There must be a Venn diagram somewhere with serious overlap between lovers of old Ford station wagons and patrons of vintage stores. In January of this year, I had spotted and written about an ’88 Crown Victoria LX wagon I had seen in front of one such business. Not long after that essay had run, I had rediscovered pictures of our featured car I had taken four years ago in front of a different retro shop, right after purchasing a pair of never-worn trousers from the ’70s. In both instances, the very existence of each wagon was enough to make me pause and take notice, as one just doesn’t see old, full-sized station wagons anymore. The connection between this ilk of big car and shopping for other people’s former possessions might be that one can fit a lot into the wayback for a complete, throwback shopping experience.
The other thing I noticed when looking through these pictures was just how much better these cars look with the fake wood, which tends to distract attention away from any minor imperfections. That other unadorned ’88 in appliance white was in fine shape, and its owner who had found it on eBay was right to be proud of it. In my mind, though, a big Ford wagon without the Di-Noc is a little like Wilford Brimley without a mustache. The Country Squire’s wholesome, grandfatherly demeanor loses something without the fake wood.
My maternal grandparents were born in the 1910s, and they had raised their young family in the middle of the last century, right around the time that science was developing all kinds of synthetic materials. There’s no doubt in my mind that Grandma and Grandpa believed in the realism of the wood-tone things in and around their house, and in the authenticity of plastic that was molded and textured to look like other materials found in nature. I remember my grandma stating matter-of-factly that the “leather” in their ’88 Mercury Grand Marquis was actually leather, from a cow, that was specially treated and not synthetic at all. She didn’t like my use of the term “pleather”, but I shouldn’t have questioned her as an adolescent. She was such a kind, loving person and I still think of her with great fondness. (Sorry, Grandma.)
Nostalgia for old clothes and home furnishings seems to have very little middle ground between those who have a taste for what was in their parents’ (or their grandparents’) houses when they were little, and those who can’t stand it. My living room is furnished much like a more chic version of my parents’ first wood-paneled basement (complete with a shag carpet area rug) where we had lived until I was five. I have friends who immediately take to my home decor, but also a few who question my adherence to the looks of the ’70s.
I suppose it boils down to associations. Younger generations, in finding their own, separate identities, often reject aspects of their parents’ tastes, music, ideals, and even values. I used to hate the very sight of corduroy, reminding me as it did of all the noise my trousers would make when I was walking up the center aisle at church during communion on Sunday mornings. Swish, swish, swish… I already had a little bit of a swishy gait. It didn’t need a soundtrack. My question, I suppose, is at what point did my disdain for things that used to embarrass me turn to warm, fuzzy feelings of that certain adventurous, curious spirit of childhood and the seemingly endless possibilities of what the future might hold?
Judging by the condition of this ’86 Country Squire, it might belong to someone with hipster-ish, ironic leanings as much as it might be the everyday transportation of a Boomer retiree who lives in a walkup not far from the intersection where I spotted it. The only context clues I could find that might lean toward the former might be the pair of red, fuzzy dice barely visible on the dashboard beneath the glare of the reflections on the windshield. What I genuinely love about this car is all of its embellishments that were ladled onto it from the factory: generous swaths of vinyl on three of its sides, the stylized crown hood ornament, the wire wheel covers, and the choice of font on the rear quarter panel. The overall effect, the gestalt, is much greater than any individual element would suggest. It’s like this wagon took all of the postwar, Populuxe-era gilding from my grandparents’ living room and put them on one car… all the way in 1986.
That year, coincidentally, was the last in which there were two distinctly different LTDs for sale at your Ford dealer, with the smaller, Fox-platform car on its way out to make way for the front-drive, radically-styled Taurus. Sales of the smaller LTD, at 72,500, were positively dwarfed by those of the Taurus, which moved close to 236,400 units in its first year. In the meantime, about 124,000 big LTDs were sold, of which only about 20,200 (about 16%) were wagons, with or without the wood. Over at Chevrolet, almost twice as many Caprices (245,000 were sold), which included over double the number of wagons (45,200; 18% of total production).
There was just one engine under the hood of a Crown Victoria that civilians could buy, which was a 302-cubic inch V8 with a multi-port, electronic fuel injection system that yielded 150 horsepower. (Police cars came standard with a 180-horse 351 V8.) This car was manufactured in St. Thomas, Ontario, Canada, if the results of my license plate search are to be believed. The base price for a non-LX Country Squire wagon like this one was $12,655 in ’86, which translates to just over $35,000 today.
