Something by Chevy or GMC would be best because there are probably more of them. The thing should run, or pretend to run, at least well enough for it to be licensed. An older model -- something with a conventional power-train -- would be a better candidate for what I have in mind than any of the later-model vans. The 'power- pod' front-wheel drive assembly does not lend itself to what I'm thinking of.
What I have in mind is pulling a fiberglas copy of the nose of a splittie, slicing the front skin off the Chevy and giving the thing a face-lift, right thru to the dash and a few interior details.
Would it be an authentic copy of a splittie? I doubt it. Odds are, the dimensions would be off. You'd need to do a bit of sculpting in the mold to get a smooth VW-esque interface between the splittie-style nose-skin and the Detroit-stamped body shape.
But could it be done? A definite Yes! And would it look the same? Well... maybe. At a distance.
Why bother? Because we're running out of splitties, for one thing, although we're going to run out of loafs a lot quicker than anyone realizes. The late-model loafs are going to go because the engine is an orphan. The '68's thru '71's will hang in there because the basic elements of their power-train is still being manufactured -- you can keep them running. Early splitties are already running into parts-availability problems with brake drums and reduction box gearing. As the pool of available parts is used up their prices will skyrocket. Bus owners may be handy with a wrench but damn few of us can turn out a hypoid pinion gear.
So why bother? I suppose the only valid reason is too keep alive the spirit if not the soul.
-----------------
What would something like that cost? Probably a lot more than you think. Basically, it calls for re-engineering the nose of the vehicle, using a composite skin to replace the steel.
Preserving the early-bus look & feel isn't too difficult -- we can steal the basic shape simply by pulling a mold from the nose of an existing bus. Then comes the Hat Trick -- marrying the skin to the Detroit foundation -- and pulling a second mold from that. But the second mold is only a transitional step. The second mold would be the tool used to create the final shape from which a third -- and final -- mold would be pulled. If the final mold were fabricated from composites rather than plaster, it would be good for up to a thousand copies, plaster is good for maybe twenty-five before the cost of the patches outweighs the cost of making a new mold.
Once you have a properly engineered skin, doing a nose-job is fairly simple. Using proven composite-to-steel bonding techniques, the nose of the donor vehicle would be cut-away according to a pasted-on or projected-on pattern, the interior cleaned up and the new skin bonded to the foundation using a combination of pop-rivets and epoxy. The rivets are a standard procedure in this kind of thing, the new nose-skin having been designed with structural channels deep enough to conceal the head of the rivets. Structurally fastened to the foundation, various types of filler are used to extend the composite structure to existing panel-joins. We know it's going to crack so -- as with sidewalks -- we include the cracks in the design. Properly prepped and treated, such joins are no more prone to rusting than other methods of fabrication.
That's the easy part. Here comes the tricky stuff.
Inside the vehicle we have to deal with the engine, especially with the cooling system. Feeding air to a radiator without chopping up the Transporter nose-skin is a do-able thing... but engine access is another matter, as are the structural questions. For adequate crash protection the floor-boards must form a part of the structural bond to the nose-skin. I can see where some locally fabricated pieces will have to be welded to the foundation to facilitate the modification.
To preserve the 'feel' of a split-window Transporter, I think the dash would have to be a virtual copy. Finding a suitable circular speedo-head is a no-sweat kind of problem but I would like to provide the engine with good instrumentation, the mounting of which will probably be one of the tricky bits. Then come things like a VW-type steering column and wheel, the turn-signal switch, the ergonomics of seat-pedal-steering and so forth -- It's really a much more difficult problem than coming up with a marriageable nose-skin.
--------------
What about the rest of the vehicle?
With regards to the body, it would probably be best to stick as close to stock as possible. Oh, we could come up with some dummy panel-joins to make it look like we have a rear hatch -- a few things like that aren't very difficult. And VW-clone bumpers wouldn't be much of a chore, assuming they were wood- or foam-cored fiberglas structures. (Don't wrinkle your nose -- such bumpers work better than steel when it comes to energy absorption.) Maybe some moon-type hub-caps to carry-through the Transporter 'feel'. But no major surgery. Ummm... well, maybe a pop-top -- but that would have to come later.
As for the power-train, everything we need is already here, parked right over there in that Chevy S-10 pickup. Nice little V6, a variety of trannys, and differentials in a variety of gear ratios - - all stock, all available at reasonable prices. Or run-what-ya'- brung -- leave the original power-train intact. One of those.
-------------------
When can you get one?
Get serious. There is at least a man-year of dedicated effort involved in such a thing, to say nothing of the material costs. Chances are, it's never going to happen. But print this out. Stuff it in the 'Crazy Idea' file. One day...
One day yours will be the last Type II in town -- kids will point at you when you go past. Somewhere along in there the idea won't seem so crazy. Of course, by then all the conventional vans will be gone too. -Bob Hoover -20 February 1997