We’ve had lots of two-fers, some three-fers, but how about a four-fer?
Ok, it was the Plymouth and Matador that caught my eye first. They’re both familiar, having been subjects of previous CCs, but I’ve never seen them hooked up.
The ’73 Matador has acquired a nasty rear-door dent since its debut here at CC. Now if only that Fury were a ’70 or ’71, than we’d have two loop-bumpermobiles.
The ’69 Fury is a daily driver that I encounter very regularly. Here’s its day in the spotlight.
Honda Accord wagons aren’t very common, and this one is a sweetie. Honda just didn’t sell very many, but folks who have them don’t want to give them up. What to replace them with? The Olds (not this particular one), that also has been documented here, as the last chapter of the CCCCC.
So three CCs in one shot, as this generation of Accord joins the ranks–long overdue, too. Oh yes, then there’s that BMW…
I so wish I could have gotten my hands on one of these Accord wagons. I remember as a teen wanting one, they just seemed so…right.
Oh well…
I always thought this was the best looking Accord they ever built. That new Acura wagon isn’t a replacement for this as it only has 2′ between the rear shock towers, just try to put stuff back there.
It’s like we have two decades represented, and neither one the current one. On the Matador/Fury side, it’s about 1971. Across the road, we’re looking at the Cutlass, Accord, E39 5 Series, and what appears to be a Ranger/B-Series. So, about 1997 then?
That Accord wagon is a beauty, by the way. Perfect shape.
Except for the missing cap, there’s always one missing……
I imagine somewhere in the ether, there is a realm full of missing wheel center caps from every car.
You still see these Accord wagons around SoCal and they really hold up in terms of looks and utility. No wonder folks hang on to them. Look at the incredible visibility provided by the big windows and slim posts. IMO we need to get back to this styling instead of relying so heavily on cameras and sensors.
Count me as another fan of these Accord wagons. I am envious of the guy who gets to drive a 69 Fury every day.
Only in Eugene! (Yes, SoCal also.)
In my area (central VA), you don’t see AMCs of that vintage nor first-year Fuselage C-body Chryslers. Count me as a nonfan of loop bumpers; that ’69 Fury is just right.
But Accord wagons and those dated Cutlasses are still extant.
Just this morning took a nice autumn drive in my 76 Royal Monaco. It’s been sitting for about 3 weeks covered with a tarp. (With 4 cars, I’m storage challenged) After the usual coughing and spitting for about 2 miles, it still is a joy to drive. I’m sure that 69 Fury drives even better.
After getting gas, got on the four lane, driving at 65 is effortless. I feel the car is too old to drive faster. Cars kept passing me like I was standing still. If some fool wanted to really push it, the old girl might keep up. Just not with me in it.
Reminds me of a story. My father in law had a 93 Plymouth Acclaim that one of his daughters gave him. Still drove nice, with over 130k on the clock. When he passed away in 2002, the car was given to one of the grandsons. He didn’t have the car long; he blew the head gasket soon afterward. It was really sad. The car would have served someone sensible as reliable transportation.
Old cars need love and respect.
Those Accord wagons are here in plague numbers both in euro and us trim but ex JDM.
I don’t know why the ’92 Camry gets so much credit for superlative material and assembly quality. I honestly think the ’90 Accord was a little bit better. I’ll admit to being a Honda fan, but I’m also critical of many of their shortcomings. That being said, this generation of Accord was the first without a flimsy structure and rattles, and had an uncommonly smooth balance shafted four with hydraulic engine mounts. It also had a one piece dash and door panels which were fully padded, carpeted lower doors, courtesy lights on each door, high quality velour on most other interior surfaces and chrome accents throughout. The ’92 Camry did not have many of these, and while its 2.2 4-cyl was quieter, it was primarily due to being choked up by a restrictive exhaust and still made unhappy grumbly noises. And in terms of durability, the two cars were a draw. The Accord did rust around the edges, but not structurally. Honestly, it’s one of the best built cars in memory and one of the few 20 yr old cars which I still see in central Ohio, often in good condition. The only reason it didn’t work as a wagon, however, is because it was pretty poor in terms of space efficiency. It had a 107 inch wheelbase, but no more rear seat room than many smaller cars. All of this was spent on a bulky rear suspension, front footwells without intrustion from wheels and a backward tilt to the engine. I had a ’96 Accord wagon; different body style on the same basic platform. I couldn’t fit a freaking twin mattress between the suspension towers with the seat folded down; pathetic. And don’t even think about driving an automatic version on two-lane roads with a full load of passengers, cargo and A/C, despite its shorter final drive compared to the sedan/coupe. As a sporty wagon, it would’ve made sense with the 5-spd and the Prelude VTEC’s H22 engine. As a family car, the Legacy was a much better choice.
The Olds Cutlass Supreme pictured above. It had very low seats and huge glass area. It was, along with other W-bodies, unfortunately ignored by most buyers in favor of the Taurus, but had a superior drive train and more trim-level variation. All of them had smushy large domestic sedan dynamics which only the SHO managed to avoid, along with the Chrysler LH cars. I would love to have a Regal 4-door with the 3.8, but prior to the introduction of the Rubbermaid dashboard after the car’s facelift.
That Matador is beautiful. Those door handles are a hallmark of Dick Teague designs, are they not? I feel that this car and the Plymouth behind it exemplify the my favorite era of domestic car styling, coinciding with the Nixon-era and before Malaise. They were well integrated, restrained and modern, embodying the country’s ambitions before we went for Baroque and rejected progressive ideals in favor of cheap, post-modern sentimentality and cynicism.
And of course, who could say anything bad about that Plymouth’s long, low proportions, frameless glass and dog-dish hubcaps?? Even that character line seems effortlessly well positioned. The designers of that car knew so fundamentally about car design that the final product doesn’t even look deliberate. There’s a comprehensive sense of rightness in that car’s design and it’s easily the most beautiful of the four pictured.
Still see plenty of those Accord wagons. My best friend had the 91 version in that same white with blue interior, and yes, it WAS the EX model too.
My parents had the 4 door version of that same car, same color combo too.
I tried to buy the wagon, but was not able to get financing on it at the time (2004).
Oh well, I have what I need now so no worries.
BTW, I still see these, and the later 94-97 wagons a fair amount here in good ol’ Puget Sound.