The 1955 – 1957 Chevy Nomad was a bold exercise to build the first sports wagon, and it quickly became iconic. Station wagons were the hot new trend (along with sports cars) in the 1950s, and Chevy took it to the next level with the very sporty 2-door Nomad, which started out as a 1954 Motorama dream car with a Corvette front end.
Two-door station wagons had been fairly popular in the 1950s, but had mostly disappeared by 1961, the Falcon hanging on through 1965. They were clearly a dead end, as was the case with large two-door sedans. So why did Chevrolet buck the trend and introduce a two-door Chevelle station wagon in 1964? And why was it only offered as the lowest end trim level, and not with more rake in the tailgate and rear window, and call it Nomad?
I’m sure you’re all familiar with the Nomad; finding pictures of an original is not all that easy, as the great majority have become fulfilments of their owner’s dreams, or nightmares. It had a completely unique roof structure, and its tailgate and rear window had a much stronger rake than the regular wagons. The Nomad’s influence on the ’64 Chevelle 2-door wagon are all-too obvious, especially the forward-leaning B-pillar and divider in the rear side windows.
Unfortunately, the Chevelle 2-door doesn’t have the Nomad’s forward-raked rear end; the cost of tooling up a new rear end would have been prohibitive. As it is, one wonders why they bothered to tool up for the 2-door wagon. All of 2,710 were built in 1964, barely 6% of all Chevelle and Malibu wagons sold. And in 1965, the numbers dwindled to 1,668, not even quite 3% of Chevelle and Malibu wagons. Those are minute numbers, in the GM scale of things.
So why did they bother to make it at all?
The answer is called El Camino. Ford had pioneered the concept of a passenger car-based pickup in 1957, and Chevy had followed Ford with their wild take on it in 1959, but it was already cancelled after 1960. Why?
Because in 1960 already, Ford switched the Ranchero to the new Falcon, creating a new format for the concept; lower cost and more economical. It was essentially an open bed sedan delivery, and its lower operating costs were appealing to commercial buyers.
And since the Falcon Ranchero and 2-door wagon shared almost all of their bodies except for the rear roof, there was economy in tooling and production.
Contrary to a stubborn and recurring myth, Chevrolet did not build a Chevy II wagon. It’s pretty safe to assume if they had, there would also have been an El Camino version. But Chevy decided to sit out that little segment of the market for the time being.
But despite the rather small market for the Ranchero, Chevrolet decided to jump back in for 1964, using the new mid-size Chevelle as the basis. Maybe mid-size was the charm?
That of course explains the Chevelle 2-door wagon; just like previous El Caminos and Rancheros, the 2-door wagons and pickups could share a very large percent of their bodies. The door frames are a bit different at their top-rear: the El Camino’s curves, the wagon’s has a sharp corner. But welding on two different window frames to the door isn’t exactly a big deal.
These two shots (top by Ate Up With Motor, lower and featured car at Mecum Auctions) show how essentially everything from the beltline down was shared by the two.
Of course significant elements were also shared with the 4-door wagons. But the whole sides of the El Camino and 2-door wagon were of course different from the 4-door wagon, starting with the longer front door, shared with the 2-door coupe and sedan. Mix and match.
This particular ’64 Chevelle 300 2-door wagon had a frame-off restoration after the original owner’s son found it again in 1984. It was ordered with a rather unusual power train, given its position as the low-end economy wagon in the Chevelle lineup.
It was ordered with the 220 hp four-barrel 283 V8, which was the top power option in 1964 on the Chevelle until the 327 V8s were added mid-year.
And a four speed manual to go along with it. Seems like the original owner may have had a modern-day Nomad in mind at the time.
The upholstery is a dead ringer for the original. Someone spent a few bucks restoring this car; it’s like new.
The bright trim around the front door must have been an option.
It doesn’t appear to be there in the brochure.
But this owner clearly wasn’t looking for the lowest cost wagon, despite it being a “300” series.
Here’s a little curious oddity: This image was found in the Canadian market brochure, and there’s a little asterisk for the 2-door wagon only, noting that it is imported. Presumably the two-door wagon and El Camino were no built by GM Canada. Or maybe just the wagon?
The Chevelle 2-door wagon was only a 2-year affair, but of course the El Camino would soldier along for quite some time alone. But that hasn’t stopped folks from building their own 1966 and later 2-door wagons.
Curiously, the Nomad name did come back, and on Chevelle wagons, but this was in 1968 and applied to the low trim versions, analogue to the Chevelle 300 DeLuxe and base Chevelle 300. It stuck around through 1972, and then was dropped again.
Both the name and the 2-door wagon were reunited in the limited production 1975-1976 Vega Nomad, although not on Chevy’s assembly lines. This was an aftermarket kit that most likely was created by dealer interest.
The Nomad name had its final outing on 1977-1981 Chevy vans. A rather ignoble ending.
Related CC reading:
CC Capsule: 1965 Chevrolet El Camino – Designed To Be Effective At Certain Tasks
Classic Car Show Capsule: 1955 Chevrolet Nomad – Stealing The Thunder From The High Priced Cars
Curtis Perry Outtake: Chevrolet Vega Nomad – Relax (Formerly: Drink) Freely At McFeely
Classic CC Capsule: 1969 Chevelle Nomad Wagon – More Name Debasement, And Confusion
Curbside Classic: 1959 Chevrolet El Camino – I Have Seen Many Strange And Amazing Things In America
Curbside Classic: 1957 Ford Ranchero – The First Respectable Truck
Automotive History: The Short And Odd Life Of The Two Door Station Wagon
I would LOVE to have that Vega GT Nomad, w/ a V-6 or V-8 conversion, and a 4 speed! On second thought, I’d take it and drive it as is!! 🙂
Nice note, Paul. Thank you!
