I thought I was done with my personal contribution to Wagon Week, but an impromptu visit to Bob’s Big Boy this past Friday proved me wrong. Exhibit A is this gorgeous ’65 Plymouth Fury, looking both resplendent and menacing at the same time. If Darth Vader and the Borg Queen married and had a brood of little evilets, this would probably be their ride of choice for a family picnic in the forests of Dagobah.
The S.S. Fury’s command center. Those velour buckets look pretty comfy, even if the material isn’t original. Note the aftermarket ratchet shifter neatly integrated into the aftermarket center console. Also note the center dashboard vents, indicating a factory A/C car. What’s with the funny looking water bottle?
Another view of the Fury’s passenger compartment, this time from the driver’s side. Out of all the domestic offerings during the mid-1960’s, Mopar instrument panels seem to be the most aerospace inspired.
All this be yours for around $18 Grand. It’s an awesome ride, but if you bring this home instead of the trendy hybrid CUV that the Mrs. wants, be prepared to sleep in it.
The hood was shut, so no shots of the engine, unfortunately. Even so- with 440 cubes’ worth of big-block Mopar wedge under the hood, this is the view you’re most likely to see if you challenge him in your VW Squareback or Rambler American.
Next up is this groovy ’64 ford Falcon. Looks clean and mostly stock, but the Shelby wheels provide a pleasing upgrade.
The Falcon’s interior. Its slightly rough and mismatched appearance indicates that this car is driven and enjoyed regularly by its owner instead of being some pampered fairground queen.
I have no idea what’s under the hood, but the aftermarket tach and floor shifter, as well as the five-lug wheels and dual exhausts, make the existence of a 170 or 200 inch six-popper highly unlikely.
Another view of the Falcon’s giblets. The scratched and dinged up cargo floor is another indicator that this car is still used as an actual car rather than a precious museum piece. I tip my hat to the owner for not being afraid to use his car for its intended purpose, no matter how classic it is.
Bye-bye birdie.
A radical departure from the yank tank theme is this funky Volvo 240-Series wagon. This car seems to be suffering a bit of an identity crisis. What exactly is it supposed to be? Rally car? SCCA production racer? Road trip mule? Ski runabout? Note the upward rear tilt of the hood, an old racer’s trick to vent hot air from the engine compartment. Also note the taped headlights, another road racing requirement to keep glass shards off the track in case of a shunt. Does the owner actually race this thing?
I tried to get a good shot of the interior, but that didn’t work out so well. If you look really hard, you can just make out the heavily bolstered Corbeau racing seats, complete with five-point harnesses.
Volvo owners tend to take their cars, and their ownership of them, seriously.
Backpacking in the Sierras, the Red Bull Rampage extreme mountain biking competition, or a picnic on Pismo Beach? Aw, screw it- let’s do ’em all !
I’ll end this installment with this slightly crummy pic of this International Travelall, a late arrival that my friend spotted just as we were leaving. It was too dark to get a good shot of the enigne, but the original IHC 345 mill is still very much present and accounted for. One can spot the slight lowering job, as well as the dual exhausts. These old Internationals weren’t the fastest, nor the most comfortable or efficient of their breed, but they were as durable and tough as a mountain gorilla. There’s always room for one of these in my Lottery fantasy garage. I wonder if I could get a 7.3 Powerstroke to fit…
I normally say I don’t like black interiors but that Fury makes a liar out of me. The shapes and the generous chrome and silver accents really work well together. The whole car is just beautiful, actually.
And it wouldn’t surprise me it that 240 sees the occasional track, or at least some autox runs. Despite their prosaic nature, there’s a lot available performance-wise for those cars. And judging by the look, it embraces that split personality.
I bet vintage Falcons are easy to maintain with aftermarket 1st-gen Mustang parts.
That Fury is aptly named.
Love the black paint & wheels on the Fury, interior mods not so much.
The Falcon gets my vote today, yeah the interior is even more mismatched but since it’s not as serious it somehow works..
+1 on the Falcon.The Fury is a bit too funereal for me.The white Henry J looks interesting,any further info please?Thanks for a great read
Not a week after asking on CC about pictures of a Fury Wagon. LOVE it! Missing my ’65 Fury III even more now.
Interesting that the back-up lights are down in the bumper rather than between the tail lights in either side as I’ve seen (and had) on the non wagon version. Maybe Chrysler wanted them to still be somewhat effective when transporting a long load with the tailgate down?