Rasmussen Ford of Storm Lake, Iowa, appears to have been acquired by Holzhauer Motors only six months after I had taken these pictures. The former was a multigenerational store that had originally opened in August of 1920, when many were realizing their car ownership dreams with a new Model T. When Holzhauer took over, the dealership was only months away from having been in business for an entire century under the previous family name. This echoes how the Country Squire badge was Ford’s third-most in longevity at forty-one years, after Mustang and Thunderbird. Getting back to vintage shopping as it relates to the Di-Noc, my purchases usually have to be all-in on that retro aesthetic, or I just keep my money. Any big Ford wagon would be a find today, but bless the hunter who finds one that has been kissed by the mythical forest of plastic trees.
Roscoe Village, Chicago, Illinois.
Sunday, April 7, 2019.
Brochure photo was as sourced from www.oldcarbrochures.org.
A clear survivor, to be sure. I like wagons, but I prefer the “plain jane” versions, sans faux wood decal appliqués, as opposed to the wood decals with the plastic trim that is supposed to look like the wood frame of the body, but isn’t fooling anybody! Think Ford Country Sedan (bare metal sides) versus the Ford Country Squire (fake wood). I dislike the phony wood for the same reasons that I detest vinyl roofs (rooves?, sic). They’re both trying to be something they’re not. A vinyl roof is an attempt to mimic a convertible top, and the decals on the side of a wagon are an attempt to mimic a 1930’s or 40’s era “woody” wagon, where the body was actually made of real lumber! In both cases, the appliqués also serve to trap moisture and accelerate rusting. IMHO, the apotheosis of the wagon was 1969-75, body-on-frame full-size wagons, available with seating for eight, able to haul a full 4’x8′ sheet of plywood flat on the floor and able to tow up to 10k pounds, when properly equipped. I was always partial to Ford products of this era, the Country Sedan and Galaxy 500 Wagons, but the GM equivalents, the Impala and Caprice wagons had some unique features as well (clamshell retractable tailgate). I always thought that Chrysler was at a disadvantage as the only unibody examples in the segment, since that limited towing capacity compared to the competition.
The irony is how Chrysler (with Iacocca at the helm) got their revenge on GM and Ford’s station wagon dominance with the minivan.
Right! I agree.
Thank you for this great post. It seems we have much in common. First the car. I have been fortunate enough to have numerous upscale vehicles including Fleetwoods, Grand Marquis, Town Cars, Fifth Avenues and others. Only my 77 Monte Carlo was a new purchase. My 1989 Crown Victoria LX with formal roof, white with plush red velvet interior and traditional American luxury looks could hold its own with any of these. Currently have beautiful low mileage 2007 Lincoln Town Car Signature Limited, last of the GREAT AMERICAN Luxury sedans. Like the station wagon,it has been replaced by SUVS and crossovers. Similarly, my home is filled with traditional furniture and family antiques that no one wants. Today is July 4th and even THAT has changed from celebrating our nation’s birth 🎆 to a weekend of relaxation and picnics with little regard for true significance. You and I have been truly blessed to have experienced life as it seems we both have. Thank you for this great post. I really appreciate it to start off the day!
I wonder how much the demise of the traditional, full-size station wagon (brought on by Iacocca’s T-115 minivan) contributed to the death of the conventional full-size sedan.
Likewise, it’s fascinating how the big station wagon never really went away; it just morphed into a big-ass, high-center-of-gravity, AWD SUV. When you think about it, it’s remarkable how the arrival of the minivan coincided with that other auto-world gamechanger, the 1984 Jeep Cherokee XJ. It was the one-two punch that would eventually wipe-out the station wagon.
Still, there’s the proliferation of the smaller AWD ‘lifestyle’ station wagon, the good ‘ole Subaru Outback, which enjoys a popular following to this day. Do any of the German marques (like, say, VW) still make a station wagon variant, or are they all just CUVs?
One of the more recent efforts that I was actually rather bummed went away as late as 2020, was the Buick Regal TourX. I thought they were attractive, practical cars, particularly in how they eschewed the traditional high-riding stance of, say, the aforementioned Outback.
Alas, I suppose that low-riding posture made the TourX just a bit too much of a station wagon for most, and it never got much traction in the marketplace (despite generally positive reviews). The Buick TourX station wagon definitely seems like a future CC candidate as the domestic station wagon’s last stand.
If what’s left of my memory serves me correctly, the van was technically rated as a truck and NOT included in calculating CAFE figures, therefore highly promoted. Do not understand the current obsession with these glorified SUVS and crossovers! I believe that my Town Car probably gets better gas mileage than most of them while I ride in comfort. But as I believe, the whole world has gone nuts 🥜🤔!
