Can a vehicle be a Curbside Classic if it is still in production? When it is a throwback like the Club Wagon Chateau (and when I am the appointed arbiter) the answer is a resounding YES. After all, if the Law & Order television shows can be both in classic reruns and in current airing, why not the big Clubber?
From the late 1960s and lasting well into the 1990s, the Ford Club Wagon set the standard for passenger vans in the US. The full sized passenger van became a growth business in the 70s. By 1971, each of the big 3 (big 4 if we count GMC) had moved beyond the early passenger vans which were hopelessly crude in comparison with the big station wagons that ruled the family market at that time. Although the competition made a good run for the business in the early 70s, the debut of the third generation Econoline in 1975 put Ford out front in this segment for the next generation.
The Chateau as the top trim level of the Club Wagon goes back to at least 1969, and included passenger accommodations on a par with the contemporary Country Squire. No more metal and rubber interiors, no sirree. The Chateau Club Wagon was all cloth, vinyl and carpet. Why was it called Chateau? My cousin’s answer when his wife asked this question was as good of an answer as I ever heard: It was the size of an average house in Switzerland.
If you were a kid in the early 70s, chances are that someone you knew traded a station wagon for a van for family hauler duty. Once that happened, you got to experience the luxury of room, room, room. In 1973, my friend Dan’s dad traded his Travelall on a new Dodge Royal Sportsman. In 1976, my friend Tom’s dad traded a strippo ’69 Ford Van (metal floors and all) on a new silver Custom Club Wagon. Tom and I were both, however, chagrined that his parents had chosen the Custom and not splurged on the Chateau. But then, spending other peoples’ money is always easy.
My mind was made up. When I got older and had my own family, I would not make them crawl into the back of cramped two door cars (which I considered a form of child abuse at the time) but would provide them with the luxury of spacious accommodations which would make everyone happy and joyful at all times.
Fast-forward about twenty years. After a 1995 trip from Indianapolis to Dallas and back, I learned how small a Crown Victoria really was with two kids in car seats in the back. Diaper change? Snack? Another toy? Stop the stupid car, get into the trunk and root around for the necessary supplies. Does one of the boys absolutely require Mom to sit next to him? Stop the car again, horse around with moving a child seat into the front (this was pre-air bag) and resume.
Not long after that trip, I remembered my vow and started looking into vans. By 1995, the Suburban was becoming the official car of soccer moms and little league dads everywhere. But for family transport, I always considered it inferior to a big passenger van, which provided more room for people, lots more room for cargo, and was quite a bit less expensive.
Then too, there was the minivan, then at the peak of its popularity. For the same price you got a smaller vehicle with a fuel economy improvement of only about three to four miles per gallon. With gas prices of around $1.25 per gallon, the minivan remained in consideration for about 45 seconds.
In the 1970s through the 1990s (and beyond) you had one big choice when it came to vans. Factory or Custom. Custom vans were hugely popular in in the 70s (at least in the midwest) and they maintained a following for a long time. Custom vans started life as a base level commercial van, custom fitted (by lots of companies in and around Elkhart, Indiana) with big windows, deep velour captains chairs, varnished wood trim and built-in electronics like stereos and even TVs. The problem with the Custom vans is that their quality varied widely and their resale value often dropped like a rock as they aged.
This was not so with the high end factory vans. In the used market, they were always harder to find and were much more expensive when you found them. Plus, the factory interiors were generally MUCH more durable, if not as flashy.
In truth, I really wanted a Dodge Ram Wagon. But Dodge had not invested more than about $1.35 in passenger accommodations since the ’70s and stubbornly refused to provide shoulder belts to rear passengers in the two bench seats other than the two window-seat passengers behind the driver. This was a safety tradeoff that I was unwilling to make.
Then I drove past a Ford dealer one day with two of these sitting near the building. Both 1 year old ’94s in Chateau trim, one red with a 302 and the other, green with the 351. Once Mrs. JPC set foot inside, she was hooked. You see, I had showed her a minivan, but she liked the room of the big van, proving for the upteenth time that I married the right girl. (After test driving a Grand Caravan, she asked if we could look at the extended model. Good Girl!) This Ford Chateau provided the niceties that the minivans provided, and the beautiful interior (which always elicited “ooohs and ahhs”) sealed the deal. I was happy that she preferred green, because I preferred the 351.
