I’ll start with the one that I’ve never seen moved more than a few feet, though it does have current registration; the residential street parking sticker looks surprisingly new for being 15 years old. Of course this is one of the final (1978+) generation, but I’m not sure of the exact year. Assuming the rear badging is to be believed it’s 4.3 V6, with fuel injection that would make it an ‘85-87 made in Mexico.
According to the front license plate frame this one’s a 1985. The Cragar wheels are an interesting choice which to me would look more appropriate on an older car.
Speaking of older, here’s a Colonnade El Camino Classic. These were made from 1973 to 1977. With the stacked headlights, I believe this is one of the last two years. Interestingly, unlike later uses of the Classic name, as in the fleet-only version of the 1st gen FWD Malibu, the El Camino Classic was the top-of-the-line version, V8 only. Although as a high schooler I loved several of the then-new Colonnades, my attraction to the El Camino version faded as soon as the new downsized intermediates came out. But the flowing lines have grown on me, and most Colonnades are old enough to be exempt from California’s strict smog regulations which require stock emissions equipment, or certified alternatives. This can make it tough to keep some 1976+ cars viable. If I didn’t feel the “need” to have a 4WD pickup I could see having one of these as a casual utility vehicle (please spare the “It’s not a real pickup” comments. I know that).
Back to the downsized final generation El Camino. This example is the only one of these four that I’ve heard running, and it has a healthy V8. Other than the wheels and tires though, and perhaps the stance, along with an aftermarket steering wheel, it looks mostly as original.
Ironically, when I lived until 12 years ago just off El Camino Real north of San Jose, I don’t remember seeing as many El Camino’s as I do now further away. And all four of these, if they’re parked at home, I can enjoy on a brief neighborhood stroll.
What is the proper plural for El Camino? El Caminos? El Caminoes? El Camini? Los Caminos? The NYT style guide is shockingly silent on the matter.
It’s a proper name, not a noun, so in english should be treated the same as when your family sends their Xmas cards, i.e. “the Halters”. El Caminos, Camaros, Chevelles, Geminis, Silverados, Sierras, etc.
In spanish I’m pretty certain it would actually be Los El Caminos as you are pluralizing the name “El Camino”, not just changing from one Camino to multiples thereof.
As Jim said, it’s very simple in English: just add an “s”. Do not change the spelling otherwise. That’s why it’s “Chevys”, not “Chevies”. One does not ever change the spelling of a proper noun to pluralize it.
I think Jim is correct on this key grammatical point. The road up the SF Peninsula is always called “The El Camino” in spoken English by locals. Parts of it are State Route 82, but we NEVER say “The 82” in Northern California. That is totally a SoCal thing. It’s just “82”.
Excellent finds. Credit to General Motors, for making all four Chevrolet Colonnade models quite attractive. Including the coupe, four-door sedan, wagon, and the El Camino. As El Camino magazine ads seemed quite prolific, between approximately 1973 and 1975.
Around a decade ago, I used to see a clean El Camino, in my 2km radius neighbourhood. Delaware Avenue, in Ottawa. Haven’t seen it since.
Popular ad, I recall seeing relatively often, circa 1974. Wasn’t a fan of the two-tone package, featuring the white mid-section. Interior decidedly brougham.
These are all pretty appealing nowadays. With the caveat that while the bedside is so low and accessible it’s that way for anyone walking by as well with all your treasures on display.
Four of them in one non-domestic-car-haven neighborhood is a pretty impressive gathering.
Although I didn’t take all these pictures the same day, I did see all four El Camino’s (I prefer to use apostrophes for the plural of proper names ending in vowels, which I’m sure is wrong) on a single dog walk last week.
Looking at the photo of the 1976 or 1977 colonnade El Camino I can see it has the 5 mph rear bumper. I have looked at the 1974 to 1976 Ford Rancheros and they do not have 5 mph rear bumpers but have 5 mph front bumpers. Was the rear end of the El Camino and Ranchero considered a truck or utility vehicle and therefore would be exempt from passenger car rear bumper standards? If so, GM probably did not want to design a different rear bumper for such a low volume vehicle and decided to use the existing rear 5 mph assembly from the Chevelle wagons whereas Ford found a way to use a non 5 mph rear bumper with minimal tooling costs.
Any answers?
Good question, and sent me down a little rabbit hole. Growing up in the 80s, I saw lots of El Caminos (and A-body wagons) and always recognized that the rear bumpers of the El Caminos was the same ones on all of the downsized A-body wagons (Malibu, Cutlass, etc). I assumed that the same was for the Colonnades as well.
But, I think that you are right. The El Camino continued to still use the 1973 Malibu/Chevelle wagon rear bumper all the way through 1977. The 1973 rear bumper had 4 round(ish) lights, very similar in shape to the 1973 coupe/sedans. These lights were positioned below the rub/impact strip on the bumper.
But in 1974, the wagon rear bumper moved to rectangular lights and the lights were on the same line as the rub/impact strips. The bumper does seem to stick out a couple inches more. But the El Camino continued to use the bumper from 1973 all the way up until 1977. And looking at photos online, it does appear that the El Camino’s rear bumpers looked more tucked in than the wagon’s rear bumpers from 1974-1977
I had an 85 El Camino that I thoroughly enjoyed. Had to sell it a few short years later when the addition of kids to the family forced me to sell for something more family oriented. I remember the front suspension had to be rebuilt after less than 10k miles when an alignment became impossible.
These all look pretty good and if you don’t need 4WD or a extra cab space an El Camino typically has a 750-1200lb payload and a bout a 6′ bed so you can haul useful loads. One El Camino on the streets near me usually had a canoe in back.
I’m a big fan of the El Camino and the Ranchero too, having owned one of each. My El Camino was a ’75 SS. Basically SS was a decal package. Anyway, I bought it off the back lot of our local Chevy dealer in 1983. I was the 3rd owner. It was on the back lot because it had a sagging driver door, non functioning AC and rust behind the rear wheel openings. It ran and drove good, so I bought it cheap. A trip to the junkyard to get a door hinge and the sagging was taken care of. The AC only needed charged up, which I did myself with no further problems. The whole undercarriage was coated with cement which I cleaned off. The original owner owned a local concrete company. I think this caused the rust as the rest was very solid. I had a friend who owned a body shop repair the rust and I had a great truck. I pulled a 23 foot camper with it and hauled loads for firewood on occasion. Later I changed jobs and ended up traveling all over Indiana on a weekly basis. I finally had to park it when the front end started going bad. After a few months a friend who ran a parts store bought it and fixed the front end. He drove it for several years until someone hit him and totalled it. He took the 350 out and put it into another one, along with the front end and drove that one for years. I sold the ’73 Ranchero when I bought the El Camino because the engine had developed a wrist pin knock and it didn’t have AC. I love this kind of truck and wish I had either one back today.
I believe that GM could have produced these another 10 years with good sales. People would buy a new one even today if they were available
I like all of these but the blue ’75 or ’76. The stacked headlights make the front of the car look unbalanced and overly heavy. The cabin looks like a space capsule with the steeply sloped windshield, the overly thick B pillar, and the closed in look. The loooong doors look ungainly. The gas filler door looks too low on the body. Just a not all together look and feel to it.
A 1959 El Camino would look the best in this crowd.
photo example