For those of you familiar with the alternative/new wave rock band The B-52’s and their iconic first hit, “Rock Lobster” from the late 1970s, one of the memorable peaks in that idiosyncratic song is lead singer Fred Schneider belting out the lyrics: “He was in a jam. In a giant clam!” And somehow that refrain seems fitting for this car, Chevrolet’s version of GM’s mammoth 1970s “clamshell” tailgate full-size wagons. Courtesy of Road Test Magazine, we can take a glimpse at what life would have been like, circa 1973, in a giant clam.
Hailing from Athens, Georgia, The B-52’s formed in the late 1970s and delivered very unexpected takes on traditional music formulas, fusing together retro, pop, Southern, rock, punk and dance styles, along with some very quirky lyrics. Though The B-52’s 1989 hit “Love Shack” touted a Mopar: “Hop in my Chrysler, it’s as big as a whale. And it’s about to set sail,” the band would no doubt have also been familiar with GM’s biggest station wagons, as they were a staple in towns all across America at the time.
Like The B-52’s, the big wagons introduced by General Motors in 1971 were surprisingly unconventional. Rather than continuing with GM’s copy of the “Magic Doorgate” (Ford’s innovative wagon tailgate that “opened like a door” or “folded like a tailgate”), the massive new wagons received the retractable “clamshell” tailgate, with the rear window sliding up into the roof and the tailgate dropping down below the floor. To say the least, it was a complex arrangement, but the goal was to “out-wagon” Ford with novel features.
For 1973, to better battle with the “Wagonmaster” (aka Ford), Chevrolet reintroduced the Caprice Estate name, once again tying the top full-sized wagon to the top-line range of big Chevy sedans/coupes/convertible models (from 1969 though 1972, top Chevrolet wagons were called Kingswood Estates). So this “new” model (really just returning to a more well-known Chevrolet wagon name) was the car that Road Test sampled.
This particular Caprice Estate was very fully loaded, including the 454 4V V8 engine and virtually all available comfort, convenience and handling features. That largess with options took its toll however, as the Caprice Estate as-tested listed for $6,600 ($39,179 adjusted), which was a pretty penny for a Chevy. Granted, Chevrolet also served up a mainstream Impala Wagon, sans fake wood grain exterior trim, and the budget-priced Bel Air Wagon for buyers seeking less expensive full-sized haulers, but there was no avoiding the fact that big bucks were often required for big Chevy wagons, especially in Caprice Estate trim, which still would have cost $5,664 ($33,623 adjusted) even with a more moderate option load.
But that money bought quite a lot of car. The Caprice Estate was huge, smooth riding and comfortable for a wagon. Roadability was enhanced on the test unit due to the addition of the F40 Heavy Duty Suspension package. The 454 V8 was arguably necessary to effectively haul the beast around (especially when it was fully loaded), but other standard items, such as power front disc/rear drum brakes and the Turbo-Hydramatic automatic transmission provided respectable performance by the standards of the day for full-sized cars. It was a good wagon, assuming you could get used to the unusual tailgate and were willing to drive a leviathan.
But did Chevrolet beat Ford in full-sized wagons for 1973? In a word, no. For starters, the big Fords all wore comprehensively revamped styling, giving the cars a fresh, new look. The Caprice Estate, despite the new (old) name, had only minor styling tweaks at the front, primarily to accommodate the massive new 5-mph bumpers. For showing off the suburbs, newer was (and is) better, so the Ford got the nod for that. Plus the Country Squire nameplate carried a good amount of snob appeal—it had been known as a “fancy” wagon for years.
Inside Ford also looked to upgrade the luxury feel by offering an optional interior for the 1973 Country Squire that mirrored the upscale trim found in the top-of-the-line LTD Brougham package. So in terms of adding “luxury” to a wagon, Ford was leagues ahead. Plus, Ford continued to offer the center facing rear seats with a table in the middle for games and picnics. That was the kind of gimmickry many wagon buyers wanted, not “vanishing” tailgates.
