For the past month or so, I’ve frequently noticed this SuperClean classic workhorse, parked just a few hundred meters yards from my place. Always nearby the same location, where they’ve been working on a new construction home. For now, I just assume it belongs to a self employed craftsman.
The truck doesn’t have our full, legal status of a classic vehicle yet, as it has to be at least 40 years old for that. But it is registered as a commercial vehicle (something a self employed craftsman would like), which results in a substantially reduced road tax, among other things.
To keep things simple, a passenger car or any factory CUV/SUV can’t get a registration as a commercial vehicle. But an old pickup truck certainly can.
The Ford was imported into the Netherlands in October 2019, so it’s a fairly new arrival on our roads. And what a fine addition it is!
I don’t know much about these trucks, so I’ll have to go by the information according to its license plate registration. Luckily, there are plenty of US Ford pickup trucks adepts around here -among contributors and commenters- who I gladly want to invite to chime in.
There’s a 4,948 cc V8 under the hood, with a registered maximum power output of 142 kW. Well then, that must be the 190 hp, 302 Windsor engine with electronic fuel injection. On this engine, EFI was optional for model year 1985 and standard for 1986 (so I’ve learned).
Given its wheelbase of 352 cm 138.8”, this is the SuperCab with a 6.75′ box. I think it really looks great; the stance, wheel/tire-size and all dimensions are spot on! May it rumble down our roads for years to come.
Related articles (1980 – 1986 seventh generation Ford F-Series):
CC Capsule: 1982 Ford F150 – A Real Pickup
Trucks of a Lifetime: 1986 F150 4×4 – Unstoppable And Unkillable
I’m thinking that is a good possibility that it has been repainted, looks too much like pure white instead of Wimbledon White which is what they used at the time. Being a Lariat it would have also most likely been tu-tone when it left the factory.
Agreed on a repaint job. Either that or someone has taken really, really good care of it and treated a work truck as if it was made of gold. For a very long time.
Upon looking at it closer it appears that the grille is aftermarket and things don’t line up quite right. So my guess it that it has been wrecked in the front and that prompted the repaint. For what ever reason they chose true white rather than trying to match the original colors.
The dual fuel tanks make me suspect this truck is not LPG-equipped, but that was a factory option, and from what I understand LPG is popular in The Netherlands.
That’s correct, no LPG system (yet).
What a fabulous Ford! When equipped right these were quite nice, and seeing an extended cab of this vintage, even 30 years ago, was a rarity. I’m liking this one quite a bit.
My father had a regular cab ’84 which, apart from the cab length and some trim, was a very close approximation to this one. His was not ideally equipped, as it had a 300 straight six (sorry, I know many love this engine and why is one of life’s great mysteries – talk about a wheezing, fuel swilling engine – but it was smooth and reliable, so I give it that) although its four-speed with granny-low tried to make the most of it. I put many miles on that pickup, burning a gallon of fuel every ten to twelve miles.
These were supremely comfortable pickups to drive regardless of trim. I’ve driven quite a few and all were tough as nails.
Is there a name for the SuperCab’s dual, vertical side windows? A distinctive feature, I like them. They look like something a custom car/truck builder could have come up with.
Edit: divided window panel? (see Daniel below 🙂 )
Ford fans here may know if the dual windows had a special name. I wished then Ford offered a choice. It was because they looked aftermarket, I was indifferent towards them. 🙂 I believe they switched to full rear side windows in ’92.
TWINDOWS!
Ford called them Twindows!
So Brougham-ish!
So luxurious!
So fashionable!
So perfectly awful on a pick up truck.
LOL!
Are you serious!? Twindows? That is so 70s. At least they didn’t offer louvred versions with pinstripes. 🙂
Were they ever actually called Twindows? That’s almost too good to be true.
They seem to have been “officially” called twin windows when introduced for 1980, but I’ve always heard them referred to by people as Split Windows.
I’m curious about the bodywork around them, though… is that sheetmetal? Or is it some sort of removable insert that covers the window up? Doesn’t look like it’s a removable part. Regardless, it’s the F-150’s version of an opera window, I guess.
Daniel, they may have looked ’70s, but the actual ’70s SuperCabs had one large window, as per my avatar.
I’m with you, Eric–I can’t find any source, official or otherwise, that uses the “Twindows” name, just “Twin-Window”. I’m fairly certain that the split window for 1980-91 trucks was just an insert over a one-piece window. When the ’92 trucks introduced a new window design, it replaced that entire assembly.
@ Drzhivago138 I made my original comment below suggesting the two window design was reminiscent of 1970s car opera windows, such as the ’73 Charger SE.
Johannes inadvertently replied to Jason’s comment, and all the comments have followed here. Above the original comment with the pic below.
