I get it. Marketing is sometimes hard. The buying public represents a moving target that is buffeted by economic fortune, fashion trends, and today, social media. Every once in a while, however, one gets the idea that nobody in the room was willing to say “no” to the boss, and automotive history is sprinkled with such failures of nomenclature. A few come to mind: the “Miser,” a trim level of the Dodge Ram that was geared toward both fuel mileage and embarrassing its driver with a titular sticker on the rear window; Studebaker’s “Scotsman,” a cheap car that looked as cheap as it was; the Dodge LaFemme, which needs no introduction; and one that I hadn’t given much thought to until now — the Ford Econoline. As a portmanteau of Economy Line, it harkens back to those creative days when Ford would sell you a Standard, DeLuxe, or maybe even a Super DeLuxe Fordor (and this coming from a man who owns a Buick Special). Unlike those other gaffes, however, the Econoline made the grade by holding on for decades — and this 1970 model is the only one I’ve ever fallen completely, desperately in love with.
Like any good van, the 1970 Econoline was almost infinitely configurable in two wheelbases: the 105.5-inch Regular Van (come on, Ford…Regular Van?) and the 123.5-inch wheelbase SuperVan (much better — forget my disparaging comment from earlier). It’s an economical superhero, frugal and dashing at the same time.
Well, dashing may be a bit of an exaggeration, at least in this early guise. The SuperVan was introduced for the 1965 model year, when the first-generation Econoline (shown above) was still based on the compact Falcon. The second-generation models, produced from 1968 to 1974, were far more truck-based than their predecessors; they shared the F-100’s Twin-I-Beam front suspension and general load-carrying capabilities.
And the second time around, Ford showed signs of planning ahead for a larger hauler. Unlike the 1965-67 models with their foot-and-a-half protuberance hanging behind the rear wheels, the 1970 SuperVan is properly proportioned, and even without windows, there’s no denying that the Econoline is surprisingly handsome for such a utilitarian appliance. The painted Ford rally wheels from the 1968-69 era don’t hurt the looks, nor does the paint.
Given that there were no fewer than fourteen colors on the truck palette that could be labeled as Earth tones, it’s easy to see why narrowing down a color is a topic that could spark debate. I would fall on the side of “New Lime,” but the brochure said it wasn’t available on vans; therefore, my closest guess becomes “Crystal Green.” Either way, as a booster of light and medium greens, I approve of the choice.
The second-generation Econolines were certainly more comfortable than the first, with a new “clear deck” interior layout that pushed the doghouse both forward and a little starboard to give the driver more space. Beneath the doghouse was a somewhat narrow selection of engines, including a weak-kneed base 105-horsepower 170-cubic-inch six (which was a member of the 170/200/250 engine family); the 150-horsepower 240-cubic-inch “Big Six,” which was similar to the 300 and standard in the E-300 vans; and the 205-horsepower 302 small block. Unsurprisingly, the SelectShift Cruise-O-Matic was only available with the two larger engine choices, so this E-100 originally had the 240 or the 302.
By the time my grandpa’s ’75 Club Wagon “Chateau” was built, buyers could choose from a 300 six or a 351, with the big 460 optional in the E-250, quite a step up from our featured ’70 Econoline.
So, how does such a clean, solid van emerge from 55 years in Michigan? It doesn’t. Based on this sticker on the vent windows, it spent at least some of its life in Big Sky country.
Getting older brings about many changes, not the least of which in my case has been a complete reevaluation of 1970s Ford trucks and vans. When I was young, I looked at my grandpa’s old 1974 F-250 with respectfully veiled disgust; I thought it was the ugliest truck on the planet, and its “bumpside” predecessors weren’t any better to my youthful sensibilities. When I’d see a 1969-74 Econoline in a movie or TV show, I thought it looked pig-nosed and awkward, far worse than its Chevy or Dodge counterparts. Boy, was I wrong. I’d drive any of them today, and there was even a period recently where I was semi-seriously looking at 1970-72 Ford trucks for sale.
