Throughout its lengthy history, the Chrysler Town & Country was a vehicle that came in many different shapes and sizes. Yet throughout nearly eight decades of uninterrupted production (save for WWII), there was always at least one of two constants: 1) the Town & Country was Chrysler’s most family-oriented vehicle and/or 2) it was a “woodie” in one form or another. In many years, these two qualities happened to overlap, with one of those such being 1988.
Starting out life in 1941 as a true “woodie” station wagon, following World War II, the Town & Country was a woodie 4-door sedan, 2-door convertible, and ultimately, a 2-door hardtop sedan through 1950. Immediately following this, the Town & Country became Chrysler’s fullsize station wagon in 1951, a vehicle that ran concurrently with Chrysler’s fullsize sedans through the 1977 model year. Most recently, the Town & Country was more well-known as Chrysler’s long-running and very popular minivan, sold from the 1990 through 2016 model years. Yet the years between its life as a fullsize station wagon and a minivan are often most forgotten.
Although the rest of its fullsize C-bodies lasted another year before they were downsized to the 4-door “pillared hardtop”-only R-body for 1979, the Town & Country was shuffled to the midsize M-body in 1978. Serving as the premier station wagon variant of the LeBaron line, it came complete with simulated teakwood appliqué with white ash surround and insert moldings reminiscent of the original real woodie Town & Countrys of the 1940s.
Despite losing some two feet of length, nearly 1,000 pounds of weight, and the availability of a third row seat, at 205.5 inches long and 74.2 inches wide (based on 1981 specs), the M-body Town & Country still exhibited very fullsize exterior dimensions by today’s standards. It was also a very fullsize vehicle compared to the Town & Country that arrived in 1982, as to little surprise, Chrysler’s wagon was downsized yet again to the ever-multiplying compact front-wheel drive K-platform.
Now reduced to decidedly compact dimensions, the 1982 Town & Country rode on a taut 100.1-inch wheelbase and measured only 179.9 inches long, 68.5 inches wide, and a svelte 2,676 pounds. Downsizing of substantial proportions was the name of the game in the American automobile industry from the late-1970s through mid-1980s, but the Chrysler Town & Country was subjected to one of the largest quantitative losses of mass of any nameplate, and quite possibly the most significant loss of mass of any automobile during this period.
Just to put things in scope, the 1977 Chrysler Town & Country rode on a 124-inch wheelbase, measured 227.7 inches long and 79.4 inches wide, and tipped the scales at a mammoth 5,126 pounds with its optional 440 cubic inch (7.2 liter) V8. So, in just five years, the Chrysler Town & Country lost some 58 inches in length, 11 inches in width, and 2,450 pounds in weight. In fact, the Chrysler Town & Country wagon just might hold the title of “Most Downsized Vehicle” of the Malaise Era.
The Town & Country’s body wasn’t the only thing that faced such a drastic reduction in size. In that same period of time from 1977 to 1982, the Town & Country’s largest engine went from a 7.2 liter V8 making an admittedly weak 195 horsepower and 320 lb-ft torque as a result of emissions standards to a 2.6 liter I4 making just 92 horsepower and 131 lb-ft torque. Thankfully, power soon rebounded a bit, and by 1985 the Town & Country was available with an optional 2.2 liter turbo making 146 horsepower and 170 lb-ft torque.
In any event, the K-body Town & Country retained familiar styling features of its immediate predecessor including a prominent chrome “waterfall” radiator grille with crystal Pentastar hood ornament, standard roof rails, the quad headlamp fascia echoing larger Chryslers, available wire wheel discs, and its iconic faux “marine teak” woodgrain trim with light “white ash wood” moldings. A woodgrained LeBaron Town & Country was also produced during this era, the nameplate’s first application on a convertible since the 1940s, but for all intents and purposes, this article will focus only on the wagon.
As with past generations, the K-based Chrysler LeBaron Town & Country was a reasonably comfortable place to be in standard form, and a downright luxurious place to be if optioned right. Offered for the entirety of its production was the Mark Cross package, which upgraded the T&C’s standard cloth interior to soft leather supplied by the luxury leather retailer, Mark Cross. Mark Cross edition cars by default added the available 50/50 split front bench, along with a leather wrapped steering wheel and stitched door panels featuring the Mark Cross medallion.