Actually, I rather like the picture of the Travelall. I rather like any of them, though I’d need to tone down the Swede a bit…
I like the ’65 Fury. $18k is still a high price for a C-body wagon, but it’s a pretty safe bet the owner has spent more than that on its construction. Obviously the 440 is non-stock as that displacement wasn’t offered until 1966. The car was originally a column-shift. You can still see the non-functional PRNDL in the gauge cluster, and where the shifter arm was removed. The steering wheel has been replaced with one from a ’65 Chrysler (or ’66 Chrysler 300, which continued to use gold insert in the center).
From the front, the Volvo looks sleepy. 🙂
I don’t like low riders much, but this Enrique Jota actually works. Brings out a natural fierceness that was hiding under that clunky image all those years.
Nice Travelall. It is not lowered it is just a 1000/1010 version which has the IFS and a totally unique frame which make them sit way lower than the solid front axle 1100/1110 version which in itself sat a bit lower than the competing makes.
I have to strongly disagree that they weren’t as comfortable as the trucks from the big 3, if you want the best riding and best handling 1/2 from the era the IFS equipped IHs are far and away the leader.
Love the Fury. Never been a fan of C body mopars to be honest but that one is right up my alley, minus the center console and cloth seats(I like them as buckets though and like the Hurst shifter)
Yeah, nice Fury….but ditch the seats and console. I think the stock column shifter would look better.
Love the Travelall. I remember quite a few in my hometown that were set up for towing. Eric, I didn’t realize the 1000/1010’s road so low due to the IFS. I always thought they looked a little funny, but that would sure beat the beam axle.
There’s more than enough room for a 7.3 ‘Stroke. Who knows, maybe it wouldn’t be that much heavier than the beefy 392. It would be a nice package in a 3/4 ton, 4×4, with the 5-speed O/D gearbox. Like the Fury, however, I’d have to sleep in it if I brought one home.
The PS 7.3 would definitely fit a number of people have done it. Had IH got the MV done in time for the beginning of the 1974 model year then they would be a bolt in for those vehicles that were equipped with it. The 74 chassis was redone in part to fit the MV in there so they moved the engine location back several inches. That also meant a new coil spring IFS. The MV and 6.9/7.3 share the same mounting dimensions so that IH could lower the different number of parts needed to fit them into a given chassis. So if a MV truck actually existed you would just have to transfer the motor mounts over and bolt it in hook it up and go.
The torsion bar IFS chassis is significantly different than the I beam/4×4 frames. Instead of a deep C channel frame they have a relatively flat frame that for the majority of the length is a rectangular tube formed by 2 C channels welded together. The basic C channel frame is like 3″+ taller than the torsion bar IFS frame.
The beauty of the torsion bar IFS is the fact that you can lower the front easily while maintaining the ride. Search for my COAL series and you’ll find some pictures of my 1010 Travelall that I did lower in the front for that traditional rake.
Agree on ditching the floor shifter and bucket seats.
Somehow an American full sized station wagon just doesn’t look “right” without a column shifter and bench seat. (Perhaps a later model bench seat with a fold down armrest?)
What will ALL the awesome torque of a 440 and the excellent shifting characteristics of a 727 TorqueFlite; all the driver needs to do is leave it in Drive and “Stomp & Steer”. No hand shifting needed on THIS vehicle!
Hurricane Betsy’s (August, 1965) flooding in New Orleans brought an abrupt, early demise to Mom & Dad’s ’65 Fury station wagon. The Fury was replaced with a ’66 Ford Country Sedan station wagon that I have mentioned on this site a few times.
The “which wagon was better” debate lasted for over 30 years; until Dad’s unsuccessful battle with chemo & cancer ended it. The discussions were often intense and spirited.
The Fury had a better drivetrain (383 4-BBL “Golden Commando” engine and 3 speed TorqueFlite automatic transmission) and more complete dashboard instrumentation that the Ford; but the Ford had a quieter, plusher ride. As I recall, the two way tailgate on the Ford was the “deal breaker”.
Black on black Fury hits all the right buttons. The Falcon is nice too but I’m not sure grey is it’s colour though. It probably looks better in the metal than in pixels. I’d be peeling a lot of stickers off that Volvo though.
Something for everyone there. I see a smurf blue 710 and a first generation Honda Civic, at least a ’77 or older. Leave the hood black but orange the roof and ditch the wheels for the original steelies with beauty rings and make them black.