That Club Wagon became one of my favorite vehicles of all time, and to this day I feel a warm sense of smug whenever somebody in a Suburban passes me with luggage and crap piled up and covering the back window because there is not enough room behind the third row for real cargo. Seriously: you buy a three ton vehicle that gets thirteen miles per gallon and you STILL need a cartop or hitch-mounted carrier? Oh, I’m sorry. Was I ranting? Maybe a little.
You Suburban partisans must understand that I was just used to a cargo area behind the third row that looked like this. Actually, this van cost me a lot of money, because a lot of big things from a lot of stores rode home in the back of it. Maybe Mrs. JPC had this plan all along.
Anyhow, our family of 5 went on to explore much of the eastern half of the United States over the next eleven years in this van. Scout campouts, school carpools, field trips, baseball and football practices and games, this car became part of the family. These two photos of my sons illustrate the lifestyle span that our Club Wagon bridged, always with convenience and comfort. And we never outgrew it.
Although I spent the first 80k sorting out ball joint and tire wear issues, a set of ball joints with these really cool things called grease fittings and a set of Michelens made this one of the best highway cruisers ever. The second 80,000 miles were quite trouble-free, and by the time I let go of it in 2006, my big Emerald Ford smashed my previous record for time of ownership of a car (five years with a 1971 Plymouth Scamp).
This particular generation of Club Wagon (still in production) goes back to 1992. Most people remember the re-body job done on the big Panther platform cars, but forget that the Ford guys pulled the same rabbit out of the hat on the E series vans. By 1991, the 1975-vintage Econoline was virtually unchanged, then with a new body popped onto what was essentially the old chassis, Voila! We have a new van. There actually were quite a few changes under the skin. Although the running gear was largely carried over, the suspension, steering and other parts got some tweaking.
Also new was the elimination of the twin gas tanks (25 and 15 gallons) with their complicated and troublesome switching mechanisms, replaced with a single 35 gallon tank. There was enough that was new for this van to be declared Motor Trend’s 1992 Truck of the Year. (Pause for great flourish and fanfare.) But despite all of the changes, you still had a very familiar Twin I Beam Ford van, for better or for worse.
When I spotted this 1995 model in the same color combo as my old 94, a flood of memories hit me and I had to stop and photograph it. I may be one of the few people who could instantly identify this as a ’95. It is easy, because that was the first year for these wheels (which I liked better than mine) and the last year of this color (at least with this front end treatment).
It is unfortunate that Jacques Nasser’s cost cutting blade hit these vans in 1997 (coinciding with the discontinuance of the iron engines and the addition of one of the more unfortunate grilles on a Ford truck).
In fact, it seems that Ford stylists have been having an office pool for years on how to top an ugly existing design with an even uglier one.
Each series seems to have done so, right up to the present day. It is also unfortunate that the interior accommodations have never recovered from that 1997 attack of the cost-cutting machete. Styles change, and the Suburban remained cool while the venerable van became like the ex marine with a flat top and wingtips in 1972 – extremely capable but hopelessly basic and out of style.
If I have been convincing enough, you can still buy a version of this big wagon today. Only now it is called an E-150 XLT Premium. It is hard to imagine how buyers can pass up a vehicle with such a catchy name. Maybe it is the fact that Ford does not promote it at all, or that it lacks most of the luxury features that people expect today. Or that you can visit two hundred different Ford dealers and never see one.
I have thought once or twice in the ensuing years about joining Club Chateau again. But used ones are getting harder than ever to find and, truthfully, owning one of the mid 90s versions (that goes down as one of my favorite vehicles ever-or did I already say that?) would ruin me for one of the newer cheaped-out units.
So, let us (or me, at least) savor this big, old, comfortable box one more time. I am glad that someone is still enjoying this one. And in the Sam’s Club parking lot, I am confident that those big swinging doors will close behind anything that its owner can roll out on a cart, and seven people besides. Try THAT with your Suburban.
A neighbouring family had one of these one of these, in the same colour scheme, in a Bay Area apartment complex we lived in 7 years ago.
As I recall they were deeply religious, with numerous children and children’s children, and they piled them all in the Econoline on Sundays. The van wore some odd bumper stickers, and there were often soiled diapers scattered around it as it sat in the carpark, along with–for reasons unknown–large quantities of latex gloves. ‘Unknown’ because they wouldn’t talk to me (for I was cohabitating with my then-girlfriend, now-wife, at the time).
Over the course of our lease, I noticed the hard-working Econoline was taking longer (and longer, and longer) to turn over. Towards the end, I’d hear the starter cranking for several minutes every evening.
