(first posted 10/26/2015) Ok; it’s not really a Bel Air wagon, but if Chevy had kept that nameplate alive into the 90s, this is what one would have looked like. And although I’ve never been a big fan of this generation of big Chevy, I’m seeing some genuine 1963-vintage curb appeal with this one.
It’s almost amazing how wheels can transform the looks of a car, and in this case, these ’63 Chevy dog dishes are really doing it, in a very good way. Now if they had been from a ’61, we’d have to call this a Parkwood. Which would be appropriate in its setting here, in the parking lot of Alton Baker Park with woods behind it. But the air was good too, on this perfect fall day.
1963 Bel Air courtesy JPCavanaugh, who is standing in front of it in his PJs.
The big question is this: did the owner specifically use ’63 Chevy hub caps because of the similarities with the actual ’63, with that body character line running from the front fender over the low-cut rear wheel opening? Inquiring minds want to know.
This may technically be a Caprice Classic, but there’s nothing very Caprice or classy about the interior. I don’t really know the actual year, but it has to be from ’94 – ’96, thanks to the very cheap looking dash. Pretty weak…but then the 1963 Chevy dash wasn’t exactly memorable either.
I was a bit taken by this Chevy wagon, especially since it was the very best time of day for the light and all. Maybe I would have felt differently on a rainy day? Or maybe it’s because I couldn’t stop looking at those black tires, white wheels and dog dishes.
Maybe it’s time to paint the wheels on my wagon white and find some….’63 Toyopet hub caps?
Sadly, the owner didn’t see fit to change the name of his car along with the hub caps.
That does look sharp, and it sure is clean.
I’ve been toying with the idea of doing the same with dogdish caps on my yellow gold ’87 Caprice wagon. This sure is good motivation.
Looks very familiar. https://www.curbsideclassic.com/uncategorized/cc-kids-jpc-can-prndl-too/
Actually, that lower body character line makes this almost a perfect ringer for Dad’s 63 Bel Air wagon. I suspect my father would have hated this one too, though I find it kind of attractive for the same reasons you do. And if you wonder whether an early 60s mid-width whitewall would look any better, my father’s wagon let you look at both and decide.
I kept seeing a mental image of a white ’63 Bel Air wagon somewhere here at CC; of course, it was a Cavanaugh-mobile.
Yes, that character line is remarkably similar. So did this owner put ’63 hub caps on it specifically because of that similarity? Hmmm.
Wow – look at the similarity!!
Jim, I’ve updated the post with your picture. It’s perfect. 🙂
That is simply fantastic!!!
Would be nice to take the same picture in the same driveway today with the 1994 wagon.
Those trees in the background would have 14′ trunks, the houses and fire hydrant would be painted different colors, and no TV antennas to speak of.
GM reasoning for the 63- bumper doesnt line up with the character line on the wagon? Stamp in another one.
Yes, the white whale needs whitewalls to show it out!
I totally dig this, the older wheels and centercaps compliment this jellybean/bathtub design far better than I would have imagined had it only been described in words. But yeah the interiors are terrible, not in a stripper Bel Air kind of way either, bare bones interiors can at least be attractive, what these had were completely anonymous lumpy plastic, looking more like what you’d expect to see in an express work van.
That dash is truly horrible, and yes, express van worthy.
And the door panels are so…BALD looking!
They’re so plain they look home-made.
The work van analogy fits with the dog dishes. Feels like a former government fleet car, or similar. When I worked at a state university in the late 00’s, there was still a 1982 Malibu wagon owned by one of the departments, and it had steelies and dog dishes. Very unusal to find those on a non-police Malibu. This car has the same workmanlike air about it.
Jeezo, is that ever some rear overhang. I am always shocked to notice it.
This car would be perfect if t were debadged.
I think I’m a pretty competent driver, but that rear overhang would hit something very soon if I got behind the wheel of one of these wagons. And not from backing into something, but from swinging around and hitting a wall, tree or other car in a tight maneuvering situation.
Since the badging is done with the standard Chevrolet/GMC/Opel lettering, it can’t be that hard to create an actual era-consistent Bel Air badge.
I’d prefer throwing some vintage Bel Air badges on it. Replace the Chevroet scripts as well, and it’s be perfect.