Forgoing the button-tufted floating cushion design of larger EEKs, the somewhat loose pillow-like seats featured French stitching on the thigh and head cushions, with piping and contrast color vinyl trim. Mark Cross cars were commonly also equipped with all the power options including power front seats, windows, locks, mirrors, as well as air conditioning, electronic digital gauge cluster, and premium AM/FM stereo with cassette player.
Basic by today’s luxury car standards, for the 1980s, the Chrysler Town & Country was easily the most opulent small wagon available from an American manufacturer. After all, it was good enough for Frank Sinatra. Featuring luxuries rivaled only by the most loaded fullsize Buick Estate and Mercury Grand Marquis wagons — cars it was coincidently once sized directly against — the Town & Country was truly in a league of its own, in so many more ways than one.
Of course, that league was shrinking with the overall market for station wagons in the U.S. on the visible decline throughout the 1980s, as Baby Boomers’ preferences for family vehicles fell elsewhere. While there’s no quantitative data to support this, the LeBaron Town & Country’s buyers likely skewed middle-aged to older, as the Town & Country’s compact dimensions and fancier interior didn’t make it ideal for parents transporting many small, messy children.
Rather, the Town & Country was more ideal for people whose children (if they had them) were older and didn’t need to be driven around on a daily basis, much like one of the car’s most famous on-screen drivers, Mrs. Bueller in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.
Indeed this segment was small, but K-body Town & Country sales held fairly steady relative to total K-body LeBaron sales, averaging around 10 percent of total LeBaron sales from 1982-1988. Selling far better than top trim yet less plush in comparison Reliant/Aries wagons, a grand total of 52,601 K-body LeBaron Town & Country wagons were produced for the 1982-1988 model years, with its best year being 1984 at 11,578 units.
The truth was that those looking for a small luxury wagon or wagon alternative that wouldn’t break the bank had few options in the 1980s. As far as somewhat premium-ish wagons went, GM had their A-body Cutlass Ciera/Century and Ford had its Fox-body LTD/Marquis, but these wagons were larger and no more luxurious. The similarly-sized Nissan Maxima and Toyota Camry wagons lacked American gingerbread decor, and cost roughly 50% more when comparably-equipped, and anything from European brands easily cost much more.
The only truly luxurious compact SUV available at the time was the Jeep XJ Wagoneer, and it retailed for substantially more. There were no luxury minivans at this point, and even top-spec versions of the heavily-related Caravan/Voyager didn’t quite match the Town & Country’s posh finishes. Which likely sparked an idea at Highland Park.
Chrysler’s Dodge Caravan and Plymouth Voyager minivans were obviously a smash hit, and with the original K-car’s slated phase-out over the 1986-1989 model years that included no wagon replacements, it only was logical for Chrysler to introduce a luxury minivan under its own brand, thereby shuffling the Town & Country nameplate once again. The new Chrysler Town & Country minivan officially debuted in spring of 1989 as an early 1990 model, in the process marking the first time since 1974 that a new Town & Country increased in exterior size, a trend that would continue through 2016.
Concerning this generation Town & Country, the final wagon iteration, there is something intrinsically charming about its compact dimensions yet gaudy styling and big car aspirations… it’s almost cute. As a matter of fact, while photographing this car I was approached by the owner of the shop where it resided, asking if I was an interested buyer.
Had it not been for the crippling passenger side damage, I might have actually paused momentarily to even consider making an offer — before I would come to my senses and tell myself that buying an old K-car, even if it was for an insignificant amount, is an irrational decision on my part. I have neither the space nor time for another car of any type at this point. But I digress…
Aside from that very serious body and possible frame damage, and that’s a very big aside, cosmetically this must be one of the cleanest daily-driven LeBaron Town & Country wagons and K-cars still in existence. While the collector market for these isn’t that hot, they are indeed an interesting car in American automobile history, sort of a hybrid bridging of gaps between bygone eras of distinguished style and oblivious bigger-is-better consumption, and a modern era of increased social consciousness and efficiency.
