I can’t remember the last time I’ve seen one of these single-eyed LTDs, which were only made in 1979 and 1980 (as the LTD S). And checking the brochures implies this one is a ’79, as the ’80’s fender blade lights are solid amber, not white and amber like these. A first year base LTD wagon; despite my lack of fondness for these in general, I’m very happy to see this survivor still on the road.
My lack of fondness? I’ve gone over this so many times, but the original Panther came off looking like a cheap Chinese knock-off of a ’77 Chevy B-Body. As in, back then, not now, as the Chinese have gotten dramatically better at both imitation and styling. One of the worst transgressions was using the same doors as the sedan, and then continuing that plane to the rear instead of tapering it back in. The result is a hugely empty wheel well.
Here’s a closer look at that issue. And those dreadful door frames! Not only do they not seem to fit into the roof, but they’re so heavy and clunky with that second layer of trim on the body. The longer I look at these ill-fitting and poorly designed doors, the less I can believe that these came from Detroit and not Poland. Yuck.
Here’s the original. Pretty embarrassing, given the two-year lag Ford had in coming up with a proper and cohesive downsized design.
There’s plenty more stylistic fodder with which to denigrate the early box Panther; but I already covered that in this post here, our Design Shoot-Out of the ’77 Chevy and ’79 LTD. No need to speculate on the overwhelming winner.
Enough of all that styling stuff; this wagon has long transcended those petty issues. A little tape has helped it do so.
Yes, this survivor has led a long and hard life. And it’s acquired a green door interior panel along the way. That’s not exactly in keeping with the typical old Eugene beater of not having a door card at all.
And what’s on its rear window?
Can anyone identify these, and their purpose?To hold the window in place because of some malfunction?
I wonder what’s under the hood. The standard engine was the “5.0L”302 V8, with the Variable Venturi carb. Are there still fully-functional VV carbed engines on the road? Is this one of them? Or has it more likely been swapped out along the way? For a base wagon, the likelihood of it having the optional 5.8L 351 are not great. But at least the transmission was still the smooth-shifting three-speed Selectshift automatic. No herky-jerky AOD yet.
Whatever it is, it’s still chugging away. And my hat’s off to that achievement.
Ahhhhh, yes. Early Panther. Thank you. I see the deep rear wheel openings as an excuse for some 10-inch wide mags in the back. Kind of like the way old Darts and Dusters had such a narrow rear track. This would make a fun sleeper. Clean it up a bit, healthy 351, fat happy tires, enjoy.
Woah, I’ve literally never seen that single headlight setup before on a Panther.
Watch Charlies Angels
No, they each have two headlights, I’m sure of it. 🙂
Paul, you’ve done it again – made the mundane the subject of an irresistible read. That Poland jib hit the nail.
1979-81 base models. Oddly, they all had those extra lights in the grille that were duplicate parking lights, not turn signals or foglights.
Worst of the Panthers, with the single headlamps and extra spartan interior. The green driver’s door panel just adds extra ambiance inside, along with the different color fades on the plastic parts (though Ford doesn’t seem to be as bad as GM in this regard from the late 1970s) and the “rugged,” unappealing vinyl that still tore to shreds.
“and the “rugged,” unappealing vinyl that still tore to shreds.”
After the mid 60s all of the Detroit manufacturers moved to cheaper vinyls that were not all that durable. No experience with AMCs, but I have lots of experience with 70s American vinyl seats with multiple split seams. You only need to add more years and butts to get them to this shape.
I thought Ford used a particularly bad texture on their vinyl too. Since most of the cars in my family in the 1970s had vinyl seats, I have some recollection of the better ones and really the bad ones. On the “good” end of the “vinyl connoisseur” spectrum, my mother’s ’79 Olds Ninety-Eight LS had tan vinyl seats, and they were soft and smooth enough to give a decently upscale vibe (don’t know how well they lasted for the long haul, we only had that car 4 years).
In contrast my Granddaddy Will’s ’79 LTD (single headlamp) sedan had horrid Smurf blue vinyl seats (similar to the picture car) that featured awful semi-course surface texturing. I suppose it was meant to be like mock “leather” grain, but the Ford’s vinyl upholstery just seemed industrial, cheap and uncomfortable, like something you’d find in a taxi cab.