Wow! What a cool looking wagon! I can’t believe I’m actually saying that about this generation Caprice wagon – which I have never been a fan of. But this car looks so cool with the dog dish hubcaps and white wheels sans whitewall tires – I think I’ve been converted into a true fan!
When I was a kid one of my uncles (I had 10), bought a new Chevy full-sized wagon every other year, that was his big “splurge” item.. And he always bought a Parkwood/Bel Air wagon in a light color like white, tan, or that light metallic brown. He would own examples of Chevys that I would call “runner-up” years…..a 62 instead of a 63. Or a 64 instead of a 65. When he finally was able to “downsize” to a smaller car (kids all moved out) he switched to Buicks, a string of Buick Regal 2 doors, all in colorful 2 tone paint combinations.
I can’t believe how much those 63 Chevy hubcaps transform this car. I’ve actually always liked these wagons and wish they had made this generation of Caprice as a two door as well. The article mentions the excessive rear overhang.in all honesty, it’s not as excessive as it appears. If this car had a slimmer rear bumper, it would look a little shorter. Conversely, to me, the absence of rear overhang on that Scion ( itself a 3/4 scale copy of an 85 Chevy Astro van) looks absolutely cartoonish. Unfortunately, everything built today suffers from such goofy proportions. They all look like something a five year old would draw.
Unfortunately, everything built today suffers from such goofy proportions. They all look like something a five year old would draw.
True, but the interior space in relation to the shadow it casts is simply unbeatable. The seating is much roomier than the Chevy wagon (same as a Tahoe), and it can slip into the tiniest parking places. I like the idea of the Chevy wagon, but zipping around town, and nipping in and around traffic the way I do, I’ll take the xBox. 🙂
I have never liked those xBs, but your posts extolling their practicality has softened me on them somewhat. Ideal for around town on well maintained roads…but not much else. For a road trip I’d take the Caprice 10 times out of 10.
Newer designs have gone so deep into pulling the wheels out to the corners that I think people are starting to get their aesthetic sensibilities scrambled. I don’t think I ever heard the word overhang used, at least not en masse, until within the last 10 years or so, so I pretty much always roll my eyes when I see it brought up as an aesthetic criticism for an older design – packaging efficiency and balance I understand, but for the aesthetics, I’ll take the sacrifices. I can’t think of a time where I’ve actually gotten within 3/4s of my maximum cargo/passenger capacity in my car, nor driven close enough to the limit to the point a couple pounds of overhang made the difference between turning and going into a ditch.
Oh, yeah; we knew about overhang in the 60s and 70s. Cars were so ridiculously proportioned in the 1970s that we used to joke about a long one getting caught in a dip because of the overhang.
There is an art to driving a car with a lot of overhang, you either enjoyed it as part of the deal, or you didn’t.
I always enjoyed it.
Actually, I didn’t mention overhang in the article; one of the comments did.
But FWIW, the ’94 wagon was 7″ longer than the ’63, and yet had a 3″ shorter wheelbase. So yes, it does have a somewhat extreme amount of overhang. Chevy really should have lengthened the wheelbase on these wagons. 116″ is a bit short for a 217.3″ long car.
My father was stationed in the Canal Zone from ’65 through ’69 where we had a well-used up ’58 Colony Park and a very steep driveway. The wagon had to be parked in the street because it’s rear overhang would gouge the street. My mom couldn’t manage backing it up the driveway, therefore, it stayed in the street for almost all of it’s four years with us!
I’ve long been a bit curious about why downsizing meant stingy wheelbases instead of the benefits of pushing the wheels out a bit more.
I’ve assumed that shorter wheelbase = shorter / lighter frame and that it was a weight saving device. But, perhaps it was to maintain the appearance of the proportions of early ’70s cars?
Dave: the downsized 1977 Imapala/Caprice looked great on their 116″ wb, as did the longer Buick Electra/Olds 98/Cadillac on their longer wheelbases. The problem is with the 1991 re-design, that made these cars significantly wider and longer, but kept the 116″ wb (on the Chevy and all the wagons). They should have gone to a longer wheelbase too.
That surprises me that the 63 is significantly shorter than the 94. I agree that the Caprice would be a bit better looking with a couple more inches of wheelbase and the same length (pushing the rear wheels back, I would think). As an owner, I will say they have a pretty good turning radius, but don’t have as much leg room as you might expect in a big car. At least it is better than the Panthers, which had 114″ between axles.