@ Eric, it is a single window with a fiberglass bezel on the outside to give the appearance of two separate windows. You can unbolt those windows and bolt in the later flush windows as used on the final trucks to use this cab and bed.
I think Ford may have used the Twindows term in the advertising of the downsized Thunderbird.
Thanks Scoutdude, it’s been quite a while since I’ve been up close to one in person, so I couldn’t quite remember the details.
I recall people calling the dual opera windows on the ’76 Elite “Twindows,” but the Ford Brochures called them “Twin Opera Windows.”
Much more buttoned-down, far less cool….
A good friend’s Dad had an ’84 with the 300 six, and a 4-speed transmission. It was a regular cab 8-foot box 2WD. He loved that truck, said it was his best ever. He had an ’84 F-150 with a 302 prior to it, and said the 300 was much stronger. He used to complain that a stiff head wind would slow down the 302 truck. However, I also think it wasn’t running quite right (he installed a parts store rebuilt carb to try and help it). As for fuel economy, it probably wasn’t far off what Jason reported. It did however haul a massive trailer from Manitoba to Ontario without a hiccup. He claimed it pulled well in the big hills by Lake Superior.
Excellent find Johannes. I thought the Supercabs were well styled at the time. Just a small personal preference, but I probably would have liked to have seen these offered with a conventional rear side window choice as well, for the extended section. The divided window panels reminded me of 1970s opera windows. Like on the ’73 Dodge Charger SE. It looked aftermarket. I would have preferred a full window treatment. As they later offered.
Neat, professional job. As always.
There’s another (and much younger) Ford commercial vehicle in the background, a Transit Custom. I’m sure you can turn that into a Tourneo Custom just fine…
Always enjoy your excellent reports and photos. Showing us so many state-of-the-art vehicles. I also like how The Netherlands uses so much brick and stonework for road surfaces. It is very attractive. We can’t use these materials to the same extent in Canada, as it is so vulnerable to the uneven ‘heaving’ caused by winter freezing. Thank you!
Yes, bricks for roads are highly common indeed, also often used for large lots. Over the past decades, many asphalt roads in built-up areas have been replaced by brick roads.
In our climate, bricks hold up much better than asphalt. No melting- or scrubbing issues, especially where heavy vehicles frequently pass by and corner.
Another advantage: if there’s an “underground” job to do, like a sewer repair, you just take out the bricks at the exact spot. Do the job, and after that you can place the same bricks back again.
The best and most expensive are baked, clay paving bricks. These will last till the end of days.
10–12 mpg for a 300 six? There was either something wrong with it or it was driven very hard. I never got less than 14 loaded around town and it got 18 loaded San Francisco to Las Vegas via Barstow, A/C blasting. F-250, 3:55 + Mazda five speed. Now, it was injected, but from reading the forums the lower-power carb engines got better gas mileage than the injected engines.
Yes, indeed, and I drove it very gently.
However, it did not have overdrive, which could be part of the equation, and it had a one-barrel carburetor. It may have achieved 15 mpg at one point, but that was an isolated and celebrated event.
For what it’s worth, the truck had less than 50,000 miles on it, also. It’s not like it was some ragged out beater.
The gas tank had a slow leak. 🙂
Seriously the FI 300 was a huge improvement over the last of the carb units, which were in typical Ford fashion at the time saddled with the most restrictive of smog controls. The FI 300 had much better power and efficiency.
Now the early pre-smog 300 was a whole different story. It was rated at 170 gross hp, and was as efficient as any big six, as long as it was geared properly. And of course a torque monster.
It’s quite easy to make a smogged 300 run like it was originally designed to run, as long as one doesn’t have to have smog inspections.
They even retarded the camshaft on the smogged version. That’s an easy fix right there.
That struck me as rather poor economy as well.
My current daily driver is a ‘96 F-150 “short wide” or RCSB. It’s about as petite as full-size pickups go so perhaps on the opposite end of the spectrum from a F-250. With the 300 six and Mazda 5-speed with 2.73 gears, around town I average 16 mpg and cruising country back roads I have seen as high as 22 mpg. On the highway it gets 20 mpg at 70 mph, but drops off at higher speeds.
The 2.73 gears certainty help the economy but are really too high for any serious use and will probably be swapped out for something in the 3.23 range. Apart from that I’m very happy with it, it’s my first pickup and the bare-bones stripper XL suits my needs well.
That sounds a lot like the F-100 “economy” models Ford fielded early in this generation, which usually paired the 300 with a 3.08 or taller rear and a 4-speed with OD to reportedly achieve 22 MPG highway.
Now I wish I even once bothered to calculate the MPG on the highway department’s ’84 F-350 flatbed with that same 300 (4-speed with 4.88 rear end meant it was screaming at 65) that I drove back in the summer of 2012. I don’t know what the fuel economy actually was–I just filled it up whenever it got low, usually in the morning but sometimes at lunch–but I know it must have been lousy.