In a word, marketing. All of the rugged, individualistic, ‘sporty’ advertisements really zeroed in on the American, freedom-loving, great-outdoors lifestyle psyche. Just look how effective it was with the Subaru Outback.
Who wants to be seen driving a stodgy ‘soccer mom’ mobile when, instead, they can have a raised ‘command seating’, AWD ‘Sport’ Utility Vehicle? Never mind that the ‘utility’ of a minivan is much greater than any SUV.
It’s the automotive equivalent of uncomfortable, but stylish, footwear versus uncool, sensible shoes.
True. The explosion of gas-guzzling SUV’s on our roads, driven by “Soccer Moms” who prattle on about saving the planet, all while contributing to its demise by driving all alone in one of these fuel-wasting behemoths, is a sure sign that the Apocalypse is nigh, LOL! Hypocrisy abounds!
P.S. FYI, I drive a 2013 Miata (my third), so there!
Regarding current VW wagons: Golf Variant, Passat Variant and Arteon Shooting Brake (sort of wagon).
https://www.volkswagen.nl/modellen
Almo$t a FAMILY TRUCK$TER!! :):):) DFO
Exactly. I loved that AMC cable channel reran “National Lampoon’s Vacation” this week. The timing couldn’t have coincided with this essay any better.
I have a terrible love-hate relationship with these. I love the idea of one of these Ford station wagons much more than I love the actual car. My father’s 66 Country Squire burrowed itself deeply into my psyche, and I still love traditional station wagons of all kinds. But. Having owned one box Panther, kinda-sorta owned another and came close to owning a third, I am pretty much over these for quite a few reasons.
As for the with/without debate when it comes to the wood, I am on the fence here. I think these earlier really square ones look a little better with, while the later versions look a little better without.
It is true that we can rebel against our parents tastes. After my mother died, I had no interest in the French provincial bedroom furniture she had chosen when she got married. Only Marianne’s insistence overcame my desire to donate the stuff. Now it has been delivered to our new daughter-in-law, who is head over heels smitten with the stuff.
While French Provincial is not my particular choice, as stated in my original post, I am a traditionalist who appreciates family treasures I have inherited. Younger relatives have NO interest in them. Very happy to hear your daughter in law appreciates the beauty and significance of family treasures.
Ditto on the French Provincial. My taste runs more to Shaker or mid-century modern/Scandinavian Contemporary, but then again, I’m a retired engineer, who worships at the temple of “Form over Function” Mies van der Rohe, LOL!
BTW we used to call Scandinavian Contemporary “Danish Modern” until “political correctness” reared its ugly head. I guess the the Finns, Swedes and Norwegians were feeling offended by omission, LOL!
To me, “Scandinavian Contemporary” evokes Ikea (in all of its weird names, allen wrench, generally about 10% smaller than furniture for normal-sized people goodness)…and not the Danish Modern living room set my parents purchased from Sears and Roebuck in Baltimore in 1965.
Then again, I recall my dad cursing as he constantly struggled to re-insert the screws that fell out of that couch and how I later learned to glue the long blonde wood arms back on it when they frequently fell off. Not unlike my struggles with various pieces of Scandinavian Contemporary Ikea furniture over the years. So perhaps there is a throughline 🙂
I like the Scandinavian style, but like so many things the quality varies greatly, depending on the brand name and where you bought it. IKEA is the bottom feeder brand for Scandinavian Contemporary, and Sears & Roebuck wasn’t exactly a quality furniture source in the 1960’s either. Cheap Red Chinese knock-offs, which I call “Cheap Chinese Crap”, or “C-Cubed” for short, are everywhere, but quality pieces are hard to find and expensive. You can often find quality vintage pieces in consignment stores, that buy quality originals from estate sales and such.
“They got an apartment with deep pile carpets and a couple of paintings from Sears/A big waterbed they bought with bread they had saved for a couple of years/They started to fight when the money got tight, they just didn’t count on the tears!” “Scenes From an Italian Restaurant” from the Billy Joel Album: “The Stranger”
You make a great point about the final aero-restyled Panther LTD wagons looking not quite as natural with the fake wood as the more linear, earlier models. And count me as someone else who is happy your daughter-in-law likes your mother’s former furniture.
“Younger generations, in finding their own, separate identities, often reject aspects of their parents’ tastes, music, ideals, and even values… “
Generally this seems to be true for most of my parent’s life style choices verses those that I opted for as I grew up.
But, it is not a point of pride if my life style choices are simply a long term form of George Costanza’s “Do-The-Opposite” (*) behavior.