But no Ford truck could come close to this slightly shopworn Econoline SuperVan, the first Ford van I’ve ever truly geeked out over.
Even though the Econoline doesn’t deserve a merit badge for naming, its SuperVan addendum notwithstanding, it’s a classic example of not judging a van by its epithet. Sure, while Dodge’s “Tradesman” is evocatively appropriate, and the Chevy Van proves that no name is sometimes the best name, there’s nothing wrong with being economical, especially when you’ve been kissed by time and left a lovely shade of green.
Related CC reading:
Curbside Classic: 1969 Ford Econoline – Ford Builds A Better Box
Curbside Classic: 1971-ish Ford Econoline 200 – Keep On Keeping On
W.O.W., just Wow! This has to be the first one of these I’ve seen since the rusty baby blue version I wrote up over a decade ago. And such gorgeous condition, too.
A high school friend’s dad had one, a 69 E-250 or 350 (I no longer remember) with windows and seats, and that was it, right down to the painted steel floor. It had the big 6 and a 3 speed, an there was no doubt you were driving a truck. They traded it on a 76 Club Wagon Custom, and it felt like a Lincoln Continental in comparison.
I remember Ford advertising the “outside service center” – the dinky little hood that allowed you to check fluids from outside. That was a big deal until Chevy and Dodge redid their vans for 1971.
I can’t tell from the photos if this one sports the spot weld dimples over the rear wheel openings. I think they all did after a few years.
Also, I vote for New Lime. Brochures are usually printed before production really gets going and things like paint colors can change easily. Paintref.com lists it as a Ford Truck color, and even if it wasn’t technically offered, trucks and vans were often sprayed in custom colors for commercial buyers.
Very nice find! I cannot see one of these without also seeing it in Dupont 93-546 (otherwise known as “Bell Green”) and thinking that inside is a carefully organized collection of analog telephone goodness.
What a great ad! You don’t happen to know which magazine and issue that was in, do you Jeff? I may collect a few ads here and there. 🙂
What a remarkable find! I can’t say I’m eager to own a 1970 van, but I’m absolutely amazed that an example like this still exists.
Regarding the name, I’m less bothered by Econoline than other cheapo names like Miser or Scotsman since the Econoline was (at least initially) conceived as a commercial vehicle, where frugality was very much a virtue. I though it got a bit odd in later years when upscale versions of the Econoline were sold – or even more incongruously, conversion vans that cost a bundle but still ended up bearing the Econoline name.
But back in 1960 when the name first debuted, I think it made sense. Below is a good ad from those years:
I see this one has the infamous recall sticker to remind drivers that the trans could pop out of Park
Crazy. A better option would have probably been to fix the problem. I remember that my grandpa mentioned that he sold one of his early ’70s LTDs to someone he knew, who was killed when the car dropped into reverse when he was behind it. Grandpa’s been gone for 30 years, so there’s no asking about it now, but I know he felt really guilty about it.
Ooo, I had always wanted one of these vans back in the mid-70s. There was no rational reason for wanting one even though I dreamed of outfitting the interior with paneling and carpet for who knows what. As for a bad car name I watched a new 1 hour video interview of Bob Lutz on Youtube last night. He did talk a little on good names vs bad names and who could and could not pull it off. His first example was Golf as in who names a car after a club that hits a ball but the car itself made it work.
I always thought of the longer-wheelbase van as the “regular van” and the shorter-wheelbase van as the shorty, as the long vans seemed much more common. “Super Van”, didn’t that get reused when Ford later offered the long wheelbase vans with an extended rear cap?
So clean! Add this to the list of Vehicles I’d Like To Drive For A While Without Having To Actually Own It.
The original Econoline was a direct competitor to the VW Transporter, which had the market essentially for itself in the mid-late ’50s. Its hallmark was of course its economy, a major selling point for delivery and small business purposes. So yeah, the name has a decided late ’50s vibe but it just hing in there to become the van-name equivalent of “Kleenex” or such.
