This car was sighted at a busy tourist trap near Brenham, Texas. The owner says she just bought it in Houston and intends for it to work for a living. I can understand that. What she couldn’t understand was why anyone would want to take pictures of her old car. She was happy when I told her they were becoming rare and that I wasn’t “quite right”. When it comes to old cars, that might describe a lot of us.
By 1992, Ford and Mercury had gone Aero; the last year for bricks, including the squared-off Colony Park wagon, was 1991. These wagons came with 302 V8s and were underpinned by the Panther platform. When this car was new, wagons were losing out to minivans for many reasons. Fuel economy was high on that list, but utility was not. These are workers.
This one looks to be pretty well maintained. A bad repair on the taillight and a little worn paint on the hood about sums it up.
These abound in Texas, thanks to the absence of winter salt and the tin worm.
This one shows a bit of fading of the wood and the interior.
I wished her well, and told her I think she managed to find the workhorse she was looking for. I just think it might be a little thirstier than what she expected, but to each his or her own.
I rarely come across any other wagons while out in mine.
“When this car was new they were losing out to the minivan for many reasons. Fuel economy was high on the list. Utility was not.” I was looking at these when I was in need of a family vehicle. For me, at least, fuel economy had nothing to do with why I purchased the 88 Aerostar and not one of these. Price was # 1 and the wife’s aversion to wagons was #2. I ended up getting an 85 Colony Park, used, some years later after I had traded in the wife.
The Marquis wagon did not sell in that great of numbers when new so yes that is a rare beast. As such it might be very hard to find a replacement taillight. The Box Panthers in general are still alive and well around here though, I see lots of them on the road, rarely a day passes that I don’t see at least one still doing it’s job. I’d wager the Box Panthers have the highest survival rate of any car from the 80’s around here. The B boxes and B Whales on the other hand are becoming a rare sight. I easily see 5 times as many Box Panthers as Box and Whale B’s combined.
As far as Panthers being less fuel efficient than minivans that has not been my experience. Of course my point of reference was an aero. As the kids started getting bigger we switched from a CV to a Windstar as our main family hauler and saw a drop of ~1mpg in daily driving and 4~5mpg on hwy trips. Yes the box is not as efficient as an aero and a wagon pays a penalty due to the aerodynamics of it’s shape. So I’d say compared to a minivan from the 90’s or early 00’s this might pay a slight penalty in city/mixed use but match or come out ahead in strict hwy use.
Funny, I was thinking the opposite.
Around here, B-boxes are way more popular than the box Panthers with the pearlescent paint and big rims crowd (which make up the majority of old American car ownership in my area), and the whales seem to have enough of a cult following to keep them on the road. See a ton of early aero-Panthers though.
I just don’t see many B’s of any version that lifted and fit with the big wheels. Around here the few I see that have the full donk treatment are usually G-bodies.
The 1991 Ford station wagons are one of those vehicles whose passing barely gets noticed when, in fact, it was a watershed moment in the auto industry. As pointed out in the recent article about the 1967 full-size Chevy wagon, station wagons were one of the few markets where Ford dominated so, for Ford to abandon it a scant eight years after the appearance of the Chrysler minivan, is quite noteworthy.
More importantly was how Ford abandoned the market for a car without any kind of combined passenger-carrying/towing capacity. From 1992 foreward, the biggest engine an ‘aero’ Panther would ever have (the only engine, in fact) was the torque-challenged 4.6L V8. I have no doubt this played no small role in the decision to forego a station wagon since the 4.6L had a tough time motivating the sedan, let alone a wagon whose dutes might also include towing.
Likewise, I have no doubt that Ford and GM execs simply couldn’t comprehend the popularity of the weak Chrysler minivans in comparison with their BOF minivans that, unlike the Mopars, could actually perform towing service when called upon.
GM soldiered on with a full-size station wagon for another five years until they, too, saw the writing on the wall and left the market after 1996.
