(first posted 8/31/2013) This was a radical car for Ford. If you didn’t live through the ‘70s and remember well all the bloatmobiles that Ford (and, to be fair, GM and Chrysler) foisted upon the American people until then, perhaps all you see is the most boringly styled automobile ever. Well, until the Chrysler K car, anyway.
Sorry, there I go again, being hard on the old Fairmont. It’s a drum I’ve beaten often around here. I have to keep reminding myself of what the Fairmont ushered in at Ford. Previously, their family-sized cars were all long-hooded sedans like this ’77 LTD II. It was the personal-luxury era, and Ford was drunk with it. While the enormous LTD II was sold as a mid-sizer and the Fairmont had a bit of a size-class identity crisis upon introduction (is it compact? is it mid-sized?), truth was that the Fairmont was bigger inside – well, not in width, but given the upright seating and airy greenhouse, it felt bigger inside in every way. And it was a better handler by a mile. Goodbye floaty boulevard ride!
I suppose it’s fairer to compare the Fairmont to the Granada, as they shared similar exterior dimensions. The Fairmont was actually shorter by a few inches. Again, the Fairmont won in interior room and handling – the Granada was the final iteration of the outdated 1960 Falcon platform.
But I knew little of handling at the time; I was 10 when the Fairmont was introduced. All I could go on was styling, and I harbored strong negative opinions about Ford’s 1970s styling direction. I was glad that my dad, an avowed Ford man, switched to Chevy and AMC in the 70s. But Ford’s marketing people teased us for months about the coming Fairmont, and I was growing excited. But when they unveiled it, I gasped – in shock at how plain of a car it was. I asked aloud of Ford, which wasn’t listening, “Is that the best you can do?”
Perhaps it was. Ford wasn’t on the firmest financial footing; by the early 1980s, bankruptcy rumors circulated. The Fairmont helped them live to fight another day.
And that’s because the Fairmont was an instant hit – at least, it was among the working-class families that were my childhood neighbors. Many of my school chums’ moms bought these to chauffeur their broods. And this is the Fairmont they bought – the ur-Fairmont, the base sedan, usually in this tan or in light blue, with plain interiors and dog-dish hubcaps. It’s so plain that it’s homely. And this homely ride was simply everywhere in my Midwestern hometown. Higher-trim Fairmonts were few and far between.
So I spent time in them. The first time I sat down on a Fairmont’s back seat almost sent me into sensory overload. There was room back there. It was bright inside; you could see. I actually felt a little exposed and vulnerable in the Fairmont. My friends’ moms had been driving big-on-the-outside, dark-and-cramped-on-the-inside mid-sized cars – Torinos, Satellites, Malibus. But here came the Fairmont, all roomy and open and bright, with gas mileage their former bloatmobiles couldn’t touch. They took to them like moths to a flame.
The styling sort of set the pace for this era of Ford. The new-for-1981 Escort looked like the Fairmont’s younger brother with its thin upper door frames and crisp corners. The Fairmont began a transitional period between the Great Bloat Era and the brilliant jellybean era of the Thunderbird, Tempo, and Taurus.
And then Ford went and got the Fairmont’s styling right in 1983, when the car was rebadged LTD. It’s amazing how new front and back clips transformed the Fairmont. And am I hallucinating, or did Ford slightly rake the rear roofline? One could be forgiven for not immediately recognizing that this car was the Fairmont of yore.
I’m going to admit another source of my anti-Fairmont bias: the two-door ’79 Mercury Zephyr a college buddy owned, and loaned me frequently in 1985 and 1986. With its 2.3L four and the four-speed stick, it was a serious dog. Its floaty, vague front end meant constant steering to keep the car on the road. But given how often the Fairmont has been praised for its strong (for the times) handling, I have to assume now that my buddy’s Zephyr needed serious front-end work.
And so I hereby pledge to quit ragging on the Fairmont. Besides, I remember well my stepson’s red ’93 Mustang GT, which was tons of fun. Gotta thank the Fairmont for that, as it donated its platform to the Mustang. Maybe the Fairmont wasn’t such a bad car after all.
I almost bought a Fairmont to replace my lousy ’66 Falcon. I still remember being at the bowling alley in a new town with a new teaching job at age 23 trying to decide which car to buy. If I recall correctly it was between a Datsun B-210, the Fairmont and maybe the Chevy Monza. I wanted a Honda but there were no dealers around and they were expensive. No Toyota dealers around at that time either. My Falcon had a lousy automatic and slush box was exactly how it drove. I swore never again would I drive an automatic after the Falcon and an earlier ’66 Buick Special with an automatic that failed around 90,000 miles while on a date. The Fairmont I was looking at was the 4 cylinder with 4 speed manual. I almost bought one, but I think I went with the Datsun based on perceived quality and gas mileage. It’s possible I also looked at a Renault Le Car. I liked that car – thank god I didn’t buy it! The Datsun was nothing to write home about and based on comments here that the Fairmont’s were reliable, I almost wish I had gotten one… I like practical and boxy still to this day.