Yes, so much to not like here. It took me a long time to overcome my initial negative reaction after my first few moments behind the wheel of a new one in 1979. Whatever else big Fords had been up through 1978, they gave a feeling of heavy solidity (at least until the years and miles started to rack up). The new 79 felt cheap and flimsy.
I am with you on the clunky greenhouse, but honestly the Chevy isn’t a lot better. The pre-1977 GM sedans with the hidden B pillar was so much more graceful. The 77 continued the 71-76 concept which had way too much going on. At least you could get a 4 door hardtop on the earlier sedans to clean up that mess. Not here.
I would bet that the rear window regulator has failed and that it is now a manual window with three fasteners to hold it closed. A pretty well thought-out hack-fix, if you ask me. Also, I would think that the 351 would have been a reasonably popular option in 1979, especially in a wagon. And good grief, when is the last time any of us saw a Panther with a classic vinyl seat? At least what’s left of it.
Looking at the Chevy/Ford comparison picture, I see an interesting styling flip-flop.
For decades, GM trucks have had square wheel openings for better or worse, while Ford has kept them round.
For these malaise midsizers, the script is flipped.
It looks like a “I’m keeping this car forever, since they don’t make ’em anymore” type of owner. 😉
Also, the green “door card” is because the whole door was picked from another salvaged LTD. See the different paint?
Yep, looks like the driver’s door came from a dark green car. One oddity about the replacement door–looks like it’s missing the exterior door handle. Pretty inconvenient for the driver to say the least.
Moss green. Must be a uniquely Eugene color.
Now was my mind playing tricks on me but didn’t I see the lead in a picture being the back end and then a reload and now the front. I swear I am not smoking any of that Eugene moss.
I switched them on you 🙂
I decided the fairly rare single headlight front end deserved top billing.
The LTD is, of course, the Wagon Queen Family Truckster.
Having problems with comments. I get “too fast” errors and the “follow up comments” checkbox doesn’t work.
The lack of a functioning driver’s door is accelerating the wear on the bench seat. Buddy has to drag his ass in and out through the passenger door.
Box panthers basically look like enlarged Granadas and in that sense I actually find this two headlamp nose with the 70s Ford signature bladed turn signals more fitting to the overall aesthetic. The four headlight design is just bland, it looks more like an Olds Delta than a Ford. I completely agree with every criticism though, I’d level almost every one at the Granada as well, Ford’s styling was beyond mediocre in this period.
The wagons have as much style as a barn.
Astute observation on the Panther looking like a big Granada (particularly the dual headlight versions). I used to hate these dual headlight Panthers but they’ve kind of grown on me. The really bad ones are the two doors. Man, if you thought the sedan or wagon couldn’t look any worse, check out one of those old Panther 2-doors. It makes the early, downsized Caprice 2-door with its bent-wire ‘fastback’ rear window look like a sports car.
But any Panther still mainly reminds me of cop-cars. Which is fitting in how stylistically stunted they seem to be. Unlike past cop-cars that don’t really look that bad (1969 Polara or ‘Bluesmobile’ 1974 Monaco), Panthers just ‘look’ like something cops would ride around in, i.e., a cardboard box with wheels.
Yes, the two doors are a rare case of being the least aesthetically attractive of the bodystyles, the proportions are all wrong and the quarter windows really bug me. I’d make a similar case for the Granada coupes proportionally speaking, but at least the roofline was pretty well done on those (if not derivative off the formal GM Colonnades).
Blues Brothers 2000 had a box Panther as the new bluesmobile, and it severely lacked the screen charisma the 74 Dodge haf, and not just because it was a terrible movie I think. The not bad looking Police cars you mentioned, which I’d include 77+ Impalas/Caprices, seemed like well tailored civil servants, box Panthers looked like they were designed by civil servants.
Yes, I too had long thought the box LTD Panther looked the most “Ford” with the single eyes. With their deep sculpturing, bladed fender lights, body color paint surrounding the headlamp bezels, F-O-R-D lettering atop the grille, and parking lights in the grille, it just shouted “Malaise ’70s Ford” in a way the more common quad-light LTDs didn’t (they shouted “GM wanna-be”).
As it turns out, the first Panther I ever was in was a single-eyed model, with tan/olive striped cloth inside. I found it less roomy than the GM B body I was used to at the time; it just felt clunky. Flat seats, huge B pillars, clumsy chrome detailing.
There was a time when Detroit made strippers like this.
They appealed to the guy who needed a new car as cheap as possible.