Over at Chevy, the “luxury” Caprice Estate made do with an interior that was basically the same as the Impala Wagon, save for emblems and a smidge more fake wood grain trim on the dash. The Impala/Caprice interior was nicer than the taxi-grade Bel Air, but that wasn’t exactly a compliment….
Sales figures reflected the dominance of the Country Squire: the top-line model outsold all other full-sized Ford Wagons combined. Over at Chevrolet, the mid-priced Impala was the top seller, with fake wood grain lovers presumably ponying-up for the Caprice Estate and the slow-selling Bel Air doing yeoman’s duty for cheapskates.
However, when it comes to market dominance, you have to recall General Motor’s mastery of the markets in the 1970s. So while Chevrolet may have been outsold by the Ford Division in full-sized wagons, the stakes changed when the more upscale GM brands were included in the totals. While Mercury added a bit more to the FoMoCo tally, it couldn’t match the sales for the Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick lines of pricier wagons. And poor Mopar, with its fast-aging fuselage wagons, wasn’t even in the hunt. So when it came to total sales of big American wagons in 1973, GM ultimately took the cake with 46% of the market, versus 39% for Ford and 15% for Chrysler. That was a lot of clams!
Additional reading:
Curbside Classic: 1973 Chevrolet Caprice Estate Wagon – Still Doing Its Big Job by Paul Niedermeyer
Love the use of graphs… They nicely illustrate how well Ford did in this segment. It’s especially noteworthy how Ford sold many more of the pricier and more profitable Country Squires while Chevy drew in buyers lower in the price range.
I should whip out my Encyclopedia of American Cars and see how the subsequent Panther and B-Body wagons did but now I’ve been spoiled by your snazzy graphs…
When I saw the headline and first photo, my heart leaped because our first ever American car was exactly the same in the photo aside from fake woodgrain siding.
My father, wanting to follow the Great American Dream, ordered the biggest and baddest car. He picked the right car and the meatiest engine. We loved this car and regretted the most when we didn’t buy it from my father’s company after it exceed the mileage threshold for a fleet car.
We miss that car very much…
I wonder why Chevy used the Impala interior in both the wagon and the convertible versions of the Caprice. That was always a mystery to me….
One of the Caprice’s early distinguishing features was soft cloth upholstery. It isn’t appropriate for utilitarian or open vehicles like wagons and convertibles.
Good question, and the only possible reason I can come up with is that the Caprice sedan and coupe seats do not appear to have been produced in a vinyl version – and as to why, I don’t know. My guess would be that a cloth interior wouldn’t have been seen as suitable for an open car in that era, nor for a wagon full of kids.
Yes, that seemed odd to me as well. Dad had a ’74 Caprice Estate equipped identically to this one. With the tighter ’74 smog controls, he couldn’t break 10 mpg on the highway, and was very frustrated with it as a salesman’s car. He had to stop every 180 miles or so for fuel. The interior was not as nice as Mom’s ’73 Caprice Classic 4-door, and the wagon was much louder as well.
As a company car with a short range, the Caprice Estate was quickly consigned too local duty and Dad was issued a ’75 Buick Estate Wagon. The Buick did not have the towing axle, but it was quieter, had a nicer interior, and got 14 mpg on the highway even with its 455 engine. With the new Radial Tuned Suspension (and the heavy duty suspension package on top of that, as always) it ride and handled better, too.
I was also mystified by the lack of Caprice interior trim for this wagon. The 1973 Caprice convertibles came with vinyl seats as standard (Impala seats). It couldn’t have been that hard (or expensive) to offer a vinyl version of the Caprice seats for all body styles. Same with the Caprice door panels with the carpeted kick panels (versus ribbed vinyl on the Impala). Those details would have gone a long way toward making the Caprice Estate feel more upmarket. Oddly, it wasn’t until 1977 that the Caprice Wagon finally shared the same interior trim as the Caprice sedans.