As an aside to the stalk mounted horn. I saw this design in action while on a marching band trip to France in 1971. We were in Nice at night and the French drivers would come to an intersection and instead of stopping, they would flash their headlights and honk their horn to let anyone else know they were going through. We American’s thought this was crazy and quite funny, along with their small goofy cars. It was later on when I drove the Renault Le Car, that I realized this was done so the drivers could grab the stalk and both turn on/off their headlights (front to back motion) while at the same time honking their horn (side to side motion). It was a fluid motion that warned the world to back off, here I come. I always had a feeling those stalks wouldn’t last long.
The only American automobiles that were conceived on the drawing tables in the ’70s that looked reasonably good were GM’s downsized full size line for 1977 and the 1976 Cadillac Seville. The really good looking cars that came out in ’70s were all designed in the mid to late ’60s.
Had one of these in our govt. fleet back in1979. 302 with HD suspension and factory Michelins. Was surprisingly fun to drive. Quick steering, taut ride and nimble. A huge step up from the Maverick. The horn control on the end of the turn signal stalk was annoying and the vinyl interior was cheap, but it was a perfectly decent car for its intended market.
I remember my dad’s 1979 Fairmont. It was an ugly emerald green metallic with a tan interior, hub caps, 2.3 liter, automatic, and no power steering! I remember the time my mom was driving the Fairmont and she had to use the horn, and she struck the stalk mounted horn button with such force it snapped right off the steering column! The Fairmont certainly wasn’t one of Ford’s better ideas.
I reckon FORD should’ve left the ‘horn-in-the-stalk’ idea on the table instead of on the car. It’s been sooooo long since my Dad had those 2 Zephyr’s I’d completely forgotten the horn wasn’t perched in the center of the steering wheel.
I like these more now than I did when they were new. I still have the issue of Car and Driver that previews these cars. The blurb for the cover story is, “Ford Builds a Sedan for the ’80s, and It’s Great.” It compares the Fairmont favorably to the contemporary Volvo.
After years of Ford dealers selling increasingly over-decorated Broughams, and very tired Mavericks, these really were a breath of fresh air in the fall of 1977. The only Fairmont/Zephyr I remember among friends and family, however, was the 1979 Mercury Zephyr wagon bought by the family of a high-school friend. It was a mid-level version. Her father was a professor at the local university.
My neighbor had a Fairmont just like this…same hideous peachy-flesh tone color. I was about 10 and had been used to riding in my grandparents’ 1971 Mercury Marquis…I can remember sitting in the back of the Fairmont (comparing the two) and thinking “wow Ford has really come out with some cheap crap”. Such a difference with the flimsy doors and cheap trim on the Fairmont.
This brings back memories for sure about my first car, a blue 1979 Fairmont sedan with a white full vinyl top, 200 six and 3 speed automatic. It was probably the least reliable and worst car I have owned to date and soured my family on Ford for years. My grandfather also owned a Fairmont during the time but it was a 1980 wagon with the same drivetrain combo. He left Ford after this car too ironically.
My 1979 was handed down to me in late 1986 from mom and dad after they bought a mint 1982 Cutlass coupe to replace it as it made a far superior road car. The Fairmont only had 60K miles when I got it and plenty of surface rust to take care of. After but a year of ownership the car was already falling apart. The rear end went bad when backing out of the school parking lot standing me there.
The passenger window literally fell down into the door during a cold WInter night after work making for a seriously cold drive home. The plastic door handle broke making it so that if one wanted to exit the passenger seat the option was to wait for me or roll the now repaired window down.
The dash vibrated severely at 55-60 MPH and according to Consumer Guide was a serious flaw on these cars as they noted the same issue. Road noise was horrible as this was a base model with zero sound insulation. Putting on snow tires made it sound like an airplane taking off.
The famous Ford power steering pump was noisy and leaked like a sieve. As did the valve cover. One day when in a hurry I slammed the driver’s door with a little more thrust than was necessary and the glass exploded into shards! There was glass literally everywhere in the interior and I was still finding it years later when vacuum the car out.
The 200 six was barely adequate in my car and downright sluggish in my granddads 1980. And we kept them in perfect tune with several carb rebuilds by that point and every ignition component replaced.
My dad used to complain all the time about the flat as a park bench front seat and routinely brought a pillow on long trips to Rockport, where we used to go overy year for a family trip. It was not a pleasant car at all for these trips with no A/C, those terrible seats and all the racket coming from the tires and under the hood to keep up with traffic as the engine made more noise than thrust.
On the bright side these were well enough designed cars as far as interior room was concerned and the handling when the ball joints and front end were tight was better than average for the time. The stupid horn was not one of their better ideas though and the quality control and obvious cheapness with certain materials was very subpar. These cars were also very sparsely equipped for some reason in most that i saw at the time or one that pops up on Craigslist from time to time. My grandfathers did have A/C and the deluxe interior decor group but little else. Mine had only 200 six and auto plus the exterior moldings and roof. They didn’t even have a passenger mirror, no visor mirror or even a day /night mirror which I think were separate options.
I had a ’78 Zephyr Z7 in the 90’s. It did handle well with slightly wider tires on it. Tracked perfectly. Smooth inline six. Don’t recall ever having rattles. Actually a decent simp!e car.
