Opel, the sick man of Europe, just can’t catch a break. Even Isuzu wants out of its current arrangements with the ailing German automaker.

Just-Auto and the Nikkei are reporting that Isuzu will halt engine building activities for Opel (including the Meriva, above), and will end a joint-venture with General Motors. It was unclear how Isuzu would get rid of its 40 percent stake in the Poland-based diesel engine operation. Isuzu denied that it would pull out of the venture, or cut its workforce in Europe.

Isuzu is joining the “let’s flee Japan and the rising yen” bandwagon, and their latest venture involves assembling export-bound trucks in Saudi Arabia.

Just-Auto outlines Isuzu’s strategy, which has nothing to do with the VehiCross

Isuzu can minimize the effects of the strong yen and better compete for what is expected to be a growing market for commercial trucks as Gulf nations step up infrastructure investment.

Small and large commercial trucks will eventually be added in, with production reaching a total capacity of 25,000 units. As much as Isuzu is made out to be the butt of jokes in North America, their Middle East distributor network looks fairly robust – or at least more robust than the Lebanese parliamentary democracy.

Well America may be the overall volume leader for pickup truck sales, the per-capita title belongs to Thailand, and they prefer a different flavor of truck as well.

Research for the Chrysler unibody truck story led to a Ward’s Auto report discussing the Thai pickup market. Buyers in the Asian country prefer double-cab midsize pickups, since they offer a good mix of both passenger and cargo space for families that must make do with one vehicle that must be versatile.

Chevrolet’s Colorado was developed in Thailand, and is built domestically, while Ford, Mazda, Isuzu, Nissan and Toyota all have their own truck nameplates. Patima Jeerapaet, president of the Thailand Automotive Institute, told Ward’s that double cab pickups alone account for 37 percent of Thai vehicle production.

While on the Infiniti JX launch event, I met a gentleman who now works with Nissan. He had a number of interesting stories about his tenure at GM, and what it was like to work on the EV1 program, as well as the technology that he swears was the forerunner to the Chevrolet Volt.

According to him, GM engineers in 1991 needed a way to keep the batteries in their GM Storm EV mules charged. A crude range extender was fashioned out of a Honda generator, which would kick in when the batteries dropped below a certain point.

The Storm mules were gutted and filled with batteries and a generator and driven around during development. He swears that, with the number of EV1 and Impact (the original GM EV) people left kicking around for the Volt’s development, the range extender idea must have lived on in someone’s mind for a very long time, until it came time to put it in operation.

I begged him to grant me an interview, or at least let me quote him, but he wouldn’t indulge me. I was left wondering about the early days of the program, until I stumbled upon this article in the January 1992 edition of Motor Trend. The big difference here is that GM has ditched the range extender and worked out a proper 220V charging system (apparently that was an obstacle in the early days).  Note that the EV1 charging paddle is absent here, and it seems to use a very-1990s flashing LED charge port, similar to the L.A. Gear running shoes that were found to have mercury in them.

Since there seems to be a fair amount of Storm love on TTAC these days, it’s worth recognizing the irony of a largely forgotten car paving the way for perhaps the biggest automotive lightning rod since the Edsel.

You can see the full-size scan in the gallery below

Here some background on the GM/Isuzu tie-up. Japanese wire services such as The Nikkei [sub] and Jiji report that GM approached  Isuzu and “informally proposed acquiring a stake” in the Japanese truck maker. The source is an unnamed executive of Isuzu.

According to The Nikkei [sub], GM and Isuzu will start negotiations in early May for a roughly 10 percent share. If the negotiations are successful, Isuzu President Susumu Hosoi and GM CEO Dan Akerson could meet this summer to sign the agreement.

Holding a 9.2 percent share, Japanese trading house Mitsubishi is the largest shareholder of Isuzu. If the talks are successful, that title will pass to GM.

Isuzu and GM go a long way back. In 1971, General Motors purchased a 34.2 percent share of Isuzu. Isuzu’s KB pickup truck was sold through GM dealerships in the United States beginning in 1972. More light trucks were added.  Isuzu also produced the luckless  Chevrolet LUV  from 1972  through 1982.

In 1974, Isuzu built the Opel Kadett under the Isuzu nameplate as the Bellett Gemini. In 1976 GM imported the Gemini into the United States as the Buick Opel. Few knew that the German car, sold through GM dealerships, was actually manufactured in Japan.