The 92 aero Panthers could be equipped with the same 5000lb towing capacity as the boxes had.
Ford and GM did not have any BOF minivans in fact Ford is the only company to ever sell a van in the US with a frame and that was/is the Econoline.
While the Chrysler minivans may seem to have been the runaway success to the general American public overall they were not the sales leader in many years. Ford was thanks in part to offering a selection of vans. In the years when the Aerostar and Windstar were both available Ford sold more minivans than any other brand. Throw in the Mercury Villager and Ford sold more minivans than any other MFG in a number of those years. The Aerostar was selling like hotcakes and the Explorer was debuting at the same time as the aero Panthers so why make a wagon version when they represented a very small portion of the Panther sales in the last 4-5 years of the Box production. Personally I would have liked there to be an aero wagon as it would have been more fuel efficient than a minivan and of course rode and handled better.
We must remember that Ford did not abandon the wagon after 91, but continued to sell quite a few of them in its highest volume platform – the Taurus. By the late 80s, the “full sized” car had shrunk to a shadow of its former 1960s market share. The Taurus, however, was for a time the best selling car in the US and Ford had a wagon in the line for a long time.
In the ’80s, my sense is that most of what was left of the wagon market (which was, for a variety of reasons, greatly reduced from what it had once been) migrated to the midsize segment. And after the Taurus was introduced, it grabbed most of the midsize wagon market. By the early ’90s, GM was completely out of the lower end of the midsize wagon market, with the A-body Celebrity and 6000 having been dropped. By that time Chrysler was out of the wagon market completely (Chrysler hadn’t really had midsize wagons since the early ’80s, and by the end of that decade, even the somewhat smaller K-car wagons were gone). There were Camry and Accord wagons, but they never seemed to be as common as Taurus wagons. While it was really just a niche market, the midsize wagon market probably held a lot more potential for Ford in the early ’90s than the fullsize wagon market did. Ford continued building Taurus wagons into the mid 2000s.
Another thing to keep in mind is that by 1991, the full-size wagon market that Ford had such dominance over in the late ’60s/early ’70s, producing 200,000+ units a year, had been neither dominated by Ford nor a market in which a single brand could sell 200,000+ units a year, for a long time. The rise of the minivan was just one of a series of blows dealt to the full-size wagon market from 1973 on. An important one, to be sure, but far from the only one. GM had also toppled Ford from its position of leadership with the downsized ’77 B-body wagons. While I haven’t looked at sales or production figures from 1980 on, I suspect that GM remained the leader of what was left of the market from that point on. Ford’s decision to drop its full-size wagons after 1991 was certainly a milestone, and is something whose symbolism isn’t really appreciated. But the decline of Ford’s full-size wagons had taken a lot longer than eight years, and there were a lot more factors involved than just the Chrysler minivans.
Ford does deserve credit for sticking with a wagon through 2005 or 06 (whenever they stopped making the old Taurus). The chassis may not have been rear drive/V8 like wagon purists like, but it was still a traditional wagon style long after GM quit making anything like it. I think GM quit making the front drive A wagons in 96 along with the full sizers.
I always thought the GM B body after 1991 was superior to the Panthers, both in engines and in keeping the wagon flame burning. The Panthers got the last laugh, though, by surviving another 15 years. It’s just a shame the wagons had to die in 1991.
Having more HP available was the only thing the B’s had over the Panthers besides offering a wagon that didn’t sell worth a darn. There is a reason the B’s went away, the aero Panthers had better ride, braking, handling, durability and lower cost of ownership. There is a reason police agencies switched to all Panthers pretty quickly after introduction of the P71 package, which I’m sure was a big factor in the death of the Whales.
The only reason the police switched to Ford from GM was that GM needed the capacity in Arlington to build SUV’s and production was eliminated. Talk to most law enforcement agencies and the Caprice was far preferred to to the Crown Vic in performance , handling and reliability.