What really bakes my noodle is that hubcaps from the early ’60s still fit on a car from the mid-’90s. That’s some standardization right there.
Actually, it’s not a stock wheel, as the little bumps to attach the dog dish hubcaps was missing by then. It’s likely an older Chevy wheel, possibly with a wider rim added.
Which makes it all the more amazing that the owner would swap out the wheels to get a look that few others than us CC-ers would notice or appreciate.
Agreed. The guy really did a superb job of creating a truly original, yet reverent and restrained homage to the classic sixties’ Chevy station wagon (which gets very little respect) and I’m positive that set of wheels, tires, and hubcaps took a lot more effort than just slapping on a set of ‘double-dubs’ from the local pimpmobile tire shop. I’d go for something like this way before a ‘bubble’ Impala SS sedan.
I can’t imagine anyone whose an avid follower of CC not appreciating this car and hope someone can let the owner know it.
Update: in looking at it closer, it appears that the wheel is a standard 15″ Chevy wheel from 1970 on, probably a 6″ wide rim. It looks identical to the one on the ’63, except for being 15″ in diameter.
As Paul mentioned, the original steel wheels that came on these Caprices wouldn’t have the needed nubs to hold the hubcaps, but your point still holds because the bolt pattern was till the same to fit any standard RWD Chevy wheel going back to at least the early 70’s. I don’t know, but I would guess that it would go back to 1965, or maybe even further. Does anybody on here know?
Very late to the party, but here is the answer on the wheels. For 1971 Chevrolet moved from a 5 x 4.75″ bolt pattern to a 5 x 5″. So the wheels could not be older than 1971 if they are OEM Chevrolet wheels. In 1977, the sedans went back to a 5 x 4.75″ bolt pattern wheel but wagons and police cars (also 9C6 taxis) used 5 x 5″ bolt pattern. In 1991, all models went to the 5 x 5″ bolt pattern. The 5 x 5″ bolt pattern wheels used on the 1977-90 Chevrolet Wagons/Police/Tax had the hub cap nubs and were 15 x 7″ but there were 15 x 6″ used on the 1971-76 cars. Maybe this car has the earlier wagon wheels since they are pretty common but there are also reproduction aftermarket wheels available.
This car has 15×6” steel wheels. They are from 2WD Chev/GMC pickups, blazers with the 5×5 bolt pattern. I believe in the 1971-1988 range but not positive on that. Wheel vintiques sells a 62 series wheel that is the equivalent but different widths.
I’ve softened a bit on the whale Caprice, and the wagons generally looked better than the sedans.
But wow, this is really transformed and actually looks right. If you were too young to have been around in the early ’90s, you’d probably believe that this was actually a base car look that was available.
Kudos to the owner of this well cared for example, and double kudos for the subtle and terrific look. Absolutely perfect with nothing more done to it.
I feel the same. But still no fan of the whales. The 63 just looks “right”. The hubcaps on the Caprice and painted wheels are an interesting touch.
But it still makes me pine for the trim lines and purposeful styling of the 77 & up. I can’t help but think “Why, GM ?” You had it right years before this blob came out. And it was essentially the same car underneath !
Would love to see this wheel treatment on a 77-78 Wagon.
Of the three (or four if you count the Olds wagon), I always thought the Chevy was the weakest looker, especially the sedan. The way this guy has it fixed up, it does look pretty decent.
Chevy, Olds & Buick versions of the wagon are what I know of. What is the 4th? I do not think Cadillac offered a wagon version.
I think he’s referring to the ’90s B-bodies in general. The ’91-’92 Custom Cruiser sometimes gets overlooked due to its limited run and no sedan counterpart.
Yep, that’s exactly what I meant. The Fleetwood was only offered as a sedan, the Oldsmobile was only offered as a wagon, and the Buick and Chevy were offered as both sedans and wagons.
I always kind of wondered what a 90s B body Olds sedan would look like or be called.
I imagine it’d look kind of like the one farther down the thread, where someone put a Custom Cruiser header panel on a Caprice. I figured it’d look a lot like that–Caprice roofline for cost savings, but unique nose and tail treatments. Being that they tooled up completely different sheetmetal for the Roadmaster and Fleetwood, knowing 90’s GM they would have mandated cost-cutting somewhere.
