Ford sold almost 224,000 full-size and intermediate station wagons for 1967, but not many buyers ordered the fancier woodgrain-clad Fairlane Squire, and very few of those had the standard 3-speed manual transmission. This handsome green Fairlane is a rare three-pedal exception, which might be why it commanded an unusually high price.
According to Automotive Industries, 81 percent of all 1967 Fairlane production (not just wagons) had automatic transmission and just 13.8 percent had a 3-speed manual. Before you ask, the 4-speed stick wasn’t available in the wagon, and while you could still get overdrive with base V-8, this Dark Green wagon doesn’t have it — just the plain-vanilla column-shifted 3-speed “Synchro-Smooth Drive.”
Short of ordering a Marti Report for a car I don’t own, I can’t tell you exactly how many 1967 Fairlane wagons had the 3-speed stick, but it surely wasn’t very many. For starters, the midsize station wagon itself wasn’t very popular in 1967: Ford built 35,131 Fairlane wagons that year, of which only 8,348 were the Fairlane Squire, with its simulated wood trim. Most (7,923) of those Squires had a V-8 engine, but beyond that, your guess is as good as mine.
The unpopularity of the Fairlane Squire is easy to understand when you consider the prices. A 1967 Fairlane Squire with a 289-cid Challenger V-8 started at $3,007.63. For just $34.09 more, the Ford wagon shopper could have a Country Sedan V-8, a full-size wagon considerably bigger than the midsize Fairlane in almost every dimension.
If you peruse the specs in the 1967 Ford wagon brochure, you’ll see that the Fairlane actually didn’t compare badly with its bigger brother in total cargo volume — Ford claimed up to 103 cu. ft. for the full-size wagons and 93.4 cu. ft. for the Fairlane wagon.
However, the Fairlane fell short in one key area the discriminating wagon buyer was unlikely to ignore, which was width: The Fairlane was 5 inches narrower than the full-size wagon, which translated into a 6-inch penalty in load space width between the rear wheelhouses. A 4-foot-by-8-foot sheet of plywood could be carried flat in the back of the big wagon, but a Fairlane driver would have to lash it to the roof or insert it diagonally.
If load width wasn’t a priority, the Fairlane wagon had a lot to recommend it. Like the big wagons, it had Ford’s Magic Doorgate, which could either drop down …
… or swing open. The Squire also included a power tailgate window as standard equipment.
The spare tire was concealed on the right side of the load area, where it was out of the way.
Under the rear load floor, there was a concealed compartment (which was lockable on the Fairlane 500 and Squire), with a volume of 7.6 cu. ft.
The rear seatback also flipped forward for more space.
Fairlane Squire and Fairlane 500 wagons had plush pleated vinyl upholstery, color-keyed carpeting, and foam-padded seat cushions.
The 289-2V engine, a $105.63 option, was not outstandingly powerful, and this California-registered wagon was retrofitted in the ’70s with a Pure Power Electro-NOX control system that saps more of the engine’s strength in pursuit of lower hydrocarbon and NOx emissions. However, a Fairlane Squire was 800 lb lighter than a full-size Country Squire, so the 289 was perfectly adequate for most duties, and its gas mileage was undoubtedly a lot better than a full-size wagon with the 390.
I assume the 289 Fairlane wagon feels particularly spry with the stick shift rather than the more common C4 Cruise-O-Matic. The “Synchro-Smooth” 3-speed manual had a synchronized low gear, which was handy, and its evenly spaced ratios weren’t bad for all-out acceleration. Unfortunately, its 1.75 to 1 second gear meant you didn’t have a passing gear at freeway speeds. The optional overdrive would do a bit better there (aside from the overdrive kickdown, it came with a lower numerical second gear ratio), but the older 3-speed gearbox that came with OD didn’t have a synchronized first gear. Overdrive also cost $116.59, and I think most buyers just didn’t want to spend the extra money — it wasn’t likely to pay for itself at late ’60s gas prices. It was rarely ordered, and Ford no longer offered it on wagons after 1967.