Finally, one night at around 2 AM, I heard a “wree-wree-wree-wree-wree-wree-wree-WHOOMP.” Looked out the window and, sure enough, the Ford’s V10 was on fire, its owner running in circles, hands over his head. The van’s interior was so filled with familial detritus that it went up in a matter of minutes, pouring oily smoke from the melted plastic. The roof over the carpark burned up as well, and while our car was undamaged, sitting a few spots over, other neighbours ended up with melted mirrors and door mouldings.
From then on, the complex owners made them park their remaining car (a white Sable) on the street. Never found out what they replaced the Econoline with. Moral of the story: by the 1990s, full-size passenger vans were being bought by some odd ducks–all due respect to the writer, of course.
” Moral of the story: by the 1990s, full-size passenger vans were being bought by some odd ducks.”
I resemble that remark !
I’ve read horror stories about sparkplugs in E350s with the Triton V10 where a dealer would charge $1 to 1.5K to change them.
Maybe this particular one had “deferred maintenance”.
Very nice write up. Brings back a flood of memories for me as well. I owned a 1992 Ford Club Wagon XLT..the E350 version ( 1 ton, 12 passenger variant ), also with the 351 motor. Hauled more people and flotsam than like no other vehicle.
And the really nice thing about the Club Wagon’s, as opposed to the strippo Econoline’s, was when you removed all the seats, you still had a nicely insulated and appointed cargo hauler, with full rear heat and air conditioning.
I think we put close to 250,000 clicks on that puppy. But alas, due to road salt up here in the northland, the tin worm got a hold of her and started the disintegration process and her eventual demise.
Pilot a 2000 Dodge Ram Van 3500 series now.
And you are so correct…1997 was their down fall…especially with the Triton engines and their spark plug blowing abilities….absolute crap motors.
Thanks for taking us on a trip down memory lane with the Club Wagon’s.
I worked in the college maint department during my undergrad years (1995 – 1999) and one of the departments responsibilities was the motor pool of full size vans for transporting sports teams and campus clubs. During the time I was there we had models from each of the big 3. The Fords were the most pleasant to drive (noise/comfort/ect) the Dodges were the most stone age and the GMC/Chevys were the squirliest in the snow. One of our Fords was one of the last built with a 460V8 before the switch over to the modular engines – it could pass everything but a gas station.
Actually, my favorite driving van was that 73 Dodge I referenced in the piece. He kept that one well into my teenaged driving years, and I got to drive it several times. The structure was really rigid and the combination of the 360 V8 and Torqueflite was just as nice in a van as in anything else. The fact that Dan’s dad (who was my car-mentor Howard) eventually equipped it with dual exhausts with glasspacks and slotted wheels with big fat Goodrich T/As made it all the more fun to drive.
These things came with a dizzying array of engines over the years. The earliest (up to about 96) had the old 300 I6, 302, 351, 460 gas and the Powerstroke diesel. The modular V8s hit in 97 and a V6 replaced the old 300 about that time. The V10 replaced the 460 somewhere in there, and there was a later generation (or two) of diesel.
On my 94, the 351 was mated to a 3:55 axle, a much shorter ratio than if you got the 302. All that torque and a 3:55 axle made that van a rocket at stoplights. On long uphill grades on the interstates it was the polar opposite of my 85 Crown Vic with the no-torque 302 and a super tall axle.
Gas mileage stayed in an incredibly narrow band with my 351/3:55. Until it started getting really old, mileage was never under 12 and never over 16, no matter how hard or easy you drove it. Another noteworthy attribute of my 351 was that I never, ever had to add a quart of oil between changes. The oil on the stick would get darker, but it would never go down, not even with 160K+ miles on it. I cannot say the same for the 4.6 in my 93 Vic.
These vans are nothing short of work horses. I worked in the Car Rental business and have driven many a mile in anything from the basic E150 Cargo to the loaded E350 15 passenger. I’ll never forget working for a Car Rental company that overbooked 15 passenger vans. In a lurch we had to buy a van from another Car Rental company. This was around 1990 or so. It was a brown E350 15 passenger with a 300 6cyl and front air only. Not a good combination for 15 people in Florida. Great vans and in my opinion, Ford dominates this market. It will be interesting to see it’s replacement. As I understand, it’s a European Ford van.
Don’t underestimate the Euro vans. Years ago we went to Munich and I remember seeing about 90-100mph on the speedo of the tall-roof VW van, and the driver thinking he was Michael Schumacher on the autobahn off-ramp. Ford has turned off a few customers out here with previous generation Transits though, fuel pumps etc. No relevance to the US though unless you actually get the diesels and even then they are completely different now.
