The 1970s was an era where the 2-door coupe luxury coupe reigned supreme. It’s been generally agreed upon that the 1965 Ford LTD was the beginning of the low-priced luxury “brougham” cars, and I tend to agree with this assessment. Initially this low price luxury was limited to the full-size cars of the era. As the concept began to get traction in the market place, the Big Three couldn’t help but spread the brougham concept (plague?) throughout its model line-ups.
While I can appreciate the concept of the 1965 LTD and I actually don’t mind those cars, I can’t say that I am much of a fan of 1970’s Brougham-mobiles. Growing up we usually had plain cars, and my dad was always of the opinion that the more options, the more there is to break. I was certainly influenced by my dad, as I also generally prefer plainer car with less frills.
Sportier Torino’s like this one are where my interests are focused
Most people who have read my comments and posts over the years knows that I own a Torino and I will often defend these whipping boys of all that is wrong with 1970s cars. However, to provide full disclosure, while I am a fan of Torinos, I suppose it’s only a small niche that I really have any interest, specifically the performance oriented models with appropriate engine and suspension options. When optioned correctly, these Torinos can be quite competent cars for the era. Nevertheless, I realize that performance was definitely not Ford’s primary mission when the Torino was redesigned for 1972.
Despite my interests, Ford’s focus was on comfortable, quiet cars like this one
Ford was banking a lot on the Torino redesign in 1972, as they had the foresight to realize the mid-size market was going to continue to increase in popularity. Ford was predicting that mid-size car sales would surpass the full-size cars in sales sometime in the 70’s. The plan of action was to make the Torino more like a full-size car in size, comfort, silence and appointments. At the time it seemed like the appropriate move, especially with the increased interest in luxury oriented amenities and qualities in the lower priced cars.
Ford Torino’s base suspension offered a smooth ride with its very soft spring rates
By 1973, the mid-size performance market was quickly fizzing out, while the mid-size luxury market was expanding. Chevrolet had its established low-priced luxury coupe, the Monte Carlo, while even over at Chrysler, Dodge had its luxury inspired Charger SE. Ford had a Gran Torino Brougham model for 1973, but it was available as a sedan as well, and didn’t really capture the essence of a luxury coupe. The Elite was to eventually fill this gap, but that wouldn’t be introduced until 1974. In the meantime Ford needed a solution to fill the void.
As Ford had done in the past, it was decided to introduce a spring-time special model as its new low-priced 2-door luxury coupe. In March of 1973 Ford introduced the Luxury Décor package for the Torino line. This package was limited to 2-door Gran Torino models and was trimmed quite a bit differently from other cars in the Torino line-up. While the Gran Torino Brougham used older style cloth/vinyl interior, the luxury decor package Torinos used a more modern upholstery design trimmed in ultra-soft vinyl. Even though it was a bench seat, the seating almost had a bit of a sporty flare, at least compared to the other seating options. While not exactly a European interior, I’d argue that the interior was probably one of Ford’s more tasteful luxury interiors of the era.
The option package had an MSRP of $395 ($2238 adjusted) and was only available with specific exterior colours: saddle bronze, medium copper metallic or metallic ivy glow paint. The option package included a white, brown, or green halo vinyl roof with colour-keyed body-side molding. A halo vinyl top did not cover the a-pillars in vinyl, making the vinyl top appear as if it was floating like a halo over the roof.
Also included was a pinstripe package, colour keyed rear bumper pad and wheel covers, black sidewall radial tires, flight bench seat in tan super soft vinyl with matching door panels, deluxe 2-spoke steering wheel, wood tone instrument panel applique, dual note horn, 25-oz cut-pile carpet, and upgraded insulation. Overall, it seemed to be a good value of the money, if these were the type of options you desired.
The interior in this example is in excellent condition
Ford did a decent job in making the Luxury Décor Torinos more exclusive from the “ordinary” Torino’s, but to the casual onlooker it didn’t really stand out. It certainly didn’t have the exclusive exterior styling like the Monte Carlo. The Luxury Décor option package was discontinued after the 1973 model year, with the Elite the new focus of this personal luxury market. It undoubtedly had the more exclusive (garish?) styling, nonetheless also included practically every mid 1970’s brougham cliché you can imagine.
Elite with the interior Décor option package
Interestingly, the Elites had an Interior Luxury Décor option that was unavailable on other Torino models. However, the interior option wasn’t much different from a Gran Torino Brougham interior trimmed in super soft-vinyl. Nevertheless, the 1973 Luxury Décor interior did live on in the 1974 Gran Torino Sport. The same seating, door panels and upholstery were used in the 1974-75 Gran Torino Sport. However, it had more interior colours available, and could be equipped with a bench or bucket seats. When equipped with the black red combination it had much more ‘70s sporty vibe than luxury.