I wonder if part of it had to do with a need to not be too blatant in trying to poach customers from Pontiac, Olds or Buick. Ford had Mercury to deal with, but with Mercury’s low numbers Ford just didn’t care.
Even as nice as the Country Squire was during the 1970s, a fair number of people still viewed a Mercury Colony Park as a step up from the Ford. This all ended with the downsized 1979 models.
It would be interesting to compare the full-size wagon sales of GM’s divisions after 1973. The impression at the time was that the Pontiac full-size wagons (and full-size cars in general) were fading, with people switching to the Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser and Buick Estate Wagon if they wanted something “better” than a Chevrolet.
Interesting that Plymouth ranked third in wagon sales in 1973 – even if it was a distant third. Our neighbors bought a brand-new, top-of-the-line Suburban wagon in 1973, loaded with everything. It was replaced by a LeBaron Town and Country, if I recall correctly.
Yes, there was a HUGE jump in prestige from the Pontiac Safari wagon to the Olds Custom Cruiser. That Oldsmobile wagon (styled like the big Ninety Eight) just radiated presence as perhaps no wagon had done up to that time.
Except for the Chrysler Town & Country, I believe it was the most expensive US wagon, and after ’73 the new version was most impressive also. We had a ’72 T & C and it was pretty posh, and rare. A nice one sold at Carlisle recently for something like $25k.
My wife still has a patient near 90 yrs old who comes to appointments in a ’73 Chevy clamshell, and yes it’s pretty rusty, as is she!
As a young boy, I remember being impressed that the 1971-76 Custom Cruiser had the grille of the Ninety-Eight, and wore fender skirts. The Buick Estate Wagons managed to be impressive, too. They both really did seem to be a cut above a Chevrolet or a Pontiac wagon.
The Custom Cruiser also (in some versions anyway) got some Ninety Eight interior fittings including the huge door armrests I’ve never seen a Buick Estate Wagon so equipped, though it would seem the Electra door panels would fit on it too. I’m not clear on whether the rear doors on the clamshell wagons were the same width as those on the C body sedans; these would be necessary for the 98/Electra rear door trim panels to fit.
Plymouth wagons were kind of the same, using vinyl on the top line Custom Suburban, vs. Gran Fury or VIP cloth. Wagons were kid haulers and most parents wanted durable seats.
Canadians got one additional big Chevy wagon for the 1973 model year. The Biscayne soldiered a bit longer in the Great White North. http://oldcarbrochures.com/static/Canada/Chevrolet/1973%20Chevrolet%20Wagons%20Brochure/image6.html
http://oldcarbrochures.com/static/Canada/Chevrolet/1974%20Chevrolet%20Wagons%20Brochure/image3.html
I remember the Biscayne versions. In the ’73 brochure, and the photo of the Biscayne, the body sides looked quite airbrushed. As if there may have been trim visible in the original photo they wanted removed.
I have no experience with the clamshell wagons, but they must have been high maintenance once rust started affecting the tailgate operation, with potential rust perforations in the cavity it slipped into.
It’s also interesting how the ‘73 brochure emphasizes how wagon-like the Suburban is. How times and tough, ostensibly SUV-related vehicles change.
I guess they wanted to market the Suburban being poised for more suburban and recreational duties. It’s the year it was completely revamp and got in option the 454 V8 for the first time.
They were a huge headache for bodymen trying to straighten them out after getting rear ended. Trying to get everything lined up and operating smoothly was a PITA.
Whenever I hear about the Biscayne in Canada, I always think of Joni Mitchell singing “Raised on Robbery”. Not just because the nameplate was discontinued here by 1974, but because , despite seeing one here and there, I don’t remember ever hearing an add for one, so that song was just about the only media attention I recall for that model.