In my area (Central Massachusetts), Ford seemed to dominate the market for police cruisers well before 1996. As far back as my high school days in the mid ’80s, my recollection is that Chevy police cruisers were definitely in the minority, and I don’t remember seeing any Mopar police cruisers at all. The Massachusetts State Police used Whale Caprices for a time in the 1990s, but they stick out in my mind because they were such an uncommon sight.
As I remember it, from the late 80’s through 96, Chevy came out on top of most all the yearly Michigan police and LA sheriff police package tests. In the areas I lived in, most agencies preferred the Chevy. GM figured they could make more $ out of their factory by making Tahoes, which was back when the SUV craze was really heating up. GM’s exit meant Ford had a virtual monopoly on the police, taxi and limo markets. On a car whose tooling and development costs were already paid for, it was 15 years of profit for Ford.
I would also imagine that fleets would build up an institutional bias. When your parts inventory and all of your mechanics’ experience is with Fords or Chevys or whatever, there is a lot of resistance to change. Around 1986-87, the Indianapolis PD bought a batch of Crown Vics to add to the fleet of Impalas. Later purchases were the Impalas again. I recall reading how the Fords were not as popular with the police officers. Our PD only went all-Ford after the Chevys were discontinued.
The ‘old’ EPA specs on these were 17 and 24 mpg. A 1991 Dodge Grand Caravan with the 3.3 V-6 got 18 and 23. With the ‘new’ EPA ratings on 10% ethanol, they both go down 2 mpg. Considering how much cheaper it is to repair and the inherent reliability of the drivetrain, I’d say the Mercury is the winner.
A thought, back when these cars were new, ethanol was just another choice at the pump. Now it’s almost mandatory. That alcohol ‘might’ be eating away at the soft parts in the fuel line and F.I. system, I’d get that looked at,
I think they’re bumping up the mix a little, like to 15 or 20%. E-10 sure raped the fuel line and carburetor on my ’66 Beetle,
Most cars sold in North America have been ethanol friendly for about 25 years now. IIRC, it was a government mandate that all new cars be ethanol friendly for air quality concerns. Once MTBE started showing up in water tables, it was no longer an option for oxygenating motor fuels. This took place once the majority of cars went to port or sequential fuel injection. Other than normal aging issues, there’s really nothing to ‘look’ at or for.
Your ’66 Beetle is a whole different matter. That was never designed for ethanol fuels, at least in North America.
I think the 302 was just about as highly developed as any American V8 when they quit making it. That and a rwd wagon with an OD automatic make this something I would have looked at too. It’s hard to think of a 91 as a classic. My truck is a 91 and I have to take into account how old it is and how young everyone about me is before I have a clue. In real life it looked even better than in the pictures. I think this lady got a winner.
On a recent trip from Palo Alto to Las Vegas, my 89 Panther wagon returned 22 mpg. Not great, but equally, not dire … I laugh when noting that some people are buying new vehicles with poorer highway mileage.
I’m one of those that went newer only to see similar or worse mileage.. My Xterra gets about what my 97 Ram 1500 4×4 (on 33s!) with the “death flash” 318 gave me. You learn something from every failure.
The 5.0 in the ’89 Crown Vic is rated at only about 150 hp, if I remember correctly, but it sure feels faster. On the other hand I presume that the Vic, despite its impressive size, would fold like a cheap suit if I rammed it into anything — I plan not to!
Actually, it might be just the opposite. I’m not sure how structural rigidity changed between the box and aero, but I did a 360 on black ice into a cement freeway barrier in my old aero and basically just scuffed up the bumper cover. I think a newer car would be more apt to fold like a cheap suit, because it’s designed to take the force of the impact.
My grandmother traded her 1992 Ford Fairlane (4.0 6cyl 4sp auto) with something like 120k on a 2003-or-4 Camry, and got worse fuel mileage. It helped that the Fairlane turned something like 1700rpm on the highway, also that if it dropped back a cog you had a lot of power for overtaking.