1974 Gran Torino Sport Interior
I found this 1973 Ford Gran Torino with the Luxury Décor option for sale some time ago. I had been meaning to do a write-up on it, but just hadn’t had the time. The car has since sold, a bit surprising since it was originally listed at ridiculous $27,995. I would think that it went for significantly less than the list price.
This car was a very nice example though with only 9,924 miles on the odometer and it appears to be in excellent condition. The car is mostly original, and is equipped with the “H-Code” engine, which refers to a 351-2V. An H-code can be either a 351W or 351C engine. This car has the less common (in Torinos) and less powerful 351W, putting out 156 SAE net hp. The interior on this car seems to be in remarkable shape, with little signs of wear.
Undoubtedly this car much has spent much of its life indoors to remain so pristine. This is also reflected in the exterior paint and trim and undercarriage which look to be in great condition. Although the exterior colour combination is hardly my favourite, I do think it does a great job of capturing the era. Hopefully, it stays this colour.
I find it interesting that the dealership has seemingly dressed this car up as a pseudo muscle car. I mean, all cars from the mid-60’s to the early 70’s were muscle cars, right? Clearly, the dealership selling this car has no idea that it has a unique option package. Even if it did, I am not sure what kind of appeal it would have with today’s typical vintage car customer.
At some point this virtually original car had dual exhaust added along glass pack mufflers, which is completely contradictory to this car’s original mission. The large aftermarket wheels don’t actually look too bad in my eyes, mostly because the extra width and diameter do a much better job of filling the fenders compared to the tiny stock 14” wheels.
I am still no fan of the 1970’s era brougham-mobiles, but I do hope that whoever bought this car they keep it well-preserved. Regardless of my opinion, as this car sits, it would make a great weekend cruiser that would no doubt stir up some interesting conversation.
Those God awful Winga-Dinga wheels need to go…..fast.
i agree. They are horrible
Some of the wheel covers available on these looked pretty awful. I wouldn’t mind the original styled steel wheels if they were available in a 15″ size, or the flat covers and trim rings. But those wheel arches need filling.
I look at the Gran Torino and just see an even more bloated Mustang II Ghia
Vince, as one who spent his first eight years riding around in a plain-jane four-door ’73 Torino painted fecal brown metallic, you deserve credit for being the only person who can make me reconsider my opinion of them. Well done.
Reading the description for this car, I’m hoping that all the “modifications” are reversible. Of course the wheels and exhaust can be returned to original type easily enough, but the aftermarket AM/FM/CD could be a different story – and who knows what else is lurking in there.
Other than the color-keyed wheel covers shown in the ad, these certainly appear to be a tasteful version of the Torino; not everything in the 1970s was tacky. Let’s hope this one found a good home.
Jason, I was thinking of the stories of your dad’s Torino as I typed this out. Based on past descriptions, I’d guess this example is the polar opposite. The aftermarket radio is a pet peeve of mine, at least when the dash get’s hacked to install a DIN style radio. Nowadays there are lots of vintage style radios available or just have an original radio updated. I looked at all the detailed photos of this car, and it seemed by photo that it was very original overall. I don’t think there are any modifications that couldn’t be easily undone.
Vince, as always, great article and subject. *Your* Torino is great, but I can’t pretend that I’ve ever been a huge fan of these. However, this one does it for me on multiple levels, as in, I actually really like it! That $28K selling price – nope, nuh-uh. But removed from that, I like pretty much everything about it – even that Saddle Brown color.
I tend to like cars “factory”, but these wheels / tires don’t bother me at all – I like them. In fact, I think I like these aftermarket wheels better than I would the factory wheel covers / discs or even the Magnum 500s.
I’m one of the few dissenters that likes the frontal styling of the ’73 Torino. I say this not in comparison to the ’72, but taken on its own merits. I always kind of liked that its trapezoidal grille reminded me a bit of a ’67 / ’68 Mustang that had grown up into its 30s. My only problem with the looks of the ’73 in general was that the bumpers were then out of balance – there was the giant, 5-mph bumper up front, but then the original, somewhat delicate setup out back.
I, like you, hope the new owner keeps this one as-is.