Excellent review GN, of Road Test’s original evaluation. I was pretty young at the time, but I am impressed at the sales numbers Ford attained during the early to mid 70s with the LTD, Torino, Maverick and Pinto lines. When each of these models were somewhat prone to premature rust. And they had a developed a reputation as such. The Granada/Monarch and Mustang II were improved, but the other lines developed a reputation for early rust after 1969 or so. Worse than their domestic competitors. Yet, Ford sales remained strong. I guess in spite of word of mouth, people just accepted rust, and buying new cars every 5 years or so back then. Plus, of course the competition had various quality issues as well.
Interesting as well, how much in some ways, AMC Pacer-like the rear of the clamshell design appeared. The bulbous rear shape melding much better on a full-sized wagon, than a short compact.
I still remembered one of the first times I saw one one of the clamshell wagons on TV was in Steven Spielberg’s ‘Duel’. I tracked the clip below to the scene in the movie where the ’71 Caprice wagon does some maneuvering to avoid Dennis Weaver’s Valiant. This being a brand new design when the movie was released in ’71. (1:03:37)
https://youtu.be/i2tlK2cWWGs?t=3817
Interesting road test. However, I do take issue with the spelling in “boosting the gage of the frame rails”. Hey, Road Test – “gage” was GM-speak. Makes me wonder about the magazine’s impartiality.
Around the turn of the ’90s, I had a musician friend who drove a two-seat green and slightly ragged ’73 Caprice wagon. Roy used the beast every day as he was a roving teacher for the public schools. It sucked up gas like there was no tomorrow. He got a lot of use out of his AAA card and I had to go rescue him on several occasions when the wagon broke down. Roy eventually replaced it with a used 1985 bustleback Seville – no accounting for taste, I suppose.
The bar graphs show something I didn’t know – Mopar was a pretty minor player in the 1973 wagon game compared to Ford and GM. In fact, it looks like Buick sold more wagons than Chrysler and Dodge combined.
I am still having that spelling argument in SAE committee and task force meetings. I always advocate for the correct spelling (gauge). I almost always get shouted down.
Unlike the write up implies, the 1973 Ford styling wasn’t well received when the cars were new. It was considered stubby. The reaction was the 1975 Ford, which had extended fender blades fore and aft (except the wagon tail) to lengthen the profile.
Also, models below Galaxie/Impala weren’t really US retail products for cheapskates by the 70s. They were government and business fleet vehicles.
If I ever win the lottery and get out of the deadbeat club, I’m going to get me one of these and just follow my bliss down a dirty back road out West. Maybe spend some money on a new wig, or splurge and buy a state all to myself. My own private Oregon, perhaps, or Montana.
Great article. A neighbor of mine had the Olds version of this years ago. Huge, unwieldy, but impressive.
One more (Planet Claire):
She came from Planet Claire
I knew she came from there
She drove a Plymouth Satellite
A-faster than the speed of light
You beat me to it!!!!
You must have static in your attic🙃🙃🙃
The back end of an early 70’s Chevy wagon always reminds me of a demoliton derby, I think that’s where most of them went in the late 80’s
The clamshell wagons kicked ass in demolition derbies. Probably second to only the Chrysler Imperial.
That was GM’s big problem. It never seemed able to accept that someone else had a winning idea, at least in a way that would let it adopt the idea and try to put it in a more appealing package. Nope – “We have to show those idiots in Dearborn that their 3 way doorgate is just a temporary stopgap before the next REAL innovation in tailgates, which we will introduce.”
Actually, when they did just try to adapt someone else’s idea (like with the 67 Camaro or the 68-72 A body wagons with a doorgate) they made a pretty appealing car. But the same thing would later happen in minivans. GM could never find within itself the will to simply copy a winning formula.
I think one big drawback to these was that extreme slope at the rear roof which rendered the back two or three feet useless for tall items. I wonder if a design with a somewhat straighter window that could retract into the tailgate instead of going into the roof might have allowed a more upright rear roof.
At least GM gave in and went back to the ‘door-gate’ for 1977. Also, weight dropped 1000 lbs, that year.
The downsized B body wagons sold well, until the Mopar Minivans then became popular family haulers in the 80s/90s.
