This Plymouth Belvedere is one of the final chapters in the Engel-Exner transition years at Chrysler, a chapter already covered at CC in more than one instance. Station wagons, with their lower volumes and tooling often expected to have longer lifespans, endured conflicting design briefs more often than not.
On this Belvedere, the formal lines favored by Chrysler’s design chief Elwood Engel, have to make do with some of Virgil Exner’s googly, space age, leftovers. The front is full Engel, straight, forceful, and one could argue, a step or two behind GM. Which was just as fine. Following GM’s styling lead suited Chrysler’s spirit of the times, in search of recouping losses after the troubling early 60’s. A conservative approach was welcomed after Exner’s adventuresome years.
The back end shows Exner leftovers, particularly in the back roof and rear windows. Space age, here we come! That convex pod in the cargo area will surely take us into Flash Gordon’s future! Just make sure to bring your tanning lotion.
That said, I’ll admit that Exner is my favorite American designer of the period. Not because I find his work satisfying, a spot that belongs to Mitchell at GM. Instead, as someone with an interest in the arts, his work generally provokes me, for good and bad. A school of thinking in the arts asks of designers to create works that leave no spectator indifferent. Exner definitely achieved this, every time.
Here is the Belvedere in its original 1962 intent; the future as envisioned by Exner’s team by the early 60’s. And yes, management interference, a questionable decision to downsize the 1962 Plymouth and Dodge, had some to do with the result. Though the early 60’s were not Exner’s best years. It’s unavoidable; every designer peaks and then declines. After a golden period in the mid 50’s, pushing the world into full finned-mobile-land, as competitors quickly caught on the outré-train, Exner felt he had to ‘reinvent-the-design-wheel’ every single model year. Every attempt and effort was aimed to wow the public, and thus, was an artistic approach to product design.
Exner’s efforts did cause an impression at Chrysler’s management, as sales went down. After being shown the door, Exner would eventually find new successful themes, anticipating the neo-classical era by a few years. That said, I doubt Chrysler’s finances could have sustained Exner’s yearly quest for artistic reinvention, until said hit arrived.
Here’s the Engelized Plymouth wagon in ’66, with all Exner genes expunged. Engel was probably what Chrysler needed after Mr. X. With a flair for safe, conservative, functional designs that projected sober elegance. Most of Engel’s designs at Chrysler were not trendsetters, but weren’t dull either.
From anecdotal evidence, Engel was quite a different animal than Exner. A social type who was into practical jokes and raunchy stories (probably a good drinking buddy too, as he was a favorite of Ford’s design honcho George Walker during the 50’s). Additional evidence suggests Engel possessed a business acumen that Exner lacked, and was more interested in designs that ‘sold’ rather than leaving indelible impressions on buyers.
The Belvedere’s face, while aesthetically forceful and attractive, seems to suffer from Chrysler’s penny-pinching. The one-piece screwed-on grille shows that engineering and accounting had other priorities.
This particular example looks to be an original import, as the plate numbers suggest. Salvadorian numbering is linear, and by the mid 60’s, plates were indeed in the 30-40K mark. I doubt more than a few were sold here. As for its semi-abandoned state, lovers of Belvederes fear not. It stood in this corner a few weeks before vanishing, probably sold to a collector. A neighbor in this street apparently deals in antique vehicles, either as a hobby or as a business. Some weeks prior, a Fiat 127 was in the same spot, only to disappear in similar form.
Some of the trim is missing on this Belvedere; the tacked-on elements probably brought more cohesiveness to the vehicle, the frosting that Chrysler’s team used to turn it into an Engel-mobile. That said, the Belvedere looks more or less coherent, in spite of split parenting.
Exner and Engel were nowhere close in their design briefs, styles, or interests. Still, I appreciate how their forced collaboration canceled out the worst of each: Exner’s daring eccentricities forcing Engel to work in shapes he wouldn’t dare otherwise. Then, Engel’s touch eliminating Exner’s proclivity for fussy detailing. Let’s take one last look at this surviving example of that unlikely “collaboration.”
