Some older cars can just make you smile, by virtue of styling cues from a bygone era, flashy chrome, vibrant colors, endearing quirkiness, or maybe all of those things. Some cars just look happy. This is not such a car. This stripped-down, full-size Ford rolling slowly down a highway on a hot summer afternoon presents an expression of dour seriousness. No fluffy frivolity here; this car has a job to do, and it’s doing it, with as little fuss and fanfare as possible. Both full-size sedans and bare-bones cars have virtually disappeared from the car market in recent decades, which makes this sighting rather unexpected… still not happy, but certainly unexpected.
Stripped-down cars weren’t necessarily cheap cars. A Ford Custom like the one above wasn’t cheap in absolute terms (at $2,350 it cost 18% more than a base model Falcon), but it shined when measured in dollars-per-pound. The Custom was a full-sized car – identical in measurement to a Galaxie 500, but with absolutely no frills. For buyers needing a big vehicle at minimal cost, cars like the Custom were perfect. Or at least they were acceptable.
Ford’s Custom nameplate dated from 1949, but had somewhat of a sporadic history in the company’s 1950s lineup. After a brief hiatus, the Custom re-emerged in 1957, filling the role as Ford’s base trim model – a role it served for three years before another hiatus.
For 1964, Ford again reintroduced the Custom, filling a similar role as the ’57 model – a no-frills car offered as a 2-door or 4-door sedan. 1964 Fords featured a new design, and they were completely redesigned again for ’65, making this single model year instantly identifiable. On a dressed-up Galaxie, this design can seem somewhat busy, but with the Custom’s lack of ornamentation, one can see it’s a rather clean shape.
Ford Custom buyers fell into a few discrete categories. Many were sold to police departments or taxi companies, with Ford offering numerous police configurations in 2-doors, 4-doors and wagons with a 6-cyl. and several V-8 engine options. Taxi packages were offered only as 6-cyl. 4-doors.
Another significant market was that of business fleets. Companies that purchased fleet cars in the 1960s sought conservative, fuss-free, full-size sedans – cars that would imply that a good business decision was made in the vehicle’s purchase. And nothing too showy that would cause customers to wonder just how their money was really being spent.
A third group would also buy these cars: Cheapskates. Such people presumably needed a full-size car, but had no appetite for unnecessary superficialities that came along with buying a Galaxie for $160 more.
It’s unclear just what share of Ford Custom’s output was consumed by each of these three groups, but it is generally thought that police and taxi buyers made the bulk of the base Custom sales, while the slightly less austere Custom 500 (featuring additional chrome trim, upgraded interiors, carpet and armrests for instance) took the bulk of business and cheapskate sales.
Source of production figures: “Standard Catalog of Ford, 1903-1998” Note: Does not include wagons. Revised with updated 1974 data courtesy of CC reader MCT.
Regardless, Ford sold nearly 100,000 base Customs in 1964, and another 90,000 Custom 500s. While that pales to the 591,000 Galaxies produced that year, it still shows that stripped-down full-size cars had quite a following. This yielded enough of a market that Ford offered a bargain “Custom” version of its full-size cars for the next 14 years. After the mid-1960s, however, the concept of a stripped-down full-size sedan began to lose some appeal. Ford’s output of Customs diminished nearly every year from 1966 through 1978 (for the last four years, Custom was only offered to fleet customers).
It’s hard to tell just what this base Custom 2-door’s purpose was early in its life, though my guess is that this was a non-police vehicle (due to the dealer sticker on the trunk lid, which would have been rare for a police car, and the lack of a spotlight). Dual exhausts suggest a V-8 under the hood (4 different V-8s were available, in addition to the standard Six), though the current engine isn’t necessarily what came from the factory.
I spotted this car on Interstate 90 in eastern South Dakota, a stretch of highway whose speed limit is 80 miles per hour. The Ford, however, was traveling about 20 mph slower than most traffic. This difference in speed made it tough to take a full range of photos, but only one picture is necessary to take a mental journey back to the past. After all, stark austerity – the type of austerity as defined by this Ford – is awfully uncommon in modern times.