As to the name..hmm. Since 88 and 98 were already taken, and 108 sounds silly…maybe call that car the Regency? The trim level of the Ninety Eight could easily be renamed to something else. Alternately they could have called it the Holiday, or the Dynamic.
I’m going with Cutlass Cruiser or Custom Cutlass or how about Cutlass Royal? Delta Cruiser? No I got it, Regency Royal Brougham.
If I live to see 100 I’ll never understand why people like these cars. Hideously ugly, with some of the most ungainly proportions ever in a wagon. And that rear overhang… WOW.
Count me in the camp that does not have an aversion to rear overhang.
This is one of my all time favorite CC photos:
Same here. I guess I would rather have a looker of a car and possibly miss out on a parking spot here or there than put up with sheer utilitarianism.
I am another one who has no aversion to rear overhang.
I had one of these Mopars, best and most comfortable car I ever owned for freeway cruising. It got surprisingly decent gas mileage for a car this size. I bet a modern 383 V8 and 4 spd AOD transmission could have it in upper 20’s maybe low 30’s mpg for freeway cruising in car that you could fit 6 people COMFORTABLY all day long and still haul the load of most pickups today in the trunk.
That picture says it all. That Altima looks fat and bulbous, with too tall trunk and too tall rear window at such a slant to virtually guarantee the inability to see out if it. People today have an aversion to overhangs but don’t mind that tall, fat, thick look. In the 80’s FWD cars, with their odd proportions at least DID have packaging efficiency….today’s cars, not at all. The windshield is laying over the front wheels and slanted back over the driver’s head, decreasing headroom. On most new cars, the most headroom is at the B pillar, where nobody’s head actually is, and the front wheel wells impinge on foot room and access. The high sills also make for getting in and out a less than easy task. Look at a Honda Civic….the dashboard alone is about five feet too far into the passenger seating area, a complete waste of space. And with all those wonderful thick gray plastic posts and window surrounds, vision outward is atrocious on most cars of today. Hardly the efficient package FWD was advertised to be all those years ago….
It’s probably a reflection of what cars looked like when you were young, and the shape and proportions were imprinted on you. But back in the 20s, 30s and 40s, cars were shaped much more like they are today: tall, with small windows and a short but tall trunk.
BTW, the Civic doesn’t waste any space because of that low windshield; that just covers the cowl are that used to be behind the hood in the 80s or so. Nobody can afford to waste space.
That may be the case, but if so then designers would never have designed anything but what was already “imprinted” on them. I, personally, really do think the three box sedan does look better. I also think the old Cadillacs and Packards and Bugattis and such from the 20s looked really classy as well, but over all, the 50s-90s Fleetwood kind of look just looks the best to me.
To me the fattest and most bulbous award goes to the Lincoln MKS. Such an ungainly car, huge on the outside and rather cramped on the inside. Looks like a beached whale, especially in white.
Funny thing about that picture is the Altima is the one with scuffs and rash on the bumper and wheels. The trend to tall trunks pretty much eliminated any chance of being able to see the corners of the car from inside. I still think a long low trunk is better than a short tall one, but to each their own. Sure isn’t much liftover in the Mopar.
And I think it goes without saying, put me in the pro overhang crowd!
I have no aversion at all to rear overhang, it’s just that that blob has so damn much of it. Way WAY too much of it. It turns that car into a rolling caricature, like something drawn up by Matt Groening for Homer Simpson to drive. Just hideous.
I love this wagon. And the comparo to the ’63 is wonderful. I’ve always had a thing for dog dish hub caps. Sometimes basic is beautiful. I remember seeing a police version of this wagon, with dog dish hub caps of course. They should have stuck some Bel Air badging on it.
I had a Roadmaster version of these. With the woodgrain, I got lots of attention. But I liked the plain Chevy version just as much. I have a plain ’96 Lumina Van, and wondered if I could make it into a GMC version. Replace the bowtie on the front with GMC lettering… but around back, what model name could I give it?
This was a challenge to come up with a name!
GMC version of dust buster vans…?
Shop-Vac
I think you should go for it. Make it a GMC and call it a… Well I can’t think of a good name at the moment, but I’d love to see you rebadge it. I wonder how many people would ever notice. If anyone was to ever comment on it, you would have to introduce them to CC because they would be the kind of person who would appreciate CC! I once saw a bubble caprice sedan with the Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser nose and vowed that if I ever get to own one of these cars, I’m doing the same thing! Hmm. I wonder what model I would call it… Cutlass Custom maybe?