Thanks for the kind word’s Joe. I am not a huge fan of Torinos like this one. I am really more interested in the muscular/racy styling of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s which a ’72 Torino fastback has in spades. This car not so much. That said, while I have no desire to own a Torino like this, I can appreciate it for what it is, and it was very well preserved. The fact that his car was so well preserved and that it was a unique option package is the main reason why I wanted to do a write-up. I also agree that the wheels on this car look fine and have a bit of an appropriate retro look.
Add me to the short list of those that like the front of the ’73. When these first came out I also considered it to be an improvement over the ’72.
My folks had a ’72 Torino and it was a nice car and they liked it real well. I have never owned an actual Torino, well maybe half way. Back in the late ’70’s and early ’80’s I owned a ’73 Ranchero. I loved that thing. It had been used a little hard before I bought it, but I had it in good shape in short order. It was just enough truck for what I needed and made a pretty comfortable car, too.
It is one of the few cars that I have owned that I wish I still had.
The mid size field was interesting before 1972. Chrysler offered a car that had been designed as a trim full sizer. Ford offered one that was really an enlarged Falcon. It was GM that really hit that happy medium. The 72 Torino was a quantum leap for Ford in that segment. It really felt quite unlike the earlier Torino in almost every way – it came across as substantial, where the earlier car felt lightweight and thin.
The halo vinyl roof is one affectation from that era that I could never stand. It looked all wrong to me then and still does. And I am amazed at a car with the Luxury Decor Group which sports black seat belts and a black steering wheel/column.
I think your description of the car being a quantum leap said it best, JP. Although maybe hard to see that looking back today, Ford did hit the target pretty dead on with these cars for 1972. It’s just too bad that the target moved rather quickly and Ford did a poor job of keeping the Torino relevant.
Ford did an excellent job in keeping the Torino relevant. They just didn’t keep it as a Torino. It morphed into the Elite, and then morphed into the 1977 Thunderbird. A grand slam for sure.
I’d agree Ford did an okay job at keeping the platform relevant, the Torino line not so much. Sales went from half a million in 1972 and 1973, and were down to less than 200,000 cars for 1975-76. While no doubt the 1977-79 T-Bird was a success, I’d argue the Elite was far from a home run. The Elite was not even close to the Monte Carlo in sales. Ford cheaped out and just put a new nose on a Montego, and essentially used Torino interiors. Had they made a better effort to differentiate it from the rest of Ford’s intermediate line, perhaps it would have been a bigger success.
The Elite was a rush job, cobbled together in response to the success of the 1973 Chevrolet Monte Carlo and Pontiac Grand Prix. It was introduced halfway through the 1974 model year.
There are actually two brochures for the 1974 Torino line. The first brochure, issued at the beginning of the model year, features the Torino. The second one, issued halfway through the model year, announces the addition of the Gran Torino Elite to the line-up.
I could have sworn I’ve seen these in white, also.
I wonder how many were ordered with Q-Codes and Competition Suspension. Throw in some Magnum 500s and the whole option book.
That’s how I would have gotten mine.
Roger you always pick the most unique option combos. That’d definitely be a one of the kind car. I can’t imagine many were Q-code let alone Q-code with competition suspension with the Luxury Decor package.
As for this package being available with white, nothing I have says that was available. But, if there is one rule with old Fords, it’s that Ford never followed the rules! I wouldn’t be surprised if there were some special ordered cars that made it though.
Yes..they were in white too! I have one! Just a 302 V8 with same color interior..had 38k original on it in 1988..sold it twice purchased it back will not sell it again! Smooth ride..I really like my TORINO’S don’t care if other people dislike them!
The dealer where this Torino was listed, Streetside Classics, is a large mostly consignment dealer with multiple locations across the US. I’ve been to their Atlanta facility and it’s impressive, easily the size of a large Walmart inside. I bet they had upwards of 300-400 cars in there of seemingly all makes, models, origins, eras and genres. Worth checking out sometime if you’re in one of the cities where they’re located.
I had an aunt who drove a ’74 or ’75 Gran Torino Brougham in copper metallic with white interior (the same pseudo-pillow-top type as in the Elite above), with a white vinyl half-top, rear fender skirts, rectangular “opera windows” in the C pillars, etc. It was a pretty car by virtue of its color combo, but it certainly lacked the panache of most of its competition.
I like personal luxury coupes from the ’70’s because I grew up with them, and because the options and color choices available really did serve to personalize them, making car spotting back then so much more interesting than it is today. The concept really had run its course by the early 80’s, but in a way you’ve got to hand it to Detroit. At a time when cars really didn’t have much to offer in terms of the measureable standards we’ve come to expect from a basic family hauler today, the stylists and marketers did certainly find a way to keep the products interesting, if only based on frivolity.
I had a 74 Gran Torino in the exact same color combo.