It’s a bit impressive to see someone keeping the faith of austerity alive. This side profile shows the Custom’s painted (instead of chromed) window frames and the lack of side trim brightwork. This isn’t exactly a happy face, but it gets the job done. And when it comes to stripped-down cars, that’s pretty much the purpose.
Photographed in Hanson County, South Dakota in July, 2018.
Related Reading:
Cohort Outtake: 1964 Ford Custom Two-Door Sedan – Change Is Not Always An Improvement Paul N
Andy Griffith drove a 4 door sedan version of this vehicle as a squad car during the 1964 to 1965 season of the “Andy Griffith Show”.
My uncle had one of these until around 1970 or so, when it was traded for a new Plymouth Suburban wagon. It was sort of a gold colour with the dog-dish hubcaps and not much else, and I always think of my uncle whenever I see a ‘64 Ford – “hey, Uncle Frank had one of these.”
While I’m biased toward the ’63s, the ’64 Fords always seemed a little off, like a chocolate bar you’ve held in your hand for too long and it has become soft and a bit runny. I don’t dislike them but they don’t excite me either. However, seeing such a plain version presents them in a very favorable light.
The police units in ’64 all had 15 inch wheels available as a “highly recommended option” in lieu of the 14 inch ones used on retail versions. It’s hard to tell but these appear to be 14s based upon how the car is sitting.
The history of this car would be fascinating to know but something tells me this Ford is a lifetime local resident, as is the guy driving it. The 60 mph speed is perhaps a combination of a gearing and not wanting to flog an old engine too hard. And, I’m going to guess he’s simply enjoying the drive. Hanging your arm out the window while drinking a soda in an old Ford does make for an astonishingly fun drive.
CC effect, sort of. I closed Curbside Classic on my phone and noticed that I had a Facebook notification.
“like a chocolate bar you’ve held in your hand for too long”
I will never be able to look at a 64 again without this visual.
Let me return the favor. The only actively bad line on the car is the sharply defined raised rectangle that covers most of the decklid. I have never understood what design problem this was necessary to solve. Has anything like it ever appeared on anything else?
I suspect you’re right about this Ford being a lifetime local resident.
From what I can make out of the dealer sticker, it appears to be from a dealer in Corsica, SD, which is about 40 mi. from where these pictures were taken.
I’ve always thought the roof/side-window treatment on the 64s was the best of this generation of full-sized Ford.
Perhaps an early iteration of the Hoffmeister Kink?
That would have been found on a ’53 Kaiser, who did it well before BMW. And who knows, maybe someone before that, but I do get tired of this Hoffmeister person always getting the credit!!
’53 Kaiser Dragon
I prefer the ’63’s as well. The jet exhaust tailights on the ’63’s were awesome. The ’64’s weren’t bad, but I liked the sharper creases of they ’63 better. My neighborhood while growing up in the ’60’s was definitely GM territory, with lots of Impalas present. As such, I was a GM fan. However, the parents of a friend bought a ’64 Galaxie 500 and I was surprised how much nicer the interior was compared to the Impalas. Great dash, with all controls fully illuminated at night. Recall it had the 352, a step up from the 289. The fastback 2 dr hardtop was also cooler that the more formal Impala coupe.
Looking at the sales figures shown, 800,000/yr. in big Ford sales seems huge, and it was, but sales of full size Chevys were over a million/yr. at this time. These are incredible figures, which will never be seen again. Camry and Accord consider it a good year if they sell half these amounts.
This is one car whose personality goes all over the map depending on trim level, body style and color. My Uncle Bob had a Vintage Burgundy Galaxie 500 4 door hardtop which I always found stylish and attractive.
This black Custom, otoh looks like something Studebaker would have built if it had been able to scrape together the development budget – a conservative and old-fashioned thing in both its styling and its mechanical innards.
Ford made the biggest change of anyone in its class from 63 to 64. It is interesting that they completely abandoned the Thunderbird-style roof and also made no effort to predict or transition into the 65 model that would follow. And what’s with that teeny, tiny upsweep from the beltline to the C pillar on the sedans? Such a strange one-year detail so completely unrelated to anything before or after.