It’s a bridging of eras that creates a very distinctive style, a style that certainly can be highly criticized for its overt gaudiness and its economy car underpinnings. Nonetheless it is a style that has its charm in a way very reminiscent of simpler times, even on a body so emaciated when compared to its decidedly obese predecessor of two generations prior. Some 21% shorter, 14% narrower, and 48% lighter than the Town & Country of 1978, could the Chrysler Town & Country be the most downsized vehicle of the Malaise Era?
Photographed in Falmouth, Cape Cod, Massachusetts – September 2018
My aunt and uncle had the twin to this car in the mid/late 80s. I had always considered them to be Ford buyers but at some point in the late 70s they switched to Buicks. Their criteria for a car when they made the switch was that it had to be a wagon that had enough space with the rear seat folded so my uncle could lie down on the long trips between their houses in New York and Florida. I don’t know which Buick wagon they had, but it blew on engine on one of their trips and rather than rebuild it they bought a yellow/creme Town and Country wagon to replace it.
I don’t know why, but I always thought that the car was not what they would have bought had they been able to take their time and pick and choose. My aunt probably felt that as long as she was doing most of the driving the turbo engine was a real bonus. (Aunt Teresa had a bit of a lead foot.) But the color? Her next car would be a supercharged Regal in a subdued shade, as was the Subaru wagon that replaced the Regal.
To me, this car always made me think of a brick of butter.
The long-enough-to-sleep-on was a key factor when I bought wagons or hatchbacks too. I was annoyed when it became commonplace in the ’80s for rear seats not to fold completely flat. OTOH, the increasing popularity of split-folding seatbacks rather than the all-or-nothing variety that was prevalent in the ’70s and earlier was a boon.
You’ve struck gold with the most downsized realization. Yes, it’s early but I’m fully awake and you’ve nailed it.
My in-laws had a ’84 or ’85 T&C. It was the only one I’ve ever seen that was a dark blue base with the faux wood sides – not a bad combination. It was also the quietest, most comfortable K-car I ever rode in. It wasn’t hard to see the appeal with these. They had it through the mid-90s but it was really starting to show its age and 200,000 miles by then. It was sold to someone who spruced it up and kept driving it.
Seeing the body damage on this one is sad. Another K-car featured a while back by Eric703 had terminal body damage, also on the right side. While these were common as dirt once upon a time, seeing any – particularly a T&C – is a treat as Hagerty Insurance estimates less than 100,000 of all original K-car variants are left. Given their production, that’s a lot of attrition.
I thought of that 2-dr. Reliant too as soon as I saw Brendan’s passenger-side picture of this T&C. Same sort of damage as well — with the upper part of the door sticking out.
The number of suitable cars for my planned K-Car museum keeps shrinking and shrinking…
Great article! You really put it in perspective. Our ’03 T&C was one of our favorite vehicles. It had obviously grown a bit again by then, but it was a good van. Like cruising around in our living room. Surprisingly good highway mileage, as it it got about 25% better economy on a road trip than the EPA estimates would have suggested. I remember this car from Ferris Bueller too. Didn’t they use one in Planes Trains And Automobiles also?
Looking over the car in the pics, It appears the door and fender got the brunt of the damage. I suspect the frame is fine. Those were tough cars and could take some punch.
It looks like all it needs is a new door, fender, door hinges and striker.
However thanks to the fake wood and the other attachments on that fender and door, it would take forever to find a replacement T/C door and fender
Still it is sad, it looked like it was in great shape
I didn’t think these things had frames. Uni-bodies, no?
I saw one of these on the road last week.
What makes this car particularly notable (as if being an operable K car isn’t enough) is that it has French diplomatic staff license plates. These plates are issued by the US State Department only to active diplomatic staff; this one, beginning with S, denotes embassy staff, rather than an accredited diplomat. Still that means that someone relocated to the US from France and actually bought a 30-year old woodie K car.
I’d love to know the story behind this. Maybe it was a dare from fellow diplomats — to drive the most stereotypical American car possible? Or maybe it’s been in the embassy motor fleet for a few decades and has become sort of a mascot? I have no idea, but it’s got to be a great tale.
Either suspicion seems reasonable. I’ll bet there is a good story behind that.
Or they have watched too many American 80s movies?
You could simply email the embassy
https://franceintheus.org/spip.php?article1131
Ask them about the car. the owner might be a fan of cars or he/she read all the countless articles about K cars on this website and wanted one.