More on Exner and Chrysler:
1963 Chrysler New Yorker, Virgil Exner Comes Full Circle – by JPC
1962 Plymouth and Dodge: The Real Reason They Were Downsized PN
1961 Plymouth Fury, What Planet Are You From? – by Laurence Jones
Engle’s de-Exnerication of the C body Dodge sedans (880 in later years) from 1957 to 1964 is even more remarkable.
I have only recently come to appreciate these cars. For a long time I considered them to be mutts, neither old or new, Exner or Engel, a mashup of two totally different eras at Chrysler. But as you note, there is a fascinating mixture here on this wagon that retains a lot more Exner than on most other models of that period.
It is interesting to debate which was the last of these Exner/Engel stews. The 66 Imperial and Valiant/Dart would seem to be it, although it is arguable that the 71 Dodge pickup could have been the last of all.
When I was younger and these were more plentiful, I avoided wagons as daily drivers out of a fear of the rarity of wagon-only parts for cars that were produced in low numbers. I wish now that I had not been so risk-averse – it turns out that I never needed to replace a bumper or a taillight on any of my sedans anyway.
I think the side with more of the trim missing shows how unnecessary that thick and fussy waist trim is. The body has a good, sculptural shape without it, the long, sloping knife-edge crease sucessfully linking front and rear without looking droopy. The thin chrome strip beneath the doors works to good effect though.
The curved glass between the C and D pillars reminds me of the clamshell GM wagons of the early 70’s.
The front end looks to be having a hard time to match with the overall design. The front was seeking at more contemporary competitor, but the rest of the body, was yet on crazy on Engel-Exner crazy of the early 60’s.
I guess they wanted to give a front end remeniscing of the full-size C-body Fury who beginned that model year.
Then I wonder what if they had introduced the 1965 front end more early like in 1963 for example?
That bronze ’62 looks very tasty, especially with the full wheel covers. These seem very color sensitive, I prefer them in rich or dark colours. The wagon is growing on me. Rich, your discussion on how the Exner and Engel elements balanced each other out is making me warm to it.
Engel’s boxy 1968 Charger, Coronet and Satellite/Road Runner bodies are big $$ in collector and resto-mod car market.
I wonder if simply shaving the wings off of the Exner version was ever considered?
The ’62 bodies were changed for ’63 at considerable expense, eliminating the prominent rear “side wing” and removing the raised section of the rear window bottom edge. From the A pillar back, the ’63 body was then kept essentially unchanged through ’65. Wagon bodies didn’t justify any further changes.
For that matter, that essentially applied to the sedans too, from ’63 – ’65.
The front end was changed twice, in ’63 and then in ’64 the “torpedo” cowl was eliminated for a more conventional one.
Shaving what was left of that “side wing” might have created structural issues with that large rear quarter panel, as that crease undoubtedly stiffened it very considerably.
Ahhh, yes I see it now, just compared some 63/62 images. I imagine without creasing of any kind that quarter panel, especially on the 2 doors would have popped like an oil can. Seems as though Exner was always in search of the suddenly it’s (insert next decade) vibe. Dad’s first car was a ’60 Valiant, which quickly grew out of place amongst all the “normal” looking cars over its 10 year run, especially when a ’65 Impala showed up across the street. I imagine that’s why I’m not particularly fond of Exner’s work.
My Dad’s ’63 wagon was a particular favorite of his. I’m divided on the front end vs. the ’64. The ’63, with its outboard parking lights, is definitely the more memorable of the two, and it didn’t require the side stainless to take a fussy loop on the point of the front fender. The ’64 looked as though the big shots told Engel to graft on a ’62 Chevy front. That said, I have always found the Exner “winged fuselage” a snappy, sculptural look. That bubble pack rear end is one of my favorite iterations, and it was refreshed nicely to fit with the facelift in ’63.