Re 1965 restyle. I’ll bet that the 64 was originally planned for the usual three cycle but Iacocca demanded a complete restyle in a more formal and dressy way for the upcoming LTD.
The ’64 is just a re-skinned ’63. Which is a re-skinned ’62. Which is a re-skinned ’61. Which is a re-skinned ’60. If you look closely, you’ll see plenty of carryover parts, with the dies changed some, or not.
This basic body was clearly very tired by 1964, and there’s absolutely no way it was going to be used for two more years. Ford knew Chevy and Plymouth/Dodge were all going to be all-new in ’65.
Keep in mind that the frame and chassis on this ’64 dates back to ’57. The ’65 had a completely new GM-style perimeter frame and new suspension. That frame and suspension would be around for a very long time.
“I’ll bet that the 64 was originally planned for the usual three cycle”
I dunno, that body was already in its 5th year by 1964 and had been losing ground against Chevrolet’s big cars in the sales war. Nobody else was still selling an identifiably similar version of its 1960 model by then and stretching that car out longer would have been unheard of.
I think Ford wanted to match GM for ’65 in the then lucrative Big Car market. Mopar even had fresh full sizers.
1965 was a seminal year for the US auto industry. GM, Ford and Chrysler all introduced drastically redesigned models that were all quite successful. 1955 was another such year. I can’t think of any other.
Well, Chevy was only one year fresher, JP. The ’64 Chevy was a similarly “refreshed” ’61-’62-’63.
I have always preferred low trim models….I think the “gussied up” versions usually look silly, or worse, tacky.
Especially pickup trucks. Love this Ford! My buddy in High school had one. He paid $25.00 for and we drove it all over Texas.
fun!
Throughout the 60s my father was the fleet buyer for a sales force of a major publishing house. Salesmen (and they were all men) got a new car every 60k miles. For some, that was every 18 months, but nobody took more than 3 years to go 60k.
Pop was a GM man, so the reps got Chevrolets. But he wasn’t a total skinflint – he skipped right over the Biscaynes and ordered Bel Airs. According to the Internet, a Bel Air was only $102 more than a Biscayne.
I like it. Always have liked the ’64s.
The ’63 front end just looked like it was all bumper to me, whereas the ’64 had some nice details, complimented by classy side sculpturing and taillights better integrated with the body.
Low-end strippers like these make ideal hot rods as the no-nonsense theme is a great match.
You hit the nail on the head with that description of the 63s, I could never articulate exactly what bothered me about the front ends but all bumper perfectly sums it up. It overpowers the uninteresting headlight/grille area.
64s look like a scaled up and refined version of the 63 Comet front end, similar brow, and headlight layout, and even the three vertical “bumps” in the grille work are there, just integrated in the mesh.
If I recall correctly, the front styling of the 1964 Ford was “stolen” from the 1964 Mercury. It had originally been proposed for the full-size 1964 Mercury. The resemblance to the prior year’s Mercury Comet thus makes sense.
Nice, the 64 is my favourite big Ford.
The low speed tells me this unit does not have the Shafer 352 / 3 speed / OD combo that permits freeway flyer speeds.
I suspect the low speed is mostly a function of the car being nearly 60 years old and the driver not wanting to risk breaking something. If everything in the engine and transmission were up to snuff even the 223 CID six was capable of a decent speed on the highway. The dual exhausts on this car make it almost certain that some variety of V8 is under the hood and even the 289 CID small block was reasonably quick. My 1961 Ford with the I6 and FordoMatic combination was capable of a sustained 70-75 on the highway, and higher speeds were possible, at least for a short while.
Love those big round taillights – they look like afterburners.
What a cool cruiser – total attitude and badassery.
I wonder if the bump in Custom sales in ’74 is a result of the gas crisis, with buyers realizing that the Custom was lighter as well as cheaper, so it might be able to eke a little bit more out of each gallon.
I very highly doubt it.
That ’74 figure can’t possibly be right. The Standard Catalog of American Cars and Encyclopedia of American Cars both show 1974 Custom 500 production, not including wagons, as 28,941.