When I was in college I inherited my mother’s 1972 Townsman (Belair) wagon. I gave a girl a ride home for Christmas break but after putting her plants in the back something in the tailgate/window interlock jammed and I could not get the rear window to close all the way. We drove down the Northway through an Adirondack snowstorm and by the time we got home her plants were frozen and dead. We are still friends though, 43 years later.
That wagon had none of the luxury stuff the tested one had – I think the only option was the AM radio. Being dark green and with vinyl seats and no AC it was unbearable in the summer.
Where did you live? Just curious. I lived in northeastern Wisconsin. We had many friends with various GM clam shell tailgate wagons. No Buicks I remember.
I know of no one who had issues with the tailgate or rear window, other than the hefty slam to close the manual tailgate. I can see these as an expense at rear end collisions. But it took a hefty hit to damage them. The reason for their favor as demo derby cars.
I lived in the Hudson Valley in NY and went to college in Plattsburgh, just south of the border with Quebec. That was the only time the window jammed. Some ice must have gotten in the works as after a thaw the window worked OK.
5,300 lbs…a good 1.500 lbs. heavier than their Tri-Five and earlier equivalents. Wow.
And 5,300 is awfully close to what my 2002 Tahoe weighs.
Ford’s more premium reputation compared to Chevy was being forged in those days.
Then again, you had a GM corporate parent looking over its shoulder lest Congress bee-slap them with Sherman Anti-Trust action. Could there have been such a thing as its largest division getting in corporate hot water for trying too hard?
If only they could’ve seen ahead a decade or two…
I have to remember these GM B-bodies had pretty competent road manners for their day. I’d driven enough of them back-in-the-day to know, although no wagons as I recall. But in hindsight, the entire series seems like an aberration compared with what came before and after. That goes for the A-bodies as well.
Whether Chevrolet regains its mojo in segments other than full-size SUVs remains to be seen. I’m rooting for them.
“5,300 lbs…a good 1.500 lbs. heavier than their Tri-Five and earlier equivalents. Wow.”
My 1963 Cadillac Fleetwood only weighed 5200!
A great article – thanks, GN! I find your graphs of full-size wagon sales very interesting. The outsized share of market garnered by Ford in this segment certainly squares with my childhood memories, when every other car I rode around in was a Ford wagon (we, on the other hand, were among the Mopar outcasts). It seems that with the Country Squire, Ford was able to reach upwards from its traditional “low-priced three” market position to capture many affluent buyers who would have otherwise defaulted to the full range of middle and upper-middle priced GM brands. Indeed, I remember many friends’ and neighbors’ garages where the second car was a Buick or Oldsmobile B or C bodied full-size. A modern day analog might be the prestige accorded the Suburban by well-off suburbanites who otherwise would never set foot in a Chevy showroom.
I recall the same situation in the ’60’s and ’70’s. Olds, Buick and even Cadillac sedan/HT owners who wanted a wagon often bought a Country Squire. Twenty years of careful cultivation of the CS image by Ford paid off. Buyers did not see these as lowly Fords, but the most popular premium wagon in America. Very much at home at the country club and tony tailgate parties. Chevy took a similar track with the Suburban. Buyers who would never consider an Impala readily fork over 60 grand for a Suburban, marketed as a big, bad SUV for the smart set.
I was always puzzled why the Excursion didn’t succeed, even though old ones seem to have a cult following today. Maybe it was too close to the Expedition, but Ford sort of neglected it and left it to die. With all the new, monstrous pickups coming for 2019, it would have been right at home.
The top Chevy wagon was called Kingswood for the first two years of the clamshell wagon. 1973 was the first year the Caprice name was used on the top wagons
The use of the ‘Rock Lobster’ line of “He was in a jam. In a giant clam!” is even more appropriate since those GM clamshell tailgates did, indeed, tend to jam. I think it was particularly acute when the manual, spring-loaded version was specified. Even when they worked properly, the manual version was tough to close when trying to pull it up. In fact, it wasn’t uncommon back in the day to see an occasional clamshell GM station wagon with its tailgate partially open.