The Ford brochure claimed that the Fairlane was aimed at the buyer who had previously owned a compact wagon, but now “wants a wagon with more size, more style, more luxury…more everything.” The ironic thing about that was that since 1966, the Fairlane, Comet, and Falcon wagons had been nearly identical structurally. They had different front clips, which gave the Fairlane a slightly longer nose, but otherwise, they differed mainly in trim and features. (The Fairlane and Falcon also had different instrument panels; for some reason, the Falcon got a temperature gauge its fancier brother did not.)
The 1967 Falcon wagon had simpler load area trim that gave it an extra 2.2 inches of usable space, although a different floor stamping deprived it of the under-floor compartment. However, if you discounted the hidden compartment, the Falcon wagon actually had MORE usable cargo volume than the Fairlane. With prices starting at $2,497 (over $400 cheaper than a Fairlane Squire), the Falcon wagon was a bargain for load-hauling cheapskates, but buyers were even less interested than they were in the Fairlane version; 1967 Falcon wagon sales totaled just 10,105 units.
Clearly, for a lot of wagon buyers in 1967, bigger was better. The full-size Ford wagons outsold the intermediates by almost 4 to 1, usually fitted with bigger V-8s and automatic transmission. Nonetheless, the Fairlane wagon was easier to park and easier on gas, and it had a sportier look. Personally, I could do without the woodgrain trim, but it’s almost as much of a conversation piece today as the stick shift.
I don’t know much about the history of this particular wagon. The listing said it was originally sold in New York, is now registered in California, and was in long-term storage for years, but I have no idea why the original buyer ordered it this way. The Bring a Trailer seller was vague about other options: The wagon apparently lacks power steering and brakes, and while it appears to have an in-dash AM radio and an under-dash FM converter, the listing mentioned neither. Overall, its equipment seems pretty austere — a stripped-down top-of-the-line model. Back when these wagons were newer, the $184 pricier Squire would have been worth an extra $150 in trade-in value over a Fairlane 500 wagon, but the penalty for the stick shift would have more than crossed that out, and the original owner apparently held onto the wagon rather than trading it. I guess they just really liked simulated woodgrain.
Other than the stick shift, the big attraction of this Fairlane Squire to Bring a Trailer bidders seemed to be its modest mileage and mostly original condition, which is far from perfect, but is more like the wear you’d expect of a five- or six-year-old car, not one nearly 60 years old. I can see why that might be appealing — not a basket case, but not TOO nice to drive and use — but I still can’t get my head around the price: This wagon sold in August 2024 for $20,250.
Related Reading
CC Capsule: 1967 Ford Country Squire – Another One Bites The Rust (by Tatra87)
My 1967 Ford Country Squire – Learning To Drive With Dad (by Chip Downs)
I think the wood trim looks good; the large greenhouse and slab-like sides would otherwise give an appliance-like look, especially in lighter colors like that white Falcon wagon pictured above.
That said, the price for which this car was sold in 2024 seems totally out of reach. It may be a rare survivor given the odd power team and low production numbers to start with, but there is “rare”, and there is “desirable rare”…
Somebody must have really fond memories of a similar car.
Given the pretty good condition and the presence of Electro-Nox, I would imagine it moved to California after a few years of life
The NOx device retrofit was required for 1965–1970 used cars from April 1973 to October 1980, so it would have moved to California either before or during that period. (The retrofit program was terminated in late 1980, although if you already have a device, you weren’t allowed to remove it.)
The ole “FM Converter”.. brings me back. I never had one, but parents did in late 70’s. By the time I was driving in the 80’s, the “Equalizer/Booster” was all the rage. lol.
I also think this wagon would look better without the .. ‘Sim wood’.
I would also take that White Falcon Wagon w the 289 sold for less than 9k. Cheap these days.
The end.