I found a picture. Maybe Caprice Cruiser,
If it weren’t for the faux “Angel Eyes” lamps, I’d really like that. They distract too much from the rest of the car though.
Agreed, I don’t like the headlights, but I’m really wanting to do this now. I’m thinking, replace all Chevy emblems with Olds emblems, the older rocket ones not that last one they used at the end, and some basic steel wheels color matched to the car with some Olds centercaps. Or maybe a set of early 80’s Cutlass wheels.
GMC Transit
GMC Animul
Nice find Paul. I think another significant contributing element to the improved look of the Caprice, is the depth of the rims. However much flush wheel covers and rims do for modern aerodynamics, the ‘deep dish’ of traditional rims and road wheels gives any car a more elegant look, and a more solid appearance. Especially when viewing a car from a 3/4 view.
I think many modern cars would look notably more attractive if their wheel covers/rims weren’t so consistently flush with their fenders, in the name of improved airflow. An attractive design and styling element is often lost with flush rims and wheels.
The visual depth and traditional elegance of Buick road wheels, for example, enhance the Caprice whale wagon even further. Making the car look slightly more lithe and agile.
While in this example, modern flush wheels create a more bland, generic look for the Caprice.
THIS is what the base Caprice wagon looked like, though; note the color keyed moldings on the car in the article. It’s an optioned-up ride wearing plain-jane wheels.
Paul, I can picture your xB on white steelies with FJ40 Land Cruiser dog dishes, if you can get a full set of four rears without fronts and they’re not too big for the wheels.
I always liked this generation of B/D body (Caprice Classic, Buick Roadmaster, and Cadillac Fleetwood) with lake disc hubcaps. That smooths out the look and makes it appear like you’re going to attempt to set a land speed record.
I added the Buick road wheels to my Custom Cruiser, but of course with white walls.
That’s a great look–the road wheels really fit these cars. I’ve seen them on a Roadmaster sedan and also was impressed.
Change the center cap logos to Oldsmobile and they look like they should have been a factory option!
My thing about dog-dish hubcaps is that they symbolized for me the bottom-tier cars, the only ones my dad could afford back in the 50s and 60s. Just a little too close to home for me. I would have loved it, though, if Dad had considered a ’63 Bel-Air wagon. That would have been much better than the “dream car” he just had to have: a 1961 Mercedes 190Db.
Here’s to dads and their/our dreams!
So the outside door mirrors should date it from 1991 thru 1994 as they changed on 95 and 96 models
Isn’t it amazing how attractive a nice set of dog dishes look on a well-painted and scrubbed steel wheel?
I really find the VW Beetle with retro dog dishes very appealing, and if I were to ever buy one, that’s what I would want instead of alloys.
Hmmm… if I didn’t like my Impala’s alloys so much, I’d be thinking about making a change…
+1. The 63 Chevy dog dish caps were really stylish. My uncle factory ordered a 63 Bel Air four door sedan in white like JPC’s – with blackwalls, dog dishes, stick and six cylinder. He later did the same with a red 66 Impala but the dog dish caps were not nearly as attractive as the ones on the 63.
The great thing about the “heritage” VW wheel is that it actually is alloy. They do look damn good on new Beetles.
It’s a nice vehicle but it looks quite disproportionate… I’d cut the rear overhang in half, lengthen the rear doors and tilt the C pillar some more.
I’d keep the overhang, but I agree on the rear doors.
Like this shape. Wheels look great!
Like almost everyone else, I think this car with these wheels/hub caps is not bad looking at all. In fact, I’d like to see the mid-’90s sedan with these wheels. The dashboard however, doesn’t hold a candle to that which came in the ’63.
Remarkable effect of context. 90s cars are almost all chromeless and monochromatic, but we don’t see that as strippo. Add the dog-dishes, and the plain single color immediately assumes its old meaning. Dog dishes tell you that this car drives 20 miles to save 3 cents on a can of green beans.
Someday I will have the money to buy a 94-96 Caprice and I will have to think really hard about whether I want an Estate or a Sedan since each has their merits. The Estate is an example from another era, more practical, and the looks from the rear are not so flattering. The Sedan is well a Sedan, not as practical, more common, and nicer looking. If I found a Caprice 1A2 I might be more compelled to choose it over a Caprice 9C6 or 9C1. Maybe I will just get an 80s Pontiac Safari instead.