One of my uncles bought a club van in the early 70s. It was a substitute for a traditional station wagon. It’ worked well, except that my aunt refused to drive it. She did not appreciate the Ralph Cramden driving position. For the same reason, my mother refused to consider such a vehicle, so we would remain crammed into the traditional wagons. It would take Chrysler and their mini-van to revolutionize the station wagon market.
Your mother’s reaction is understandable. The Gen2 Ford (thru 1974) and the Dodge B series (at least the earlier ones) had a very bus-like angle on the steering column. I drove both and remember them pretty well. The Gen3 Ford was much more car-like, right down to the fake wood slathered all over the dash.
Forgive a question from the other side of the pond, but Wikipedia is of no help here. Anyone knows why/how Elkhart, Indiana ever became some sort of hotbed for custom vans? Who started that? Why just in Elkhart? Oh well. I’m just wondering, because this article really rings a bell. The first (and, if truth be told, last) US custom van I ever saw in my French hometown when I was a child had an emblem from an Elkhart-based company. That was in the late 1970s, the van was a Dodge with German number plates, and somehow the name “Elkhart” has stuck in my mind since then.
Elkhart is a center for RV production. The van customizing was handled by RV companies, or companies that started in Elkhart because that’s were the “talent” for that sort of work was (and is). How Elkhart became the center for RV manufacturing I don’t know.
I have no earthly idea, Oliver, but I can hazard a few guesses. Elkhart was best known as a city that manufactured musical instruments. The C. G. Conn company was located there, so lots of trumpets, trombones and such were born there. There has been a lot of camper and RV manufacturing there, and I suspect that those companies started converting vans. Elkhart County borders lower Michigan and is about halfway between Chicago and Fort Wayne, Indiana on I-80. I suspect that it was convenient go get vans delivered from the Big3 and convenient to ship them out from. Also, there have traditionally been a lot of Amish woodworkers in that area, and not as much Union activity as in some of the bigger cities in the upper midwest. I think that they sort of started there by accident and as the business grew, it sort of became a mecca. When the economy went into the tank in 2008, Elkhart County had one of the highest unemployment rates in the country for awhile, as the RV market is extremely sensitive to recessions.
Elkhart has one hell of an auto tradition. Back before the Depression, it was just about the alternative to Detroit, home to at least a dozen of the more substantial independents. Marques like Moon, Kissel, etc. if my memory is working. Unfortunately, none of the manufacturers survived the Depression. For the most part, they were all ‘assembled car’ manufacturers (Continental engines, Budd bodies, etc. – did very little designing on their own, relied on their suppliers instead).
Elkhart got it’s start back before WWI, when the American auto industry was a bit more scattered around the country. From the reading I did decades ago, I got the feeling that, as auto companies invariably fell by the wayside, Elkhart and Detroit became the two big manufacturing cities. The biggest difference was that Detroit had the bigger companies, companies that had the resources to manufacture their cars from design thru finished product. Once the economy crashed, this became of paramount importance, as none of the ‘assembled car’ manufacturers survived.
Not so much Elkhart, but Indiana in general seemed to be a center of non-assembly-line coach-truck assembly. The American school-bus industry was heavily present, in Richmond and Mitchell – Wayne and Carpenter, respectively. The earlier school-bus industry somewhat resembled the later RV industry, in that it was low-volume, manpower-heavy, semi-automated manual assembly.
My brother’s friend runs an part-time airport shuttle from a small town in Iowa, and his similar-vintage 351 Econoline has well over 400k miles. The engine is still strong, but he has put two transmissions in it.
Could never really get into full-size vans. I like small minivans. I grew up with a ’79 Chateau with a 351W. Me and my dad drove it all over. While it was good, I couldn’t live with one everyday. Truck-based people carriers just seem like driving a bus or large ship. I have four kids, and I’ve preferred station wagons, we now have a Mazda MPV and Mazda5.
In my experience (mainly Japanese pickups) there is a world of difference between roadholding and handling of passenger cars and commercial vehicles, and only part of it is the tyres. When I put the original spec light truck tyres on my Falcon ute it would give you the same ‘approaching the limit’ feel at least 10mph sooner on open road corners.
A friend would not buy an F100 or F150 purely because he hated the camber and track change of the Ford twin I-beam setup – basically big swing axles.
It would be interesting to see this vehicle format with a modern design, I’d expect a lower floor height would be achievable, seat mounted lap-sash belts all round etc
I didn’t realize these actually dated back to 1975. Wow, that’s older than the Mercedes G-Class!