In my defense, I still like their music; the Dorseys, Benny Goodman, Glen Miller, Harry James, and the Duke remain delights to me to this day. Most of their other choices – not so much.
Our bought new 1990 Sable wagon was a perfect vehicle for us when we moved from NYC to the leafy suburbs with a one year old son. I’d still welcome a car like that 33 years later if the occasion arose.
(*)
I remember the COAL on your Sable wagon (unless I’m mixing it up with something else). That was a good story!
As much as I tried to distance myself from my father…I ended up in his line of work (radio), and understood the appeal of owning a large truck once I became a homeowner. Mom’s taste in cars isn’t my style either – small, foreign, & sporty. Riding around in her Miata as a kid in middle school wasn’t fun as I had to wear a bike helmet as an added safety measure. Was very glad when that got traded for a BMW 325 convertible.
Dads taste in music and mine couldn’t be more opposite however – he was a classic rocker, and I love Motown, soul, doo wop, and R&B. He couldn’t have punched away from the oldies station fast enough when the falsetto opening of “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” flowed out of the truck radio one afternoon on the way home from school. But I do share his affinity for Steely Dan and some Led Zep – grew on me after awhile.
My wife won’t consider a station wagon or minivan…I guess that’s a bridge too far. A Suburban/Tahoe/Yukon however is A-OK, gas mileage be damned.
Also can’t get her to budge on a PT Cruiser…even with your glowing COAL!
The only difference between George Costanza and me is that I still have all of my hair, LOL!
I love that episode so much! Elaine: “STICK…with the opposite.”
Born in the mid-’50’s, I very much am a product of the 60’s. If I were to add an extraneous car to my garage a 1965-68 Squire would be a strong candidate… preference to the ’68 (Navy blue like my mom’s?) without the chrome fasteners on the light trim.
Odd this piece posted today, as we’re on Cape Cod for a couple of months right now. There’s a fair number of DiNoc Dinosaurs here every summer; a Buick Roadmaster sits a couple doors away.
I love that it sounds like there’s a pocket of automotive traditionalists where you are with cars like these. I imagine them being part of “the estate”.
There were two noticeable styling shortcomings, with the downsized Ford Panther wagons, I spotted almost immediately. When they were introduced in 1979. As an early teen then, I found it compromised their looks.
To accommodate the large vertically-placed spare tire in the fenders, aft of the rear wheels, it required the rear most fenders go noticeably straight downward. With no lower tuck-in. I thought it looked heavy-handed, and clumsy. Earlier LTD wagons, didn’t make it so obvious. If only, they could have placed the spare under the floor. I’m guessing, because of downsizing, they had less flexibility, with making the exterior sheetmetal curve inward.
The other nit-pick was in the same area. Same beef, I had with many 1970s Chrysler products, the other day. Lots of daylight visible aft of the rear wheels, inside the wheel wells. Can easily see the springs and gas tank. They needed wheel well liners, that would mask this better. Gave them a cheap unpolished-look, combined with the awkward near vertical rear-most fenders.
Why, I was never a huge Panther wagon fan. Thought their rear styling was somewhat compromised. Earlier LTD wagon, being more attractive IMO.
(Before and after examples below. Production model, on the right. I find the tweaked example presents better.)
That is true. Ford could have tried a bit harder to sweat the details (was that GM slogan?). I like the Panther wagons, but I still think they are more than a bit awkward looking, especially next to the GM wagons. The too-tall windshield is the most obvious example.
Well said. The 1973-era wagons were large, squarish, and slab-sided. However, I found them more stylish and attractive, than the post 1978 wagons.
Now, that maroon one without the DiNoc actually looks pretty cool. Although what really catches my eye in that picture is the look of the Architect in the photo. That hair! That beard! That outfit!
I need to go listen to some Bee Gees now. 🙂
Lol The ‘architect’ here reminded me some, of the late Dan Fogelberg, circa 1979.
He is protected from falling debris by his HairHat.
Kudos to you for being able to identify and articulate what didn’t quite work for you on these from an aesthetic perspective. I’m going to have to look more closely at these pictures, but I think you’re right.
I agree with you 100% on these Fords and the 70s Mopars, but you articulated it better than I would have.
Similar example. Lent an unfinished, utilitarian appearance, you’d expect on a pickup truck, or commercial vehicle. I was actually surprised in 1979, Ford didn’t address it better.
Ford could barely afford to keep the lights on in ’78/79
They kept that unattractive styling element on these, until the end of their production. If they fixed it, the earlier ones, would have still looked bad.