But being a 74 it had the huge bumper in the back too.
It was my first car – I bought it in 82 – and had it until I graduation college in 86.
Being my first car I still have the feels for Gran Torino’s – even though the one I had a lot of problems. I needed a new transmission – and ate front tires like crazy.
Still – my first car – my first love.
I had 3 direct experiences with early 70s Torinos. One of my younger female cousins had a 71 Torino 2 door hardtop with a package very similar to this car. Her car had small, dog dish looking hubcaps that had a large trim ring around them….I am reasonably sure this was a 2 piece affair. Her car was a medium green in and out with a darker green halo roof.
Another experience was when my older sister was given a 4 door pillared hardtop, a 73 or 74 Torino as a loaner when her Mustang II was in the dealer’s shop, yet again. After driving less than a block from the dealership she asked me to drive the rest of the way home. The loose feeling steering and the very soft suspension made that Torino feel like a boat. And to make matters worse, it looked too wide from the front seat to travel the twisting 20 miles home on a “typical” 2 lane road.
Last experience? Riding back and forth from Jacksonville FL to Fort Wayne, Ind. in a friend’s 72 Sport Torino. Very nice car for travelling on interstate highways.
This car appears to have the wrong color of rear bumper pad, as all the other moldings match the roof. And the wheels look better than the factory wheelcovers that looked like pie pans, though in the case of this car, instead of the center being black the center would also match the color of the body.
Just like you now pay extra to get chrome trim painted black, back then you paid extra to get as much color keying as possible inside and out.
My biggest beef with these 72 and onwards Torino? They are very wide outside, but nothing special for room inside. Just a lot of wasted width.
That first one sounds like a ’71 Spring Special. As noted in the post, Ford was noted for these mid-year dress-ups to stimulate sales.
Interesting and very nice write-up.
As I’ve mentioned before, I had a ’72 Ford Gran Torino, my second car, and mine was a good one (pic below from not long after I got it). The wheels, exhaust, and even an aftermarket stereo don’t bother me, especially if done well and if reversible. Back in the day, that was a pretty common thing to do (I kept the original radio, but installed a popular-at-the-time Pioneer stereo in mine that was easy to remove).
I think perhaps to really understand these cars you almost had to be there in the ‘70’s. Style is subjective of course, but the Torino was actually pretty tasteful at the time compared to some of the competition. I see these occasionally at car shows, and they’re always popular. I wonder, too, if there will ever be a movie made with some of the popular cars today in such a prominent role 36 years after they were built as there was a ’72 Gran Torino (i.e.- Clint Eastwood’s “Gran Torino”).
That light brown had to be on 50% of what Ford built in 1972.
That picture of my car is around 43 years old and didn’t transfer well digitally… my car was actually a medium/light green. I don’t have a lot of good photos of my car, but it was something like the one in the left side of this ad…
My bad. I thought it was this one.
You know how I feel about YOUR Torino, Vince. I certainly have complimented it enough here. To quote Clint Eastwood, “Ain’t she sweet.”
But in the case of this generation, I have to agree with Joseph above: those huge bumpers on the front only for ’73 threw the whole car out of balance. By the Starsky & Hutch year (’74), balance was restored by hanging one out back as well.
But nothing beats the ’72 for looks. Now with that said, I did not hate the big bumpers on some cars. I grew up in the seventies having been born in 1960. Malaise maybe, but that’s when I learned to drive, so big bumpers were everywhere by then. I probably have a biased opinion, but I did not mind them on my ’73 LTD (the car in which I learned how to drive), and actually thought they made the Lincolns of the era look stately. A big old Continental Town Coupe or Sedan looked great with them by 1977, and a Marquis looked good from about ’74 onward. Everyone here probably knows how I feel about the Bill Blass Mark V of 1979.
But then I was a Brougham Head back then. I even liked the Elite, feeling it pulled off the big bumper look better than the Torino ever did. I will say as some others often say here, “Time has soften me to these.” – The subject car looks great, EVEN WITH THE WHEELS. Back then, it was quite common to put Cragar S/S wheels on just about anything, so in that respect, since those wheels resemble them, the car is somewhat period accurate. Personally, I would’ve kept with the Brougham theme and gone for a modern equivalent to the old Fenton Wirebaskets.
Oh, and MAN does that shot of the engine bay bring back memories! My LTD had that engine in it. That huge a$$ air-conditioner would freeze you right out of the car!
It actually reminds me of this 1972 Gran Torino coupe wearing rear torque thrusts circa 1974 taken by Langdon Clay, featured on CC in fact.