“Aside from the outlier 1974 model year, Ford’s output of Customs diminished annually from 1966 through 1978 (for the last four years, Custom was only offered to fleet customers).”
One more minor nit: there was no Custom 500 in 1978, at least not in the U.S. The model was renamed LTD ‘S’. Any cars that left U.S. assembly lines that year carrying Custom 500 badging were destined for export to Canada, where the name remained in use (and I believe was not fleet-only, but was still being sold to the general public).
Thanks for looking that up… I think there must be a typo in my copy of “Standard Catalog of Ford.” My copy lists 1974 Custom 500 sedan production as 128,941 — looks suspiciously like they added an extra “1” to the genuine number.
The number you quote (28,941) is more in line with 1973 & ’75 production. I thought the ’74 number was unusual, but since it was sort of ancillary to this article, I didn’t spend too much time worrying about whether it was accurate. I went back and amended the chart. Again, thanks.
As for ’78, the source I used (yes, the one with the type above) lists production of both Custom 500 and LTD S for ’78… very small number of Custom 500s, so I assumed that the Customs were only manufactured during the very early part of the model year. Now, I’m not so sure.
Here’s what the “Standard Catalog of American Cars 1975-86” has for the 1976-78 period.
1976:
The text says “LTD was the only full-size Ford available to private buyers this year, as the Custom 500 badge went on fleet models only.” That seems pretty straightforward, but it’s the only thing it has to say about the Custom 500. It does not explicitly mention which body styles the Custom 500 was available as.
The chart showing price/weight/production figures etc. for 1976 lists Custom 500 two and four-door pillared hardtops, as well as a “Ranch Wagon”. There are production figures shown for all three body styles, but there is no price or weight shown for the two-door. There are two issues here:
–Looking back at earlier years, the 1946-1975 volume of the Standard Catalog indicates that the 1970-75 Custom 500 (and 1970-72 base Custom) were available only as four-door models; the two-doors were dropped when Ford eliminated the two-door pillared style after the 1969 model year. It’s my understanding that two-door Customs continued to be available after 1969 in Canada, with Ford Canada switching to the two-door hardtop body style (from 1975 on, “pillared hardtop”). In light of all that, and the lack of a price or weight for the two-door, I’m wondering if the two-door referenced in 1976 was only available in Canada, and the production figure in the book represents cars produced in the U.S. for the Canadian market.
–It’s my understanding that Ford stopped using the Ranch Wagon and Country Sedan names after the 1974 model year, but the charts in the Standard Catalog showing price/weight/production figures etc. continue to refer to this trim level of station wagon as the Ranch Wagon through 1978.
1977:
The only mention of the Custom 500 in the text is the sentence “As in 1976, the Custom 500 was for fleet buyers only”.
The chart showing price/weight/production figures etc. lists the same three body styles as in 1976, but this year there aren’t any price or weight figures for any of them. At first glance, that might give rise to suspicions that the Custom 500 had been completely dropped in the U.S. and all of these were cars built for Canada. But the reference in the text does indicate fleet availability in the U.S.
1978:
The Standard Catalog’s coverage this year is very confusing.
In the text, it states, “Custom 500 was the fleet model, sold in Canada”.
The chart showing price/weight/production figures labels this model as the Custom 500, and lists the same three body styles as the past two years, again with no price or weight figures for any of them. A note follows, reading “Custom 500 was produced for sale in Canada. Totals include an LTD ‘S’ 2-door and Ranch Wagon for sale in the U.S.”.
Production is shown as 1359 two-doors, 3044 four-doors, and 1196 wagons.
There are multiple issues here:
–As noted, the text states “Custom 500 was the fleet model, sold only in Canada”. I think this sentence is correct that the Custom 500 name was only used in Canada this year. From what I understand, though, while the Custom 500 represented a trim level that was fleet-only in the U.S., the Custom 500 was never fleet-only in Canada. It continued to be sold to the general public there for as long as it existed. This sentence appears to be mashing together two facts which are each accurate on their own, but really aren’t correct when linked together this way.
–The note under the chart suggests that the two-door and wagon were sold in the U.S. under the LTD ‘S’ name. That makes no sense to me. I strongly suspect that “two” is a typo which should say “four”.