In the case of my truck, it was just how the most basic no-option F-150 RCSB came. Probably for the same reason as before: so they could say “Up to 22 mpg!” in advertisements. Fortunately the 300 six has the bottom end torque to pull off that kind of gearing. It’ll cruise at 60 mph in 5th (which gives around 1300 rpms if I recall, there’s no tach) but you have to downshift to maintain speed on any real hills. Once you get up to 75 or 80 (around 1600 rpms) you can take hills without downshifting. The issue for me is that 1st gear is just too high.
Anyway, the big engine/high gears combo is an old trick for getting good economy without sacrificing too much power….
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/almost-forgotten-the-20-mpg-400-cubic-inch-1967-olds-cutlass-turnpike-cruiser/
Very nice truck.
What’s going on with the top of the grille area? (by where the hood release lever would be)
It looks pulled forward or crooked or something.
I like the “twindows” or whatever they’re called.
And the wheels look fantastic on it. Are those Shelbys/Dukes Of Hazzard rims?
Looks to me like an aftermarket grille and factory headlight surround that aren’t lined up right/installed correctly.
The factory chrome grille would have the flange where the upper screws hold it on painted black so it disappeared in the darkness under the hood lip. Instead the black screws jump out against the plastichrome.
The front bumper also appears to be aftermarket. At this trim level it should have the wide rubber strip as seen on the rear bumper. Plus it has that sort of satin look of the cheap aftermarket bumpers.
The wheels are likely from when the truck was new as they are definitely aping the ones used on the General.
I don’t think many of these trucks looked like that when they were new, at least in the US. I say this because when shopping for my new Ranger in 1986, it was difficult to find a mid-trim model that wasn’t two-tone, and invariably an unattractive combo separated by chrome trim. The more modern wheels and monochrome paint are more 21st century, and there are still a lot of them on the road here, refreshed into today’s style. Nice find for Europe, though I’ve learned from CC and watching Scandinavian TV shows that US trucks are more popular in Northern Europe than I would have thought.
Edit: my sister bought one of these new, 2wd and pretty stripped down, and I just found a snapshot of it … it had the twin windows too, so I suspect they were standard. It succumbed to rust (Canada) pretty quickly.
When I first looked at the pics Johannes posted, and the raised white letter tires and finned wheels, I was reminded of this style tire/wheel combination being used in the early 80s. International offered a similar raised white letter tire and finned wheel combination around 1980. They used this look on their Scout prototype from 1979. The example below is the AMC Eagle Sunchaser from 1981, with a very similar raised letter tire/ wheel appearance to this F150. I found it gave this Ford an early 80s appearance, based upon these designs I recalled from that era. More fins on the AMC wheel, but very similar otherwise. I find the raised white letter tires kind of date it to the 80s, more than modernize it. But more a custom look than what Ford offered at the time.
I can’t get over the thickness of those underbody reinforcements on that Sunchaser. No wonder it’s sitting lows at the back!
You’re right, and the photographer should have caught it, as this is an original marketing pic. For a profile shot, they likely should have taken the photo from a higher angle, without the underside of the car so well lit.
BTW, I called it an AMC Eagle ‘Sunchaser’, it’s actually called the ‘Sundancer’, and was offered on the Concord and Eagle. This was the Concord version.
Those are American racing “Vector” wheels, most famously associated with TV’s General Lee.
Exactly! Thank you. I didn’t place them to the General Lee, but I knew it was a popular early 80s design various makers had variations of.
My XL from this era, which wasn’t the base trim at that point in time was Tu-Tone, dark metallic blue with the white side panels. The bottom was separated by the trim this one has while the hard line at the top was covered by a oh so hip tri color tape stripe on the sides. On the tail gate there was a piece of trim at the bottom and top. So yeah this XLT Lariat would have been Tu-Tone unless it was specially ordered.
I owned one of these for 23 years. It had the extra cab, 8 foot bed and 6.9 liter diesel.
I loved the dash in it. You could see the changes inside with this model, leaning towards a more carlike interior. It was a Lariat with air, cruise, power windows, dual tanks and captain’s chairs.
It was indestructible except for cancer in the cab corners and I was able to haul 60,000 pounds of topsoil off the property, sometimes 4400 pounds per load and it never broke a sweat.
The day before we moved to a new state we were on a final dump run and a guy there swore It could fetch 3500 in the sad condition it was in..rusted, failed clearcoat and paint as well as dents…it was basically a farm truck, and that day, a rancher came 200 miles from central California to buy it sight unseen for my (low) asking price. And he was going to put it to work that day hauling a gooseneck load of hay.
It was a fantastic machine, one of Ford’s best.