It would’ve made for a better Curbside photo-shoot if someone would’ve cleared the cardboard boxes out of the way.
Joseph Dennis would NEVER have poor composition like that. ;o)
Yes, Rick you have said many kind words about my Torino and it is much appreciated. I am with you that the 72 was the best for looks hands down. I used to really dislike 73 Torinos when I was young but I have softened on them over the years and I don’t mind them now.
I also don’t mind the big bumper cars either. We had lots of them growing up. While at the time when they were everywhere they were nothing special, now in the era of smooth plastic bumpers I don’t mind the big chrome bumpers. I guess it’s a bit nostalgic for me.
I also agree that the 73 Ford LTD bumper wasn’t bad for the time and was certainly more stylish than the 73 Torino bumper.
Perhaps the most famous 1973 Gran Torino is The Dude’s car in The Big Lebowski (1998). The movie takes place in 1990 or 91, so The Torino El Duderino is a worthless 18-year old beater that ends up getting crashed into a pole, then stolen, then used as a restroom, then recovered, then driven into a dumpster, then has all of its window glass smashed by an angry neighbor, then set on fire by nihilists. Legendary.
I have seen so many 1970s period pictures of Cougars and Elites in this basic bodyshell equipped with deep dished slotted mags and air shocks that for anyone saying PLCs should have stock wheels or nothing, just relax. Same with the dual exhaust/glasspacks for that matter. The factory produced supercars may have been dead, but the aftermarket for speed parts lived on and some of those parts would make their way onto cars like this, even if it would have been by 1977 with its second owner. I prefer the day 2 look to factory original anyway, I wholeheartedly approve of this cars presentation.
I had seen this car on eBay when it was for sale and thought it looked really nice. I do echo JPC on his opinion about halo roofs, but it’s still better than a puffy landau top with opera windows you’d later see on the Elite that effectively succeeded this option. The 73 is still my least favorite Torino year, with the unbalanced bumpers and unattractive and fussy grille design, it betrayed everything beyond it. The 74s were arguably more ungainly looking than the 73, but the grille design was a big improvement and at least the big bumpers fore and aft looked balanced. Seeing as how this one looks pretty good to me though, I may revise my opinion and say the 73 sportsroofs were more hurt by this rhinoplasty than the coupe.
Bingo! Growing up in the era, our parents’ cars were factory stock, but in those years it was not at all uncommon for our 20-something neighbors to drive the same or similar cars with some “custom” touches.
My friend’s older sister dated a guy in his early 20’s around in 1976 who drove a light metallic blue ’76 Cordoba with a 400 under the hood, chrome side pipes, air shocks in the rear and Cragers. It was hardly an oddity aside from the fact that he’d bought it new. In those days pretty much any 3 or 4 year old car owned by anyone under 28 or so sported some kind of (real or perceived) “performance parts” from the aftermarket.
Matt I am on the same page with you, in that I don’t mind the modifications to this car. Like I said, the wheels fit the car okay, and have a bit of a retro look. I am always okay with dual exhaust, but I definitely don’t like the glass packs. They just sound bad IMO (especially with a low compression engine), and I am over excessively loud exhaust. I’d think something with a mellow tone would be more to my liking. My commentary about it being dressed up as a muscle car was more about the fact that the dealership is misrepresenting what the car is, at least to those who are less knowledgeable than the typical CCer.
I do agree that the ’73 Torino is the least organic of the 72-76 model years, but I still don’t mind the ’73 Sportsroofs in particular. I used to not like the ’73s, but over the years they have gown one me despite their flawed design. I am okay with liking imperfect things. And speaking of bumpers, the rear bumper on the ’73 also bother me, due the extra spaced added between the body and the bumper for the 2.5 mph standards. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.
I should clarify that if I found a 73 sportsroof that struck the right chord, I absolutely would own it. I’m not obsessed with perfection either, as I don’t believe there to actually be such thing, in car design or elsewhere, otherwise nothing would have any flavor. It’s my least favorite Torino year, but I like Torino’s, my least favorite Mike and Ike is lime, but it’s still one of my go-to choice for candy. At the very least I do find the front end interesting in that it previews the basic theme of what would be the Mustang II nose.
I have noticed the spaced out rear bumper, there were quite a few 73 models that did the same thing, the Mustang was another and Chrysler did the same thing with the Chargers, Challengers and Barracudas as well. It looks odd, but I would say I aesthetically still like the look of half assed compliance using the old small bumpers to full compliance battering rams. One thing I do like about the 73 Torino over the 72 is the rubber strip placed between the taillights. I have never been a fan of the taillights in the bumper look but having something to break up the huge expanse of chrome between them visually helps it for me.
