[The good Dr. Rudolf Diesel himself.]
In my “Cars of a Lifetime” article, The RWD Diesel Stick-Shift Brown Station Wagon Mythical Beast of the Internet, I touched briefly on the American car enthusiast’s fetishization of this unusual car. With this article, I hope to provide a comprehensive study into why this particular car has become an object of desire, and the realities of actual availability and sales of the rare beast.
In the post-WWII era, Americans were first introduced to the Diesel-engined passenger car , the Mercedes-Benz 180D, in the 1950s. Production and importation figures are unavailable, but it is difficult to imagine that too many Americans would be interested in purchasing a small, slow, and expensive car that required difficult to obtain fuel, in this era. Sales figures were most likely minuscule. For all of the 1950s, 1960s, and into the early 1970s, Diesel-powered passenger cars were barely a blip on the radar of overall passenger-car sales.
All this began to change in October 1973 with the OPEC Oil Embargo. In retaliation for US aid to Israel, the OPEC nations banded together and raise the price of a barrel of crude oil by 70% overnight, and oil production was cut 5% per month.[1] Gasoline rationing ensued in the US. Car buyers looked for alternative-fueled cars with better fuel economy. During the Oil Embargo, Diesel fuel was often more readily available, largely owing to the fact that it was mostly used for commercial trucking, and almost always sold for a lower price per gallon than gasoline. This was the primary reason for the rise of the Diesel passenger car in the 1970s.
During the same period, gasoline-powered cars were beginning to become more complex. Buyers wanted cars that got better fuel economy, and the government was beginning to mandate cleaner, less polluting cars. The engine bays of new cars became filled with these crude emissions controls devices, their electronics, and yards of vacuum hoses.
[This is from a 1985 Honda Civic. Just a wee bit complex.]
In the meantime, since the availability and use of Diesel engines in passenger cars was so minimal, they were essentially ignored by government regulators. Combined with the lack of emission controls, Diesel engines eliminate the entire spark ignition systems (along with their increasingly complex emission-reducing devices) rendering the engine bay of a Diesel car much less complex.
[This is from a 1981 Mercedes 240D. Just a touch more simple.]
Rear-wheel drive and manual transmissions are also incredibly simple and well-understood systems. In a period of ever-increasing automotive complexity, many enthusiasts appreciated the simplicity of cars with Diesel engines, manual transmissions, and RWD. As for the station wagon part, enthusiasts appreciate the utility of that body style when combined with the ride and handling characteristics of a passenger car.
Why brown? It can only be surmised that brown is the perfect color when reminiscing about malaise-era cars. There really isn’t any other reason.
Having established why this mythical beast is so beloved, let’s look at the actual players in the market – who sold these mythical beasts and who did not.
Peugeot:
[A 1979 Peugeot 504 Diesel wagon]
The first entry into the US market with a Diesel station wagon, Peugeot introduced the 504 Diesel in 1973, and began exporting cars to the US for the 1974 model year. According to Brian Holm, the proprietor of Peugeot Holm, the premier US source for all things Peugeot, and a well-respected member of the online Peugeot Enthusiasts Group, the Peugeot 504 Diesel Station Wagon was sold in the US from 1974-1983. From 1974-1976 the only transmission choice was a 4-speed manual; from 1977-1983 an automatic transmission was optionally available. The later 505 Station Wagon was never sold in the US with a manual transmission.[2]
Peugeot was never a huge player in the American market. For the 10-year period during which the subject cars were sold, total US Peugeot importation was a mere 119,558 cars.[3] As Peugeot abandoned the US market in 1992, no breakdown of individual models, much less transmission choices or color, is readily available. Even if the wildly optimistic figure of 5% of those cars were brown station wagons with manual transmissions, that is a mere 5978 cars over a 10-year period.
Volvo:
240/260:
[The author’s 1984 Volvo 245 Diesel.]
Seeing the rise in popularity of Diesel cars, Volvo wanted a Diesel of their own to sell. However, owing to financial restrictions, the decision was made to outsource an engine, rather than design one in-house. Volvo turned to Volkswagen and purchased their 2.4 liter I-6, as used in the VW LT Transporter, a model not sold in North America.
(Side note: For markets outside of North America, Volvo also bought a 2.0 liter, five-cylinder version of the same engine. Both are related to the 4-cylinder Diesel engines that Volkswagen used in their own cars.)