One sold (and it was perfect, red on red) at 33K miles on BAT last week for $45,000!
Maybe I should have asked more than $950..there were 11 hits inside of 4 hours when it went on facebook marketplace.
These Fords with the opera windows are excellent candidates for Brougham trucks, especially the late 80s high spec models with bordello red interiors and tufted upholstery. Just add a partial vinyl roof, opera lights, illuminated running boards and either wire wheel covers or fancy alloy wheels.
Like most of the people on this board I prefer the simpler looks of the 90s models with the single window and my personal truck is a 2002 “aero body” F-150 which loks positively Bauhaus next to its 80s ancestors.
I also just remembered that the rental yard I worked at from 88-93 had one of these in two tone blue with either a 302 or 351 that was originally the salesman’s truck until the sales rep switched to a Mazda B2200 extended cab. We used it a s general shop hack for servicing and delivering lighter stuff since we had an F350 diesel and an E350 window van for regular use. It was nice enough to drive but I actually preferred the more basic look and firmer seat of the 87 F350 XL I usually drove. I also liked the rumble of the old 6.9 diesel. In mostly rust free Oregon all three generations of “square body” are still common and often well kept.
When I was a kid my across-the-street neighbour had a truck that looked almost just like this one, a white ’85 F-250 with a maroon interior. It had a 351 (5.8L) engine and automatic transmission, and he let me use it whenever I needed to pick up a large component from the wrecking yard or take an engine to the machine shop, or otherwise like that.
Mindful of the big savings and convenience of borrowing rather than renting a truck, I was careful always to replace whatever gasoline I used, plus a few gallons, and once when the rearview mirror came off in my hand I repaired it before giving back the truck (and told Chuck I’d done so). Fine.
Chuck’s truck had a very rough idle—it ran like it had a fairly significant vacuum leak, or perhaps an EGR valve stuck slightly open—but above idle it smoothed out and ran okeh. It was also very hard to start, requiring prolonged, extended cranking each and every time. Even when I wasn’t using the truck, many was the time I could hear Chuck grinding away at it, crankity-crankity-crankity-crankity-crankity-crankity-crankity, again and again and again until it would eventually fire and run.
One day, in possession of the truck I got fed up and set out to fix the hard starting. I popped the hood, clambered up on the bumper, and had a look around: eek, this truck was clearly suffering from deferred maintenance. The air filter was fudgy. I didn’t want to get into replacing spark plugs, for fear of something going wrong (broken plug, stripped threads or…), but I went and fetched a new air filter, crankcase breather filter, and there might’ve been a cap and rotor in the shopping bag as well. I put these items in, and…no change in the starting behaviour.
I took another look at the carburetor, and it was just as Stephen King described Christine’s: black as a mineshaft. I grabbed my can of B12 and hosed down the carb, then started the engine (after the customary fight) and aimed the carb spray at the air bleeds for awhile. Put the air cleaner back together, tested my work, closed the hood, washed my hands, and parked the truck in Chuck’s driveway.
The next morning, I heard Chuck hop in the truck and slam the door, but then instead of the usual extend-o crankfest came “CHUNkaVROOM!”.
Then I heard Chuck stop the engine, wait a minute, and start it again: “CHUNkaVROOM!”. He stopped the engine again, exited the truck, and slammed the door. A minute later he knocked at our door, and when I answered it he said “The truck hasn’t started right up like that in years; what did you do?!!” I told him, he thanked me, and I carried on having use of the truck until Chuck moved away.
Lovely story Daniel.
I’d forgotten the sound of starters cranking forever to wake up an out-of-tune engine, and how sometimes they cranked in vain and the battery went flat. Then the owner blamed the battery or the car or anything else, but never think it was their own lack of maintenance that was at fault. Good on you for persisting beyond the initial parts-swapping to help Chuck’s truck get over its narcolepsy.
In retrospect, had it been a Dodge I’d’ve faced duelling temptations: on the one hand, leaving it would’ve meant more Highland Park Hummingbird music, but on the other hand who wants to hear good machinery suffer?
It’s interesting, isn’t it, that starters have grown (much) more efficient and powerful while the demand on them has grown (much) lighter as engines have grown (much) easier to start by dint of fuel injection, ever-improving ignition systems, ridiculously durable spark plugs, and oil that actually flows when it’s cold.
A mate had a very similar 84 F150 but Aussie assembled and with an ambulance conversion 351 Cleveland engine and auto 9″ diff it weighed 3 tonnes empty consequently it went tyhru petrol like it was going out of style 12-13 imp mpg either solo or towing a 24 foot caravan, Jake had it converted to LPG with twin tanks and the engine modified to suit that solved the fuel consumption or rather money consumption LPG was really cheap compared to petrol good wagon but as usual savage on steering components with wide front wheels but bullet proof mechanically.