That car looks to be in too nice condition to have been a motor pool car in the land of rock salt (DC/MD/VA) since the 1980’s
Maybe the owner grew up seeing these in France? I know the J body Lebaron convertible was sold in Europe. I also know the first and second generation Caravan was sold there too.
This would make a great story.
My thinking — this person relocated relocated from France to the US and decided they wanted the full “American” experience while here. As part of that this person sought out what they perceived to be the most “typical” or “iconic” American car — a woodie station wagon. So it would be sort of like an American moving to France and buying a Citroen DS.
Speaking as a Frenchman who lived in DC back when these K-cars were popular, the overwhelming majority of French embassy/consulate folks were driving American iron. There was also trickle of Renaults and plenty of Japanese cars, but that’s to be expected (it was the late ’80s).
Most French people living in the US, like most Europeans there I guess, leaped at the opportunity to own something quintessentially American. They were exotic and pretty cheap.
Great post, Brendan. Takes me back…
Hi there, I can tell you the story: I love old american cars! (and also I might sell the car, pretty soon… any idea how much I could sell it for? any buyers?…) (and I’m looking for a wiper motor connector/relay that I can’t find… any idea? junk yard etc…)
I had never thought about “most downsized” but you could be right. Another thing I had never thought about: the 25 horsepower drop from the smogged 440 V8 to the Turbo 2.2 I4 amounts to a loss of 6 1/4 horsepower per missing cylinder.
I thought Chrysler did two things particularly well on these. First, they did the “wood” trim as well as anyone ever did. We all knew it was plastic of course, but the look was as evocative of the classic woody as anything done after the early 50s. Also the interiors on these cars were exceptionally well done. Had gasoline continued to go up the way everyone in 1980 expected it would, this would have been a much more successful car.
This may be my favorite K car flavor. I would choose another paint color, but this is something I would drive even now. (Although the 78-81 version might be even better).
“the 25 horsepower drop from the smogged 440 V8 to the Turbo 2.2 I4 amounts to a loss of 6 1/4 horsepower per missing cylinder.”
Crazy. I picked up on the Turbo’s relative proximity (in hp) to the de-smogged 440. That 440 must have ome sort of record as the least efficient engine of its time.
Another way to see it is in hp per liter:
440 V8: 27hp / L
Turbo 4: 66hp / L
At the very least, the K-car was a huge step in the right direction for Chrysler compared to the dinosaurs of the ’70s.
Nice find. Were these really that luxurious though? I don’t see them as more upscale than a Ford Taurus LX or Mercury Sable LS.
No not really
Just a K-car with better shocks and more quieter tires when bought new. Plus standard power windows and locks and the option of leather.
Power windows and locks were still a luxury type item then.
When this was was introduced the Taurus was still being developed so this would have been compared with the midsize LTD and Marquis and yes they were a cut above them.
The Lebaron T/C was the crowning jewel of the K Car fleet.
Nvm, I didn’t somehow missed the key word “small.” These were definitely the most luxurious small wagons of the time.
If you’d ever been in a low-end Dodge Aries, and then ridden in anything Mark Cross had to do with, you’d change your mind. A friend of mine growing up had a base Aries, and I swear someone had a meeting to figure out just how much they could leave off a car and still be able to drive it. Hard, flat church-pew seats (that if i remember correctly didn’t have any rake adjustment, just back and forth) upholstered in plain vinyl. Even as a kid, riding in the Aries for an hour would give me a numb butt and stuff back. The interior in the T&C looks like something that wouldn’t be out of place in an Imperial, or something-it’s VERY nice. Especially in an era that considered “power windows” as extravagant and only found in Cadillacs… that’s why this car is so revolutionary, no regularly seen “economy car” had anything like the luxury features found here.
To me it seems the New Yorker was even more severely downsized although it probably wasn’t quite as much; it just started (i think) slightly bigger and went through three shrinkings rather than just two so it seemed that way (before becoming larger again, and also in three stages).