Frugal as a Studebaker Scotsman.
Ford Custom
Chevrolet Delray
Plymouth Fury I
These cars didn’t always have all the chrome, badges, headlights, backup lights, automatic transmissions or V8 engines.
This was what it was in 1981.
As a GM guy, there’s no question where my affections lie with the B-body vs. Panther debate.
But even with the Panther’s odd way of reconciling panels with each other, I still vastly prefer it to, say, any full-size Ford from 1965. Or most of the brand’s 70’s offerings.
It’s been a LONG time since the last time I saw one of these single-headlight offerings ’round Pittsburgh. Glad this one’s still around.
Since the Panther platform lasted from model years ’79 thru ’12, can’t bash it.
I prefer the Mercury Marquis from ’79 thru ’83. Very sharp edges and distinctive grill.
I’ve mentioned this at CC before, but those dual headlight LTDs from ’79 and ’80 will always remind me of the Terry Fox Marathon of Hope for cancer research in the Summer and Fall of 1980. Most of the scenes from Ontario where Terry’s Marathon sadly ended, featured Ontario Provincial Police escort LTD’s as shown in the many TV and newspaper pics from the time.
I have spent about a gazillion km in GM B Bodies and about a quarter gazillion in box Panthers.
The B Body is a better car in almost every way. The only advantage of the Panther was the seat was higher off the floor than in the B Body.
Although a EYESORE, the “Family Truckster”; really isn’t much worse than the original it was “built” from……..truly FUGHHLEEEEEE! 🙁 DFO
Great find! Sadly, this survivor doesn’t look like it will survive too much longer. I’ve seen nicer ones in junkyards.
I’ve owned a few B wagons and one Panther wagon. I also prefer the B’s, but to launch off Canucknucklehead’s comment, I can think of a couple more advantages for the Ford.
1. Great visibility. The mildly bladed fenders make it very easy to see where the corners of the hood are.
2. As mentioned,the relatively high seating position, which also aided visibility. Ford sold this feature in ads and brochures early on.
3. The extra tall windshield, also enhanced visibility and allowed the higher seating position. The windshield contributes to the awkward and ungraceful styling IMO.
4. The doors, while maybe not actually any better quality than GM’s, close with a very satisfying thunk. GM B’s were just OK. Lincoln’s closed even nicer. Real bank vault feeling. Also, the tailgate closes easily, unlike GM’s which require a very hard slam in my experience. BTW, I’ve tried lots of doors at auto shows and elsewhere and have never found a modern car that has that same substantial feeling on closing, even on expensive cars.
5. Short turning radius, owning to the 114″ wheelbase (116″ on GM). The short wheelbase had tradeoffs, of course, but combining the great visibility with the turning radius made the car VERY easy to drive in parking lots and other tight places, for being such a large car.
6. Durability. Anecdotal, but my 84 Country Squire had over 180k miles and was in really good condition: chassis, body and cloth interior. It had been well maintained by its original mechanic owner, so maybe it wasn’t typical. But, the example above hasn’t received much TLC for a long time and it’s still kicking.
Having owned both I’d agree with most of your points. The seating was higher, but I also found the Ford seats generally better (at least the later model ones). However, the GM rear facing third seat was far better IMO than the dual facing seats that Ford used. While the Ford windshield was noticeably larger, I didn’t notice a significant visibility advantage with the Ford, both cars were excellent.
On the doors, Ford in the 70’s and 80’s had much nicer closing door latches. The Ford latches will close with a gentle tug and a nice sound, while GM doors need to be closed with some authority. That said, the GM hinges do a far, better job of staying open. The detents on the GM doors were very strong, even the big coupe doors could stay open on an incline. The Ford doors didn’t stay open very well on any sort of incline.
On the durability, I don’t think the Ford had an advantage there, especially in the early years. We also had an ’84 wagon, but a Pontiac Parisienne, and it was running strong and in great shape when we sold it with nearly 200K miles on it (even the TH700-R4 was untouched). I will say that in 1986 when Ford introduced the 302 with SEFI, it probably had the edge on the engines. It was better performing and required less maintenance than GM’s archaic E-Qjet V8s. The 305 Chevy got fuel injection in 1989 (Ford had it in 1983), but the wagons were saddled with the slug of a E-Qjet 307 from partway through 1986 to 1990.