I don’t remember these at all (maybe more print advertising than TV advertising?), but that interior immediately reminded me of what we’d see in the (1975) Granada very soon.
I’d also forgotten about Ford’s spring specials–1977 here:
Chevy didn’t have a “Chevelle Brougham” to match the Gran Torino, until the 74 Malibu Classic. Had velour, opera windows and stand-up hood ornament. Top level Landau was more plush than a base Monte Carlo. Being a good seller led to the Chevelle name fading away for ’78.
Regarding the ’73 Chevelle Laguna, to me it was more ‘Euro-lux’, like the Grand Am. Which mainstream buyers [IMO] weren’t quite ready for, yet.
My mom had a white ’77 Mercury Cougar Villager wagon, which shared the same chassis with this vintage of Torino. It was horrid in every way. Always a FOMOCO wagon family, this was the last FOMOCO product my folks would ever own. She traded it after less than two years for a new emerald green ’79 Chrysler T&C wagon which turned out to be a great car, far and away superior to that POS Cougar Villager.
I like it, it’s perfect and the wheels / dual exhaust don’t scare me.
Sometimes original is not better.
I loved my 1972 Torino. Loved the style, loved the 351 Engine. My first ever new car. Two door , formal roof, white with white vinyl top and gingerbread vinyl interior. Ford was kind enough to extend me credit in the form of a 3 year loan. Exactly at my 36th and final payment it started showing rust from the inside out in the door jams , the trunk lid, and under the vinyl top blisters were forming near the trim. After several “discussions”with Ford managers , Ford agreed to pay for a bondo-style cover-up at a body shop of their choice. But, In less than 6 months , it looked like a p.o.s. —Cancer was popping up all over the car. Traded it for a 76 Cutlass that was a much better car. Still ,I think that the 72 Torino’s looked great. The 73 bumber law and new grille ruined it for me. Never bought another Ford.
The Fords of this era were horrific rusters. In an era when everything rusted, I remember being shocked by a three-year-old Ford which had the bottom edge of its trunk lid rusted away. Of course, they were still not bad compared to what happened to Vegas, and as for Fiats oh my God.
Yes these Torinos were horrific rusters as were most Fords of this era. That along with the poor quality control didn’t do Fords reputation any favors.
Supposedly Ford dragged its feet on implementing the e-coat process at all of its North American plants. This process – which had been developed by Ford’s European operations – ensured better coverage of rust-proofing material on all parts the body, particularly hard-to-access nooks and crannies.
Ford immediately installed the equipment necessary to apply the e-coat at the Wixom plant, and I’ve seen brochures touting its use on the Pinto and Mustang II. But the plants that built the Maverick, Torino and LTD didn’t all have the facilities necessary for application of the e-coat process.
As young boy, I don’t remember Lincolns and Thunderbirds having a rust problem, and Pintos and Mustang IIs weren’t bad for the times, either. The problems were with the Maverick (probably the worst), Torino and Galaxie/LTD from the early 1970s until about 1975.
The question in my mind is this: The 1965-68 big Ford line had been no worse than average in terms of body rust. But the 1969 model was absolutely awful. I doubt that they were e-coating cars before 1969, so there was something else that Ford screwed up. Every single one of its lines (except probably the Lincolns and Thunderbirds coming out of Wixom) were horrible, horrible rusters. Even the Pinto and Mustang II that you refer to became no better than average after the e-coat started (and the 71-73 Mustangs were horrible). So there was something else going on before the e-coat issue, and I have never seen anyone address what that was.
It could have been the preparation given to the sheet metal prior to the application of paint. If a bean counter decided to save some money by skipping a step – or using cheaper materials – that would have affected rust resistance, and not been immediately apparent.
Here in southcentral Pennsylvania, I don’t remember the full-size Fords as being terrible when it came to rust. A friend’s family had a 1969 Galaxie 500 sedan well into the late 1970s, and I don’t remember it being rusty (or having been repainted). Nor were they meticulous in caring for their vehicles. Salt is applied to the roads here – as it was back then – although not at the same rate as roads in the northern and western parts of the state.
The bigger problems were with the Mavericks and the post-1971 Torinos. I do remember those as being serious rusters.
The Pinto and Mustang II were, if anything, better than the domestic competition (Vega and Gremlin) and Japanese competition when it came to rust resistance. The best, however, were the rear-engine VWs.