CC effect strikes again. One of my current model builds is this “1996 Impala SS
convertible” I’ve slimmed the rear quarters as suggested above.
Engine is Chevy Orange with rams horn manifolds.
Ignore the door shut lines, they will be filled & the front door lengthened. If I can figure out how do it well, I’m toying with triple tail lights too.
At quick glance, it looks like a Chrysler Sebring JXI convertible. Lol
When I hear or read the term ‘dog dish’ hubcaps, I think of some much plainer than the pictured set, they are too fancy for a dog’s dish!
I’m going to go against the grain, the plain steel wheels with hubcaps are too deliberately anachronistic (a bit hipster?), a good set of factory alloys would be a much better look and no doubt could be had cheaper.
They usually were much plainer – the 63 Chevy dog dishes, with all that detail, really stand out. I remember they did so at the time. Just look at how much plainer they were three years later.
These hub caps sell for as little as $15 a set on Ebay. And the wheels are dirt cheap too. I doubt you could find alloys for that little.
True, but I was factoring in the refurb costs to bring the up to the condition of this car’s (even diy), unloved style factory alloys can go for the same price as steel wheels over here and the price usually depends on the state of the tires mounted more than what the wheels are.
You had me for about one second.
If it had black bumpers and no roof rack, you coulda had me for a few seconds longer.
Fun spot and contrast.
This thing is relay poor ply proportioned, presumably to fit on an existing platform, but it how much can you put before the rear bumper is scraping the ground?
I liked the 1963 Chevy dash. That graceful compound curve arch housing the information center, taking three fourths the width of the car. Enough stamped metal to make a Prius waiting to bash the skull of the unfortunate. And that little idiot light that told you the engine was “cold”, like the balkiness of the 283 didn’t say it clearly enough.
Oh, and single speed electric wipers, don’t get me started…
I don’t know why, but I really like these gargantuan GM wagons from the ’90s, and this guy made a genius move with those doggy dishes. This car has chutzpah. It’s the last gasp on titanic wagons that hearken back to long family vacation trips in the ’50s. I could have stretched out in the back of this barge as a kid, with plenty of room to read comics, despite a full complement of luggage for six, assorted gear and a Coleman cooler of sandwiches and sodas. The comments about the Australian roads and big spaces are enlightening, too; those experiences parallel those in the U.S., but ours would have been twenty years earlier. Seems like our parents went to bed one night and woke up to a finished interstate highway system.
Paul, from what I see, you might have to take it personally if the owner changed the name of his car. Why mess with perfection?
Paul, look for a set of ’86-’88 Toyota Corolla center caps, they work surprisingly well on the xb. I used them on mine, though I filled in the toyota lettering as I completely debadged my xb.
After the lettering was removed.
Nice! So tell me more; is this the center section of a larger wheel cover? And how is it mounted to the wheel? And how did you fill in the lettering?
Never saw your reply, so here is my very late response.
These were the cheap hubcap option on the factory steel wheels, they have a small ring in the center that grabs the center hub of the wheel. If seated properly they stay on really well.
I scratched the fact of the letters with an awl to give some surface bite and used a 2-part sandable epoxy(something like JB weld) to fill in the letters, sanded them down and used some spot glazing putty to get them perfect.
Thanks for that!
Dull then, Dull now (In My Opinion).
Looks like the great white whale Moby Dick. In a world of suvs, cuvs and faceless minivans, this beast stands out from the crowd. It has Presence. Needless to say, I love it!
With the “no gingerbread” look, and sporting the dog dish hubcaps… It looks more like a 90’s Biscayne wagon, than a BelAir.
Hopefully this updated 1963 wagon doesn’t have the uncomfortable, sagging front seat and flexible, willowy frame that the original did?
Why Chebby sold so many of these 1963 models always perplexed me; the same year Ford or Plymouth wagon was SUCH a superior vehicle.
I’m sure Ford stomped Chevy in wagon sales that year, though. Ford owned the wagon business back then.
I really, really like this. The dog dishes somehow work perfectly with the car, and the monochrome look completes the effect. Just rebadge with some vintage Bel Air scripts, whatever year best fits.
