(first posted 10/28/2015) We were on a walk, and I suddenly started trotting when I spotted the distinctive grille of this Jeep Wagoneer down the street. Wow; I’ve been looking for an early ’63-’65 Wagoneer for as long as I’ve been doing CC, to do a definitive write-up on what was one of the most significant pioneers of the modern SUV genre. When I noticed the lack of a solid front axle, I got really excited. It’s one of the rare independent front suspension versions! I couldn’t believe my luck…literally.
It was too good to be true. One look inside told me what I had been fearing since I noticed the non-stock wheels. This is not an original. It’s had a Ford Explorer dash-ectomy. Ugh. And I so much love those original old steel and chrome Wagoneer dash boards. Bummer.
I dropped down to look underneath, and sure enough: that’s not the very distinctive Jeep IFS that used a live, pivoting “swing axle” for its lower control arms, and upper control arms with torsion bars. A bit like the original Explorer and other Ford twin-beam front ends, but without the camber change. It was a one of a kind. This looks like one of a million other Ford Explorer front ends, after it went to conventional IFS in 1995.
I don’t know why I even bothered to raise the hood, as I knew the also very unusual and rare Willys Tornado SOHC six was undoubtedly gone too. Sure enough, and replaced by a pushrod Ford 4.0 V6.
I would have loved to wax eloquently about the terrific styling job done by Brooks Stevens, and the similarity to the Studebaker Lark Wagonaire from this view. The Jeep Wagoneer lasted for 30 years! And still was interesting to look at after all that time.
I have fond memories of things that happened in the back seat of a ’65 Wagoneer at a drive in movie on a very frigid Iowa April Saturday night, with a new girl friend. We found creative ways to keep warm, and didn’t care what the other high school aged couple in the front seat thought about the moans. The driver’s parents owned the jeep, bought after a move to an old farm outside Iowa City and used to haul kids and a horse trailer. The Tornado six didn’t stand up to the abuse too well, and was eventually replaced by a big Fury with a 383.
It’s an odd front end, for 1963 design state-of-the-art, and one that was replaced by 1966 already, although the Jeep Gladiator trucks kept it on for a couple more years yet. Brooks Stevens was of course an early exponent of the neo-classic movement that was just getting under way at the time, including his Excalibur, that appeared just a few years later. of course, the 1959 Studebaker Lark as well as the 1960 Valiant may well have been an influence too.
No, the hood ornaments are not original.
One of these days, I’ll find the real thing. Although I get the idea of having an updated car, especially a classic shape like this one, but I just can’t quite warm up to this one. That plasticky Explorer dash gave me the willies.
So I’ll keep looking. And hoping. For a genuine 1963-1965 Wagoneer, with the original SOHC six (which has quite a story), and the unique torsion bar IFS. It may be a while…
Here’s a good look at the 1963 Wagoneer via a Vintage Review
These were assembled for a short while in Israel by Kaiser-Ilyn in Haifa. My uncle had one with the Tornado engine and as a result became an International Travelall (and Scout) convert…
Why would you install the dash of a Ford Explorer in a vintage Jeep? (You just need airbags?) The horror…Is this some aftermarket kit car thing(that might be cool…reskin your Explorer with a Wagoneer body)
Scott I think it’s only sitting on an Exploder chassis but they probably used the whole wiring loom from the donor vehicle and wanted to save on splicing the old into the new? Bad choice in my opinion also. It ruins the feel of the vehicle.
So, since it was not made completely clear, I take it the enitre chassis/drivetrain is Explorer? Kind of surprised the wheelbase and width match; the Wagoneer *seems* like a considerably larger vehicle.
And agreed–the dash ruins it. Though those ridiculous hood ornaments and too-modern rims aren’t helping any. The body looks to be in beautiful shape but, unless the original frame was rusted or otherwise damaged, it’s a bit of a shame what it’s sitting on.
This seems to be the new thing. Everyone wants a cool old vehicle, but wants it to drive like a modern car. So, plunk the body onto a modern chassis, which usually includes the modern dash and wiring harness. Most I have seen do not do a full dash implant like this, so this full Explorer dash is a bit of a novelty. I see this a lot on old Studebaker pickups.
I am not a fan of the “have it your way” mentality. With an original classic Wagoneer, everyone knows what you have and the next guy will know too. With this, what happens when the current owner tires of it? It’s not like the Explorer is one of the all time great engine/chassis combos out there. What you will have is a parts truck that will provide some sheetmetal to the restorer of another Jeep, but not much else.
And a replacement EFI 5.0 for someone’s Foxbody if that’s what it has.
Which is why it is not a 63-65 Wagoneer. It is a newer whatchamacallit but definitely not Jeep.
There is an all original project IFS waggy in Alabama for 2k I think it said right now. It was listed in one of the jeep groups I am a member of on Facebook
The wheels and dash completely ruin it for me. I love these old trucks, but with the rate they are gaining value I will never own one.