I can’t speak for the big Ford’s but since you brought up the 71-73 Mustangs, and have been relatively exposed to the restoration processes of them, my observation would be that Ford engineering’s refinements that came along with every styling refresh between 65-71, such as torque boxes, braces, side cowls for the fresh air vents etc. all provided more and more seams and open spaces for rust to spread. Coatings including E-coat are only effective at preventing the development of light surface rust of open swaths of metal, but if moisture can get into a seam or crevice where panels are spot welded together, or puddle up in low spots such as the notorious upper cowl vents for the HVAC, any coating will eventually be compromised.
Also Ford started using large amounts of tar like sound deadener hastily sprayed on the underbodies on the assembly line around this time frame, and it wouldn’t surprise me if there were some engineered in drainage channels that got blocked off by that stuff.
There were issue with sheet metal prep (lack of), lack of e-coat, as well as it was rumoured that Ford started using a lower quality steel. I think Matt has a good point about the increasing areas were joints were formed and where water could collect. Fords of this era are notorious for rotting in the cowl area where the fresh air vent intakes are located. This is an area loaded with spot welds, joints, and moisture collects there. Ford generally did a very poor job is prepping these areas.
Up in Canada, there were lawsuits against Ford for how quickly the cars would rust out. Apparently Ford of Canada had implemented a “secret warranty” that could be invoked. The J-67 warranty extension applied to premature rusting on 1970-74 Fords, but you had to know about it. Ford wasn’t telling it’s customers.
Almost all Ford from the late 1960’s to the late 1970’s disintegrated very quickly here in rust country. Ford did improve the rustproofing techniques in the late 1970’s and those cars actually held up fairly well, despite many sharing the same basic structure as the earlier cars that rusted out quickly. FWIW, the 1965-68 Fords had lots of issues with frame rust in this area, even though the bodies held up better than there 70’s counterparts.
I was born in 1976, so I remember what these cars looked like in around 1986 or so.
First, I’m always happy when someone preserves a car which was not ever thought of as a collectible, and I hope someone continues to preserve this car. I imagine at whatever price they paid, surely less than 27,995, they have to preserve it. Vince, I’m also happy you are preserving your Torino.
The interior on this one looks really nice and plusher than the comparable GM cars. I remember the GM A bodies, even most of the “sporty” ones, coming with flat, featureless straight bench front seats.
Other than that. . . I cannot find a single appealing line on this car. The grille isn’t any particular shape. The designers started to contour around the headlight pods, and then didn’t finish it, so the headlights are neither bluff and aggressive nor smoothly projecting from the body. The front bumper is almost straight across and doesn’t follow the contours of the grille and rest of the front end. The fender and door have nothing to do with the bizarre and unnecessary strake which to me adds a lot of weight to the rear end starting at the back door. The rear window is too small and overall the greenhouse isn’t well proportioned. Do the taillights even have a shape? They’re characterless, boring blobs. In 1972, you could have bought a Cutlass or other GM A body, which managed to be sleek and muscular, or this. In 1973, the Colonnades, particularly before they got opera windowed, were also sleek and muscular, versus this which looks bloated.
I never drove one of these but they had the reputation of being wallowing, underpowered, overweight, and cramped barges, even in a day when almost everything wallowed, was underpowered, overweight, and generally cramped. Ford seemed to do the worst malaise engines in terms of wringing power out of a large engine and were the most cramped inside for the size of the car.
Torinos also seemed to hold up the least well by the mid eighties compared with the GM A bodies and even the Chrysler products. This is definitely the nicest looking Torino I’ve ever seen and quite possibly the ONLY nice looking Torino I’ve ever seen.
The point of this post was not that it was an amazing vehicle or exceptionally styled. The reason I chose to highlight this particular car was because of its well preserved condition and its unique option package that I though CCers would like to read about. As I stated in the post, this isn’t a car that I would have any interest in owning.
While I will agree that the 1973 Torino was far form a world renowned design, I certainly don’t think it was out of step with the cars of that era. The 1973 Chevelle while it did have an airier green house was also adorned with a rail road tie of a front number, and fairly generic overall styling. And the public in 1973 on average didn’t think the Torino was a horribly styled beast either when compared to other ’73 makes. This is reflected in the fact that the Torino was the segments best seller, beating the all-new Chevelle.
It’s interesting that you mention the 1972 A-bodies and the Colonnades compared to this Torino. Growing up I had experience with all three in our family. In fact, I learned to drive on our family’s ’72 Torino, 72 Skylark and ’76 Malibu, and my first car was a ’72 Chevelle. All of the cars were pretty comparable for the most part and one wasn’t more easy to drive than the other. The space comment always comes up, but sitting in the back seat of all of the above, I can tell you they are all pretty near identical space wise. In fact the Torino actually has more back seat width, which was noticeable since we always had three in the back seat. The Torinos were not more cramped than the GM competition and of the four cars I mentioned above our Torino had a noticeable larger trunk.