I love it! Brilliant choice by the owner on the wheels, they really give a unique yet very fitting appearance to the car. I would be willing the bet his selection was intentionally recalling the 63 wagon, because one doesn’t just acquire 1963 vintage hubcaps and wheels to fit them by accident. I never realized the similarity in the rear wheel openings and the lower body character line before. That’s really neat.
Brings back good memories of the wagon I had until a few years ago. I choose 94-96 9C1 wheels, because I like the look of them generally on the Caprice cop cars and they fit the plain jane appearance of the white, no wood wagon.
I would not be surprised if very few people on the road notice that those gorgeous dog dishes aren’t original to the car. In the 6 years I had the cop car wheels on my wagon, I don’t think anybody ever commented to me about them. Lots of comments on the car, but nobody ever noticed that the wheels weren’t right or asked if it was a police package car.
On the interior, I am biased being a former owner, but I have never had a problem with the 94-96 Caprice dash. I like it better than the 91-93. It is plain, but not unattractive. Very usable layout. I like the digital speedo, wish it had a tach. My car had the rare crank windows, which were not so convenient, but did fit the plain look of the interior and the car. It also had a non-split bench seat, which I believe is the last year and model of any car to have that historically long running seat configuration.
A+ for effort in appearance and “art” history. C- for helping an already hideous design become more visually corrosive.
I always thought these looked like upscaled Tauruses(Tauruii?), but no one ever seems to point that out, is it just me? Not a bad thing, just an observation. This comparison lends the 94 much of the 63’s charm.
I stumbled upon this nearly 6 years later! The picture was from just after my ownership. The wheel/tire package was a tribute to the ‘63’s. I was considering a change to redline tires at some point. Here are some details about the car and some other poverty cap pics for all https://gmlongroof.4umer.com/t10738-1994-caprice-wagon-no-wood-west-coast-car
.
I think that calling a wagon of any sort, a Caprice (Classic no less) was an abomination. Imagine an Olds Ninety-Eight wagon. Maybe they did that too. I know there were Eighty-Eight model wagons.
Chebby should have kept the Caprice for their upscale sedan models only. For that matter, Olds and Buick too. Leave the haulin’ to the Impalas and Pontiac Catalinas.
The design of that dash looks like someone left wet clay in the oven too long and it sagged.
These GM whale boats somehow bring out negative vibes in me.
Those ’63s like the one in Jim’s photo do look great. That’s a car over which to salivate.
I agree! They were a hideous design 30 years ago and my sentiment hasn’t changed. What a sad way for the big GM wagons to go out!
Kudos to the owner for making the best of a situation with his ‘tribute’ wagon!
I will never forget the first time I got into the driver’s seat of this vehicle. Absolutely shocking at how nasty and cheap GM permitted that instrument panel to look. An amazing let down. Whoever is responsible for it ought to have been immediately forced to drive it for the rest of their auto career.
Chevrolet is a style leader. I have always admired their design. Simple, attractive and often inexpensive – but not this. The “restyled” Caprice from 1980 also had a bad dash, but it was an evolution from the 1977 dash, and the restyling just didn’t work.
However, this era GM product, the Roadmaster, 98, and Caprice was abysmal. It could have been done well, as in other GM lines, but these road whales had nothing to offer us except size and heritage. They utterly failed.
This is a nice one. Just don’t make me drive it, or I’d start crying.
I had a ’91 Caprice wagon about a dozen years ago and loved it. It was comfortable, drove well and was good on gas. Cheap to fix as well.
With that said, I echo the sentiments expressed here about the dashboard. And it seems the facelifted version from 1994 (95) on, only made it worse.
But either way, both versions screamed CHEAP GM CRAP!
Which was sad. The car deserved a better dash.
Happy to be able to say the 2015 Impala LTZ we have now is far superior…especially considering how cheap its W-body predecessor looked and drove.
We had a ’63 Impala wagon with full wheelcovers that were like stylized wire wheels, and almost as difficult to clean.
Count me as another fan of this car.
Well done!
Can someone who knows Photoshop please make an exaggerated rear overhang for this?
Oh wait, Chevy already built it.
WOW! Staging sure is everything. I’ve never considered one of these “whale like” GM wagons as anything except HUGE……….until the picture of this one with your white Japanese TWO-BOX vehicle.
The Chevy looks sleek, elegant and positively “fast”! GR8 comparison photo… 🙂 Chuck Jordon would be so proud!! That wagon has never looked better. DFO