Importation of the 240/260 Diesel models began in 1979 for the 1980 model year. Because of new emissions regulations regarding Diesel cars that became effective 1/1/1980, Volvo could no longer import cars after that date. Volvo got the engine cleaned up enough to resume importation in late 1981 for the 1982 model year. Importation and sales continued through the 1984 model year, but a few leftover cars got new VIN and were titled as 1985 models.
Production figures from this era are available, but only broken down by body style, not engine, transmission, or color. Combining the 1980 and the 1982-1984 model years, Volvo sold 283,756 station wagons.[4] Once again, if the wildly optimistic figure of 5% of those cars were brown with manual transmissions, that is a mere 14,188 cars over a 4-year period. Anecdotal information suggests that Diesel sales were only a tiny fraction of overall sales, so again, this is an extremely optimistic guess.
740/760:
[A brown Diesel 745 is too rare. This is a gas model.]
For the 1983 model year, Volvo introduced the 740/760 series of cars. Although a turbocharged version of the same 2.4 liter I-6 that was used in the 240/260 was available that year, no station wagons were produced. In fact, during the entire production of the 740/760 series (1983-1992) the only year in which an American buyer could combine the Diesel engine with a manual transmission in a station wagon body was the 1985 740. Total production of all 1985 740/760 Station Wagons was a mere 8008 units.[5] Once again, using the wildly optimistic figure of 5%, that makes for 400 units.
That’s it. Volvo and Peugeot. Sticking with the ridiculously optimistic 5% figure, that would make for a maximum of 20,566 US sales of brown, RWD, manual transmission station wagons ever sold in the USA.
“But wait!”, I hear you scream. “[Brand X] also sold brown, RWD, manual transmission station wagons!”
No sir, they did not. Here are the almost-rans:
Mercedes-Benz:
Prior to 1978, Mercedes did not manufacture station wagons, although some aftermarket coachbuilders did offer conversions. In 1978, Mercedes introduced their first factory-built wagon, on the W123 chassis. Official US imports for the 300TD and 300TD-Turbo ran from 1979-1985. None of them – none of them – had manual transmissions.
That is not to say that there weren’t gray-market importations of W123 wagons with manual transmissions, or later importation under the NHTSA 25-year exemption, or homemade conversions (using parts from a manual-transmission W123 sedan). There were, and there are. But Mercedes-Benz USA never officially sold a W123 station wagon with a manual transmission.
Oldsmobile:
Everyone’s favorite Diesel punching bag, Oldsmobile certainly made plenty of Diesel station wagons, in both full-size and mid-size variants. (Buick, Pontiac, and Chevrolet sold station wagons with the Oldsmobile Diesel engines as well.) None of them had manual transmissions. As an interesting bit of trivia, there was a manual-transmission option for the Cutlass in the 1979 model year, but it was not available in the station wagon body. As bad as the Olds 350 Diesel engine was, nobody remembers the Oldsmobile 260ci/4.3 liter V-8 Diesel, which was worse than the 350 by every measure. However, in 1979, a masochist could order this engine under RPO LF7. Tick the box for RPO M75, and you could combine the smaller Diesel with a Borg-Warner T-50 5-speed manual transmission. But again, this combination could only be had in a sedan or coupe – never in a station wagon.
Datsun/Nissan:
The early 1980s was a transitional period for this Japanese carmaker. What started as the Datsun 810 became known as the Nissan Maxima. Both could be had with the LD28 2.8 liter I-6 Diesel. A 5-speed manual transmission was offered, as was a station wagon body. However, American buyers could not combine all 3 elements into a single car. You could get a Diesel sedan with a stick-shift, but all wagons, both gas and Diesel, required an automatic transmission.
Volkswagen:
By the time their Diesel engines were produced, VW sold FWD cars exclusively – with one exception. Sold in the US with the model name “Vanagon”, the T3 Transporter was available with a Diesel engine for the 1982 and 1983 model years. While Volkswagen’s marketing department would like to believe that the Vanagon was a combination of a van and a station wagon, it wasn’t a station wagon at all.
It was a van. With seats. Not a station wagon.
By the end of the 1980s, the era of the Diesel passenger car was all but dead in America. Die hard fans were limited to offerings from Mercedes and Volkswagen, but the sullied reputation (mostly due to Oldsmobile’s poor engines) left the Diesel by the wayside. In addition, the widespread adoption of electronic fuel injection for gasoline engines, along with greater understanding of repair of such systems, largely eliminated the rat’s nest engine bays that frightened buyers in the 1970s and early 1980s. With only a few exceptions, the era of the RWD passenger car was over as well.