The ’72 Torino hit the target dead on in my eyes, but that was also the problem. Ford was designing the car to compete with the 1968 vintage GM A-bodies, and they came out with Ford’s new and improved version of the GM A-body. By 1974, Ford had done a poor job of updating these cars, effectively killing the styling and they were certainly no longer a trendy in anyway. GM had moved their A-bodies in a new direction, leaving the Fords to looked dated and completely out of style.
I attached the photo below, because to me it really shows how close the ’72 Torinos were designed to the GM counterparts for 1972 (albeit larger)
Frankly, that composite photo makes the Torino look bigger than ever compared those poor little Chevelles.
Yes, the photo does highlight the size difference. The Chevelle was the smallest 1972 intermediate, being almost 10” shorted than the Torino. However, compared to the other 1972 GM A-bodies, there was a less significant size difference, as the Chevelle was a fair bit shorter than even its platform mates. Of course the Colonnade cars were more comparable in size to these Torinos.
However, my point was to show the similarity in the design language, not highlight the difference in size. To me it’s very obvious that Ford was trying to emulate GM’s intermediate line (but make it bigger).
I agree and thanks for bringing to light this example, Vince. It was interesting to see.
While the 1973 models weren’t as good compared to the 1972 models but at least the 1973 rear end still had the taillights on the bumper (I’ve hated the 1974-76 Gran Torino tallights).
” In 1972, you could have bought a Cutlass or other GM A body, which managed to be sleek and muscular, or this…”
While the ’72 GM A bodies are a continuation of the ‘classic’ muscular 1968 era body, at the time, they were considered “outdated and too small” for mid size cars. The new BOF Torino lineup was the #1 mid size car in ’72, and one of the Gran Torino ads spells it out.
Car and Driver tested a 1973 Torino fastback, and noted how successful the 1972 Torino had been. They also liked their 1973 test car, although it was equipped with the heavy-duty suspension.
The Torino was facing pressure from both above and below within the Ford line-up by 1975. The smaller Granada looked newer and more efficient (even if it really wasn’t all that economical). The full-size LTD, meanwhile, appealed to the “bigger is better” crowd, while offering much the same in fuel economy.
By 1976, the Colonnade Oldsmobile Cutlass was selling over 600,000 units annually, while the Torino had fallen far behind.
What year was Starsky and Hutch’s red Gran Torino?
74-76, it varied as the series went on
The ’72 is the best-looking version. Especially the Ranchero GT!
Thank you Vince for the making the impossible happen: bit by bit you’ve gotten me to appreciate these for what they are. I no longer wince. 🙂
Wow, that says a lot! Next, we need to work on the full-size 1971-72 Fords. 😉
That just may be a bridge too far, Vince, although Paul IS sitting in this one with a big (forced?) smile on his face. ;o)
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/auto-biography/thank-you-all-for-your-great-car-buying-advice-but-i-ignored-it-all-and-bought-this-pristine-1972-ford-ltd-instead/
Look at what turned up for sale in the Seattle area for $35900, oof
https://seattle.craigslist.org/kit/cto/d/1973-ford-gran-torino/6597557366.html
My Aunt had one of these in the exact color combination. Honestly, I hated this car, and I didn’t dislike too many. Maybe because we we a GM family, and she had to bring this Ford to town when she visited from Canada periodically. The soft vinyl must have had a fake leather scent because the car smelled like that, which was offputting to a kid. And I couldn’t see the scenery from the back seat it had such bad visibility. That car was totalled in the early 1990s on her way back to Canada when some hit and run driver on one of our roadways caused her to crash. She was all right, but not the Gran Torino. She replaced it with a much more acceptabile (to me) Cutlass Ciera.
The wide and high “hips” were defined perfectly in the SNL spoof of “The McLaughlin Group” (they called it “The Arakawa Group”) in the early 1990s when Mike Myers, playing a Japanese businessman asking questions of other Japanese businessmen in a round table discussion. The joke was that they just ridiculed Americana, and Myers asks what is the worst American car, Rob Schneider says, “1972 Chrysler Imperial. Because from rear end, looks like fat American woman in stretch pants.” So much for the fuselage look……
Car is alive and well in Minnesota since Sept 3 2018, immediately got rid of those rims adding Keystone Classics with 275x60R/15’s
Cool, summer evening at a car show