I was thrilled to see the this post and couldn’t wait to see the rest of this Jeep. What a let down. I get why people modernize a vehicle with a newer drive train, but I don’t consider them to be real old car guys. The exception is the old guys who still want to drive their old cars, but feel they can’t handle them safely any more. My feeling has always been that if you really like old vehicles, you should like them for what they were meant to be, not what you can turn them into. If you’re saving a hulk from the scrap heap, then okay. But to do this to a survivor isn’t right. And the Explorer dash? Much of the enjoyment of driving such a rig is what you see and experience from behind the wheel. It’s lost on this one. When I bought my ’49 Olds, which is one of the last Big Sixes, a co-worker said that I should put a Chevy V8 into it. Parts are readily available, etc. I told him that If I’d wanted a modern Chevy, I’d have bought one. My Olds still isn’t restored, but how many of you have opened the hood of a ’49 Olds to find a flat head six under it. That, along with the fact that it’s a fast back Town Sedan is why I wanted it in the first place. Paul, I hope you find a Wagoneer that’s the real deal. I’d love to read about it.
How in the world would a dash from an Explorer fit? A good job of kit-bashing, from what I can see, but I would keep it as original as possible. I miss steel dashboards with padding – or not.
I lived with that dash in my old 1996 Ranger for six years. I hated it, too.
I looked at that dash in my ’95 Explorer for 12 years, loved that damn truck. sure it wasn’t terribly reliable, but I put 240,000 of its 340,000 miles on it, and the 3rd owner loves it now. still working on its 2nd transmission, original shortblock. I did pull the dash out more than a few times to replace heater cores though.
But in this vehicle… no, that dash does not fit. though the OHV 4.0 will last forever.
I kept my Ranger longer than I wanted to because the seat was killing my back.
Trouble was the thing wouldn’t ever break! I couldn’t get rid of a vehicle that always ran perfectly until my back told me too, so in 2004, I bought a new 2004 Impala and my back hasn’t stopped thanking me, and my 2012 Impala makes it that much better!
I have a 63 Wagoneer, 230 OHC engine, factory IFS in non-running condition, for sale in central Arkansas. Clean and clear title.
Cool! Looks like you have some other interesting finds on your lot, too. Photo tour, please.
Nice rig! Love the patina and I hear tell southern AR is a well kept secret in terms of rust-free classics.
Um ;
BIG gaping rust holes in the rockers…
At the price it looks a good deal though .
-Nate
That Dash swap looks like it makes for a tight fit for the driver. I’ve had a few SJs and at 6’3″ tall I’ve found front leg room is at a premium in stock form.
The real travesty here is the wheels. Those were terrible on the Explorer and they’re worse on anything else.
Beautiful choice of colors and obviously its well loved. But Explorers have always had crappy mechanicals…and that plastic blob dash…BLECH!!! Ok, the 8.8 (solid axles) are great and the 4.6 is ok. Outside of that…meh.
Restomods are like a lightning rod for opinions…we all know the consensus on those. Personally im all for upgrading an old rig like this to make it more reliable and a better all around driver/performer. Theres lors of room to personalize it so long as the uniqueness and charm of that vehicle are intact. For me, this misses the mark. If serviceable, id have left the frame and especially the dash intact. The stock mechanicals are likely a nitemare for sourcing parts, so upgrades are justified. 2nd gen rams are common as dirt and use some of the best underbits around and keep the bloodlines pure. Solid axles with coils up front–total upgrade. 318 and 360 Magnum motors rin like bears and the reputation of Mopar smallblocks precedes them. Or , lets get silly with it and scavenge a 2500. 3/4 ton gear in a rig like this would be near immortal. NV 4500 granny/OD manual and 6BT Cummins in a classic Waggy? YUP!!!!
+1 If you are doing a full frame swap, why an Exploder? It would have been more or less the same amount of work to keep the original frame and upgrade the drivetrain and rewire it with a stock dash. Even if set on the ‘ploder I would never had swapped that ugly dash in there.
I think most newer cars have the instrument cluster tied in to the ECU as a required part of the system (with even more systems included the newer you get), although I expect you could modify the system to live without it. Taking the whole dashboard rather than just the actual instruments is a bit of an over-reaction though!
This is far from being new enough to use CAN and you have it backwards it is the instrument cluster that needs the PCM to work not the other way around. Nowadays the PCM needs all that data that is shown on the cluster so rather than have separate sensors or using the same signal and risking a compromised data stream all those analog signals go to the PCM and then when it isn’t busy the PCM will send it to the Instrument cluster where it’s computer will presist the readings even if it has no signal.
People are already swapping Coyote pullouts and to use a take out rather than a Ford Racing PCM you just have to have the security turned off or use the donor vehicle under dash fuse box and zip tie the transponder key to it.
Why and Explorer because there is nothing that comes close in dimensions that is reliable and has a full frame.