By any reasonable estimation, less than 10,000 brown, manual transmission, RWD station wagons were ever sold in the USA. Perhaps enthusiasts romanticize this model too much; they certainly never had any real sales when they were available, so why are they desired now?
[1] source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis – accessed 11/17/2016
[2] source: personal email correspondence with Mr. Holm, dated 6/7/2016
[3] source: http://www.productioncars.com/production-numbers/peugeot_new.php – accessed 6/5/2016
[4] source: http://www.vlvworld.com/indexframe.html?production.html – accessed 11/17/2016
[5] source: http://www.vlvworld.com/indexframe.html?production.html – accessed 11/17/2016
Long before this trope existed, in the late 90’s, I owned a brown 1982 Peugeot 504 diesel wagon. The doppelganger of the one in the photo. It was an “automatique” (that was the badge) however, manual transmission was available! This was actually one of my all-time favorite cars although insanely slow. I would probably still have it if it hadn’t been destroyed by an inept mechanic (not me). I remember how excited I was when I found another 504 in the junkyard that had the plastic dashboard panels replaced with homemade solid oak panels… Put that oak in mine, it looked fantastic
One of the few new cars my father bought was a 1974 Peugeot 504 LD. It was as low-spec as they came, with the horizontal speedo and column shifter (four speed manual, natch). And it was close to brown, i.e. dark red. Alas, it wasn’t a wagon. Still, it soldiered on for ten years before being replaced by a blue 604 with the dreaded PRV.
In your reasoning for the desirability of this vehicular unicorn, you forgot the most important reason of all: The virtually complete unavailability of the combination (I have a feeling that the diesel, manual, brown station wagon was 1% at best, not the 5% you so liberally credit).
As internet auto-bloggers are best known for making sweeping demands on the auto manufacturers with absolutely no intention whatsoever of ever reaching into their collective wallets and pulling out the money necessary to buy a NEW automobile, the demand for a diesel, manual, brown station wagon is a very safe choice. Given it’s relative unavailability, said opinionated, loud-mouthed demanding blogger will never be faced with the possibility of actually having to put their money where their mouth is and BUY said car when it becomes available.
Because it won’t.
Thus saving them the public shaming of being shown to be the hypocrites they usually are.
In real estate, “Buyers are Liars.” Problem is, people misrepresent their desires if they’re afraid to admit the real ones when asked. This might explain misleading political polls as well.☺
Political correctness fooled the political polls.
Exactly.
I don’t know how many times I’ve heard these silly demands and that is always my question, “So, would you actually buy one new?”
“Um…well, uh, if I had the money I probably would…” is usually the stammered back answer.
Well, then you have your answer. Car companies aren’t going to waste their time, money, and effort to market some sub-niche odd ball car for a bunch of fanbois with no money.
I’d be the first in line telling the dealer to shut up and take my money if Caddy or Lincoln or Chrysler would make a real brougham again, but I know they never will. I get tired of the people who actually whine about it, especially when I know they don’t even have money for some 10 year old run down near hooptie.
So if you can’t afford a new vehicle you’re not allowed to have an opinon?
Duly noted.
Opinions are fine; just please don’t post “I’d buy one in a heartbeat!” when it’s obvious to yourself (and others, as well) that you have no actual intention or means of actually doing so.
What I find refreshing on this site is that people will regularly post, “The (insert oddball vehicle here) was perfect for my needs at the time, but not many people were like me, and willing to actually buy one…so I understand why XYZ Motors discontinued it.”
So in the spirit of this week (at least in the US), I’m thankful for the many insightful and intelligent folks who regularly visit this site… 🙂
Opinions are like part of our anatomy, as the old saying goes.
The point is, why get butthurt or curse the car companies up and down for not building the brown diesel wagon, or L’Empereur Brougham d’Elegance Par Deux, or whatever when there is no real market for it? Car companies are in business to make money, not listen to fanbois with more hat than cattle.
So, yes, anyone is welcome to their opinion-just don’t expect anyone (least of all car companies) to give a damn about them.
If they’re going to treat us like cattle, expect to get a lot of shit. As a consumer I couldn’t give two craps about production efficiencies or sales statistics to color my desires and opinions in a product, that’s not what I’m paying for. I don’t expect automakers to build anything I specifically want either, but the companies were the ones who raised expectations with prior models, not the consumers. With all these so called advances in production efficiencies outsourced labor costs you’d think a la carte on some level would make a comeback, but it’s more homogenous as ever.