Other contenders for most downsized ever:
– ’77 Cougar sedans to late-period Euro coupe, though the latter postdates the malaise era
– Cadillac Eldorado from the too-ponderous ’78 to the ’86 that looked like the prize from a Happy Meal
– Dodge Charger, from the classic ’68-’70 model to the Omni coupe
– The first Olds Starfire was a 98 before becoming a stand-alone brand in the ’60s; by 1966 it was 217″ long; by 1975 it was 169.9″. (the J body that replaced it was almost a foot shorter still). But these are not contiguous so don’t really count.
– Pontiac Grand Am, first generation sedan was 214.9″L; third was 177.5″
I haven’t done the calculations for all of these, but when writing the piece I did for the Eldorado. It was less than the T&C.
As for the New Yorker, while it was right around the same size as the ’77 Town & Country, it we never downsized to quite as small as this K-body. The K-based New Yorkers were always one size class above.
As for the others, I’ll leave it to someone else to do the hard calculations.
I checked the 1976 vs. 1985 Buick Electra, which I thought as a sure thing in beating the T&C downsizing. I was wrong – the ’85 is 84% of the length of the ’76.
227.7-179.9=47.8.
Every time I see one of these (and while not often, they’re probably more common here in the land of low mile retiree cars), I want it. This one immediately instilled lust that was sadly (or fortunately) extinguished when I saw that damage.
I think Brendan hit the nail on the head with “it’s almost cute”. There really is something very endearing about the traditional American big car swagger applied to a “Mini Me” body. I always felt the same way about the LeBaron K Coupes. Their wire wheel covers, padded landau roofs, especially the ones with the Mark Cross package. They just made me think, “Oh isn’t that just adorable. Look at that little feller trying to act like a Cordoba.”
My impractical emotional side really hopes someone rescues this one. It was in amazing shape before that accident.
Very entertaining and informative piece. What’s funny is that before even reading this piece early this morning, from the thumbnail of the car, my first thought was “Mrs. Bueller’s wagon”.
The plastic wood cheapens it, the fake wire wheel hubcaps finish it off, it looks like crap.
It’s just really one of those “You had to be there” things.
Absurd though they are, cars like this just somehow epitomize 1980’s America for those of us who actually were there. Tough to explain. Clearly even tougher to understand.
My first thought when seeing this was also Ferris’ mom ferrying around her real estate clients while dealing with her ‘sick’ son. What a star turn for an otherwise innocuous car!
The Mark Cross interior is tasteful and restrained relative to the velour bordello floating cushion monstrosities seen in so many of its brougham contemporaries. I remember riding in a Mark Cross T&C owned by the mother of a college friend (your buyer demographic profile is right on, Brendan!) and thinking it was actually pretty nice compared to my parents’ 1980 Pontiac Lemans wagon.
The T&C was replaced by a Sable wagon and then a series of Audi and Mercedes wagons, illustrating very nicely the migration of the affluent away from upper-middle domestic fare to European makes.
I’d have to say no this isn’t the most downsized car. I put this in the category of name debasement. It is not a smaller version of the T&C as much as it is the T&C name being placed on a smaller class of car. The original was a full size car while this is a compact.
The difference is that while something like the LTD moved down a notch while a larger car formerly called LTD remained in the lineup, the Chrysler Town & Country of the 1970s-80s was always the biggest (only?) wagon offered under the nameplate at any time.
I’m not seeing a difference there. Ford and Chrysler both put formerly full size names on mid-size cars as an attempt to lure some buyers into thinking they were “downsized” full sizers until they could create a truly downsized full size. This is very similar in that it was a rebadge of a car from a smaller size class, only worse since they dropped two sizes. This was not a new more space efficient full sizer it was a gussied up compact from their low priced brand.
They were pretty nice IMO. I like the styling and the seats were very comfy.
“Basic by today’s luxury car standards, for the 1980s, the Chrysler Town & Country was easily the most opulent small wagon available from an American manufacturer” – I guess it’s easy to forget AMC’s Concord wagon in Limited trim, which from 1980 onwards could be optioned to the hilt with power windows, locks, seats, liftgate, AC, cruise and a premium audio sytem, not to mention very luxurious seats in nice cloth or leather. No digital dash, but that’s just a gimmick anyway.
What a shame. I had photographed this very car a couple of years ago before it suffered the body damage. It was in great condition, sitting outside a mechanics shop on Cape Cod awaiting some minor mechanical maintenance after being either newly acquired or pulled from long-term storage.