Definitely, Ford had the edge on engines when it fuel injected the 302. I believe 83 was the first year, with the more advanced electronic one starting in 86. My 84 worked well enough. Not a powerhouse by any means, but it always started well and didnt need much attention from me.
I’d ride with pride. These are my kinda cars.
Incredible find! I honestly can’t recall ever seeing one of these single-headlight LTDs in the metal, in any form. Being so used to the quad-headlight setup, these one-per-side LTDs look almost foreign. It is truly amazing how a different front clip could so dramatically change the look of the LTD.
I do see later models of this generation from time to time, including the wagons, which have become somewhat “collectible beaters”. In fact, I just saw this Country Squire last week.
Good golly that car is rough, coated in patina, and the 30 year old license plates are roached! I had no idea the early Panthers had that single headlight setup and I agree the B-body looks better than this. So, wonder how in good shape the mehanicals are and how many more years we will keep seeing this car on the road?
The oldest of those Doug Fir plates are usually quite roached, here is another example for you.
GM did several things to make the styling on its wagons work. Like the Ford, the GM wagons had considerably wider rear body compared to the sedan. This was done to ensure that the load floor could carry the 4 x 8 sheets. However, GM used a unique station wagon rear door. The rear door slightly tapered outwards to join the wider rear body. It’s very subtle, but on Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser wagons with the stainless trim on the top of the doors, you can easily spot the taper in the door by looking at the trim (it’s wider at the back of the door). The other thing that GM did was use a wider rear axle. Since the station wagon rear frame section was wider, it moved the control arm mounts wider too. This required a separate rear axle, and GM added over 2″ of tread width compared to the sedan to ensure the wheel wells were filled.
Of note, this generation of GM fullsize wagon is when Chevrolet began to dominate the fullsize wagon market for the first time. And it beat Ford every year in station wagon sales from 1977 until the Ford wagon ended in 1991.
That rear window looks like it’s plastic. Original broke and couldn’t find replacement glass?
Holley used to offer a line of new carburetors, the Economaster. They were fully emission legal bolt on replacements for many cars that claimed to improve fuel economy. They did offer one to replace the Motorcraft VV unit. It was the way to go when they were available. Of course you could always stik on an older traditional 2100 and be good to go too.
This car brings back nightmares. I had a company full size ’77 Ford wagon. Fantastic car. I begged to keep it but our fleet manager said no. Then I got a ’79 wagon like this. Dark green/ camel vinyl interior (not an available option). Being one of the last off the ’79 line, our fleet manager called and said Ford was out of the green seats.
It was a garage queen. You name it, it was probably bad at some point.
Our headquarters office was located in a bad part of town. I hated the car so much I would park it in the unguarded parking lot with the ignition key in it and door unlocked. The occasional car thief never took it. They took other ones while mine sat there. I guess they would only stoop so low.
Fortunately I only had to keep it for two (very long) years. It was such a POS that I found it in a junk yard in 1984. A Positive ID thru its unusual color combo and certain body dings and things.
The Motorcraft 2150 carb is a direct bolt on replacement for the VV carb
The Panther outlasted the GM B by nearly 15 years. Last official model year was 2011, not ’12. There was a last run of PI’s in Oct. ’11.
My understanding of LTD trim levels and headlight arrangements in the 1979-81 era:
1978
LTD ‘S’ – replacement for the former Custom 500, fleet sales only, available only in four-door form. (Note that there was also an LTD II ‘S’, similar in concept, although I don’t think it was fleet-only, and I believe it was available as a two-door.)
LTD – successor to the pre-1975 Galaxie 500
LTD Landau – top trim level, successor to the pre-1975 LTD
The LTD Landau had concealed headlights, the others conventional exposed headlights. This practice had been followed for the past few years before this.
1979
As far as I know, there was no LTD ‘S’ in 1979. Neither the Standard Catalog nor the Encyclopedia show one. Fleet buyers were presumably directed to the LTD II ‘S’. Either Ford wanted the Panther to go out with its best foot forward (no stripper-level, fleet-grade models), or they were trying to amortize costs on the LTD II before it sunset.
LTD – same as 1978
LTD Landau – same as 1978
The LTD Landau had quad headlights, the base LTD dual headlights. This division was similar to the one that had been used in prior years.
1980
LTD ‘S’ – with the demise of the LTD II, the LTD ‘S’ returned. For this one year only, it was sold to the general public (not fleet-only), and was available in a full range of body styles (including two-doors).