There’s a line between being informed about the realities of business and kowtowing to their practices, and that’s often crossed when I see lecturous statements regarding why this car or this color or this engine or this drive layout isn’t available anymore, and why one’s not purchasing that hypothetical product, that may not be well executed, but most definitely for a hefty premium, deserves the ire and the company the praise. It’s one thing to say you’re going to buy the brown diesel wagon and then go out and buy a beige base Camry instead, but I suspect most pining for the weird car simply do neither, and keep the clapped out old brown diesel wagon they already own and like instead.
Actually, in a ‘perfect’ world, I would think that the purchase of a new automobile would allow you to post to any and all auto blogs for twelve months following the day of delivery of said car. At the beginning of the thirteenth month, you’re locked out from the comments section until you buy another new car.
Draconian? Hell, yeah. But it’s called “putting your money where your mouth is” which is a concept that 99% of all blog comments don’t understand in the slightest.
And all those bloggers who pride themselves on never buying a car that costs most than (fer’instance) $5000.00; we never have to listen to their opinions about what the auto industry should be building.
Great…. so when cars start falling apart at month 13 nobody can complain. Perfect! Just buy a new one!
How the hell does that work for an auto blog about classic cars? I can only talk about how much better looking, fun, and easy to work on an old Impala was if I bought a brand new Camry with none of those things?
You’re just beginning to understand a car at the 1 year mark. Still pretty much brand new at that point…
Well I suppose that would be one way to get the manufacturers to start paying attention to blogs again.
That’s the point. I’m not an “enthusiast”, I’m more a Brougham/luxury fan but I get tired of hearing people bellyache and moan about Cadillac or Lincoln or Buick or Chrysler or whoever not putting out anything good, unlike their Buy-Here-Pay-Here Grand Marquis or Park Avenue.
I’m all for more choices in color or engines or trims and more ala carte options, but no one is listening to people who want to start up the Town Car assembly line again. First, because FoMoCo didn’t think it was what they needed to do even though we all know livery, and taxi and police would have bought Panther based cars to this very day. If they weren’t moved by a considerable chunk of business that is pure profit, they sure as hell aren’t going to design a dedicated RWD platform covered in gingerbread with a stone reliable old v8 to make some people happy that have nothing more intelligent to say than all new cars suck and they all look the same…not to mention I’m on a Hyundai Accent budget so I’m not going to buy one of these new Broughams anyway-well, maybe until they show up at Cars 4 Less 15 years from now.
Look down your nose all you want at used car buyers, but automakers didn’t ignore the kids in the 50s and 60s souping up old jalopies. Times have vastly changed since then, where those old jalopies truly were used up worthless tin until someone swapped in a junkyard Chevy or Cadillac V8 back then, the Buy-Here-Pay-Here Grand Marquis or Park Avenue – or virtually anything else made since the 90s – are every bit as reliable as what’s being churned out today, for a fraction of Hyundai Accent money, in creampuff condition no less.
Automakers, in a perfect world, want EVERYONE’s business, but they are by proxy competing against the past, and that’s probably the biggest slice of the enthusiast share of market these days. A case has to be made for their new product and offering something like the FR-S that matches but doesn’t necessarily exceed the capabilities, style, reliability or value of something similar made decades ago isn’t the way to get those sales. Automakers are the first ones to cite their own histories to bolster a brand, but it’s wrong for an enthusiast to do the same when citing their own history to criticize?
Also, enthusiast doesn’t equal high performance. If you’ve gone to the trouble to make a profile and comment about cars on a car site, you’re an enthusiast. Doesn’t matter if the car in question is a Lamborghini or a brown wagon.
I’m not looking down at used car buyers, I’m criticizing the blowhards that don’t seem to realize their particular desires aren’t universal and represent no appreciable market share-thus will never happen. The issue is why complain if they are never going to be able to buy it new anyway? Car companies need to make money, they aren’t going to do that chasing nonexistent business.
I’m using “enthusiast” in the sense of how it’s often used, as a certain kind of car hobbyist.
They’re not non-existent though, what I’m criticizing are the blowhards that only see new car sales as relevant for what people currently want. There’s over twice as many used car sales as new car sales every year, 38.2 million vs. 17.5 million for 2015, and that doesn’t even factor in the number of longer term used cars kept around because *gasp* the owners like them.