It would have been way more work to refurbish and up grade to add: disc brakes, (and very time consuming to add ABS), integrated cruise control, integrated climate control, OD transmission, limited slip differential (assuming he picked the right Explorer) and air bags, though I don’t know if I’d want them active as the sensors are calibrated to the specific characteristics of the crash structure.
So yeah to add a lot of those items and integrate them properly the dash was a necessary part of it.
Jeeps and Rams are related by marriage only; there is no bloodline there. If anything, I would swap a 401 AMC in it.
I’d rather drive an explorer on a Wagoneer frame, at least it would still be a strong and reliable truck, albeit really ugly.
This mess here doesn’t make sense to me one bit.
Awesome article. I’ve always liked this generation Jeep Wagoneer. 🙂
I’m kind of conflicted when it comes to “projects” like this. I’m happy to see an older vehicle that is still roadworthy, but also appreciate a vintage vehicle that is kept original. The best “compromise” if an updating that uses nearly all modern parts….from the same manufacturer. Example: instead of that Ford engine, a newer Jeep 4 liter 6.
And I agree, the Ford wheels need to go.
BTW, I don’t think I noticed it before….that simularity to a Studebaker Lark.
This is horrible, the turquoise paint gives me flashbacks to over done billet laden street rods. The sort of thing that propelled the H.A.M.B. and the billetproof car show.
If this color wasn’t available from the factory, ill bet its pretty close. Works well with the truck.
Did the dash swap on this old Jeep give you the willies, or give you the… WILLYS?!
Fun fact: Willys is actually pronounced like Willis.
Yup.
If this was the only practical way to get the vehicle running – which it very well could have, given the availability of Jeep interior parts – I’m not going to fault the owner for going that route.
It isn’t like salvage yards aren’t full of cheap Explorer parts.
Yeah, I’d cut the guy some slack. Given the area, it’s quite possible the body kept its good condition through all these years while the original drivetrain was shot. If that was the case, going with a more modern, more easily fixed, and cheaper drivetrain to keep it usable on a daily basis doesn’t seem like all that much of an old-vehicle sin (particularly if the Explorer bits came from a vehicle whose body was shot). And although the original Wagoneer dash might have been more aesthetically pleasing, I don’t think the Explorer dash is all that bad, either. The lack of interior door panels seems more distressing (and the Navajo seat covers are definitely a nice touch).
Overall, I wouldn’t be embarrassed to be seen driving it (or even take it to a car show). The only real issue I have with it are those JC Whitney hood ornaments. That’s tacky.
Thanks for the story, Paul – I, too, have fond memories of high school double dates in my Wagoneer, but we left the back seat as a kind of buffer zone and the other couple took up residence in the ‘way back,’ as we called it.
But the mashup subject vehicle…ugh.
Yup. Very similar to a 59 stude Lark. A face only a mother could love. Would have liked to see the original dash. Curious if it was as minimalist as the Larks was.
I’ve always really liked the “face” on these. It’s not beautiful, but tons of character.
The ‘face’ of these early Wagoneers is a bit like the old 1957 Forward Look Chrysler cars that had quad headlight nacelles but they stuck a smaller, turn-signal into the inboard lights because some states hadn’t yet certified quad headlights (1958 would see this rectified with proper quad headlights in all Forward Look cars).
But the inboard ‘ports’ on the Wagoneer weren’t used for lights of any sort. I would imagine that they’re designed for additional cooling. Whatever the use, the styling is okay, certainly better than what was used for the headlights of the ’57 Forward Look cars.
Even closer to the ’64-’66 Larks
Nice to see this rig wasn’t scrapped long ago .
I worked for Jeep in the 1970’s and all the guys told me those OHC InLine 6 engines were trash and few made it past 40,000 miles , that’s why you so rarely see one of these rigs : they were scrapped when fairly new .
-Nate
I’ve read that the version of the Tornado used in the M715 had most of the durability issues resolved, but I’ve also read that it leaked oil perpetually and the Army didn’t tolerate oil leaks, so they spent their service lives in service bays.
Why not use a late-period Grand Wagoneer as the engine/suspension/dashboard donor? Well I guess those cost a small fortune nowadays and an old Explorer doesn’t….
While the early vertical grille didn’t last long, the raised hood bulge to accomodate it lasted through the end in the ’90s. Some years the bulge was incorporated into the grillework, other years got a horizontal grille that all but ignored the hood bulge making it look like a hat over the grille.
As for those fond backseat memories, nice, but nearly as original as folding down the seat of an early Barracuda and watching the snow fall on the massive rear window. *That’s* a creative way to keep warm…. Plus, no other couple in the front seat. I never did understand the concept of double dates.
*not* nearly as original
Nicely done for what it is.
Not my style, but not my money either.
There’s room in my car-world for this.
I guess I’m the oddball here as I kinda like the way the wheels look on it.
The hood ornamentation, not so much.
I agree, except for the dash and hood ornaments.
There are easier ways to get newer driveability in an older vehicle, then again Tri-Five Chevies are my thing and nothing could be easier to upgrade than a ’55-57.