would later go on to participate in the Ford Sierra project (for which I’m eternally grateful) and latterly the risky Vel Satis and Avantime from Renault. He was not a man with any shortage of imagination.
“The Cargo bears a strong relationship to the corporate Ford style established by the passenger car range”
This was true, and an aspect of Cargo I could recognise even as an infant. I could see the similarity between the horizontal slatted grille on the Cargo and the one on my fathers Cortina. I could see likeness in the stacked headlamp / direction indicator arrangement, to that employed in the Fiesta, albeit reversed. Even if you took the blue oval off, it looked like a Ford.

“Aerodynamics obviously played a vital part in the design concept to reduce drag and fuel consumption to a minimum.”
There had been streamliners before, there had been American trucks with outrageous coamings and bulges in the interest of airflow management, but the Cargo came to launch with considerable song and dance about actual, proper aerodynamics. The idea was obviously to future-proof the design concept as this was to be Fords lorry proposition for at least the next decade. I’m going to credit Ford with a European market first here, because if you look at the brochures of the contemporary opposition there was scant mention of low drag coeffiecients or the advantages thereof.
“An optional roof mounted air deflector can reduce the drag coefficient by as much as 25%”
They didn’t outline the exact circumstances, but if we assume they’re talking about that big gap between the cab roof and the front of the box body or trailer close-coupled behind, that big figure sounds reasonable. There was also claim that drag could be reduced by a further 10% with under-bumper air-dams.

“The unique kerb observation windows enable the driver to have excellent vision low down on both sides of the vehicle”
This feature, though, I can relate to. I travelled in a Cargo a few times when I was really little; the three actual seats were taken so I had to sit on the floor on the passenger side. This, though, was absolutely fine by me as I had my own window to peak out of.  Three-year olds being illegally carried in mere Mercedes or Volvo lorries would have suffered a miserable, claustrophobic existence where I had my own commanding view down onto the balding heads of MGB drivers.
Life in that cabin was actually quite comfortable by the standards of 1980s lorries.

“One luxury level of trim is provided”
Luxury is subjective, but the black cloth covered seats with their red striping were comfortable and could optionally be heated or given suspension. The actual cloth design was called Laser, which would be familiar to anybody who spend far too much time reading early 1980s Ford passenger car range brochures.
Comfy seats aside,  the driving environment was nicely cocooned from mechanical cacophony. The cab was isolated from the chassis via rubber bushings and the actual cab panels were tuned individually for thickness and size, in a bid to cut noise, vibration and harshness. It did seem that Ford were putting very considerable thought into this machine, even extending to the external rear-view mirrors being placed on unequally length arms to ensure that rear visibility was equal from both sides.

The dashboard itself featured many touches familiar to anybody who had piloted a Cortina or a Granada. The binnacle itself sloped at 45degrees and wrapped around the driver, presenting dials with similar markings to the car range. The red striping to the dashboard binnacle was a nice touch and had a whiff of the Capri and XR3 about it, and the heater controls were instantly recognisable. It was about as car-like as it could reasonably get away with being without compromising on functionality.
Overall, in terms of ease-of-use, it seemed that Ford had achieved in the medium-heavy truck sector what they had managed with the van market with the Transit in 1965. The Transit had broken new ground as a van with car-like performance, comfort and driveability, and here was the Cargo with its car-like interior and superior, up-to-date aerodynamics. And practicality, too. Not only was a tilt-cab standard fit, but the front panel under the windscreen gave:
“….access to the clutch an windscreen wash reservoir. Also accessible is the complete heater, wiper motor and brake valve, all of which can be removed in just a few minutes.”

But from eighties infant perspective the thing I really loved about the Cargo was the big blue oval on the front. This meant that my Dad could get one instead of a Granada. Well, he might, anyway. For me, the upper Ford range went Sierra, Granada, Transit, Cargo. The Cargo was the one I really wanted. There was the Berliet-cabbed Transcontinental, too, for those who really wanted to show off just how much Ford they could drive, but that was way out of my Dads league.
And, obviously, Ford had got their sums right, as witness the long life that the Cargo enjoyed with Ford, Iveco, Otosan, Sterling and Freightliner badging. And still it continues, though Le Quements styling has somewhat evolved over the years.
And I know I’m highly unlikely to own a Cargo; but At Least I Own The Brochure.
(Disclaimer: All images are of original manufacturers publicity material, photographed by me, on my bed. Yes, Ladies and Gentlemen, that’s where the magic happens. All copyright remains property of Ford, who don’t sell lorries in England any more. Yes, the Magic)