For the record, I think both viewpoints and criticisms have merit, but really it’s particularly grating to see these discussions inevitably devolve into a patronizing shareholder meeting where the business is all important. The whole brown manual diesel station wagon is way more often used by a jumping off point to rip enthusiasts these days than it is a posted desire from one. It’s not the consumer’s responsibility to worry about such matters, it’s up to us to seek out and buy exactly what we want, and those who find it elsewhere aren’t any less important. They’d probably like to find what they were looking for easier and automakers ultimately aren’t in business to turn away customers. It’s all about making the sale.
Wouldn’t that be an odd policy for a site devoted to used, antique and classic cars?
With the average car in use nudging a dozen years old, such a site would have limited relevance, anyway.
I wish I could buy another SAAB or NSU to keep up my membership rights, but I can’t so I’ll go now…
Personally I’d be happy with a AWD manual transmission gas wagon – but honestly even Subaru doesn’t sell them anymore (hatchback, yes – OUTBACK, manual no longer available) and even Mazda the ZOOM, ZOOM purveyor won’t let you order one of their CUVs with AWD and a stick.
Lets be honest, the CUV is the modern American wagon.
It’s a pity about the Outback now being CVT-only in the US, but you can still order the Forester with a 6-speed manual.
I have a 2009 Forester, 5-speed manual, in harvest gold. Pretty close to that mythical beast.
At least in Subaru-saturated Vermont the manual Forester isn’t just orderable but readily found in dealer stock in both base and panoramic-sunroof Premium trims.
No brown though, that’s only available on higher trim levels (plenty of red, blue and green though so they’re not all grayscales).
This. Now if only that was a Forester XT…
I was filling up at Costco back in August when a Subaru Forester XT (looked to be a 2nd gen model) pulled up next to me. I noticed it was lowered, had performance stickers all over it including one that said “Wagonmasterz” or something like that. Big burly linebacker of a guy got out of it to fill up. I peeked around the pump, to my disappointment it was an automatic.
Subaru must have offered that in brown at some point. If not recently, then back in the 80’s before the days of Outbacks.
my brother had one in the 80s. brown manual subaru wagon (gas not diesel). actually, wasn’t that great of car. interior quality was meh and it was rust bucket before its time.
btw, fantastic article. now i know why i daydream about putting a manual transmission in a mb 123 wagon.
I’d lament Mazda no longer selling what I thought the perfect vehicle- the “5” (or Premacy, depending on where you live) a car-sized minivan with sliding doors AND a 5-speed. Of course I kept mine for 9 years and 190K, so my opinion shouldn’t count for much. Maybe if I had bought 4 or 5 of them…
I’ve always thought the cliche was more that those were the most common features commenters will note “if only X was available, I’d buy one myself!!”, not that anyone was necessarily looking for all that in one car.
That being said, when I bought my last boring new Japanese daily driver sedan, choosing a proper root beer brown color did help me to feel like I’d retained at least a small bit of my gearhead credentials…
My father had a 1980 (or 81, can’t remember which) Buick LeSabre diesel wagon, although it was metallic grey. He actually got good service from it, although I only remember him keeping it a bit less than two years. Figure he was starting to hear the stories and traded before his luck ran out.
My only car is a 505 diesel wagon, albeit with the auto. A 5 speed transmission would only make this excellent vehicle better!
I drove one! I drove one! In 1984, when we were looking for a new car for our expanding family, we started out by trying out used cars. There was a gold with light brown interior (is that close enough?) Volvo 240 Diesel with manual transmission at a dealer in Shreveport, LA. I think it had been owned previously by an officer at Barksdale Air Force Base. It had 60,000 miles on it and had been immaculately kept. Everything about it was solid as a stump; unfortunately, it accelerated just about as quickly. It was clear, however, that once you got it up to speed on I-20 it would run smooth and fast all day. (Which is saying a lot, given the general level of construction of Louisiana highways at the time.) I was fascinated by it, but the new car was to be the wife’s, so we had to pass. She liked manuals just fine, but wanted something a little quicker. We liked our new yellow front wheel drive Corolla just fine, but it wasn’t a brown Volvo 240 diesel manual station wagon.
And we must not forget the Olds 4.3L V6 diesel. Saw one in a Pontiac 6000 of 1984 vintage…poor me 🙁
There were technically THREE 4.3 V-6 Diesels available…
The LT6 was used in RWD A/G-body cars (Regal/Malibu/Monte Carlo/Cutlass) from 1982-1985. Automatic only, of course.