In 1999, GM had 49 percent of the company, effectively gaining control of the company. One of GM’s strategic planners, Donald T. Sullivan, was installed as executive vice-president of operations. No Japanese manufacturer had ever involved a non-Japanese speaking manager in such a high position before.

Shortly thereafter, the romance began to sour. In 2002, Isuzu started to buy back its shares from an increasingly cash-strapped GM, reducing GM’s 49 percent share to 12 percent.

Then, things get a little murky. The official history timelines are mum in regards to GM’s final disengagement. “Due to financial difficulties, the United States’ GM sold its 7.9 percent stake in Isuzu in 2006,” says the Yomiuri Shimbun. Shortly thereafter, Toyota bought a 5.9 percent share in Isuzu.

Isuzu will have to evaluate GM’s advances carefully, because a lot is at risk, and there is more than one knot that needs to be untied. “A reforging of ties between the two could trigger a response from Toyota,” says the Nikkei. Translation: Toyota will most likely dump the stock. Isuzu will also end capital tie-up talks with Volkswagen . According to Japanese media, Isuzu still hopes to supply pickup trucks to Volkswagen in Thailand, where they will be sold as VWs.

Judging from the high-level leaks to sympathetic Japanese business wires, some executives at Isuzu might not be too excited about the rekindling of the romance. As part of its default, GM has stiffed Isuzu with bills of $1.7 billion, some people say. As it turns out, the on-line sources confused  1.7 billion dollars with 1.65 billion Japanese yen ($20 million.)

Uh oh. Here we go again. GM apparently wants a 10 percent stake in Isuzu to build commercial vehicles.

The deal would focus on Asia and Central/South America, while also necessitating an end to the Isuzu/Toyota commercial vehicle alliance. Isuzu was also reportedly in talks with VW regarding a deal to sell Isuzu pickups in Thailand badged as Volkswagens, but that would end as well if an agreement with GM was reached.

Isuzu has resisted GM intervention in its management before (for a very lengthy, detailed timeline, click here and scroll down), but if GM did get its 10 percent, GM may have an option to get more in the future. A Thai pickup venture for shared R&D and production was also discussed – something we’ve seen in the past as well.

TTAC Commentator Tree Trunk writes:

Hello Sajeev,

I comment on TTAC as Tree Trunk from the frozen tundra in interior Alaska and am looking for advice on how to deal with an out of control repair of an old beater. I have a ’95 Isuzu Rodeo with 130K that until recently had been a pretty low maintenance, reliable ride.

Out of the blue the check engine light came on and the engine stalled.  A handy friend checked all obvious things to get it running again without success.  It would start up run for a few min before reving wildly and then die.  Luckily I thought, it broke down close to a reputable shop (NAPA certified) so we towed it there.

Seven weeks and two thousand dollars, not to mention the rental car cost I am back at square one. First they diagnosed bad PCM, a rebuild unit was in five weeks later, two weeks behind schedule.  I made it half a mile down the road before it stalled again.

This time around it was supposedly a slack timing belt hitting the crankshaft sensor causing the engine to stall. Week and another thousand dollars later, after first ordering the wrong parts and then not all the needed parts the engine started up, but wouldn’t you know it stalled again.

In hindsight, I should have scrapped it the moment it broke down.  But short of finding a time machine that is not an option.

Now I am waiting the next call from the shop and need advice from you and the best and brightest. It seems obvious that the one or both of the diagnostics were faulty and some third thing is causing the stalling.

What do I do, keep paying with a smile, demand a full repair free of charge or something in-between?

Sajeev answers:

First off, this is NOT the Isuzu’s problem. Sometimes I treat Piston Slap like a child psychologist, blaming the parents for the bad behavior of a little kiddo.

That said, I am sure you are a wonderful “parent” and I’d never think otherwise. I blame your shop: my first indication was their first suggestion, a bad ECU.

Folks, the computer is rarely the culprit in a poorly-performing electronic fuel injection (EFI) system. Yes they are wear items, other more actively engaged EFI gizmos are far more fragile as time goes by. Many times a problem like this comes from a bad TPS (throttle position sensor) or the electronic idle/choke system, normally called an idle control valve.  The only way to know for sure is to scan for engine codes, write them down, and look up the diagnostic tree associated with that problem via searchable database. Any decent mechanic should do this. Thanks to Google, anyone reading this website can do it, too. I am not sure if your rig is OBD-I or OBD-II, and the latter is universal and rather easy to diagnose.