And yes, this is a stellar survivor. I drove a number of these during my car jockey time, and I fantasized about stealing one:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/auto-biography/van-of-a-lifetime-1971-ford-econoline-e100-what-might-have-been/
My brother in law started in carpentry in the early 1970’s and worked for my dad who was a builder. His first work van was a 1972 Econoline Super Van he bought from Avis. It was Avis red with PS, PB an automatic and a radio. What a great van! He drove that until 1978 when my dad’s company leased him a brand new Econoline! This one is in remarkable condition.
Ford Supervan interesting title I was expecting the other one, never heard of these though Econolines have showed up in NZ, Ford in UK blended a Ford GT40 with a Transit a long time ago, quite the delivery device except they mid engined it so lost cargo space but fast.
Great catch, Aaron!
I put a lot of miles on one of these, including moving from Washington state to Texas and back towing a 16′ U-haul trailer. Mine was a ’73 E-200 SuperVan window van with the 240 6 cylinder, automatic and power steering. It did not do very well with that load, but it did get the job done. By 1980 the rust was advancing, and I had a new job with a 80 mile a day commute, so I traded it for a Vega.
One minor nit; there was no ’68 Econoline. That was the plan but a strike and other issues delayed it’s release until mid-year, so they called them ’69 models.
Good to know, Patrick! I’ve changed the text.
For several years my brothers and I rode to summer camp in a first gen Econoline. No seats, of course, other than a driver’s seat. There were about 6 of these vans. They also had two early Chevy versions. I remember the camp installing a padded bench seat that wrapped around the inside, bolted to the floor and no seatbelts. Us kids could also sit on the engine hatch. Again, no seatbelt. Mighty 6 cylinder and three on the tree! How did we survive?
You’re right, this generation was a winner, and the looks have aged well. Growing up, most Ford vans on the road were the 75+ variety, which had the very long (for a van) hood. Whenever I’d see one of the old 69-74 ones, I’d think it looked so stubby-nosed. Now that they are both old, I can now appreciate the 69-74 as the better styled of the two, even if the long hood is more practical.
I only ever drove one once. In the 90s, I worked for a large ambulance company. As part of their driver training, they had us drive the “blowout” van on a slalom cone course. The van was an early 70s Ford equipped with an air tank connected to each tire by a setup of tubes and valves. The passenger had a control panel where he could deflate any tire in a matter of seconds, then fill it back up just as quickly. It was supposed to simulate a tire blowout as you were driving through the slalom and you’d have to control the vehicle and correct your steering as needed. It worked pretty well and as far as I know, it never rolled over, which is probably a testament to the inherent stability of the van, even with the I-Beam suspension.
On the other hand, my fire department first ran ambulances in 1971, when they purchased a fleet of SuperVans and outfitted them as ambulances (standard flat roof). Emergency driving may not have been their strong suit, as within a couple years they had a firefighter killed in a rollover accident. After that accident, the department quickly got rid of the SuperVans and bought pickup-chassis based modular ambulances which were much more substantial vehicles. They have been running that style ever since. There have been countless accidents, but I don’t believe anyone has been killed.
Econoline: it was the best of names, it was the worst of names. My family had two of them when I was growing up. One just a basic passenger van, the next a fairly nice conversion van. It’s hard to pick a better name for a work van or basic people carrier. It does become a liability as you move up the chain, but I’m not sure many people were put off by it. It can’t have helped on the top end, but it wasn’t something stupid like “miser,” and it rolled off the tungue well enough. Other, blander names like “Transit,” for one, are more of a let-down to me.
They were a solid vehicle for a bigger family (like I grew up in). They were easier to get in and out of than a station wagon, and the back seat wasn’t as much of a penalty. That’s in contrast to most current three-row SUVs: often only good for a couple kids. Even the ride was a wash compared to an overloaded station wagon, and better than the likes of the Suburban. Can’t beat the cargo room either. The Econoline served a purpose, and that about as well as anything. I still think the name works; hard to imagine anything carrying it across the “sexy” line anyway.