All told, the clamshell tailgate’s advantages simply didn’t outweigh its disadvantages. But when you add in all the GM divisions, they still outsold Ford/Mercury.
I always assumed that in addition to retracting into the floor, the lower tailgate could flip out to extend the load floor for things like carpets. But in all the stories I’ve read on these cars, I’ve seen no mention of that. Of course, the load floor was already quite long in these cars, but a fold-down gate still seems like an advantage for Ford owners, especially for parents of kids with paper routes.
IIRC, the GM wagons lost 900 lbs during the 1977 downsizing and reverted to the three way tailgate and gained some interior room to boot.
Thanks so much for finding this gem, GN! 0-60 in 10.6 seconds sounds good given the weight, but then 10-11mpg – ouch!! We’ve come a long way with today’s minivans and crossovers.
Clamshells must have seemed like a cool idea in theory, but the weight, cost, complexity, reliability and cost of repair in accidents are all negatives I’ve read about them. It made me think of Tesla Model X falcon doors as the modern version of unnecessary complexity.
Clam shell was designed in the “go-go” 60’s, brought out fall 1970 for new 71’s. Back when “bigger was better”.
At the ’71 Auto Show, parents were wowed by the new tailgate. But we stuck with our ’68 Plymouth until 1975.
Nowadays, in our xUV crazy market, we are back to ‘bigger is better’, : – P
From my recollection (and I was only 9 at the time) in 1973 most folks were far more brand loyal than they are today. I came from a GM family, and there were Ford families, and a handful of Chrysler families.
I didn’t know folks who would compare the Ford wagon to the Chevy. It was more like “Which GM do I want to buy?” or “Which Ford do I want to buy?”.
Evan I was also 9 in ’73. We are the last of the Boomers! And you’re quite right about there being “Ford” people and “Chevy” people back in the day, and they were very brand loyal.
Me too. And my Dad was an “Oldsmobile Man!” We had a new ’73 Custom Cruiser. 12 mpg whether you had 1 person or a full load and a popup camper. Ours had the manual tailgate. Never had problems with it but it did take a good slam to get shut. Also over time debris got in the tailgate well and trapped water, causing it to rust out.
The car was sold in the ’80’s, probably for a demolition derby.
Bob
Another thing I should add is that back then customers were also loyal to their dealers as well. Dealers were much more stable then. And existed with the same make and ownership for years. Also back then a lot of sales people would stay at that dealer for years and that was their chosen career as they would concentrate on building a long term customer base. .
The sales guy my father always dealt with was the owner of the dealer. He didn’t get any better treatment than anybody else. The owner/salesman treated everybody equally and everybody very well.
Bob
The only people I knew with a mid 70s Mercury Colony Park wagon were loyal GM buyers, but the dad of the family refused to buy one of the clamshell wagons. Everything else they ever got (while I knew them) was GM.
I would have bought the Ford. It was just nicer.
By 1973 a lot of people here in Texas were buying Suburbans instead of these. The price was not much different and the fuel economy was similar I believe. Since the Chevy did not really have the Caprice interior the trim was pretty similar too.
And, back in the 70s if you drove a Suburban you could pretend that you owned a ranch!
Life in a giant clam, well local to me you can have your last ride in a clamshell wagon theres a 75 Chevy wagon doing hearse duty, better still is the 38 Dodge hearse in use round here.
The whole idea of sliding doors/roofs/tailgates has never really sold or worked all that well. From the Kaiser-Darren sportscar, to the Studebaker Wagonaire (and it’s modern version, the GMC Envoy XUV), to the GM wagon clamshell tailgate, none of them ever really panned out and were unceremoniously dropped (sometimes because the company went out of business).
In fact, wasn’t someone recently working on a pickup tailgate that slid into an area underneath the bed?