Wow, just swap the brown velour for cranberry leather and this is exactly like the wagon I picked out for my grandma in 1996 when I worked for Mr. Sesi. She LOVED that thing! Truth be told, I rather enjoyed it myself. I was behind the wheel in October 1998 when it turned over 100k. I think they kept it about five or six years and then my grandpa decided to take it to Virginia and give it to his sister, who then traded it off in less than a year for some kind of an econobox, or so I have heard.
My grandma still grumbles about that…
I can attest that the “common wisdom” regarding these wagons and mpg is quite false. I took my 1991 Mercury Colony Park from Mpls to Chicago last weekend with two people and some luggage. 22 mpg at a steady 75 mph. During the first week of July, 3,500 miles to and from Mpls to Florida, 5 passengers, luggage, 70 to 75 mph, A/C blasting, every tank averaged between 20.5 and 21.5 mpg. When I use it as a daily driver on occasion, tanks average 18 mpg in mixed city/highway driving. Fuel economy is not a problem at all!
Some day I will need to take the time to write up my pair of curbside classics.
I’m envious of you Panther owners with your OD transmission and lower octane requirements.
What did you get towing the RX7?
About 18 on that trip. When I pull the folding camper filled with camping gear and people, I bottom out at 15.
I have always loved these. When my son was looking for a car, I tried to get him to consider a wagon, but no go. Still, he went with an 89 Grand Marquis sedan last November. He is up to about 55K on the odo now. This piece is well timed, as I spent part of Saturday “advising” while he replaced factory plugs and wires. Although the parts did not make it to their silver anniversary, we figure that they had lived a good life. A few more things to do to it before college starts up again. He remains totally and completely in love with it, and has not regretted buying it one bit.
I had a 1991 Grand Marquis GS. It had been a retired person’s tow vehicle, unfortunately, it had not been treated well during it’s first life. My time with it was just expensive as many items were worn out, abused or neglected. I spent a lot of money keeping that old crock on the road; I never got to a place where I was happy with the way it ran. I gave up on it and donated it to a charity.
That said, on the occasions it did run well, it was great. Smooth, quiet, handled well in the “American” car tradition. But sadly, those times were few and far in between.
But, it is a decently sized package for a full sized car, and it had a lot of utility. I hope the lady who bought the wagon got one that was maintained well.
“…the wife’s aversion to wagons…”
#1 reason wagons fell out of fashion.
American women in 80s/90s wanted to ‘not be like our mothers’ and drive SUV’s/vans. Also, the wood sticker siding was out of Vouge to ladies. “Eww, I’ll never drive that, honey!”
Love these wagons, but “controllers of the purse strings” in families decided the market.
I really want a Colony Park, Country Squire, Custom Cruiser, or Estate Wagon for hauling things/camping trips. I want an older 80’s boxy wagon but I can’t find a good one up here. The only ones I see for sale regularly are mid to late 80’s Olds Custom Cruisers, but they usually have a bad trans (damn Turbo 200) or some major rot issues. A full size wagon would have been much better for my camping trip this weekend, instead of trying to jam a tent and other camping equipment into my 2011 Focus (the Mustang and Thunderbird are not camping vehicles ;)).
I remember once when we were tent camping out of my old 300L, and the people in the next campsite were doing the same thing out of a 1979 Firebird. They had a smaller tent and only a little hibachi instead of a big old Coleman camp stove like we had, but they were doing fine. I suppose the main difference would be when you’re loading out, when the “Should we bring this?” question would more likely be “No” with the Firebird.
That was the problem. We have a big (6 person) tent so it was kind of hard to fit other stuff in the Focus.
You remind me of the blessing and curse of camping with a Ford Club Wagon. For every idea for something to bring, the answer is “What the hell, throw it in.” All the comforts of home, but the loading/unloading is a real pain.
To any current or former CP owners: I’m thinking about buying a wagon to replace my aging ’05 Jeep Liberty. We travel around the country and tow a 3500lb travel trailer. I just love the way they look, and their beastly size… Am I crazy??