As a former K-car owner, it hit all my buttons. I seriously considered asking if it was for sale, but wasn’t really in any position to buy another old car at the time. I now wish I had bought it and saved it.
Small world! And yes, to me it appears that the damage must have occurred after January of 2017, as its inspection sticker indicates it passed then.
The mechanic where it was said that it was on its second female owner, the original owner being the current one’s aunt who had owned the car for most of its life. Such as shame!
Here’s a couple of pics of this car in 2016:
Great pics!
more
one more:
A lawyer neighbor had a 1990 town and country a number of years ago, could very well be the only one I’ve ever seen.
I’ve had a ‘87 and a 1990. Yup, the 1990 minivan was rare. This was mine.
Nice!
I’ve never seen an S-platform Town and Country. Ever. I think the production numbers were really low since it was just one model year before the AS vans were released. Apparently they only came in white or black. I have never seen a black S-platform minivan. Come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve never seen an AS-platform van in black either. Nevertheless, the S-platform vans are probably all extinct by now.
Growing up I may have mistakened an S-platform T&C as a woody Voyager but I doubt it, because there was quite the distinction between the Voyager and T&C grilles that I would have noticed. I have seen a few AS T&C’s (and others) here and there, and the NS T&Cs (and others) are still out there in large numbers, which is impressive being that the last of them rolled off the assembly line sometime in the first few months of 2000. Darn, so much for “crappy Chrysler reliability” as the critics like to say to this very day. The Ultradrive had been made pretty darn bulletproof by then and they still equip a few cars with the same 4-speed (and the 6-speed version, which was released in 2006). The engines in those were all solid too, even the 3.0 Mitsu, which had a tendency to go through rings but managed to go on as long as its owner was willing to put up with the blue puff of smoke (I have this engine in my ’91 LeBaron convertible, which was fully restored, including the engine, and the ring issue was addressed in the overhaul). The 3.3 and the later 3.8 were the best engines for Chryco minivans I think.
I saw one of these in absolute mint condition a couple of months ago, parked at a grocery store. My wife and I were on our way to dinner and a movie and I had to stop and snap a few pictures. It was a dark blue with the faux wood intact and in great shape. The plastic trim wasn’t even faded, so it had to have been garaged from the day of delivery onwards. Palm to forehead was my wife’s expression, along with the requisite eyeroll. I will not deny that I was also looking for a For Sale sign, but in a way, I’m glad I didn’t see one because I have no more garage space.
I could drive by something like a Lamborghini or Ferrari and not notice or be interested, but if I see something like a this, a Dodge 400 convertible, an Eagle Vision, an old Chrysler/Plymouth/Imperial land yacht and all other various rareish Mopars through the years I get a little excited. Unfortunately a lot of what I do see tends to be worse for the wear and/or clearly on its last legs and my wife is like, “You like THAT?!?!”.
On a recent hike, I remember spending a good half-hour trying to determine if the carcass of a long-abandoned Chrysler A-body was a Plymouth Valiant or a Dodge Lancer (to which my wife sighed and said, “Sev, it looks nothing like the Lancer!” [she was thinking of the contemporary Mitsubishi Lancer quasi-sports sedan, I am almost certain she had no clue of the A- or even the much later H-body Lancer’s existence, though both cars were way before our time]). The engine was long gone, the whole front end missing with a tree growing where the engine used to be. It was just a shell without doors, but I was looking for the name plate because I was curious. I didn’t find anything but I took a few pictures.
Anyways, without rambling on wistfully about seeing rare Mopars in the wild, the Town & Country nameplate should have never went away after they announced that they would wind down the RT platform in favor of the CUSW Pacifica. The Pacifica should have been a CUV which Chrysler so desperately needs. The 200 should have been revived as the LeBaron (especially with the first generation because a convertible was offered). In fact I jokingly refer to my 2013 200 Limited sedan as a LeBaron (if I had a Charger, I’d say it’s a Diplomat or a Monaco, lol). New Yorker is another name to revive — I think it should have started out as a trim level for a fully-optioned 300C.
My biggest fantasy is the revival of the LH cars. The Tesla Model S body would have been a great starting point, just with a more traditional, conservative and classy interior and a 3.6/8sp. drivetrain combo rather than the electric drivetrain.