My dad bought one of these as a former fleet vehicle at his job at Hewlett Packard when I was in high school. When my best friend and I saw it our jaws dropped in horror — it was so bland, so boxy, so beige, oh my god, people at school are going to see us in it, ridiculous teenage drama. We called it the “F-Car,” and thought of it as almost evil. Looking at it now, there’s only a feeling of endearment for a time long past. Shine on, you big ol’ boxy diamond.
Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, Chrysler paid tribute to the Fairmont with the last year (and one year only), Fairmont-clone grille on the Plymouth Volare.
Alice Cooper releasing an appropo song that year.
After my aunt wrecked my grandpa’s 77 Impala wagon around 81 or so, he bought a Zephyr wagon. Not sure what model year. Straight 6, auto, brown exterior, dark red interior, those lace type wheel covers. Even as a little kid I was like wtf over the horn button on the stalk. And I always wondered what “ride engineered” on the dash meant. Once out of nowhere I sneezed and puked on the back seat floor, that dark interior hid it pretty well. He never had any problems with the engine or anything else, but he was a big tall guy and really wanted a bigger wagon. Being so light and with the small wheels, it would ride up on snowdrifts and get stuck instead of plowing through. In 87 or 88 he traded it for an 86 Caprice wagon which he drove for as long as he could drive.
As far as driving foreign makes in the midwest, my experience is rural Michigan. The biggest problem was lack of local dealers, parts availability, and local mechanics who knew how to work on the things. Even through the 90s, you’d have to drive several hours downstate to find a dealer.
Hard to imagine anyone getting excited over these cheap & cheesy extremely built-to-a-price K-Mart boring mobiles. Somehow that Prosthesis Beige color suits it’s nature to a T. Nothing about them exudes even a modicum of quality or style, and the ancient and anemic drivertrains were just the non-icing on the cake. Just the worst kind of examples of Detroit cost-cutting and lowest common denominator thinking. Until the T-Bird/Tempo/Taurus came along Ford was just marking time… and if not exactly world-beaters, at least those cars evinced a bit of fresh thinking.
There are a lot of comments about the horn being on the turn signal. In my Citroen the horn is on the stalk that controls the lights. It is on the right side of the steering column and you twist the end to turn on the lights first position is city lights (“V” = ville} and the second position is highway (“R” = route). you push the stalk away from you for high beams. To sound the horn you push on the end of the stalk. There is a slight complication in that the 2CV has the famous umbrella handle gear change coming out of the center of the dash. As the car is quite narrow, when you select first gear (out and to the left), your hand comes very close (1.5 inches) to the light switch. When I first got the car I used to sometimes beep the horn, but I have learnt to avoid it. In the photo, which is not that clear, the light switch is marked with “O” for off.
Lots of comments since 2013 – yet Paul again, comes away with what is, in my opinion, the perfect way of interpreting this car, “the anti-brougham”.
When the Fairmont was revealed, it was the anti-brougham car that signalled a new way of thinking about US cars from Ford. The Fairmont was boldly honest styling-wise. MacPherson struts on a Ford? WOW. Yes, it was generic. It was the antithesis of Ford products and 86% of what was on the road in 1978. The Fox body was a dawn of a new era at Ford. It saved Ford by providing the basic mechanicals beneath dozens of Ford, Mercury and Lincoln vehicles. The Fox body was a flexible and solid work and was a part of the Ford line up until 1993.
Ford was known as the auto company that produced floating barges of velour and shag since the success of the LTD, Granada, and Thunderbird. Mercury, during the 1970s discovered a level of success in the Brougham Business that it never again matched. Ford made buckets of loot with the Lee Iacocca model of options, padded luxury and plastic wood trim. After the Fairmont, “opulent” a common adjective in describing Ford Company products – was rarely used again.
It is easy today to see the Fox body Fairmont/Zephyr as cheap cracker boxes. Yet at one time, after decades of bigger-is-better and faux brougham luxury, a cracker box was seen as radically fashionable, Volvo-esque, and modern.
Yeah – that horn stalk was terrible. It was never available when you needed it.
UK-version 1978 Ford Granada had fresher-looking styling that still would have been very well received here. Fairmont looked-like a Falcon for the late ’70s.
1978 Ford Granada from the UK, would have looked a generation newer, and accomplished everything the Fairmont managed. With more modern, less dumpy styling. Clean styling that would not have offended domestic customers in the US, while still appealing to import buyers.
The ’78 Fairmont looked older, than the Granada. More predicting ’80s styling trends as well.Ford could have started their early ’80s domestic styling revolution 5 years sooner.
Ford made a Brougham variant of the Fairmont- the ’81-’82 Granada and Mercury Cougar (non-XR7). The shared doors and cowl made them obvious relatives, as did similar interior shapes. They didn’t sell well and were replaced with the less Brougham-y Fox-body LTD and Marquis in ’83-’86 (despite using the ’80-’82 Thunderbird dash). The Cougar LS was the most Broughamed-out of these, sharing the top-line loose-cushion/button tufted front seats from the box T-Bird/Cougar XR7.