You need to know the codes generated from the Isuzu’s self-diagnostic test. Do you know them? If none are present, the EFI sensors themselves need to be tested to see if their electronic guts are to spec. In this case, I suspect the Idle Control system is at fault…but that’s just a wild-ass guess.

So what should you do? Demand answers.  Demand engine codes.  If the shop stutters and sputters in their answer, demand a full refund for your lost time/wages/money.

From what little I see, it really, really sounds like they didn’t diagnose the problem. And threw your money at the problem instead. Not good.

Send your queries to sajeev@thetruthaboutcars.com . Spare no details and ask for a speedy resolution if you’re in a hurry.

Japanese carmakers are driven out of the country by a rising yen and an urge to diversify their production after the catastrophic March 11 tsunami. A favorite destination is Thailand. Due to free trade agreements with many nations, Thailand increasingly morphs from the Land of Smiles to a South East Asian production and export hub. Now, most car production in Thailand is stopped – again because of killer floods.

Toyota has three plants in Thailand. Toyota says the plants were not affected by the floods. Again, it is the supply chain that brings production to a halt. Plant closures, originally planned through October 15,  now have been extended through October 22. “A decision on production at the plants from October 24 onwards will be based on a close observation of the situation as it develops,” Toyota says in a statement.

Honda has two plants in Thailand. The car factory in Rojana Industrial Park is reported as flooded and inaccessible. Honda’s plant for motorcycles and generators and is not directly affected by the floods. However, both plants will remain closed until further notice. “It has not yet been determined as of the date of this Notice when production will be able to recommence at each of the above two production bases,” Honda wrote in a letter to shareholders. “The Company plans to determine about future operations upon monitoring the situation.”

The Nikkei [sub] reports that Isuzu will extend the shutdown of a factory on the outskirts of Bangkok to next Friday. Nissan planned to keep a plant outside the capital closed through next Wednesday.

On Sunday, The Nikkei [sub] reported that Japanese carmakers manufacturing in Thailand are likely to suspend production for a month or more. Again, it is parts makers that took the brunt o the catastrophe – no parts, no cars. Toyota has asked major parts makers in Japan to increase output of parts for cars being built in Thailand.

When the first rumors of a possible tie-up between Volkswagen and Isuzu were floating around, they were vigorously denied by Isuzu, and meekly (“currently not on the agenda”) denied by Volkswagen. Here they are again. The Nikkei [sub] writes without the usual qualifications that „Isuzu Motors Ltd. and Volkswagen AG have begun negotiating a tie-up involving the mutual supply of truck engines and related technologies, a move that could create a formidable force in emerging markets.”

According to the report, if that engine deal progresses well, “they will also consider acquiring stakes in each other.”

The Nikkei heard that “Isuzu would supply midsize diesel engines to Volkswagen, while the German automaker would provide advanced technologies to the Japanese partner. They would also begin joint procurement of engine components.”

When they say midsize, they are talking truck engines, a 7-liter-class diesel engine for commercial vehicles produced by Volkswagen group firms, such as MAN SE.

Toyota still holds a 5.9 percent stake in Isuzu.

The Trooper II deserves some serious respect and love. It was among the very first, perhaps the very first of the “compact” SUVs that took the US market by storm in the eighties. It was eminently practical, durable, rugged, and good looking. And it’s one of the cars on the list that I wish I had bought. Did it have any faults? Probably, but as far as I’m concerned, someone should still be making this Trooper.

Let’s do the history first. I don’t have the proof to back me up, but I seem to remember the Trooper being available in California before the 1983 Chevy S-10 Blazer. We gave the baby Blazer GM Deadly Sin status, so maybe my memory is skewed by the fact that I instantly elevated the Trooper well above the Blazer in my ranking. I readily admit that they were very different animals, and the Blazer’s claim to fame was that it offered the amenities (V6, automatic, etc) that made SUVs acceptable to the mainstream and sparked the whole boom. That may be precisely why I dislike it too.

The Trooper was a totally different animal than the Blazer. Like the little Chevy, it was based on compact pick-up underpinnings. But that’s where the differences start: the Isuzu P’up (Chevy LUV) was a notoriously tough little goat, reflecting fully Isuzu’s light-truck expertise and the best of (mostly) typical Japanese quality standards of the time.