The LT7 was used in FWD A-bodies, 1982-1985
The LS2 was used in Cadillac/Buick/Oldsmobile C-bodies (deVille/Fleetwood, Electra/Park Avenue, and Ninety-Eight) and only in 1985.
They all sucked 🙂
By most contemporary reports, the 4.3 V-6 Diesel wasn’t *nearly* as bad as the 4.3 V-8 Diesel that only lasted 1 year in the RWD Cutlass.
“By most contemporary reports, the 4.3 V-6 Diesel wasn’t *nearly* as bad as the 4.3 V-8 Diesel that only lasted 1 year in the RWD Cutlass.”
I’ve read the same thing. Supposedly by 1982 GM had figured out all of the quirks and traps that plagued its early diesels, and the later V6s were relatively trouble-free. But by then the buying public was all too aware of the problems with the early ones, so few were willing to take a chance, despite all of the improvements.
Have always thought an 85 Coupe Deville with the 4.3 diesel would be a great drive around the world car. At that time unleaded was not available worldwide so if one wanted to reflect their American heritage a diesel Caddy was the way to do it. Roomy, quiet, surprisingly international size, 35mpg highway with a big gas tank. The Caddy name will be familiar but the shape won’t be..
Back in the late ’70’s, I was working at a VW dealership, we sold and serviced many brown, stick shift Dasher Diesel wagons. Brown was a common color, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if more of these brown stick shift Diesel wagons were sold in the US then any other during this time period.
It’s a damn shame they were wrong wheel drive.
VW has announced it will no longer sell Diesel’s in the US. Not really an unexpected move.
You know how to set a guys’ heart aflutter.
Diesel, stick shift and wagon all in one! What a sweet combo.
Um… about the brown… well maybe not that. Make mine a green or blue Peugeot please!
PS I laughed out loud when I saw the Honda vacuum schematic! I remember those days…
I had a 84/5 Honda Civic five door manual, thankfully a NZ model carb but no vacuum spaghetti.
If we temporarily ditch the RWD requirement, I thought of another FWD possibility–early 80’s Escorts were available as diesels. They were available as wagons. They were available in brown. Could all three things meet?
I’m at a loss to see why the pedantry for RWD, FWD done by people who know what they’re doing gives better space utilisation and superior handling and roadholding to any RWD car.
It’s interesting to read the enthusiast press’s raves in favor of FWD from back when only Citroen was doing it, or when an early Mini was the test subject. I guess familiarity really does breed contempt.
Same applies to RWD. FWD came to prominence when live axles, buggy springs, and “road hugging weight” were still the standard, almost every argument in favor of FWD ultimately comes either from people who remember those days, or people who only experienced RWD in cars such as Mustangs and F-bodies – which literally had two feet planted in those days – Standard center consoles, floor pan tunnels for exhaust/structural strengthening/driveshaft(on cars with optional AWD) have made a mockery of the inherent space efficiency of FWD.
Honda finally ditched the floor pan tunnel, at least in the rear, with the 8th-gen Civic. But the front console is likely here to stay.
I had a diesel five speed manual station wagon from Peugeot but in red and FWD built in 98 so wrong time frame, fast, comfortable beyond your wildest cadillac dreams, beautiful handling and roadholding, Seven seater with folding seats belts included in the wayback, it was a lovely car to drive but the cambelt jumped several teeth and that was the end of that.
That is one sweet ride!
Love this article, fun and very well written!
The “but, would YOU buy it” argument, especially in the United States, apparently applied as much in 1979 as much as it does in 2016.
The theoretical car might be perfect for, um, a courier traveling flat rural roads between towns in Canada where air conditioning is rarely a consideration.
The idea of actually driving one of those rare, dirty, smelly, slow, rattley, cars from the past, rowing your gears, in my hilly city, in rush hour traffic, in an August heat wave, with no AC………..um, I’ll pass.
But, there was no shortage of brown station wagons where I lived in the late ’70s and early ’80. My dad occasionally brought home a ’79 Ford Country Sedan, brown, no di-noc, from the company pool. Probably a 351 automatic combo.
If I squint, I can still almost see a sea of brown Fairmont wagons rolling the streets with their 6 cyl automatics.
“The idea of actually driving one of those rare, dirty, smelly, slow, rattley, cars from the past, rowing your gears, in my hilly city, in rush hour traffic, in an August heat wave, with no AC…”
Let’s be fair now!