To me, the 1992 redesign looked quite thorough from the outside, but I guess I was wrong. Anyway, it seems like it has been the right tool for many jobs for many years and still is.
jpcavanaugh: Not a classic… any more than a 1997 Prius or a 1995 Ford F-150 is a “classic”… if we use “throwback” to define a classic, then pretty much every car built in the USA for the last decade would meet that definition. If you want to post non-classics, maybe you could start your OWN blog: “Curbside cars that might be a classic 20 years from now”.
It was introduced for 1992 (and many parts date back to 1975), so it certainly fits some definitions of “classic”.
Is the original VW bus not a classic because it was made in Brazil until recently (or maybe still is)?
Besides, didn’t Paul Niedermeyer say that any interesting old car can be considered a classic to some?
I enjoyed the Club Wagon post and feel that it belongs on this site. I had no idea that there were “deluxe” factory full size band made as recently as the 1990s…in my mind vans by this time were conversions of debatable taste, airport shuttles, or HVAC repairperson specials.
JP – thanks for posting.
Any vehicle built prior to 2000 is a curbside classic…lighten up already.
The growing popularity of passenger vans for family transportation use during the 70s always struck me as odd, simply due to the fact it coincided with the worst fuel crisis in the country’s history.
Probably the same allure as a full-size van has now. If everything goes completely to hell, you can live in the thing in relative comfort.
I dont see many of these full size vans, wonder if the $350.00 to fill from empty is why?
Same, I’d think I could count on one hand the number I’ve seen in the last 10 years (not counting seeing the same 2000-era Chev van a few times)
Like the 91-2 Panthers many people wrongly assume that the 92 Econoline/Club Wagon was just a re-body on the same only frame. In the case of the Econolne even less is shared with it’s predecessor than in the case of the Panther. Pretty much the only thing that is a direct interchange are the wheels on the 250 and 350 versions. Yes it still uses Leafs in the back and the famous twin-I beam front suspension with very similar geometry but none of it interchanges. According to one of engineers who worked on it, they did start out planning to do just a rebody but then they decided that this needed tweaking which lead to tweaking that and the next thing you new the chassis was pretty much all new.
Thanks for your input, Eric. I had never owned a 75-91 version and had presumed that much more of the two were interchangeable. I had also recalled a piece from one of the car mags back then (in one of the few pieces ever written about these vans) that treated the change as a basic re-body. This just proves that the Curbside Commentariat with its years of experience with these vehicles is more informed than the glossy motoring press after a road test and a press conference. Who’d a thought? I have made some revisions to the text to reflect the greater dissimilarities between the generations.
Also, I think that this piece may increase the sum total ever written about these by about 45%.
Well, I guess that makes the Econoline the second oldest production vehicle, excluding very heavy trucks, available in the US (after the Geländewagen). Still, 21 years isn’t a bad run!
I used to refer to these kinds of vans as snail mobiles due to the fact that you’re (in effect) carrying all of your stuff with you everywhere you go.
My in-laws have a Ford from the 90′s that they still use. It may even be a 1995 model. It’s actually pretty good when you have a person in a wheel chair, as the van height seating makes it good for ingress and egress. And there’s plenty of room for the power chair, if you’re not taking anyone in the back seat. My FIL built a little ramp for the power chair to go up into the back of the van. He takes out the seats so there’s maximum cargo room.
Great post! I’m so lucky today that i was able to read your post which gives me a lot of ideas that I’ve been looking for. Thanks a lot.
Eleven passenger van rental
I wanna new one with 6.8 V10!
I saw one of these in blue (1997-2002) earlier this weekend that was RUST-FREE in the rust belt!
Great post! We think alike.
I made this video about my van. I think you’ll enjoy it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ7jCYjeSJw
Nice old van. After checking out your video, I miss mine again.
I heard this is the last year for the Econoline. If that’s true then that’s a shame.
I had two Gen2 Econolines; and then I drove any number of a fleet of these, Gen3 and Gen4 while working for an airport-shuttle company between Denver and Vail, Colorado, in 1995. That shuttle company also ran Dodge vans of the same generation; and I’ve since owned a 2003 Dodge Ram Van…the last year of it.
For my money the Dodges drove better…the 1990s example the best; then the 2003; than my old 1977. Since I never drove a late ’70s model new, that may not be a fair rating.
But the Econoline…I somewhat disliked, from a driver’s-view standpoint, the longer hood and higher dash of the 1995 bodystyle. The Gen3s were preferable, even if their trim was more industrial and the package worn from years in livery service.