The Trooper first saw the light of day somewhere in 1981, and wiki says that it was first sold in the US as a 1983 model. I was smitten right off for another reason: the fact that it looked so much like an early Range Rover. Let’s be honest and call it a blatant rip-off, right down to the single round headlights in the slotted black plastic grille as on these two early models. The huge greenhouse, the high seating position, the fantastic visibility, the dash; hell they even copied the fact that the RR started out as a two door and added the four door later. Tellingly, RR added its four door in 1981, the year the two door Trooper came out. Oops; too late; but a couple of years later, there it was!

Obviously, the RR and the Trooper shared little under their similar skin. The RR was a brilliant and sophisticated vehicle, way ahead of anything then conceived of at its birth in 1970. A long travel all-coil suspension, full time AWD and four-wheel disc brakes made similar SUVs like the Jeep Wagoneer look like dinosaurs, even in their relative youth. The fact that the RR had a detuned and relatively torquey 3.5 liter aluminum V8 (ex Buick) added to its exotic appeal at the time. I’m getting off track here; I’ll save it for a RR CC.

The point is that the Trooper may have been devoid of the Rover’s sophistication, but its tried and proven hardware was bulletproof. It’s appeal was limited to those with a certain austerity of expectations in terms of power and other comforts. The Trooper came with a 1.9 liter four that may have had something like 88 hp. Frankly, it was probably a good thing that an automatic wasn’t available until the latter years when its four grew to 2.6 liters and the Chevy 2.8 V6 was optional.

But the little four was a trooper, as long as one didn’t mind rowing the gears with the gusto of an oarsman. I had a bad case of SUV-itis in the very early eighties, and seriously contemplated a Scout Traveler with the turbo-diesel. Once the Trooper arrived, the Scout instantly fell off the radar. Well, the lack of an automatic was the rub; Stephanie refused to take up crew. We ended up buying a Cherokee when that came out; don’t ask about its reliability.

A former neighbor of mine drove one of these early two doors for almost twenty years, finally replacing it with a Toyota Four Runner (what else?). He was a hard-core kayaker, and it took him to the remotest corners of the west, without ever letting him down. He loved the roomy body, with enough space to sleep in the back in a pinch. Frankly, I don’t think there’s been another SUV that’s ever approached the Trooper’s interior space, except a Suburban and the like. It’s a giant box in there, that made the rest of the competition like the Cherokee feel like a sub-compact.

And the visibility from that front throne is like nothing else, except the Range Rover, of course. It’s not a coincidence that I drive a gen1 xB; it’s the non-offroad compact version of the Ttrooper. And I like rowing gears. I suspect if I had bought a Trooper, it would still be sitting in the back lot, ready to roll for those times when the urge to really get away from it all strikes. All these years later, and the Trooper is still an unfulfilled desire. I guess its hardly the only one on that list.

More new Curbside Classics here

In the good old “SUV” days, GM forged ties with many companies. But since the bubble burst and GM went to the bankruptcy court, those ties are being severed. Fiat, gone. NUMMI, gone. Suzuki, gone. Now, another partner  wants out. Bloomberg reports that Isuzu are looking to have talks with General Motors to review and   possibly pull out of a joint venture. The joint venture in question is the DMAX diesel engine plant in Ohio, which may operate at 30% capacity next year. “Our venture in North America serves large-size vehicles, and there is definitely a question mark on that market,” Susumu Hosoi, President of Isuzu said. “I want to ask GM what their thinking is.”

Isuzu aren’t the only ones who think this may be a good idea. “It would be best for Isuzu to end its partnership with GM,” said Koichi Ogama, chief portfolio manager at Daiwa SB Investments Ltd. in Tokyo. “The U.S. market will likely recover next year, but I don’t think demand for large vehicles like SUVs will recover.”. So while the market and Isuzu think termination of this joint venture would be good, GM have a different take.

“There are no plans to change the relationship with Isuzu in regard to the DMAX plant,” Tom Read, a GM spokesman in Warren, Michigan, said in an e-mail. Not only do Isuzu and GM have the DMAX plant in Ohio, they also have a diesel engine plant in Poland which is also under review by Isuzu. Are Isuzu right to keep their distance from GM? Well, if you ask Toyota, the answer is probably yes.