My 1984 Volvo 245Diesel was “rare, dirty, smelly, slow, rattley,” sure. But that R12 A/C worked great, even in the August heat of Las Vegas!
You could also buy a (gas) 4 cylinder/4 on the floor in a Fairmont wagon, with the bonus of plaid seat inserts available in baby blue! (might be a tough special order to get brown with a blue interior though).
Mercedes-Benz and BMW, I think the only Brown-RWD-Manual-Wagon builders these days. Jaguar offers a diesel wagon too, but as far as I know only with an automatic.
You could’ve gotten VERY close in Europe, with the Chrysler 300 touring (Dodge Magnum, Chrysler flavored) since I believe those were offered with a V6 diesel. No manual trans though.
I know its fwd, but was the TDI Jetta wagon ever offered with a manual? They do have a coffee brown.
Yes, the 300 Touring was available with a 218 hp 3.0 V6 Mercedes-Benz diesel. That engine was also offered in the contemporary Jeep GC. They were both called 3.0 CRD.
Below the 300 Touring diesel with the optional SRT-package. And with an automatic transmission indeed.
I’m pretty sure it is so offered in the lower hp versions here in Europe.
Jetta/Golf TDi wagon was available with manual including in the US, gas powered versions still are. Brown was discontinued with the changeover to the Mk7 though. Buy a white one and wrap it?
In 2015 all U.S. Golf TDI wagons were available with a 6 speed manual, whereas gas-powered versions offered a manual only in the lowest trim/equipment level and it was only a 5-speed.
The 2017 Golf Alltrack wagon is AWD which I guess means the rear wheels are driven at least some of the time, offers a stick in some models, and unique amongst Golfs offers brown – but in the interior.
There are several Jetta TDi wagons, brown with manual trans, in my town. I never realized that RWD was an essential ingredient for this enthusiast’s dream car.
This topic instantly makes me think of the last serious attempt a manufacturer went out on a limb to try and appease what turned out to be a very vocal yet non-existent consumer base: Toyota and their 86.
First, everyone lamented the passing of the affordable sports coupe. Then, when people caught wind Toyota had something up their sleeve, they lost their minds with anticipation. All that buildup exploded into an angry fury upon introduction; “Weak. It doesn’t have 350 horsepower. And it isn’t $19,000.”
You can bet good money Toyota and a lot of other manufacturers won’t attempt similar niche products in the near future as a result.
This was a well-researched and enjoyably orderly summary of the brown, diesel, manual estate car. Apart from the rear-drive part, such a car can be had in Europe. Off the top of my head it’d be a Skoda Octavia or Superb. Now: did Ford of Europe have any brown, diesel Granada estates? I’d look down that path first.
I bought the closest thing that I could find. I searched for many years and finally found what I was seeking in the summer of 2016. It’s a 2002 Explorer XLS, Mineral Gray (in spite of the name, it’s more of a Taupey Brown), Medium Parchment cloth interior, 4L V6, with the 5 speed manual transmission. It’s a 4×4; I would have preferred 4×2, but it was in fantastic shape for 170K. I bought it sight unseen (well, a few photos) took a flight to Dulles International, and drove it home to Michigan the same day. It is relatively rust free; the paint still glossy, and the interior very presentable. I gave just shy of 5K for it, higher than book, but it was what I wanted. I love it. Of course it’s not a diesel… but, I consider it to be 3 out of 4. Well, it’s not really a proper estate… so, 2 out of 4?
Brown I don’t get, but it’s an appropriate color to connect with a lot of internet bloviating.
I loved my blue 240 wagon with stick, a diesel would have been a little too much of a power trade, a 6.2 might have been interesting. I did correspond with a fellow who put a small marine diesel in his 240. He said it worked very well, obviously slow but reliable and economical. Bought it off a sailboat owner who was upgrading IIRC. Often those are low hours but with potentially lots of internal corrosion if fresh-water cooled.
Loved this article! Great work!
The Boston chapter of BMW Car Club of America runs about 10 autocross events each year and usually a couple of wagons show up (out of 80-100 entries). At the April 2016 event we had 4 of them. None were Diesel or Brown, but each has a 6-speed and at least 250 HP. Good enough for me. They are all daily drivers, but the one on the right is pretty rare.
BMW turn out M badged cars with diesel engines performance is about handling not straight line speed or traffic light drags though they are no slug at that either.