Sweet car, but that price! Once again, “rare” does not always translate to “valuable”. That said, If I had it, where I live it’s way too old for smog check, and that 289 would not stay gutless forever. Just a simple upgrade to stock 225HP 4-V specs.
It’s the same price as a five year old RAV4.
I was really enjoying this article with my coffee this morning until I got to the mention of the NOX device. Ugghh. Poorly engineered, low quality hacks that were the bane of used car buyers here in the Golden State. But I like this Fairlane, wood grain and all. A friend’s Mom drove a blue, non-Dynoc example when I was in junior high, though it may have been a ‘66. It was replaced by a full-zoot Country Squire in 1968, and the Fairlane was passed down to the Dad. I spent a lot of time in both cars, but especially the Fairlane, often in the way back. Good memories!
While it seems to have the sticker indicating that it had the low NOX retrofit it doesn’t appear to still be installed as the typical instaltion was a TVS spliced into the upper radiator hose that shut off vacuum advance once the engine warmed up. On this one the vacuum advance hose seems to head directly to the carb as it would have when it left the factory.
When I moved to CA in 1976, I was a bit surprised to find that I had to put on one of those aftermarket NOX devices in my ’68 Dodge A100 van. I think it was simplified by then, and only connected to the ignition (to retard it) which meant it was pretty easy to unhook.
Love the 66s, the wood grain and the green. I have an FM converter in my garage. Got it on eBay for my 63 s22 convertible. Radio in general sounded like crap so I just Bluetoothed it off my phone anyway… In reference to the BAT auction price, where are you going to find another..!!?? Very cool little hauler.
As Terry mentioned that appears to be a FM converter hanging under the dash so the car almost certain has an AM only factory radio. The under hood shot shows only a single belt driving the alternator and water pump, so no power steering. The under hood shot also shows the lack of a power brake booster so manual brakes too. While I see a sticker that seems to indicate that it got the NOX retrofit that equipment seems to have gone missing as the vacuum advance hose seems to head to the standard port.
Overall quite the nice survivor seemingly ordered by someone who was more concerned with looks than comfort and convenience, as I doubt a dealer ordered this for floor stock.
That rear storage compartment in the Fairlane was utilized for the three-seat version. Since the Falcon didn’t offer that, I guess it was a bit cheaper to throw in a single steel stamping back there instead.
My father ordered a 1970 Fairlane 500 wagon instead of a Falcon specifically because of the rear storage compartment. Other than a 302 and power window tailgate, it was absolutely stripped down.
Would he have paid the extra premium for the Squire?
Driven by a stubborn old man like my Dad who was a WWII vet. His first car with an automatic was in 1974. Prior to this, he had a ’64 Impala wagon with 3 on the tree and no A/C while living in the Deep South. Drove the wagon till my Mom shamed him into getting a car with A/C and automatic.
Today, not one of my multiple nieces or nephews could handle a stick shift. Have threaten to get hold of a FIAT 500 to teach them, but no takers.
I had forgotten how uncommon these Fairlane Squires were. The regular Fairlane sold well, but there was a big difference in room and feel when you moved up to the big Ford. When I had my 67 Galaxie convertible, a neighbor had a 67 Fairlane convertible she had bought new. I rode in it once, and it felt noticeably smaller and lighter.
$20k is a high price for this car: the wagons and sedans just don’t bring much interest, and it takes a lot to push the price above $10k. It’d be really interesting to know how few were sold in this spec – can’t be more than 1000 or so. But it’s the kind of thing where it could be the last remaining one, and a base-spec Mustang would bring more even though you could find dozens of identical examples. Well, to my mind at least, it’s worth something to own a truly rare car.
Wow, $20k for a car that would be very hard to resell. It took like three months to sell my manual transmission Honda Fit and that was for a lot less money. I assume the buyer liked the idea of a unicorn three on the tree.
A nice looking wagon gives me a Cargasm
Love to watch the 60s Dragnet shows. Friday and Gannon drive a plain 67 Fairlane but has a fancy wood steering wheel like a GT500.