–If the car was sold in the U.S. under the LTD ‘S’ name, and the focus of this book is on cars sold in the U.S., why isn’t this model labeled as the LTD ‘S’? Why is it labeled by the name it was known in Canada, with the U.S. name only explained in a footnote?
This is what I think happened:
–In Canada, the Custom 500 continued to be sold to the general public through 1978, and was always available in a choice of two-door, four-door or wagon body styles.
–In the U.S., the Custom 500 was never available as a two-door after 1969. I think the production figures in the Standard Catalog for the two-doors in 1976-78 represents cars produced in the U.S. for export to Canada.
–1977 was the last year for the Custom 500 name in the U.S. In 1978, the Custom 500 was replaced as the fleet trim level in the U.S. by the LTD ‘S’. Like the Custom 500 of the previous several years, it was available only as a four-door or wagon, no two-door.
Epilogue:
–The Standard Catalog does not show an LTD ‘S’ for 1979, but it returned in 1980. In the late ’70s, there was also a similar LTD II ‘S’, and I can only surmise that Ford directed fleet buyers there in 1979. In 1980, for one year, the LTD ‘S’ was sold to the general public, and was available as a two-door. In 1981, it went back to being a fleet-only model, and back to being sold only as a four-door or wagon.
–In Canada, from what I understand, the Custom 500 became an LTD subseries in 1979 (“LTD Custom 500”), then was replaced by the LTD ‘S’ in 1980.
Given all this confusion, I hope I don’t come across a ’78 LTD S to write up!
The numbers from your Std. Catalog (1,359 two-doors, 3,044 four-doors) are identical to the numbers of 1978 Custom 500 production listed in my Standard Catalog of Ford.
“Given all this confusion, I hope I don’t come across a ’78 LTD S to write up!”
Someone here actually once came across a Canadian-market ’77 Custom 500 two-door:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/another-car-i-forgot-existed-1977-ford-custom-500-2-door-pillared-sedan-the-customs-swan-song/
To close the loop on this, at least as far as sources I have access to are concerned, I also checked the Encyclopedia of American Cars.
I didn’t compare production figures, but as far as the basic information presented, for 1976 and 1977 the Encyclopedia matches the Standard Catalog of American Cars in all respects, including:
–showing a two-door body style, even though it shows no two-door Custom 500 having been available for the previous several years before this
–labelling the wagon version of the Custom 500 as the Ranch Wagon
–showing no price or weight for the ’76 two-door, or for any of the three body styles in ’77
Then, for 1978, the Encyclopedia doesn’t show this trim level at all. No Custom 500, no LTD ‘S’; nothing.
The “cheap car” buyers moved to smaller cars, gradually. Used to see lots of elders in base big cars in 60’s, but by mid 70’s, a former Custom owners would be in a Maverick.
The last year for base Custom, non-500, was ’72. Same as Biscayne. Did Ford and Chevy coordinate this?
This ’64 is a nice style when compared to the 1965. The transition to a more boxy design with the big square taillights sent Ford off in a different direction. I don’t mind these ’64s at all. I hope you gave the driver a thumbs-up when you took his photo, he looks none too pleased about having himself photographed!
1964 Fords featured a new design,
I’d call it an exterior re-skin. There’s an awful lot of ’63 hiding inside that ’64 exterior skin.
But yes, the ’65 was certainly “new”.
They are even donors for skin grafts; my ’63 has a hood from a ’64 that fits just fine.
The ‘62 and ‘64 Fords were not my favorites, at least then. Not like the crisp and sleek ‘63 (hey, I was six years old, I knew what I liked!). So I enjoyed the melted chocolate bar simile. But now seeing any of these cars on the road is nice. By the way, I was surprised to see there were two door Interceptors. I don’t recall ever seeing a two door police car in the US until the Mustangs, and a few Camaro’s.
Two-door police cars were relatively common until the early 1970s, when they suddenly disappeared. I’m 46, and I never remember seeing a two-door police car actually in use.