As soon as I read that, I knew exactly the one they were probably talking about, and I bet I’m not the only one. Used by at least GM and Ford, probably Chrysler, maybe AMC. This one:
I loved everything about this post. You always add such a helpful frame of reference with your well-thought-out narratives. I always forget about the erstwhile dominance of the Ford wagons (from “The Wagonmaster”). The cultural references were the icing on the cake.
It still pains me to think of seeing some of these “clamshell” wagons in the few demolition derbies I attended when I was a kid.
(Big fan of the B-52s… Saw them in concert back in ’93 when they were promoting “Good Stuff”, and got Kate Pierson’s autograph. Older brother used to wear out his copy of “Whammy!” in our living room – another CD I own in 2018.)
When I saw my first I thought “you’ve got to be kidding…”.
One or two uses of the clamshell tailgate in a hard rain, or layer of snow/ice made a lot of believers in Ford’s 3 way door gate.
Reminds me of the GMC Envoy XUV with the disappearing roof (FAIL). In his book Bob Lutz admitted the XUV was a financial disaster. And he approved its production
The clamshell tailgate lives with all the short lived “sounded like a good idea at the time” growing list of automotive failures.
According to Popular Science October 1972 The Highest Sticker price for a 1973 wagon was a Chrysler Town &Country for $5000, The Olds Custom Cruiser was 2nd at $4850. Third was the Colony Park and Buick Estate Wagon at $4750. 4th was the Grand Safari at $4700. Dodge Monaco and Mercury Marquis at $4600. The Country Squire and Caprice Estate were at $4450. These are all base list prices. I will post more if anyone asks.
Bob
I just want to add these were base prices. I don’t know about options or
prices for them.
Bob
At $6,600 you were entering Cadillac territory. A 1973 Sedan deVille started at $6,500.
And I remember as a kid being so infatuated with Ford’s power mini-vent windows.
I thought they just seemed “prestigious”. After you’ve seen a Ford product with them, one without them looks cheap.
They were cool gadgets, especially the way the same button opened the vent pane, then the main one. But, I never thought of them as particularly useful, given that they couldn’t divert air into the car the way the pivoting vents did. Maybe if I smoked (and had no compunction about tossing the embers into the woods), I’d appreciate them more, but maybe those plastic rain guards they sell online are a passable substitute.
Yup! Ford indeed was “The Wagon Masters” (quoting their advertising slogan) from the 1950’s thru the 1970’s……and Chevy wasn’t.
The only thing that Chevy did better than Ford was their variable ratio power steering system.
Very good “road feel” (when compared to Ford or Mopar) and quick response.
It always seemed like Ford was (at least) one generation behind General Motors with their power steering systems.
Imagine being impressed by a car being able to pull .63g in cornering. We’ve come a long way here.
I like that GM spent the money to have each of the four divisions have unique sheetmetal on their clamshell wagons, save for the roof and tailgate. The fenders and taillight area all look like the respective sedans, and different from each other. They’d cheapen out on the downsized 1977 models and thereafter, where all four wagons were nearly identical from the A pillars back.
And that 63g was because of the optional F40 heavy duty/handling suspension package!
After test driving a ’73 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser station wagon, my Father commented to me: “I never thought I’d ever drive a looser, limper, greased pig on roller skates station wagon than your Mother’s Ford……but we just did!
Love the GM math – in order to say you beat “Ford” you have to add all divisions together and claim victory. This is a tired and rancid evaluation of success – carries on today with Chevrolet claiming GMC sales to try to beat “Ford”. And to think that GMC is built by the same wonderful UAW workers who put their fingers on the Chevrolets. I guess there is special love when you get a GMC. Sarcasm intended.
Having worked as a teenager for a gentleman who owned a 1976 Buick Estate (looked like an Electra) with the clam shell tail gate, I can just say it looked and worked marvelously until you started loading things into the vehicle that could fall into the area of the tail gate that disappeared under the floor. And then it wouldn’t work.