LTD – same as 1979
LTD Crown Victoria – new name for this trim level, replacing LTD Landau
This year, the LTD and LTD Landau both had quad headlights (note that this is different from 1979 with regard to the base LTD). The LTD ‘S’ had dual headlights.
1981
LTD ‘S’ – went back to being fleet-only and available only in four-door form
LTD – same as 1980
LTD Crown Victoria – same as 1980
I’m not sure if 1981 LTD ‘S’ models used the dual headlight front end or not. In the article, Paul says the dual headlight front end was used only in 1979 and 1980, but in an earlier comment, ‘nlpnt’ suggests that it was used until 1981; I don’t know which is right. The ‘S’ definitely dropped the dual headlights and went with the quad headlights at some point in the early ’80s.
Note: in Canada, it’s my understanding that the lowest trim level was still called Custom 500 for 1978 (and was sold to the general public – not fleet-only – and was still available as a two-door), then became the “LTD Custom 500” for 1979, then was replaced by the LTD ‘S’ for 1980.
Paul, I’m totally onside with your view on these cars: a very cheap imitation of the ’77 GM B-body, with a bunch of awkwardness and thoughtlessness in the Fords’ design and execution. I prefer the single large headlamp per side, not least because it reduces this copycat effect somewhat.
Two things: I’m either under- or overthinking, but I don’t understand what you’re saying about the sedan rear doors on the wagon and their effect on the wheelwell. What continued-plane do you refer to? The GM B-body sedans and wagons also used the same rear doors; what did GM do right that Ford got wrong in this area?
Also:
I don’t have the brochure, but I’m fairly sure there were no all-amber park/turn/sidemarker lenses on Panther cars until the Town Car got them as a tweak sometime in the mid-late ’80s. Could you be seeing either colourless lenses with their (amber) bulbs lit up, or the amber sidemarkers on the four-headlamp model?
GM wagons did not use the same doors as sedans. The rear doors in fact taper outwards slightly to meet the wider quarter panels. In fact, Buick and Oldsmobile wagons shared practically no sheetmetal with the sedans, since all wagons used the basic Chevrolet bodyshell and sheetmetal. So the Buick and Olds wagons even used unique front fenders compared to the sedans. See my post above about the wagon’s differences.
Oh, TIL! Thanks for the details. I’m still not understanding what plane and door/wheelwell interaction Paul is talking about on the Fords, though.
I owned a 1979 Wagon until 1994. The water pump failed and, a head gasket blew from overheating. Rusted out but solid. In 1992, A kid in a Grand Am blew a Red light right in front of me and, I hit in his Driver rear quarter at 40 mph. Spun his car around 180, MIGHT have cracked my marker light plastic cover. Knocked a fair amount of rust off though. Solid!
One additional thought: I had belt separation on a tire in 1992 and, when I pulled the jack out; the original unused spare was still there full of 1979 air! A Uniroyal, at that.
As a kid in 1980, me and my father looked at a whole bunch of import cars and decided that we were either going to get an Accord or a Celica. Both were being sold with deaIer markup from the gas crisis. I went to summer camp and when they picked me up, they had a green on green 1979 wagon that driver door might have come off of .. it had a 302, with the vv carb and a 4 speed automatic. Dad picked it up for five grand and it was too good of a deal to pass up. My nine-year-old self was horrified at this beast of a car. But without me there, it was too good of a deal to pass up. The carburetor was quirky and replaced. The overdrive on the transmission failed right at Christmas time.. the overdrive stopped working and presents were returned to help pay for it. I used to duck down when we’d drive by someone we knew. It hung around til 1987, when it was replaced by an Isuzu Trooper. I learned to drive in it, and Lea it stalled whenever the steering wheel was turned all the way to the left. The back window would regularly go off the track and that’s probably why theres that extra hardware on this survivor. The cargo area always had a musty smell. Fit wand finish were poor, with several inside door handles breaking. The rugged seats were hot in the summer and would burn legs so we would apply towels to the seats first. I think my parents generation grew up thinking you needed a big block wagon to pick up 2 kids and 6 bags of groceries. The embarrassment factor greatly increased after Vacation and the car became the family truckster replacing its former name, the zucchini. It was solid to a man who wanted to use it as a work vehicle to punish an employee for wrecking his previous vehicle.