canadiancatgreen shot a fine twofer; an International of indeterminate year and a ’68 Cutlass post coupe. The International has the long 8′ 8.5′ bed, which I initially thought to be a 9′ bed because of the fairly compact cab and snout.
Cohort Pic(k) of the Day: 1960s International Pickup & 1968 Olds Cutlass Coupe
– Posted on December 17, 2022
Has a period feel. The off-white beige wheels on the International, providing a further retro look.
A very subtle difference, but I find a few degrees of additional windshield rake gives the pickup a more commercial, mainstream, less utilitarian, appearance. Since a kid, I found the windshield on these, a bit too upright. Dating them some, during that era.
My issue with these was the odd combination of the high cowl and the significantly lower beltline on the sides. I think that a higher beltline (and the smaller side windows that would result) would have helped the looks of these. And I never noticed the windshield angle until now.
Definitely, has some unresolved exterior styling issues. The high cowl and low fender tops, do give it a masculine big truck look, similar to the ’94 Dodge Ram.
Generally speaking, I found these Internationals had a ‘dowdy’, non-mainstream rustic ‘rural’ look, that didn’t appeal to me as a kid. That same design non-refinement, is a big part of their appeal today.
This was during the time when “lower” was the goal in truck styling, and International pushed the limits pretty hard. The issue is that the frame was not stepped down enough to make the floor as low as it ideally would be, so they made it look lower by dropping the belt line. The end result is that one sits in these rather close to the floor, and the steering column is almost horizontal, as can be seen by the wheel. It’s the same challenge Studebaker had to deal with.
The hood seems a bit high because they couldn’t lower the engine. They tried too hard to make the cab look low, and the result is less than ideal. Well, it is low, but at the expense of good proportions as well as interior space efficiency.
The problem International ran into was they were using basically the same cab from their ’57 truck, which had relatively straight frame rails. In ’61 IH introduced a somewhat dropped frame on their light duty models, at the same time eliminating the cab step wells and shortening the doors. That in effect dropped the beltline but the high hoodline (correct about the engine placement) and tall greenhouse resulted in this awkward look. The 61’s had the steering box mounted practically at the end of the frame ahead of the front suspension which resulted in the very shallow steering column angle you pointed out. I wonder how much the 1960 GM light trucks influenced these Internationals.
I don’t want to insult anyone. Something for the future. How much? Sincerely,
Teresa A Lewis
That is his color
What’s that little box-like thing in the stepside area?
The mounting bracket for the extra wheel/tire.
(Please delete other photo)
My wife learned to drive on an International just like this in the late sixties (white and blue though). Her father was an LP dealer, and she also got an IL class 3 license to drive their bulk truck. This more than fifty years ago and long before most 5’4″ 115 pound teens had any desire to drive a pickup. And yes, I am still extremely proud of her (if you ever saw her drive any of our many manual transmission vehicles, including our RX7, you’d know why).
In 1968 the eleven year old me thought those Cutlass Coupes were stunning, the round wheel wells, lack of belt line at the C pillar and just overall proportions seemed perfect. And I was primarily an import fan. Two years later the second generation Camaro would inspire the same feelings. The International? I wouldn’t have even noticed it. A frumpy workman’s or grandpa truck. Now? I still like the Olds but I’d take the IH in a heartbeat.
Your words could have been written by me, but you beat me to it.
1. Was in HS when dad ordered a new Cutlass S.
When we picked it up, he was upset to find that the one he ordered turned out to be a 2-dr. sedan, rather than a 2-dr. hardtop (which he wanted)
Interestingly, *both sedan & hardtop had the same roofline*
2. Sev. yrs. later, I was working in ghe Natl. Park Service
My favorite pickups were the Internatls. like this one.
Shifting thru 3-on-the-tree, and elbow out the *low-beltline* window, with my Smokey hat tilted back on a sunny day. What could be better?
(steering wheel lightly grasped by left hand during shift)
I drove two International Travelalls, a 1965 and a 1968. Love them. I was also selling IH’s in the late 1960’s. Tough iron.
An interesting thing about this pickup is that it appears to have dual side mount spares. A single side mount is usually found on the driver’s side, not the passenger side. Since it is IH I guess it could have been ordered with a single side mount on the passenger side, but definitely not common.
I like the current half ton, crew cab pick ups, but they are often found with a 5 1/2 ft bed, the 6 1/2 isn’t much better. For me, a working truck has to have an 8 ft. bed. The crew cabs are used as family CARS most of the time, and there are bed extenders. So you have to live with a compromised truck, but can get by with one vehicle. Short standard cab pick ups did not make good family vehicles. I’ve got my long bed pick up and find it convenient for how I use it. I like being able to carry 8 ft. lumber, completely within the bed. I don’t mind having other vehicles around to carry passengers. It all depends on what your needs are. There are a lot of pampered crew cabs available on the used car market.
I help out on some volunteer construction projects with a few older retired contractors who still use their 20 year old work trucks. All are Toyota’s, Tacoma or Tundra, with 6 or 6.5’ beds … and lumber racks. The bed is for tools or hardware, but the lumber is often 12-16’ long so an 8’ bed isn’t sufficient anyway; the rack lets them get by with a smaller truck that’s more economical and easier to park in town. That said, an 8’ bed is useful but it isn’t essential for work.
Very few people cart building supplies in their ute/pikup here, that stuff gets delivered to site on a real truck usually with a hiab to unload, utes are just a toolbox on wheels.
In 1968 I would have been 20, working for a GM HD truck dealer in Vancouver and a serious car guy. I too was drooling over the new style Cutlass and an acquaintance had ordered a Cutlass in the colour pictured with the 350 4 speed W31 package and either 4.33 or 4.66 gears. His folks lived 150 miles away and he was having to travel quite a bit on the highway, which made for a lot of high-revving trips. It was a rare model then, probably not many survived.
Comparing this vintage International to the contemporary Dodge light trucks I have to say the International was the result of an attempt to modernize an older design while the ’61 Dodge in all it’s Exner-esq glory was an original design.
Agree on the ’68 Cutlass, one of the best looking A bodies of the 60’s.
From the scant info available online, IH’s “standard” narrow pickup bed (IH never had a fun trade name like Flareside or Stepside) on the ’60s pickups was nominally 8.5′ rather than 8′. Their wide bed, named “Bonus-Load,” could have an 8′ or an 8.5′ length depending on year.
Here’s a ’63 brochure:
I should say that’s a ’63 brochure on the left, and a ’67 on the right.
Thanks for that clarification. When I first looked at that picture, I thought maybe it was a 9′ bed, as it looked to long to be an 8 footer. But then it also looked to short to be a 9′ bed! I should have considered that there was something in between.