Below is an example of one from the Virginia State Police:
Two-door police cars were relatively common until the early 1970s, when they suddenly disappeared.
An inevitable consequence of the two door body style being dropped after 1969 by Ford, Chevy and Plymouth. The big 2-door sedan era ended quite abruptly.
And some police departments held on until the bitter end:
They were probably just about the only buyers left for them. And then had a helluva time flipping their useless-as-a-taxi orphan gas guzzlers in ’73 or ’74. I’ve often wondered why more comptrollers and auditors-general haven’t laid down the law with the law about their oddball taste in cars.
The base 2-door post was always the cheapest and lightest in the line, so the beancounters thought they were doing the right thing at the time.
As a side benefit, they were more secure for prisoner transport at a time when power locks etc were uncommon in .gov level trim.
It looks like Missouri went one better in ’58, opting for the hardtop.
As for resale, point taken. But how I would have loved to find a police-spec 2-door big block boat back in the day for peanuts at auction.
Hog heaven!
There is a lot to be said about simplicity. I just picked up a 1998 Ford escort se sedan to daily drive(BMW relegated to weekends)and it’s a great pleasure to drive around in something that does not draw attention and is just bare bones transportation. Kudos on this article those Fords look really cool with no trim and just the basics.
I wonder how many buyers, even then, bought such stripped down cars.
Today in Canada, we have two strippers for sale: the Nissan Micra and the Chevrolet Spark. Both have base prices of C$9999, plus freight and PDI of course.
I think I have seen one Spark equipped this way, and not a single Micra.
The number of retail buyers of big strippers dropped pretty dramatically after about 1961, which was a recession year. The economy and more importantly real wages grew strongly from 1962 through 1971 at least, thanks to the Kennedy tax cut and later the Vietnam war, among other factors.
It was increasingly rare to see new ones that weren’t fleet cars, which some folks in our parts of town had (company cars). But even these increasingly were the next level up (Bel Air, Custom 500, etc.)
The cheapskates had lots of smaller cars to chose from. No guy with a family and any sense of social self-awareness would buy a bottom line stripper by the mid 60s. Except of course my dad, the Johns Hopkins neurologist, who bought an absolute stripper ’68 Dart as his commuter car. But he lived in a world of his own. 🙂
The stripper Big Sled was never that popular on the West Coast, but the prairies had them in abundance. I can remember being in Alberta in the late 1970’s and seeing plenty of Meteors, Belairs and Customs. As often as not the Chevy cars had the six and three on the tree.
Times have changed and so have tastes. The memories of the Great Depression were well alive circa 1978 and they will die with our generation.
A neighbor of mine in Brooklyn,NY had one in the late`60s. Total stripper 4 door, 6 cylinder black with red interior. 3 speed manual, no power steering, power brakes, heater OR radio.I remember seeing him with his wife and 2 kids driving to Sunday mass at St. Francis Catholic church in the freezing cold.After mass, he would go to a local diner . The waitress there hated to serve him because he never, ever left a tip.And he was NOT a poor man. He was an economics professor at Brooklyn College!
Sounds like my dad, a neurologist, who drove a stripper ’68 Dart. But he was actually a pretty generous tipper. Apparently his personality was a bit more complex that the economics professor. 🙂
That’s funny, my Dad’s best friend in Baltimore was head of Endocrinology at U of MD Hospital, and lived in a beautiful house in Homeland-Guilford, but drove a stripped ’68 Dart: AM radio (for baseball) heater, rubber floor mats and 3 spd column shift… must have been a ’60s Dr thing!
Now I wonder if they were the same color. That would’ve made some interesting mixups leaving medical conferences if they were.
Ha! Hard to imagine. But my pop’s didn’t even have the AM radio! He bought a cheap little pocket transistor radio and sat in on the dash.
I’ve never been really enthused about Fords, but seeing this is a welcome sight. I had a childhood friend whose family traded in a plain ’57 Chevy sedan for one of these. It was a new Custom 500 2-door, sort of a medium forest green, with a V8 and automatic. Definitely not frivolous. I like the looks of this car now, and I couldn’t say that before. Anyway, Mike’s family traded in the Custom 500 about 5 years later on an immaculate pre-owned ’67 Galaxie 500 4-door, which was replaced by a series of BMWs. Didn’t see that coming.