It’s interesting to note that the ’64 featured also has A/C, as can be seen both in the dashboard openings and in the compressor on the beckground of the engine compartment. So, it definitely wasn’t a cheap car. I can’t figure out if the car has power steering. Brakes are manual.
The pulley under the alternator probably is from a power steering pump.
I may be mis-remembering but I recall a neighbor having a 1964 two-door Pontiac Tempest station wagon that was his fishing car. The fishing rods were suspended from a home-made rack on the ceiling. This was in the mid-1970 so the car was over 10 years old. It wasn’t a beater by any means but it looked like what you would expect a “fishing car” to look like.
My survey of the internet turns up no actual factory two-door Tempest wagons and, if it really did exist outside my sketchy memory, it certainly was not a custom job unless someone skillfully grafted a Tempest front clip to a Chevelle wagon. The car was definitely a low-trim model.
I really didn’t pay much attention to the wagon because the neighbor also had a nicely restored 1965 Mustang convertible with the pony interior and three lovely daughters.
There was no Pontiac version. Only Chevy. But that hasn’t stopped folks from making GTO 2-door wagons.
and a GTO/El Camino probably
Our first wagon was a ’59 two door Brookwood, bottom of the line, with V-8, PG, PS, radio, heater, whitewalls, well equipped. Dad did not want the kids to open rear doors and fall out.
I’ve known a couple different people who have told me stories of family members falling out of the back seat of a car in motion back in the sixties.
Gotta admit two door wagons have a great aesthetic to me. But I remember a friend with a VW Fox wagon saying it was back breaking loading his two small children in the rear car seats several times a day. But I thought it looked really sharp and Audi-like despite being a low end car.
Dad’s last wagon was also a two door, VW Squareback.
Growing up in the ’70’s, I never embraced two door wagons. Particularly disliked the Pinto and Bobcat wagons. Vegas too. Kids wanted their freedom to climb in or out, on their time. Not at the control of parents, at the front doors. Seemed like a leftover out-of-date idea from early generations, when parents called all the shots. lol
In a similar fashion GM (and to a lesser extent, Jeep) continued building pickup-based Panel Delivery models long after Ford and Chrysler had eliminated that body style.
Why? Because the Suburban (and Wagoneer) existed, it was pretty inexpensive to continue building Panel Deliveries. Ford and Chrysler didn’t have suitable pickup-based SUV from which to build a Panel Delivery, and the market was waning in favor of cargo vans, so they just stopped building them.
*notes: GM finally gave up on the Panel Delivery after the 1970 model year. I can’t find any definitive answer as to when Kaiser Jeep stopped building them.
ALSO… the 2-door Chevelle wagon is my favorite GM car. I wish I could own one.
Blanking out rear side windows is a bit easier than this. They still had to tool up aspects of this 2-door wagon, meaning extra expense. And the sales clearly weren’t there, which is why they dropped it after two years. Seems like kind of a dumb move.
Oh, I’m not saying it wasn’t dumb. It was a risky (and as it turned out, pointless) move, and it very clearly turned out to be a wasteful flop. But as I said in the Turbo Olds post below, I applaud GM’s willingness in this era to spend money on projects with unknown potential, just because they *could*.
I do think some of the reasoning behind the 2-door wagon was to keep kids under control in the back seat, so they couldn’t open the doors and fall out. Growing up in the 70s, my parents mostly had 2 door cars, which were more popular anyway at that time – Grand Prix, Toronado, Rivera, and Regal were some of the cars my family had when I was younger. I was an only child so there was no shortage of space back there for me. Plus, I kind of enjoyed getting in and out behind the front seat.
As I got older we switched over to 4-doors – Ninety-Eight, Maxima, Audi 4000, Topaz, Cutlass Ciera. Of course, I was a well-behaved kid and never did open a car door unless it was appropriate!
It would not be surprising if the 2-door wagon and the El Camino were sold to management as a package that would spread some tooling costs across a predicted higher volume at very little cost. Barely higher volume, as it turned out, but the predictions in the presentation probably looked much rosier.
The Chevelle was new in ’64 and Chevrolet didn’t know exactly which models customers would want – maybe given their smaller size compared to full-size Chevys that still dominated sales, buyers would want a two-door wagon. (They did when the even-smaller Vega and Pinto arrived). Low-end only though because two-door wagon sales had dropped off by then, I guess. The 300 two-door wagon seems to have been one of those “let’s put it out there and see if anyone buys” cars. Not many people did, so it only lasted two years. As for a high-trimmed Nomad version that wasn’t offered, lux two-door wagons were pretty much gone by this time, and the last Nomad 2-door was only seven years in the past, not long enough for it to be perceived as the classic it is today.
The ’77 Nomad was a somewhat unique vehicle, basically a hybrid 5 seat passenger/cargo van with up-level trim. The interior used ‘Beauville’ trim including high-back bucket seats, 1 bench seat, carpet, etc., but the area aft of the bench seat was standard cargo van. Windows were provided in the sliding door, corresponding left side, and rear doors but not the quarter panels. Nomad vans were offered until 1981 and seemed to me to be quite popular with dirt bike enthusiasts. GMC dealers offered a similar van called the Gaucho.
I think JP Cavanaugh is probably right about the 2 door Chevelle wagon.
The Chevelle is pretty and sporty, certainly deserved the Nomad name.
Looking at the close-coupled back seat makes me think of a club cab pickup. With a little more tooling Chevy could have started a new niche.