We very nearly ended up with one of these instead of our ’65 Coronet wagon. My father and I looked at and he drove a Belvedere wagon first, but for some reason, he didn’t bite.
I rather like the Belvedere front end better than the duller Coronet’s.
And yes, at the time I was all-too aware that these were slightly disguised ’62s. It was a bit disappointing to me; I would have preferred a nice Olds Vista Cruiser. 🙂
And why did he buy Mopars anyway?
I don’t genuinely know. But Mopars were relatively popular with German/Austrian immigrants in Iowa City at the time. They had a reputation for better engineering, and that appealed to them. A number of the traded in their Larks and Ramblers for Mopars around this time (mid-late 60s).
He had a decided GM antipathy, although he did buy an Opel Kadett in 1965. And for some reason he didn’t like the 65 Fairlane wagon he took for a test drive.
I was 10 years old in 1965. I grew up surrounded by Chrysler products. My dad bought one of the first 1960 Valiants in Los Angeles, and then moved up to Chrysler 300s, and I seemed to like all Chrysler’s styling. It was unique enough to be all Chrysler and yet it changed every year from the late 50s to mid 60s.I loved the 62 300, with its canted headlights and the Astrodome instrument cluster..But when the 63 and 64s came out they were totally Chrysler and so did the 65 which was completely different. We had one of each in the family, including a 66 Imperial, and I loved them all. Dad then bought a 69 300 and I loved the fuelsage styling but I was sorry to see the pushbutton drive disappear. After that we switched to Lincoln Town cars and have been a Ford family to this day. I feel lucky to have lived the the U.S auto industry in it’s prime.
What bugs me in the nose shot is the body-color sheetmetal visible through the grill. It just screams “cheap” to me. Would it have cost that much to spray the radiator header black?
From the factory that definitely came black, this is likely a repaint, and for whatever reason a lot opt to leave that area body colored. Count me in the it looks cheap camp
Body-colour paint on the front of the radiator core support panel looks just fine…on black cars. On all others it just looks half-buttocksed. Matte black paint was applied from the factory (though the rest of the underhood sheetmetal was body-coloured, including the aft surface of the rad support).
Neat! In looking at the ’62 and ’65 wagons side-by-each here, I prefer the beltline upkick near the trailing edge of the rear door (’65) rather than near the leading edge (’62). The prominent front-to-back bodyside crease creates a cleaner, less busy, more cohesive design than the Valiant-style separate front and rear creases on the ’62; those work great on the ’62 Plymouth sedans; hardtops, and convertibles, and they look out of place on the wagon. I much prefer the ’62 front end (and wheel covers), but my preference at the back end is neither/nor; I think the ’64 Plymouth wagon takes first prize on these wagons.
I have plenty of memories from riding in the back of a 65 Belvedere wagon. My dad bought it new in July 65 and I came along the following January. 9 years and 450000 miles later dad got rid of my dear friend. Hoping to find a decent, affordable one one of these days.
The 1965 Belvedere/Coronet was never marketed in Canada that year. Not until 1966 did Canada receive them.
A very Baron-esque contemplation of Exner and Engel as here Belvedere-melded, ( meaning excellent).
I have always thought a bunch of the Exner excesses just silly, and that might even be true, but they do indeed provoke, proving the excellence of the Baronical observation.
And – perhaps I should whisper it lest the faithful revolt and throw things at me – I find much of the Engle Angular to be a bit Done With Rulers, and provoking more of a yawn than anything else.
I remember a white one , as a kid. Looked like the blue on in the lead pic. Was in better, not great, shape.
It was one of those ‘parked cars” that never seemed to move. As we lived in a rather small town, don’t recall seeing it in motion or anyplace else.
There was a green “Studebaker” that parked in that same block for a good while as well.
Remember seeing it in motion a time or two. Time frame would a been 1969-71ish.
Sure bringing me back, my dad would let me drive a 67 Belvedere wagon green ,white top , 3 on the tree slant 6 and I could get it to slide in the turns . While Dad drove a white Studebaker to work those were the todays