The ’64 Fords also remind me of the AMT ’64 Galaxie 500XL convertible model that had real lights for front and rear. Wish I still had it.
I think the low trim versions are universally better looking across the board for 60-64ish big cars, be it a Ford Custom or a Chevy Biscayne. High trim still had a lot of 50s jukebox elements in them.
I wouldn’t say that’s an unhappy face, he has an old steering wheel in one hand and a slurpee in the other, he may not express it facially but there is no doubt great joy in this moment. I feel this applies to the car itself, cheap and cheerful with a cloak of seriousness.
The full-size 1964 Ford was much better built than the redesigned 1965 cars. The ’65 suffered from premature rusting in the rear quarters behind the wheels, and frame rust-out in heavily salted locations. One thing I did like about 1964 2 door sedans, was the rear windows lowered fully, where 1965 & later only lowered half-way. Though one thing I did like on 1965 Customs were those round taillights.
What you say about ’65-up is somewhat true, especially the frame rust part.
Having said that, I’m firmly in the ’65-up camp, preferring it’s more modern
engineering methods to the stone age-’64.
I quite like these photos especially the one with the gruff looking driver, and oh boy that scenery sure is flat! So, $160 in 1964 is now $1,299.16 so I can see why some people would want to save some money.
When I was a lad all of the town’s MOPAR cop cars had decals on the decklid
saying ”ST.ANN DODGE”
Hey, a place I actually know and have been to! Exit 335, just east of Mitchell and climbing out of the James River crossing. Nice to see the tin worm hasn’t claimed every old car in the upper Midwest.
Strange to see no side mirror on this. I had a black 64 Galaxie with chrome trim that was so beat to hell I took it all off, so this brings back memories. But I can’t imagine needing speakers in the package shelf if there’s an FE to listen to.
The retail market Custom 500 continued into 1978 in thrifty Canada. However, by 1975 it had the same interior trim as the base LTD. The differences amounted to minor
items such as deleted hood ornaments and such.
Actually, the Custom 500 survived into the Panther era, but gone after ’79 in favor of the LTD-S. However the ’79 lacked any kind of identifying script, unlike the ’78 & down.
I suppose the CC (cheapest cheapskate)—still wanting a “new car”—would get the year-end leftover/demonstrator. Nov. 1964 here (Rome, NY); none are total strippers, and Tudor customer gets V8 & whitewalls and a *lot* of car for less than $2000:
That $1989 “full size” Custom is just $16K in today’s dollars. Such a deal!
Agreed, MikePDX. I searched for the ultimate stripper ’64 Custom; this one appears to have zero options, save the dealer putting it up on the rack to spray some undercoating:
Turn signals……hot damn, now that’s decadent!
I had a ’64 Custom when I was in college. Black exterior, red vinyl interior, 223 six cylinder, manual choke, 4 door, three on the tree, AM radio, the works.
It was 7 years old when I bought it (cheap), forgot how many miles were on it, but it was one VERY reliable car. There was so much room under the hood I could actually stand in the engine compartment and work on it, untouched by inclement weather. The large volume of room in the interior and the trunk was often put to the test. Next best thing next to a station wagon.
My maternal grandfather bought that 1957 Ford stripper in cheap looking gray. He had a nice house with swimming pool in a nice suburb of Los Angeles and sold insurance for AAA.
Why were so many of these non-fleet strippers made in colors, like black or beige, that made them look worse than the same car in turquoise, for instance? That ’64 would look much better in the available turquoise. I think the dealers kept an ugly loss-leader in stock in hopes to upsell something more attractive. A local Ford dealer did this in the 1980’s with a brick red, grey vinyl Explorer Sport. That “weekend special” remained unsold for most of the year.
My dad, a well paid engineer, bought a bottom of the line Pontiac, but with radio and heater, in ’55 and the lowest trim Chevy station wagon available in ’59. He did spring for a Powerglide in that one, making resale much easier a few years later. This car was fairly attractive in metallic blue.