And to my point of taste (my taste) that I mention below, that wagon without DiNoc looks like a utility vehicle for a funeral home. (not that there’s anything wrong with that, but not so good for the cub scouts or field trip duty) You know, the one they send out for the pickups before the fancy hearse is used in the actual funeral.
Then again, a black car with DiNoc might look even weirder.
Great find! And it is very much like a 1984 Country Squire I owned for a time. Same color even. I think the only difference is mine was an LX and had the aluminum wheels. Pretty good car. It worked well, but I didn’t think it handled or steered as well as GM B-bodies. Engine power was about average for its era, but even under hard throttle there was no V8 growl at all. Totally generic engine character.
The tailgate closed better in door mode than GM wagons I’ve owned. And the feature I absolutely loved was the visibility. The front fender corners are visible from the drivers seat, so combined with the hood ornament, one could see exactly where the front was through the large windows. A female friend borrowed the car once and she was a little nervous about driving such a large car. When she returned the car, she raved about how much easier to drive and park it was than she expected. I agreed, it was the easiest big car to park I’ve ever had.
And it’s not too rusty for Iowa. I have family just down the road in Spirit Lake/Milford. Nice country!
I’d be curious to drive one of these now and see whether the upright frontal styling and visible corners would make it easier to park than its size might otherwise suggest. Great point.
It seems like there were quite a few car ads in the 1970s & ’80s features folks loading stuff in their car at antique stores. Of course now that I’m looking, I can’t find many, but here’s a representative 1978 example. A wood-paneled wagon is a perfect fit – especially now that the car itself is as vintage as the stuff in the store.
It’s interesting how people reject aspects of their parents’ tastes in things like design and music – it seems like people often pick and choose, but in unpredictable manners. Based on my (unscientific) experience with my kids’ generation, I’m surprised at how many kids these days share musical interests with their parents. A generation or two ago, that would never have been the case. It’ll be interesting to see how/whether that trend extends into an interest for other “vintage” things as this generation ages.
Yes indeed, a common wagon brochure trope.
This is one that I used in my COAL on the 71 Chrysler. Presumably they’ve not yet started loading the antiques yet, but rest assured that there’s enough room in that car to take away most of that stuff. 🙂
Great observations, and to your point about music, I’m always genuinely shocked when my nephews and nieces are familiar with and like music I remember liking when I was young / younger.
None of the wagons that I’ve personally owned have had DiNoc, although the Chrysler wagon of my youth had yards and yards of it.
I’m basically in your camp, Joe, about liking the fake wood. In fact, I don’t think of it as something that’s supposed to fool anyone that it’s wood. It’s DiNoc…that’s its own thing, and it’s a fine thing by me. I think that once I stopped thinking that it was posing for something else, I accepted it as its own design feature necessary for a ’60s – ’80s station wagon (and not necessary on a modern car). No disrespect to those who feel otherwise, but I have always felt that a wagon of that vintage that either came originally WITHOUT DiNoc, or later had it stripped off just looked kind of weird. A Country Squire without DiNoc looks like some kind of municipal or government vehicle. Not that there’s anything wrong with that I suppose.
I thought these big Country Squires were the joint when I was a little kid. It always seemed to me that the kids whose moms were able to ferry them (and most of the cub scout troop, birthday party attendees, field trip participants, etc.) around in one of these were living in the lap of genuine American luxury. Certainly a lot more luxury than I seemed to get with our much smaller Plymouth wagon that smelled heavily of dog and had the weird nylon seat fabric that had a terrible tendency to catch and rip off every hang nail an 8 year old could present to it.
Great points. Even in period shows like “Vega$” from the late 1970s, big Ford wagons without the Di-Noc were used, as you stated, as municipal vehicles or some other unglamorous task.
I didn’t know what “antiqueing” was when I saw those ads, though our family had wagons since I was in grammar school. Those ads depicted a comfortable, middle class, suburban life. Nice home in a nice neighborhood, lots of time and money for leisure activities. Sure was something to aspire to!
My childhood was more of a “blue collar idyllic,” a similar, safe, comfortable, family oriented lifestyle. Just lived a little less lavishly. My Wife and I were able to provide our kids with a little more upscale middle class life than I was accustomed to.
Affluence can make a lot of things easier, but no amount of money can replace the love that envelops the members of a happy family. Wood grain panels or not.
I love these observations and would say I also agree especially with your last paragraph. Thanks for this.
I absolutely love our 1989 Country Squire!
Frankly, I’m glad they’re not EVERYONE’S favorite… how boring would that be???
Bill, I like the way you think!
My daily driver…