I’m surprised at just how rare 3er wagons are in the US (<5000 units/yr FWIU) considering they're almost as common as the sedans in Vermont. One of the more popular luxo cars at that; granted, not near the all-conquering SUVs/CUVs though.
My buddy had almost that combo a late 1980’s Ford fairmont wagon in brown with a 4 speed but a gas 6 cylinder motor not diesel though…
My uncle in South America has a 1980s-vintage brown Toyota Cressida wagon, rear wheel drive, 5-speed manual and (I believe) 6-cylinder diesel engine. Acceleration is slow but otherwise reliable and economical, he says. Considering the road conditions in Bolivia, who needs to go fast anyway?
New wagons are pretty rare in the US. If you want a stickshift diesel wagon here, about your only choice is one of the few vintage survivors from Peugeot and Volvo, or grey-market used. I own one – a grey-market ’84 non-turbo, 5-speed, manual windows, manual heat & AC, Mercedes 300TD. Mine’s ivory though – I’m not painting it brown!
Happy Motoring, Mark
It’s unforgivable how people give the diesel engine a bad name in the past 40 yrs. I imagine Rudolf Diesel would be turning in his grave. I’d buy a diesel powered car or light truck if I could get it at a decent price.
In the states they seem to have a bad rep. Not so much on the island where I live in BC Canada. There seems to be a large number of vw diesels of the last few generations and lots of pick up trucks (probably due to all the loggers in these parts). Having lived with a few here are my observations: the econoline cube van was great once you got it started and ignored the smell and noise (this was a late 1980’s model). The Volkswagen Jetta I owned, a 1993 model, was excellent on fuel I could get between 800-1000kms a tank on 50 litres of fuel. But when that injector pump goes south get ready for a shock. $1800 for a new one or if you can find someone to rebuild the $20 worth of seals and gaskets you might get lucky and only spend $400-$600.
Having said that I still miss them every time I fuel up…
I’ve never understood the US govt. reluctance to allow car and small trucks to be powered by diesel engine. I want to breathe clean air as much as anyone, but I think the standards the EPA imposes on tailpipe emissions is unrealistic. It’s as if they’re trying to eliminate every bit of pollution that comes out the back of a car. I don’t see how that’s possible, short of returning to pre-industrial times.
There’s a big difference between running a diesel in the Pacific Northwest (where I was just yesterday) vs., say a place like Denver (where I live today). A modern, “Clean (-er, -ish) Diesel” still emits a large share of Nitrogen Oxides. In sunny or high-altitude regions, heat and UV cook NOx into a nasty brew of ground-level Ozone. We average a hundred Ozone Alert days, basically every day exceeding 85 degrees in the worst zone, west of Denver beside the foothills. These facts stick in my mind since I live there!
Out in the cool cloudlands of the PNW, from Sooke to Salem, I can’t say for sure what reactions occur. NOx is a greenhouse gas on its own, and nothing to be desired. But if there were to be an Old Home for TDIs, this would be the best place. Too bad we can’t have regional standards for this…or maybe Cascadia ought to set its own regs?
As my screen name suggests, I’m from the Seattle area. We see plenty of trucks with 6.6 litre diesel engines. But for some reason very few small displacement (2.0-4.0 litre) diesel engines offered. Why is it that it’s ok for massive displacement diesel engines to be offered in the USA, but not small displacement diesel engines? That makes no sense whatsoever. 🙁
I can’t justify that at all. But as I recall, the original thinking behind the looser regs for “light trucks” was that these vehicles do the heavy lifting for society. They’re used in rural locations, and they are relatively rare, so the regulators agreed to look the other way. They didn’t expect that these would become urban commuter vehicles of choice, due in part to these exemptions. Here in Denver today, you can barely see dealership buildings for the rows of pickup truck noses that stand proudly out front. Cars? They’re in the back, where nobody sees ’em.
People will use their trucks for whatever they want to use the truck. When I was visiting England in September, I got to ride in a Range Rover SUV that had a turbo diesel engine. What the displacement was, I can’t remember. But I’m sure it was between 2.5-3.0 litres. Why that same Range Rover wouldn’t be available here in the USA is beyond me.
I’m all for clean air emissions, but I find the standards imposed by the EPA to be unrealistic at best. It’s as if they want to eliminate every little particle of gas that comes out the tailpipe that pollutes the air. I fail to see how that’s possible, short of either going totally electric, or going diesel/electric hybrid. I’d go for the hybrid.